Well, there's this statement.

> And these are creating the current environment where we can explore these topics in the abstract collectively — or the acute symptoms we are feeling with loved ones and therapists alike with more positive encouragement from others than ever before, and that helps us zoom in on our individual underlying root causes… and for better or worse, it seems more and more clear that optimal mental health is an individual sport.

Full, hard stop there. Mental health being an individual sport? No. Not by a long shot.

Sure, our own human experience is utterly individual. That is, nobody can feel what you as an individual feel. Barring telepathy, it's not possible to get to the bottom of what someone else is going through. That doesn't mean that your mental health is shaped in a vacuum nor that you are managing your own mental health entirely solo at the end of the day.

Your mental health is tied into your circumstances, your past, your upbringing, the people you met, your current family situation, job, culture, religion, politics, financial situation and so on and so on. How you feel right now is the net result of infinite external and internal factors tying into each other balancing out what goes on in your subconscious.

> Progress is being made, but we have a long way to go in continued open, public dialogue and destigmatization of these common ailments. So when you get a chance to talk about your direct or indirect experience with a mental illness, seize the opportunity to talk about it openly. There’s never been more receptivity to open dialogue than now.

This is true. And those are first steps.But that's not nearly enough. My gripe with the article is that it only lightly brushes the topic of discussing underlying root causes.

For instance, PTSD caused by domestic or child abuse. Sure, you can openly talk about coping with PTSD, have group sessions or do an awareness campaign, but actually creating a socio-economic and judicial environment in which abuse within large communities can be addressed and prevent through strong ties and support networks? It's not exactly like the ball gets pushed forward on this front in a way that a tangible impact has been made, right? If anything, modern life very much puts the focus on the individual with all the unintentional downsides that this brings.

Moreover, this the article simply moves into the opposite direction.

> It goes from a lens of “fixing” to “investing” — in other words, instead of fixing something that is by implication broken, it’s investing in its durability to withstand the wear and tear that comes with modern life. And this begins well before the internal or external life-interrupting event itself (in fact, that is the whole point).

I read this as: there's somehow a way to build "mental credit" that you can expend when you fall on hard times. Yet, the author disregards individual social and economic background, personality traits, and so on.

As I said, sure, to an extent managing stress and sleep are things you do to maintain your own well being... in the present moment. I'd feel down as well if I eat unhealthy, don't get enough sleep and just don't manage the basics in my life properly in general.

But they aren't a silver bullet that solves anxiety and depression caused by losing your job and your house in a pandemic. Neither does a strict and health-focussed training inoculates soldiers against the horrors of the battlefield. The numbers on mental health issues and suicide in veterans serve as a stark reminder here. And they sure aren't a golden hammer that does away with anxiety and depression in teenagers caused by peer pressure or meeting the high expectations by parents and guardians.

> For example, instead of just thinking about fixing an acute financial problem like personal debt, wiser heads are thinking about investing in the optimal outcome with almost every economic decision; financial freedom.

> Instead of fixing a mental illness when it comes across your path, it’s investing in the optimal goal with daily and weekly habits beginning as a teenager; mental freedom. After all, optimal outcomes are planned years and decades in advance. We have this understanding in other investments in our lives… financial, career, relationships, acquired skills, hobbies, etc, and we’re starting to have that with regards to mental health, and I want to further encourage that with the concept of mental wealth.

Okay. This is where the article devolves in pandering. What is this "optimal goal" exactly? What are "optimal outcomes" here? And why is mental health a separate item on the list between "financial career" and "relationships"?

In my opinion, the author does nothing more then dumbing the concept down. Sure, maybe you don't read in his writings that mental health is 100% the responsibility of the individual. But I'd wager that a sizeable part of his audience would be most willing to believe this, for the simple reason that it's far easier to accept simple solutions then deal with the murkiness and complexity of human minds.

Finally, I made the effort to construct a criticism and all you give me is a "you're just projecting"? Please. You'll have to do better then that.