I'm planning to try this way of making a standing desk. Only $22, plus a bar stool or something, because I don't think I can stand all day, especially in the beginning.

Switched to a standing desk at work. I have one at home and I mentioned the idea to my boss. He eventually found a post where the right $22 at IKEA lets you build a desk -> standing desk converter. It's basically an end table with a shelf screwed to the side; since you are making the screw holes yourself, the shelf is at whatever height is ideal for you. He decided to try it out also, along with a few other people, so we shall see how the grand experiment goes.

It's been a few hours and I have already discovered that standing for long periods in tennis shoes is not quite the same as standing barefoot. If I don't adapt, I may need to buy new shoes.

Yeah, increasing tolerance is probably one of the main factors. But I thought I could counter that with the doubling of the dosage.

Yup, I guess it's likely that the negative day-to-day effects were mostly withdrawal symptoms.

What do you recommend? Just not taking antidepressants for a while?

Sorry, I probably haven't expressed myself clearly. I still believe (~60%) bupropion has some, small positive effects for me and that my mood would be even worse if I didn't take it. Here's a more detailed story:

I've taken this anti-depressant for quite some time, for around 8-9 months. At first I noticed a definite increase in mood and productivity (or so it seemed). I also tried to eliminate confounding effects and so stopped to take it for a week or so - and my happiness declined significantly! However, I was still concerned about placebo-effects so I made some "blind" tests (i.e. took capsules either containing bupropion or not, but without my knowledge which containing which). The next day I guessed if I had taken a mere placebo or not, and I was right about 85% of the time (n was only 7, but still...) 'cause my mood was worse when I only took a placebo. I also took two pills on some days and it felt like I had much more energy and was way happier. So Bupropion seemed like a true panacea to me.

Unfortunately, my mood started to decline around two months ago therefore I went to my psychiatrist and he doubled my dose. This was around a month ago but didn't really help.

I hope this clears things up! ;)

Is Hermione's inability to think that she might have been bespelled part of the spell, or normal psychological reaction? Would fake memories have the same kind and amount of detail as real memories?

I would hypothesise that, to an ordinary person who has not learned about the fallibility of memory in general, the idea that something that feels like a completely real memory would be false is a very challenging one. Thinking "have I been memory-charmed?" is like thinking "I could be wrong about absolutely anything I remember" for the first time. It would be very difficult, and exactly the kind of thought one flinches away from.

From personal experience, I remember recalling a very emotionally charged MSN conversation months later, and thinking about an agreement I'd made with someone in it. But searching through the logs (and I logged everything), I could find no mention of any such agreement ever. It was pretty traumatic to discover that my memory was so fallible on something so important, and I'm not sure I could have accepted it without such firm evidence.

In regard to detail, I'm not sure people ever go through their memories and say "huh, this memory lacks detail so something must be off". Unless some key feature is missing (say, Hermione being unable to recall the words of the curse she used), I imagine any given detail's absence could be easily rationalised.

I don't think it's quite eidetic - she says as much herself. It's just ridiculously good. I think if she had literally perfect recall of all her experiences, rather than merely amazing recall of information she consciously tried to absorb, she would be less of a normal 11-year old girl. For example, she'd have perfect recall of every mistake she'd ever made, and every time anyone had ever hurt her. I imagine she would be much warier of doing anything with the potential to leave traumatic memories.

With that said, it's worth noting that no-one has ever proved having long-term eidetic memory in repeated scientific tests, so all our speculations on the subject must rely on anecdotal evidence and fictional examples.

Oh I know he thinks she has the potential and I'm in no doubt myself either.

My point is it doesn't necessarily mean it can be transmitted; how come Godric never trained a whole cadre of True Patronus users? Perhaps everyone needs to figure it out themselves, like Harry (and presumably Godric) did.

Anybody believing Hermione was meddled with ought to be asking who will be next. The mentioned mistake has Harry assuming Hermione didn't go undetected for six months, so he is far less alarmed than he should be.

This is a really interesting point.

We know for a fact that Hermione has been manipulated because we've seen the scene with Hat and Cloak. That may bias us in favor of thinking the evidence is clearer than it really is. Yet Harry knows that in this universe memories can be tampered with. The prior probability of a morally upstanding little girl trying to murder someone is much less than the prior probability of someone else trying the memory-charm plot, especially given that Hermione is friends with Harry and Harry's status as the Boy Who Lived makes him a target.

Now, I might put a probability of something like 0.2 on the possibility of Hermione casting the charm after someone messed with her mind. But if you're the plotter, it's so much easier to do a false memory charm to make her remember casting the charm, than to do all the delicate manipulation to get her to actually cast it. So more likely than not, Hermione didn't cast the charm.

Harry is making a subtle mistake here, though: he's over-confident about his ideas about the details of what was done to Hermione. For example, he thinks a false-memory charm was used to cause Hermione to start obsessing over Draco, when in fact that was based on true memories of a conversation (albeit one involving lies and some kind of shape-shifting/illusion magic). Feminist bank tellers and all that.

I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this, but I just noticed it while rereading the Self-Actualization chapters:

Hermione went to tremendous lengths to be her own person rather than just something of Harry's, including becoming a general and fighting bullies. Now she has sworn herself into Harry's service and house forever. That is really sad.