I really like the idea here, but think it's important to be more careful about recommendations. There are community members (Gwern, Scott of SSC,) who have done significant research on many areas discussed here, and have fantastic guides to some parts. Instead of compiling a lot of advice, perhaps you could find which things aren't covered well already, link to those that are, and try to investigate others more thoroughly.

For Feldenkrais there's a supportive meta-review that concludes:
Further research is required; however, in the meantime, clinicians and professionals may promote the use of FM (Feldenkrais Method) in populations interested in efficient physical performance and self-efficacy.

Video games can treat PTSD

The link points to an article that doesn't provide evidence that the treatment works.

service dogs

From the linked paper:

The overarching theme in the literature that cut across those addressed in this review was the need for further empirical research. It is evident given the extent of anecdotal evidence that PSD are effective in the management of PTSD. There are challenges and difficulties with the use of PSD as a treatment as indicated in the review. And the evidence, whether scientific or interpretative, about the exact nature of the challenges and the effectiveness, including the conditions that influence effectiveness, is still lacking.

Basically, the tenor of your article seems to support some treatments that are are only supported by anecdotes if they are nearer to the mainstream while rejecting other form of therapies that are less mainstream.

It is a nice article, impressive. keep writing