>But my point still is that for one's personal happiness it is better if one doesn't invest too much emotion or energy in things that one cannot control. It is the very definition of stress.

That reminds me of the concept of Learned Helplessness in psychology. When confronted with a stressful situation that (apparently) cannot possibly be solved, animals and people develop an apathetic state. They get desensitized. They won't become happy, but the gain is they won't get depressed too much. They will survive and that's what the body wants in the first place.

Your advice sounds fine, but there is a problem here. For one, our society is built on the presumption that we all do have actual real influence on our environment. For two, the apathetic state is a primitive defense mechanism of the body, built in our DNA, and it cannot be reached by conscious wish.

Take for example a handicap. In the beginning there's always a search for a solution, by doctors for example, and denial that it will be for the rest of your life. As time passes by, the handicap is to some extend accepted, even when the level of pain is quite high. That 'acceptance' is hardly done with conscious thinking. Rather, it are primitive mechanisms of the body, a body that is built to ADAPT, to whatever the environment requires of it.

In the long run even Naomi (Naomi's body) will adapt, but most advice given to her here will not help her much in that process. Rather, it will victimize her even more.