The parallel intended was that if you propose a solution that is technically a fix but not feasible for some reason beyond preference, it's not going to help.
CPAP machines are often prescribed for people who are not necessarily at acute risk of death so much as having no consistent high quality sleep, which has a lot of complicated possible knock-on effects. Unfortunately, since it takes a long time sometimes to notice positive effects, while they're uncomfortable to use from the start (among other reasons), it becomes difficult to convince people to keep using them for unseen benefits. (To my understanding, yes, insurance will just stop paying for it if you don't hit some threshold of usage. I've not had insurance that did that, but I have personally known multiple people who had to avoid certain activities because they would have been away from electricity for too long.)
Similarly, if you suggest exercise, an activity that requires a significant investment of mental effort for many people to engage in absent habit, as a sole treatment for a condition where people sometimes cannot manage to invest enough effort to eat, an activity which many people enjoy doing, it will not be constructive.
(I'm not arguing against either as part of a larger treatment plan, but if you don't consider the reasons that people might not have done them beyond "I didn't know it was an option", then you will often end up giving advice that is technically correct but not usefully actionable.)
CPAP machines are often prescribed for people who are not necessarily at acute risk of death so much as having no consistent high quality sleep, which has a lot of complicated possible knock-on effects. Unfortunately, since it takes a long time sometimes to notice positive effects, while they're uncomfortable to use from the start (among other reasons), it becomes difficult to convince people to keep using them for unseen benefits. (To my understanding, yes, insurance will just stop paying for it if you don't hit some threshold of usage. I've not had insurance that did that, but I have personally known multiple people who had to avoid certain activities because they would have been away from electricity for too long.)
Similarly, if you suggest exercise, an activity that requires a significant investment of mental effort for many people to engage in absent habit, as a sole treatment for a condition where people sometimes cannot manage to invest enough effort to eat, an activity which many people enjoy doing, it will not be constructive.
(I'm not arguing against either as part of a larger treatment plan, but if you don't consider the reasons that people might not have done them beyond "I didn't know it was an option", then you will often end up giving advice that is technically correct but not usefully actionable.)