I'm sorry, but this is such an extreme example. You should not overdo anything, be it meditation, gaming, playing, reading, any sport, even drugs. Drugs also give you a state of mind that, when taken to the extreme, can harm your social life and well-being. That is not a problem specifically of meditation.
You can safely do anything up to the point that it benefits you. The moment your well-being suffers, or you neglect important parts of life, like friendship, you should stop.
That's what I did. I mean, my story is quite unique in that I never knew what meditation was (or religion, to be honest) and it just fell into my lap.
I think, looking back I can safely say that it did help me address a lot of emotional trauma. I didn't exactly have a gentle upbringing and I somehow entangled myself into all those memories.
Meditation helped me to clear the air, but as you say - it blindly became a somewhat of an addiction. So I stopped and started focusing on other things. And I still have a long way to go.
From the article, it sounds like the author was spending more than just 40 minutes a day on their spiritual pursuits. They also didn't describe their actual practice.
This thread seems to be full of people trying to debunk meditation as some kind of dangerous dark art.
> it was just that no matter how much I tried I couldn't predict a future where I weren't constantly in agony
That's a great way to put it. I had a few depressive episodes in my life, I know that these thoughts and feelings are symptoms. The inability to feel, even the hopelessness are symptoms of the disease. Usually, I can even pinpoint the cause of the episode. But another symptom is the inability to imagine a state of mind without depression. And no matter how rational you are, it is very difficult to believe in something that you cannot imagine.
My assembly is probably worse than yours: and that is why I weaseled with "as written". I expect good compiler -- such as the ones we use every day will get this right.
But clever compiler still give me the willies, with their less-than-literal interpretations of the meaning of what I wrote.
I prefer code that is efficient good (whether that means fast, or something else appropriate to the circumstance) when taken literally, and then trust trust the compiler to smooth over my naivity about what efficiency really means.