ellopoppit
That's like saying physical damage from a rape will heal in weeks but verbal sexual harrassment can still be hurting decades later.
Like never letting your child ever ride a bike without training wheels.
It's a form of agoraphobia.
Kevin Hart talks about the fact that no one can insult or harm him with words because of the initiative gauntlet he went through to become a comedian.
Have you ever been physically assaulted, punched in the face, had your ribs broken, or been put in a strangle hold?
-John Kenneth Galbraith
What has been working for me lately is:
1. Eating one big meal and perhaps a small snack later all within a 4-6 hour window; also do a 24 hour fast about once a week. This has eliminated my acid reflux, helped me gain more energy and focus, and have never slept better.
2. Cut out 95% of my sugar and carb intake, also cut out dairy as I seem to have a mild intolerance/allergy to milk which I indentified from performing an elimination diet experiment. This has helped me eliminate various forms of skin inflammation which I had been suffering from for years. Also cutting out sugar has helped me tremendously with emotional balance and equanimity.
3. Eat primarily whole unprocessed foods
I stick to a few simple meals such as:
-Scrambled eggs with onion, garlic, peppers, salt, cumin
-Steak cooked in ghee and oven roasted veggies (brussel sprouts, green beans, carrots)
-Oven baked fish and veggies
-Occasional small amounts of low sugar fruit after rigorous exercise
My typical snacks are:
-Hemp and chia seeds mixed into almond butter and pinch of salt
-Bell pepper and hummus
-A handful of mixed nuts
I also supplement with wild alaskan salmon fish oil, for the omega 3 fatty acid
Do you think extrapolating that governments and corporations may use a universal digital ID for mass surveillance, from the proven fact that governments and corporations work together to perform mass surveillance, is within that limit of valid speculation?
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/01/investigative-reports/s...
https://mobile.twitter.com/ThalesDigiSec/status/142535144657...
There is thorough scientific evidence showing that:
1) Mindset (positive or negative) has direct effects on physiology
2) Strong social bonds and a sense of community is beneficial to health, while the inverse is detrimental
3) Meditation and mindfulness can positively affect physiology
4) Chronic stress is detrimental to health (and having an existential terror of death is surely a source of conscious or unconscious chronic stress for many)
These are all things which religion and spirituality can help with.
Religion, a social determinant of mortality? A 10-year follow-up of the Health and Retirement Study
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
Reward, salience, and attentional networks are activated by religious experience in devout Mormons
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/17470919.2016.125743...
Neurobiology of Spirituality
>physical, emotional, cognitive, social, spiritual, and environmental
Are you saying you don't think there's any science showing that these factors are relevant to physical and mental health?
I'm not sure I understand this sentence... are you claiming no other vaccine had more data on long term effects prior to commercialization than the covid vaccines?
By population size, do you mean the number of people in the general public who have taken the various covid vaccines under the FDA EUA?
By what measure?
Also my mood and emotional balance have never been more stable.
I primarily eat whole, unprocessed foods: meat/fish, veggies, nuts and seeds, and occasionally some low sugar fruit after intense exercise.
It's been perhaps the most positive change Ive ever made for my mental and physical health
As it stands, psychiatrists do not know what causes ADHD (or any psychiatric disorder in the DSM), so its certainly possible that social and environmental factors which induce ADHD like behaviors could be contributing factors. This is in accordance with the biopsychosocial theory.
As for brain scans, those are not considered medically or scientifically reliable ways of diagnosing psychiatric conditions.
You'll notice that every study which suggests it is, does not control for the fact that the psychiatrically diagnosed in their study are already under the influence of psychiatric medications which have tangible effects on brain chemistry; of course a brain on drugs will look different than a brain not on drugs...
"psychiatric diagnosis still relies exclusively on fallible subjective judgments rather than objective biological tests"
-Allen Francis, Professor and Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University School of Medicine, chair of the American Psychiatric Association task force overseeing the development and revision of the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)
"psychiatric diagnosis still relies exclusively on fallible subjective judgments rather than objective biological tests"
-Allen Francis, Professor and Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University School of Medicine, chair of the American Psychiatric Association task force overseeing the development and revision of the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)
Like all other conditions in the DSM, there is no objective biological diagnostic criteria
Before such electronic media, books were the main media, and inherently required and trained users to concentrate on one thing at a time for extended periods.
TV and smartphones do the exact opposite
Tell that to the people who continue to be put in prison every day for a plant that is far less harmful than sugar and alcohol
>Knee-jerking against articles like this is perpetuate harm by keeping people in the dark about the very real drawbacks of the drug. You can't make an informed decision about using it without actually know the pros and cons.
Even worse than that, you can't make an informed decision about cannabis when the government, scientists, and the media have been lying to everyone for decades, implicitly and explicitly, in telling them that cannabis is more harmful, addictive, and sickening than sugar and alcohol.
Correcting those lies and adding relative comparative context is not "knee-jerking", its promoting science which can save lives.
Why does that upset you so greatly? I'm not saying people shouldnt be informed about how/how not to use cannabis
I'm interested to confirm this, do you know what their name is/was or where I could find more information on this?
Antarctica perhaps? Not in the middle of a freaking city.