Yidaki

As long as you take the right dose, it is safe

Hi. Please some help to get this right. I bought a huperzia serrata extract that says 99%. The recommended dose of Huperzine-A would be about 100mcg per day, but huperzia serrata is not pure huperzine A. My question is how much should I take of huperzia serrata in order to get the 100mcg dose of Huperzine-A??

I read it. Excellent book: Here I share the notes I took while reading it The path of least resistance by Robert Fritz • Structure creates behavior • instead of asking "How do I get this unwanted situation to go away?" you might ask, "What structures should I adopt to create the results I want to create?" • Responsive - Reactive Orientataions : both are based on the assumption that circumstances are the driving force. "In talking about the reactive-responsive orientation, I call cir- cumstantial stimuli any stimuli, external or internal, that seem to force people to take action." Problem Solving: is to have something go away Creation: es to have something come into being They are not and cannot be the same "The path of least resistance in problem solving is to move from worse to better and then from better to worse again. This is because the actions taken are generated by the problem. If the intensity of the problem is lessened by the actions you took, there is less motivation to take further actions." The problem LEADS TO action to solve the problem LEADS TO less intensity of the problem LEADS TO less aetimt to solve the problem LEADS TO the problem remaining • "The inventiveness of the creative process does not come from generating alternatives but from generating a path from the original concept of what you want to create to the final creation of it in reality" • Aliviar enfermedad no es lo mismo que generar salud The creative process steps: 1- Conceive the result 2- Know what currently exists 3- Take Action 4- Learn the rhythms of the creative process: germinatio, assimilation and completion. 5- Creating Momentum ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *THE PROCESS (how) SHOULD ALWAYS SERVE THE RESULT (what) •TENSION / RESOLUTION : example questions and answers or rubber bands • STRUCTURAL CONFLICT: a resolution in one system leads to increase tension in another -- example diet and hunger or the belief in conflict with the desire to get what you want. • Structural conflict may be defined as two or more tension-resolution systems in which the points of resolution are mutually exclusive • creating is not a solution to structural conflict • creation does not oscillate ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ When you are in a situation of structural conflict, you may tend to compensate by: - being in an area of tolerable conflict - CONFLICT MANIPULATION STRATEGY: WIDELY USED. “i DON'T WANT THAT SO i DO THE OPPOSITE”, BUT IT DOESN'T ALLOW GROWTH. Structural Tension The discrepancy between what you want and what you currently have forms the most important structure in the creative process, that of structural tension. The Vision Only needs to be clear enough that you would recognize it if you created it. A Concept is less specific than the vision, even when the vision is also a concept. For example, you can have a CONCEPT of a house in terms of budget, location and general characteristics, which can be many. That will allow the formation of a VISION, which is ONE. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Creative Cycle • 3 stages: germination, assimilation and completion. Making Choices is a skills that needs to be trained. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Instead of choosing to create what they want, some people choose to avoid what they don't want Instead of choosing health, some people choose the absence of sickness." @x.ex. Am I looking for abundance or avoiding scarcity. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The more entrenched the problem seems, the harder it may be to separate what you want from what you do not want or from what you think is possible. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Primary choice → about major results. about a result you want in and of itself. (end goal) Secondary choice → is a choice that helps you take a step toward your primary result. Fundamental Choice : has to do with a state of being or basic life orientation. Is a foundation upon which primary and secondary choices rest. The fundamental choices for most people are the choices to be free, to be healthy, and to be true to oneself. To be whole, healthy, free, and true to themselves. To live up to your highest potential. To be the predominant creative force in your own life. To live in accordance with your highest spiritual truths. To live from within a commited relationship. A primary choice is about concrete results, whereas a funda- mental choice is about life orientation or a state of being. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ About satisfaction: "In the reactive-responsive orientation, people look to the circumstances to provide them with satisfaction. They are in- evitably disappointed, because circumstances themselves do not provide satisfaction. In the orientation of the creative, you create your own satis- faction, independent of the circumstances. Then you bring sat- isfaction to those circumstances in which you are involved." (Page 191). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pivotal Technique Step 1: is to describe current reality. To create structural tension, it is necessary to have a clear representation only of the facts of current reality; theo- ries, explanations, apologies, and other embellishments of the facts are not necessary. Step 2 is to describe the result you want to create. Step 3 is formally to choose the result you want to create. I choose to... Step 4 is to move on... Take action on the vision you articulated And another example: Step 1: "The children demand more of my atten- tion than I want to give them. I find I react nega- tively to them after a few hours. I feel trapped. I haven't had a good conversation with an adult for weeks. I love the children, but I am beginning to express hostility toward them rather than love." Step 2: "I want to have a good relationship with 'my children. I want the children well cared for. I also want time for myself. I want a full, rich life filled with many types of experiences." Step 3: "I choose to have a good relationship with my children. I choose to have the children well cared for. I choose to have time for myself. I choose to have a full, rich life filled with many types of experiences." Step 4: Move on, perhaps by reading a book, call- ing a day-care center, playing with the children, or phoning a friend. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "This alignment with yourself will not come from at- tempting to "solve your problems" but from creating what most matters to you." P.261 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "you cannot create the result you want based on a misrepresentation of current circumstances." The more directly and faster you can recognize reality, as it now is, the better."

Now that episode will have way more reproductions

Wow

https://youtu.be/3j7am9kjMrk Here a serious meta analysis on Ivermectin @Leo Gura What is your take on ivermectin?

Thank you very much for sharing such an important topic. I am a clinical psychologist, and beyond theory I have seen in everyday practice the extent to which so many of our functioning boils down to this matter. Thank you

https://soundcloud.com/user-467037098 I share some of my musical creations: ambient, meditative and tribal style https://soundcloud.com/user-467037098

Hi there . I became very interested in the heavy metal detox subject . I read the Andy Cutler's book and actually started chelation myself with ALA. Nevertheless, I have read a couple of references on the internet, that refer to the ACC protocol as pseudo-science, and state that no clinical trials have been conducted to support the validity of the protocol. In my view, ACC seems very coherent and well articulated. To me, it doesn't sound like pseudoscience. Why isn't it regarded more seriously ? What do you think about it?

According to the protocol as taught by dr Cutler, more is not necessarily better. If you are not feeling too much with such high doses, it may be possible that you are not mercury-intoxicated

That Work is pretty powerful

Hi there . I found in this website the instructions for chelation https://andy-cutler-chelation.com/ Also, they link you to https://www.livingsupplements.com . The site to buy it online. The fact is that I get a message that says they are not shipping to my country (Chile) Does anybody know another site that sells DMSA ?

Thank you, I tried with them, but unfortunately I got this message too: "The transport and delivery of packages are temporarily suspended for this destination. We are sorry not to be able to fulfill your order right now." This is one of the challenges of trying to self-actualize while living in a 3rd world country (rant) . Any other suggestions would be highly appreciated =)

Maybe he didn't reply because he's too busy writing the book lol

New Age gurus and content refer a lot to the idea of dimension, or densities. Like moving to the 4th dimension or 5th density or dimension and so on. I imagine many of you have listened something of that sort. What is it really? is there anything to take seriously? does it have anything to do with the idea of dimensions in physics? Please, I would like to know if it is all bullshit or there is some substance to it...

It has become clear that when survival is on the line, our ability to think from a meta-perspective, in a non-ideological way flies out the window. I know that many topics regarding vaccine policies have been created on this forum, and almost all of them have become ideological battlefields. People picking sides and throwing "arguments" at each other. Although some participants have tried to elevate the topic to a meta-level, above the actual content, they have not succeeded. This is a very complex topic. I know that starting a new topic that dares to mention the vaccine stuff may be immediately annoying to some of you, but I want to try a way to do this in a careful manner, so that my thread doesn't go in the same direction than previous posts. This situation is exposing the limitations of science, because there is no consensus among the scientific community regarding the vaccines, and this is not about "pro" or "anti". This is much more nuanced than that. There are highly qualified experts, such as virologists, immunologists and so on, that disagree with each other with regard to boosters, how long to wait, and even if they are necessary at all. For example this man that clearly is not "anti", but is pointing to something worth considering. I don't have the qualifications to adjudicate the validity of what he says. Please don't think I'm stating ANYTHING about vaccination measures themselves. I'm trying to go "meta". This is just an example of the fact that THERE IS NO CONSENSUS. As Daniel Schmachtemberger has pointed out many times, this is a problem of sense-making, and sense-making is the basis for choice-making. There is no consensus in science and it has never been, and that is not a problem, but what seems strange and not too earnest is the fact that there is a narrative that tells "there is undeniable consensus and powerful evidence of this", and whatever alternative ways to see the matter are regarded as conspiracy theory, or "anti", or stupidity of "rotted minds". I am aware that many lay people with no qualifications are talking with certainty about things that don't really know, but there are highly qualified people that are pointing to some "facts" and are being disregarded, underestimated, ignored, banned, mocked and so on. SO, in conclusion. I see that the way to approach this issue have been lost in the CONTENT, and that leads to locked threads in the forum, polarization, name-calling, division, duality, fear, lack of love, and more. Therefore, I want to make an invitation to look at this from the level of STRUCTURE. How to approach this issue so that our sense-making gets more integrated and less polarized/fragmented? PLEASE ABSTAIN FROM TELLING WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT VACCINES. That is the content. I would like to keep this thread centered on the structure. I DON'T WANT YOUR OPINIONS ON VACCINES THEMSELVES. This is a question on Sense-Making. We have a problem of not being able to unify our sense-making. The question is HOW CAN WE MOVE TOWARDS A MORE INTEGRATED VIEW ON THIS TOPIC AND UNIFY OUR SENSE-MAKING? [Let's try to keep it "second tier" and not only blue/orange] Thank you for taking the time to reflect on this.

thoughtful comment. thanks a lot

I have noticed in my experience that there is a roof the semen retention period and its benefits. Benefits compound until about 30 days. Past one month, I keep feeling pretty much the same.

I use modafinil in very low doses, less than 50 mg. and that has a stimulant and cognitively enhancing quality but not too much to become jittery. More than 50 mg or mixing it with caffeine can be anxiety producing. This is based on my experience only

These are additional practices that can be very beneficial to the health of your visual system: • Get outside and GET SUNLIGHT, EARLY IN THE DAY (about 2000 LUX) for about 10 minutes . (you can measure the ammount of light with an app called light-meter). ◇ Melanopsin ganglion cells (mRGCs) send information of the presence of light, and this set your circadian clock. (Melanopsin Retinal Ganglion Cells) • Spending al least 2 hours total exposed to NATURAL BLUE LIGHT every day (ideally early in the day and at the end of the day). It keeps visual system healthy, and also has possitive effects on mood and hormonal balance regulation.

mmmh interesting

This issue challenges the right understanding and application of the ideas that Leo has exposed in episodes such as: - Collective Ego - Understanding Survival - Episode about BIAS - Self-deception - Conscious Politics - Miniseries about the Myth of Science - Episode about going Meta - Episodes about Holism And many others... (the original names are not exactly as I wrote them). It is very difficult to really embody these ideas, and the way the conversation has been carried out in a micro-level (this forum) and macro-level (media and society in general) shows how far we are from actually embodying holistic thinking. ..

I read this article: https://consilienceproject.org/an-infodemic-plaguing-the-pandemic-response/ High level analysis

Thank you for your post

Yes, it is right. Not all perspectives are equally valid and thorough. Nevertheless, there is always some kind of "signal", even when there is lots of noise. A wise solution might be to recognize what are the key values from which people, as mistaken as they can be, are operating. It would be something like "steelmaning" their propositions, instead of "strawmaning " them. And from that place we can think of a possibility of global collaboration towards some shared goal. It is very difficult, and I don't know if it is even possible...