4201

I'd be curious to see which studies you found, from what I'm seeing DHA seems highly important in brain development and to the brain in general, as well as being a good predictor for cardiac health https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02859265 "The follow-up studies have shown that infants of mothers supplemented with EFAs and DHA had higher mental processing scores, psychomotor development, eye-hand coordination and stereo acuity at 4 years of age." https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/3/5/529 "Conversions through to DHA in adults have been found to be very low. When stable isotope-labeled ALA was given to a sample healthy young male volunteers in the UK that did not take fish oil or regularly eat fish, there was very little conversion right through to DHA (EPA 7.9%, DPA 8.1% and DHA 0–0.04%) [24]." "While EPA is required for eicosanoid synthesis, the widespread presence and preferential retention of cell membrane phospholipids for DHA, particularly in the brain, indicates that DHA is the essential omega 3 fatty acid." "For instance, the work of Harris et al. [38] and von Schacky [39] have established that the most reliable fatty acid indicator for risk of coronary heart disease is EPA + DHA in erythrocyte membrane phospholipids. Further, Harris et al. [38] demonstrated that erythrocyte DHA phospholipids correlated highly with cardiac DHA phospholipids (r = 0.84, p = 0.01)." They don't really say why DHA is important (and I'm not sure they know why) but we definitely know that it's quite important for the brain because the brain has evolved to preferentially select for those acids. If DHA wasn't important we wouldn't find it as much of it in the brain. At the end of the day it's all just correlations probably because we don't understand what the body does with this DHA but it's highly likely to be a very important nutrient and given the low conversion rate of ALA, I wouldn't even bother with specifically taking ALA. When looking up "EPA DHA body requirement" on google scholar you get a bunch of results that are about what are the requirements to feed a certain species of fish amounts of EPA and DHA. It's possible such a study would have been mistaken for one about the human body? Otherwise I'm really curious about a study that would invalidate all of this body of research if you have one.

I would be tempted to think creating such an event as an awakening or retreat instead of recognizing there is no event and that it's always now creates in a way the backlash because the ego have this event to cling onto as part of it's new life story. In a sense going on a retreat is creating a special moment in which the "me" achieves something and this might lead to lots of thinking about this new "achievement of mine". Of course one could go out of the retreat with no idea (like trying to continue the meditation but in every day activities without ever conceptualizing the retreat event) but it's hard to not ever conceptualize about it ever. No matter how big of an ego backlash you get though, I would think the insights you get during the retreat are much more beneficial than the backlash are bad and I don't think the retreat itself would be the main cause of a massive backlash if any.

Yeah I guess I should just accept omega 3 is a tough nutriment to get. Where do you get Krill oil? I see them in pill form but none in "normal form". Do you cook with this stuff? chia, linseeds/flaxseeds and walnuts are all ALA omega 3 which your body can convert to DHA in the liver through a difficult process. This process does not work if you have too much omega 6 in your system so it's not a sustainable alternative to fish oils and other sources of EPA/DHA omega 3.

The book of not knowing by Peter Ralston!

You'd get a red-neck revolution similar to what happened on the capital building on January 6 lol Lots of conservatives are stuck in conspiracy theories about vaccines and the pandemic. Making it mandatory would have only increased outrage and reinforced their idea that the government is trying to "use the pandemic to control your life".

Why would one ever want to be awake only part-time? Yes you see everything on psychedelics but you had to force your mind to stop identifying with thought as if you can't do that without it. Doesn't it lead to a form of learned helplessness? No matter how much more work it is to be able to stay present without psychedelics, it's infinitely more useful than being awake 10% of the time. I really love psychedelics and everytime I take them it's just amazing. But the doubts I have about my ability to wake up sober do not go away with psychedelics. You could say I should just not care about my ability to awaken without psychedelics but my ability to not care = my ability to awaken without psychedelics. The reality is no matter how great my psychedelic awakening are, I still feel shit for most of the time because of thought identification and no amount of psychedelics actually raise my ability to not identify with thought, it just temporarilly makes it easy.

If you stop taking anything for a year, how your life would be? I personally dislike the dependence. I'm glad embracing the dependence worked for you but personally I dislike the idea of having to rely on an external substance for happiness or productivity. And honestly there is no reason to. Anything that is possible on 5 MeO is possible without 5 MeO.

I can take any psychedelic (shrooms, acid or 5meo). I know it would feel amazing but next week I'd be back thinking I can only awaken with psychedelics. That is the issue.

Yes I meditate daily for 30 minutes. It doesn't prevent me from spending the whole 30 minute of meditation rationalizing about why meditation doesn't work, but the habit is there.

Yes absolutely nothing is neither finite nor infinite but no proof nor logic exist in the context of absolute nothingness. Logic is a sequence of statements and it implies time. My point is that we can't work from this relative context to prove infinity. The only nonduality is nonduality, there is no shortcut.

The reason scientists don't understand mental illness is that they study it as if it was a physical phenomenon when it is a conceptual phenomenon. Feel free to give it the credit of a physical thing if you want, but doing this you validate it conceptually as "being a thing" which reinforces the phenomenon itself. You can't study thought with thought. It doesn't make it "simple". Thoughts are quite tricky... if you think they are

You conclude it's infinite after going through a finite reasoning. After asking a fixed number of questions to your scientists you kinda just conclude it's infinite but you haven't been through the infinity of questions you could ask deconstructing everything. This doesn't mean you are "wrong" nor that it's finite but your proof isn't a proof, it's just a "reasonable explanation". Next time your mind wants to get stuck in thought again, it can just go deeper than this explanation to get stuck. Since you assumed it's infinite you didn't go all the way in and so there's always deeper to get stuck anyway. Can you prove something to be infinite in a finite number of statements? You can prove it by showing that for everything there is another one. For instance let's prove there is infinitely many natural numbers. Assume the natural numbers are a finite set. Add every number in the set, you get a new number which is bigger than any number in the set, and thus not in the set and so the natural numbers are infinite. You can't use numbers to prove your experience is infinite though because your cognitive ability is too limited to process any number. There exists numbers too big for a computer made with of all the particles in the universe to store. So numbers is not the way to go with your human experience. You could try to go visually but you'd soon find out that the resolution of your eye is limited and you can't see images with infinite resolution, so you wouldn't be able to compare images past a certain level of detail. Same story with sounds there is a limit in the amount of frequencies your ears can perceive. Not only that but given that the speed of light is finite and there is minimum to the length and time unit you can perceive, a sufficiently powerful computer could simulate your experience in a finite amount of operations. There is a finite amount of particles in your observable universe interacting with themselves. Since the speed of light is finite, in any given time unit any particle only interacted with a finite amount of particles which make the whole process computable in a finite amount of operations. Given that time is not infinitely precise in how we can measure it, you wouldn't be able to distinguish the finite simulation from infinity. I don't think infinity is provable. If it was you could just take it for granted. There is no shortcut to being present. You can convince someone that it's infinite through reasonable arguments but you can't deal with the infinitely stubborn that requires a proof. Ironically if you could prove it's infinite you'd be totally out of possible misconceptions. (You'd have the perfect assumption) But that can't be since the amount of misconceptions must be infinite too. If it's infinite then there's infinitely many ways to get stuck and so a proof is not an option.

I think the main issues I was trying to highlight in this thread is learned helplessness regarding the ability to awaken without psychedelics. Having repeated awakening experiences on psychedelics while not seeing the type of life I want whenever I'm not on psychedelics for a long time lead me to believe I just am not able to stay awake by myself psychedelic-free. Of course this is a thought story and taking a psychedelic will deconstruct the story but it doesn't really matter. This story will come back whenever I've been sober for a while again because the story itself overlooks the psychedelic experiences has having "been done on psychedelics". It reinforces the idea that I can only be awake on psychedelics. I could simply just recognize that this is entirely a story and consider the case closed. I've done that many times before and after doing this I've taken my psychedelic. Fast forward 2 weeks later and I'm believing the same story and associating my past state of well being to the psychedelic rather than remembering the fact I've overcame the belief naturally prior to taking the psychedelic. I think it's clear for me at this point that what I want is a full sober awakening. Perhaps it's just silly to judge awakenings to either be sober or not, but I believe my ego would highly benefit having this "proof" that I can do it sober.

You can't have both nonduality and create a duality of you separate from an experience. But experience is not the duality you create about it. That duality exists purely for communication (I experienced this flower yesterday!), the experience itself is nondual and not separate from you.

If you assign probabilities, you just don't know. However you want to compute your probabilities is entirely up to you, I'm only of the opinion that it is not known. Could watch your video series (and might do when I get the chance) but we already agree on the fact we don't know on the absolute sense. Holy crap we are going deep with this one. Direct evidence is the only truth. You realized this many times before. Why personally identify with aliens as part of your "life's work"? This just can't lead you anywhere good. You putting yourself in a position where aliens must exist for a part of your "life work" to be valid. This can easily lead to ignoring evidence in the favor of confirming the bias you created.

If you want to talk about a specific case just link it. Abstract references to a number of cases don't do much. The cases linked in this thread has already been debunked, feel free to add more evidence if you have any.

Yeah the "bottomline" isn't debunked. Only individual cases can be debunked. You can't debunk the idea of magic existing either, you can only debunk individual phenomenon to not be magic in nature. In fact I believe this is what we call understanding.

No I haven't lived this specific identification by myself. All I can offer is explanations based on my own experiences with total lack of identification. Nothing can really replace one's experience. But there is no problem that is beyond identification. Quite fundamentally there is no problem unless you create one, in all cases and all scenarios. A person can totally stop identifying too and if they did that, they would feel as amazing as one can possibly feel. Of course just saying that to them is not going to make them stop identify. There's no way to force a person to stop identify, it's really only a thing you can do. You can tell whether transitioning is the best decision for you by feeling deeply into yourself. I would recommend at least waiting until you have a clear answer.

Because I'm an alien I'm much smarter than you and so I use reverse reverse psychology instead

Wouldn't they argue against there being aliens if they want to keep it a secret though? Maybe they actually brainwash regular humans using heavy metals to force their brain into believing there are no aliens, giving them brain fog to make them ignore all the incredible alien evidence out there...

The number of report itself doesn't prove or disprove anything. Take big foot for instance: There definitely are UFOs (objects not identified) but none of the UFO sighting confirms them to be of alien nature. It's like you are trying to convince us that big foot is homosexual based on the amount of big foot reports there are. No matter how many UFOs we find it doesn't confirm it's aliens. Each individual case has it's own individual explanation. Even if there are aliens out there among the UFOs it wouldn't explain 100% of the UFOs. Most of the UFOs are debunkable (like the one you linked at the beginning of this thread). If you don't want to provide any extra evidence there's not much more to chat about here.

Got my first dose of the Moderna vaccine here in Canada. No side effect for me, only slight tension in the arm after injection

You seem to have a lot of ability to notice your own bias. I sincerely think you have great contemplation skills and you can find the truth entirely by yourself. Of course it's easier to distance ourselves from the issues we aren't stuck on believing. It's easy for me to talk about gender dysphoria light heartedly because I'm looking at it from a totally detached state. It's a different thing to detach from the belief. Still, I do empathy with your situation as I had my own "heavy" things to deconstruct as well. Regardless of gender disphoria having been a misconception or not you will find happiness in accepting your current body and your current situation. All identifications are "misconceptions" in a sense. For instance the idea that I am a programmer type of person and not a footballer type of person is just an identity, it's not true. I could practice football and become better at it. Does it mean I ruined my life because I believed this idea about myself when I was young and it affected what I am good at now (RIP my footballer life)? No. If you want to make past identifications/misconceptions into problems you can but this too is a misconception. The truth is that the present moment is all there is, this story about what I should have done or could have been are ridiculous. If you truly accept everything and are fully in touch with the present moment then there is no gender dysphoria, no depression, no psychosis, nor any regrets about past decisions. Ego doesn't like to be told gender dysphoria is a misconception because ego thinks it is a person who has gender dysphoria. Even thinking you are a person is a misconception. Your true nature is much greater than that, even if it's being hidden behing layers and layers of conditioning. Gender dysphoria sure is quite a convenient explanation when you are lost, depressed and insecure about your body and sexuality. It's like a catch-all explanation which somehow explains everything "wrong" about yourself. No need to figure out anything anymore, I just had the wrong body! Reality is often much more nuanced than that. Traumas can be complex and intricate, they rarely are black and white like this. Traumas are unrecognized situations that led you to believe false things. Most of the time they are very specific to you rather than being a vague thing you can find others to have too. You say it's funny therapy doesn't fix gender dysphoria but it doesn't fix the most severe cases of depression either. Those get prescribed hard drugs instead. Of course if you have just some mild depression therapy can help, but there's no mild gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is relatively new compared to depression as well and the mainstream progressive opinion seems to be going toward normalizing hormone blockers for children and generally validating the idea of gender dysphoria being an actual (physical) illness. So I wouldn't imagine psychologists trying to challenge one's opinion of gender dysphoria just yet. I think it will take much longer before they realize that identification is limitless. Cause let's say gender dysphoria is fully validated. Now what about people who think they are the wrong species? (Furries) We would generally say those aren't valid because what they identify with isn't human. But are we going to "open up" to this idea in the future? When will we realize that one can literally identify with anything and make a problem out of it if convinced their belief is true? I imagine at some point there will be a crash but for now we haven't crashed yet so modern medicine continue to validate those identification-driven illnesses and so here we are.

It sure is far fetched hahaha, I wouldn't say I believe it but it's an entertaining idea. I'm curious what they will come up with in 2024. I don't think they can win again with Trump so what are they going to try? They are very funded so it's not like they won't try anything.