CosmicExplorer

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    37

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CosmicExplorer

  1. Posted

    Almost all reasons for emotional pain and emotions are arbitrary. The stronger the mental illness, the more it applies, but it also applies to completely average and normal people. Let me explain what I mean by that

    What I mean by that is let's say you feel irritated by something, feel guilt about something, or angry about something, or feel lonely, or anxious about something. Or even positive states like you somehow feel hopeful, energetic, and are in a generally good mood, problems seem very manageable, having a "good day". And in the moment it really feels like you feel guilt because of situation X, but actually, you're just in a guilty mood/lens, and in a guilty mood/lens that you're having right now, tends to skew everything towards feeling guilty about it. If you would be in a different mood, the exact same thoughts would not cause you to feel like that.

    Reckful talks about the same phenomena here:

    When he's depressed, it seems like he is depressed because he's thinking that everything has no purpose, but it turns out that it's not the reason because when his lens/mood switches to normal or mania, he doesn't mind thinking that everything has no purpose, he still feels happy even when thinking like that.

    I've discovered exactly the same thing by doing many experiments on myself. I would be feeling intense anxiety/guilt/anger because seemingly Y reason at the moment, I'd be like "ok let's see, maybe it's truly a reason why I feel like that" and I would set an alarm in 8 days on my phone to check how I would be feeling about that exact Y reason. And 8 days later my phone notification appears, so I check and try to bring exactly the same thoughts that seemingly caused me that feeling, and pretty much every single time it no longer felt like that at all, the same set of information I'm bringing to mind and yet completely different feeling about it results from it.

    If Reckful would feel depressed because of the thought "everything has no purpose" or I because of thought XYZ, then bringing that thought to mind would result in feeling depressed, no matter how we currently feel, but it's not. The easiest way to demonstrate that to somebody would be to give them bipolar disorder and make them do the experiments I mentioned.

    But It also applies to people without mental illness, in fact, the line between mental illness and not mental illness is arbitrary (I'm absolutely not saying that depression isn't real or smth, just that mood fluctuates in cycles, in normal people too, just to a much much lesser degree) "normal" people also have something like bipolar just only a tiny micro version of it, and most probably don't even notice that their mood cyclicly change.

    It's really surprising to me that even many therapists and psychiatrists believe that thoughts create mood. When actually it's a reverse causality - mood have a tendency to cause certain thoughts. I don't know how common that realization is, I mean I don't think I would've ever discovered that if not for mental illness. I understand how it can be hard to realize it requires a certain mindfulness and doing experiments on yourself actually trying to make your mood bad when having a good mood (which is a weird thing to do lol) and vice versa

  5. Posted

    @Schizophonia Only in extremely high doses for ketamine. No evidence of DXM causing Olney’s lesions even at lethal doses

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6264286_Oral_administration_of_dextromethorphan_does_not_produce_neuronal_vacuolation_in_the_rat_brain

    Quote

    To determine whether dextromethorphan produces these characteristic lesions, dextromethorphan was administered orally either as a single dose of 120mg/kg to female rats, or daily for 30 days at doses of 5-400 mg/(kg day) to male rats and 5-120mg/(kg day) to female rats. Brains were examined microscopically for evidence of neuronal vacuolation (4-6h postdose) and neurodegeneration ( approximately 24 or 48h postdose). Administration of dextromethorphan at 120mg/(kg day) in females, and at > or =150mg/(kg day) in males produced marked behavioral changes, indicative of neurologic effects. Mortality occurred at the highest doses administered. There were no detectable neuropathologic changes following single or repeated oral administration of dextromethorphan at any dose.

     

     

  6. Posted · Edited by CosmicExplorer

    DXM is a very interesting substance. In a lot of countries, you can buy it (even the pure version with the only ingredient being DXM) in the form of cough syrup or gel pills OTC. It's a dissociative, with somewhat similar effects to ketamine. I've tried it a few times and the biggest problem for me is very strong nausea and vomiting, and the only solution is to take it together with Diphenhydramine (DPH) but it makes the effects worse and DPH is generally a very unhealthy deliriant drug which use is associated with dementia. Many people don't experience nausea/vomiting from DXM or only mild.

    Chronic DXM use is associated with a reduced risk of dementia: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/15333175221124952

    Quote

    Dextromethorphan (DXM) has been reported to reduce neuronal damage and neurodegeneration in animal and human models
    We used a Cox regression hazard model to identify risk factors of dementia during 16 years of follow-up, and the results indicate that a significantly lower percentage of subjects with DXM use (P < .001) developed dementia compared with those without DXM use (11.38%, 4541/39 895 vs 18.66%, 29 785/159 580). After adjustment for age and other variables [adjusted hazard ratio: .567 (95% confidence interval: .413-.678, P < .001)], this study also demonstrated that DXM use appeared to reduce the risk of developing dementia. DXM use may potentially provide a protective effect against dementia.

    Furthermore, there is a dose dependent pattern, where higher dosage of DXM relates with a lower risk of dementia.

    Hazard ratio for no DXM use 1 (reference)

    Hazard ratio for 1-30mg a day 0.754

    Hazard ratio for 31-90mg a day 0.563

    Hazard ratio for ≥91mg a day 0.442

    DXM use is associated with a reduced risk of hearing loss: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32878128/

    Quote

    In human study, we used a Cox regression hazard model to indicate that a significantly lower percentage individuals developed SNHL compared with and without DXM use (0.44%, 175/39,895 vs. 1.05%, 1675/159,580, p < 0.001). After adjustment for age and other variables [adjusted hazard ratio: 0.725 (95% confidence interval: 0.624-0.803, p < 0.001)], this study also demonstrated that DXM use appeared to reduce the risk of developing SNHL. This animal study demonstrated that DXM significantly attenuated noise-induced hearing loss. In human study, DXM use may have a protective effect against SNHL.

    It has profound anti-inflammatory, anti-arthritic, and Immunomodulatory effects:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5595833/

  7. Posted · Edited by CosmicExplorer

    9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    There are different kinds of tinnitus. One kind comes from sound damage to the ears, other kind is brain related. Medications can also damage the ears or the brain.

    From what I've heard there's always at least some minimal hearing loss with tinnitus. Some people have huge hearing loss and no tinnitus tho

    https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/18agdm3/individuals_who_report_tinnitus_which_present_as/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

  8. Posted

    Aging has caused my chronic tinnitus + taking ototoxic drugs like ibuprofen and paracetamol for migraines over the years didn't help either

    I hear it all the time, but the intensity varies a lot. It's almost as if it goes in cycles, sometimes I bearly hear it and it's not troublesome at all (2/10 let's say), and then a few weeks go by and its volume ramps up to like 6/10, then again it goes down a few weeks later...

    Share the cure plz

  13. Posted

    6 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

    but how you deal with it in terms of healing is very dependent on things like your mental state and general physical health. This is mainstream knowledge now. The course I just took in biological psychology was all about the fuzzy boundaries between mind and brain: psychosomatic illnesses, functional somatic disorders, the placebo effect, mental coping and appraisal being an integral component of the stress response, mental coping and cognitive therapies being used to deal with chronic physical illnesses, mental disorders like PTSD being associated with negative physical health effects like cardiovascular disease, the 7 factors of "resilience" that protect you from disease are mental/social in nature, etc.

    Things like neuroticism are just as much genetically dependent as schizophrenia or obesity

  14. Posted

    2 hours ago, Yali said:

    Can it get worse than literally burning yourself alive with gasoline?

    How bad it is is still relative to one's genetic nociception levels. Some people don't mind when their flesh is burning

     

    1 hour ago, Yali said:

    They've trained thousands of hours to enter a state of consciousness

    Or a state of unconsciousness. That's more realistic, many meditators can do it but for one second maybe, the problem is with being able to reach oblivion on demand for long periods.

    2 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

    Once, I had physical pain; nothing much but it was painful. I decided to test something. I detached from my body and looked at it like I was observing a tree or something. Like it wasn't mine

    Here is the key to your equanimity. Try that pain x1000

  15. Posted

    Quote

    When you talk to old people, it’s not uncommon for them to say something like, “I’m tired of this life. I hope I die. I just don’t like it anymore.” Now, as a young person, when you hear that, it sounds horrible. You’re thinking, “No, please don’t talk like that, Grandpa. You have so much to live for,” and so on. But from Grandpa’s point of view, from Grandma’s point of view, they have experience fatigue. They have already eaten all the great meals. They’ve already had all the great sex. There’s very little novelty in your life as you get older. And it turns out the novelty is one of the things that makes life enjoyable. So when Grandma and Grandpa say, “I’m ready to go, and really the only reason I don’t jump off a bridge right now is for you guys,” for the family and the loved ones, and maybe even for society if they’re thinking of themselves that way, Grandma and Grandpa are not necessarily depressed, even. They’re just reflecting their experience of their life as an old person. So even though it’s hard as a young person to take that in, it’s worth considering that you’ll be there someday as well.

     

  16. Posted

    17 hours ago, Davino said:

    What is the difference between pain and suffering for you?

    For me it's pretty clear. Pain is the raw sensation. Suffering is a construction, disonance and resistance with the what is.

    Suffering is any uneasiness, uncomfortableness or aversion to sensation. Colloquially speaking and from a practical point of view pain is intertwined with suffering but for the sake of discussing a technical Buddhist term - pain is a raw sensation. What you're describing, pain sensations arise but the mind doesn't have any reaction to them is a cessation event:

    Quote

    During that period, at
    the level of consciousness there is a complete cessation of mental fabrications of
    any kind—of the illusory, mind-generated world that otherwise dominates every
    conscious moment. This, of course, also entails a complete cessation of craving,
    intention, and suffering

    Quote

    what happens
    in the last few moments of consciousness leading up to the cessation [...] First, an
    object arises in consciousness that would normally produce craving. It can be
    almost anything. However, what happens next is quite unusual: the mind doesn’t
    respond with the habitual craving and clinging. Rather, it fully understands the
    object from the perspective of Insight: as a mental construct, completely
    “empty” of any real substance, impermanent, and a cause of suffering. This
    profound realization leads to the next and final moment of complete equanimity,
    in which the shared intention of all the unified sub-minds is to not respond.5
    Because nothing is projected into consciousness, the cessation event arises.

    This is however an insanely high bar to be able to have it at will, not to mention that your ability to function in the world during perfect equanimity is precisely 0, you can't even pick up a cup of tea.

    18 hours ago, Davino said:

    You can get tortured and experience great pain. That is clear. But afterwards, one can be happy or suffer from that the rest of their life. In that difference is my inquiry. 

    Why afterward? After all, if you're free from suffering you don't suffer during torture either.

    10 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

    What does this mean. They don't have a monkey mind? They don't have a mind? They don't talk inwardly to themselves? They don't think? Explain please. Never heard of this.

    People experience self-talk differently. Some have more image-based self talk some have quiet, sub verbal, concepts shifting in their mind kind of thing, and some have loud talk somewhat like they would be talking to themselves in their own voice but in their head

  17. Posted

    what he says is in perfect accordance with what I said. Pain yes but no suffering. As pain is a first order phenomena and suffering is a made out of the first one, resisting what is. If what is, is suffering that is fine, you don'r resist either pain nor pleasure. In fact, pain and pleasure are seen as codependently arising.

    I asked him if he could theoretically do self-immolation and not suffer during it, and he started making excuses (it's from a comment in his last video on yt) and said his pain tolerance is higher when lifting weights lol. Someone who would be free from suffering would be able to do self-immolation with perfect calm without any problem, being waterboarded, sit with no back support in meditation for 16h repetitively... Read my Reddit post I linked in this thread it's a good summary of my thoughts about it

    1 hour ago, Davino said:

    I like this little story of Sri Anandamayi. I'm well aware that it is not relatable to anyone. She was born with rare genetics and an insane level of God-Realization. I like to study her case to see what is really possible under the sun, you may surely have seen the section I have here of her. It's like an alien of Awakening.

     

    1 hour ago, Davino said:

    Are all of these just stories? I'm open to both possibilities

    People exist who can burn themselves and not react to sensations until they feel the smell of burning flesh - and they don't give a fuck about spirituality, it's just their genetics https://news.sky.com/story/rare-genetic-mutation-allows-british-woman-75-to-feel-no-pain-12888007 doesn't say much

  18. Posted

    9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Getting jacked is a waste of time.

    And girls don't even like it. You're doing it for your own vanity.

    I wouldn't say it's a waste of time if you enjoy training and it's your hobby. Girls like slightly more muscle than avarage but 26 FFMI is an overkill, no one needs that to attract girls. If you can get to low body fat% (so your face looks better) and don't look super skinny in clothes, you're golden.

     

    19 minutes ago, Michael569 said:

    That's why split training is a poor way to train for natural lifters who are not on steroids because it is not sufficiently anabolic. 

    The most gains I've ever gotten was FBW 5x a week. Only training each muscle group for 2 sets to failure at the time. It was really suprising how much more gains I was getting when I switched from split to FBW (full body workouts)

  19. Posted

    9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    A lot of such scientific studies are very poorly designed. This issue is much larger than just this one corrupt Harvard guy.

    Perhaps as much as 50% of all scientific studies are poorly designed and lead to misleading conclusions. This is especially the case in the field of medicine. The studies are often extremely narrow and anti-holistic. Just because something works on some rat somewhere doesn't mean it will work for you. And often it doesn't even work for the rat!

    + Publication bias

  20. Posted · Edited by CosmicExplorer

    1 hour ago, Jason Actualization said:

    The one major problem here is that FFMI doesn't translate across different body fat percentages, i.e., a 28.4 FFMI at 15% will drop drastically once that person reaches single digit body fat

    Yes, FFMI will drop as someone gets leaner but it will not be a drastic difference. Assuming 85% fat loss and 15% muscle loss on a properly paced, high protein diet with proper resistance training, the difference in FFMI going from lean to shredded will be like 0.6 at best.

    1 hour ago, Jason Actualization said:

    But yes, you are correct, genetics are a primary factor, so much so that people with elite genetics will exceed the physique, naturally, of someone with poor genetics who is on gear

    And this is something many people can't possibly fathom, or just don't want to embrace the hard truth. And it's even more radical than that.
     

    Quote

     

    "World-record deadlifter Andy Bolton squatted 500 and deadlifted 600 the very first time he tried the lifts.

    Former Mr. Olympia Dorian Yates bench-pressed 315 pounds on his first attempt as a teen."

     

    Quote

    Recent research shows that some individuals respond very well to strength training, some barely respond, and some don’t respond at all. You read that correctly. Some people don’t show any noticeable results. Researchers created the term “non-responders” for these individuals.

    A landmark study by Hubal used 585 male and female human subjects and showed that twelve weeks of progressive dynamic exercise resulted in a shockingly wide range of responses.

    The worst responders lost 2% of their muscle cross-sectional area and didn’t gain any strength whatsoever. The best responders increased muscle cross-sectional area by 59% and increased their 1RM strength by 250%. Keep in mind these individuals were subjected to the exact same training protocol.

    https://forums.t-nation.com/t/the-truth-about-bodybuilding-genetics/285342

    A large percentage of the male population walking on this planet will never be able to squat 500 and deadlift 600 pounds even if you put them on insane doses of steroids, the best training protocol, give them the best trainers...

    In terms of strength, going from natural to steroids one can expect about 10% to 15% boost to their powerlifting total, which is definitely a great boost but it won't make a guy with weak genetics suddenly an elite powerlifter, not even close. Genetics is such an underestimated factor

     

  21. Posted

    1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

    This is false, because the body can actually produce abundant stem cells with original-sized telomeres

    There's so much more to aging than just telomeres. In fact we don't even have a proper marker of aging, you can't measure someone's biological age. These DNA kind of tests which apparently measure your biological age are a lie.

    Quote

    The longer a person’s telomeres, researchers found, the greater the risk of cancer and other disorders, challenging a popular hypothesis about the chromosomal roots of vitality

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/04/health/long-telomeres-age-longevity.html

    1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

    Technically nothing prevents us from living for thousands of years.

    There are an unfathomable amount of problems preventing us from living for thousands of years. Metabolism causes entropic damage in us which we have no idea how to stop. This is just my personal feeling, but I feel some denial of death vibes from popular social media anti-aging gurus like David Sinclar

  23. Posted · Edited by CosmicExplorer

    FACTS, WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE STEROIDS WERE EVEN INVENTED:

    Among Hermann Görner's many feats of strength were the following notable lifts:

    Deadlift – 360 kg (793 lb) with overhand hook grip. 380 kg (840 lb) with mixed grip.

    One-handed deadlift – 330 kg (730 lb) on 8 October 1920, Leipzig, Germany

    Deadlift – 270 kg (600 lb) using just two fingers of each hand
    As far as bodybuilding goes (and he wasn't even a bodybuilder) - 28.4 FFMI at 15% body fat (and this is a conservative estimation)



    So those things above are what is AT THE VERY LEAST possible with great genetics. Why? Because they didn't even use creatine back then, not to mention sub-optimal training and nutrition, AND way way fewer people were training overall than today so obviously fewer people with insane genetics were training.

    Some photos of the pre-steroid era guys (there's simply no way these guys aren't natural as steroids weren't even available in any lab):

    3997491_zzy.jpg

    3365813_comment_1673882231Om9hwLygCndBKH3365812_comment_1668776827A1nDJCeCqVNfyG3366610_comment_1608371318TmxFlCdnvqZguKxrdyrortv5q31.png

     

    It's not about who is natty or not as that is impossible to know. But about what is possible natty. And yes, great physiques and insane strength is possible natty. It requires however the most important thing - genetics which is the biggest pill

    Examples of photos (with good lighting and angles) of some modern physiques which are below 28.4 FFMI

    ~24.3 FFMI

    ba906d3539fa4fb2a7a890a988d84ab8.jpg

     

    ~26 FFMI

    comment_1651642676kFhldsiYWQPVo4Wif9QIIe

    25 FFMI

    lazar-angelov.jpg