Carl-Richard

Moderator
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    16,219

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Carl-Richard

  1. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    3 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

    @Carl-Richard i just beg to differ. I think if you have a decent level of self awareness you can look at the model and assess yourself relatively accurately. This is like a personality quiz. I won't pick "highly agree" on the question "I clean my room frequently".

    But you will pick "I approach life from a highly aware meta-perspective which sees the value of all perspectives while simultaneously distinguishing between them in a systematic way".

    When the questions of the "personality test" become highly value-laden, people tend to pick the valueable options even if they might not be fully reflective of their personality. You see this with MBTI and types like INTP and INFJ.

     

    3 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

    As for the suggestion of assessing yourself from before you learned of the model, I don't think that works with people like me who have learned about it years ago and in the meantime gone through transformations.

    You have memories. Maybe it doesn't seem like a very attractive prospect if you are in your early twenties (hint-hint). For example, did you have a concept of "the spiral" or adult developmental stages before you learned about SD?

  2. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    6 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

    According to you, anyone who studies psychology loses the ability to self reflect. Because their knowledge of psychology clouds and distorts their self perception. It's an extremely reductive conclusion to arrive at.

    Not at all. The claim is that when you learn about something valueable, you will mimick it, and you will be unable to know if you are merely mimicking it or if you have the true understanding. Because things can be simplified, things can be co-opted and made into a lower resolution picture, and you cannot verify it by stepping outside your own limited perspective, because that would obviously make it not limited. Studying psychology might help you with identifying and working with your limited perspective, but you never fully overcome it. Because it's a fact of life.

  4. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    38 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

    It's strange because i've seen somewhere 5ht1a was protective against serotoninergic syndrome. 

    Like literally right this second, I happened to read about 5HT1a's effect on endogenous serotonin release, and it actually reduces endogenous release through its autoreceptor activity. That's probably why it protects against serotonin syndrome (and why SSRIs famously have this 2-3 weeks long gap where they don't really work because the autoreceptors have to desensitize first, or that's one explanation). I remember reading about this one time during my studies.

  5. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    8 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

    It's weird to worry about the slight SSRI quality of 5 MeO when it normally and especially acts as a super-potent 5ht1a agonist. And 5HTP is barely better than a placebo.

    Maybe i didn’t understand something well.

    It seems like cases of serotonin syndrome typically occur when you get a lot of endogenous serotonin in the synaptic cleft. It might be because

    1. you might need a rather full serotonergic profile to get the full serotonin syndrome effects. Selective agonists like serotonergic psychedelics usually only affect a couple of sub-receptors and usually at varying degrees.

    2. re-uptake inhibition combined with serotonin releasers or metabolic precursors have a multiplicative dose-response relationship (you get a lot from just a little increase). However, some selective serotonergic psychedelics including 5-MeO-DMT similarly seem to be mistaken as serotonin and are affected by re-uptake, but they generally have a lower affinity for the transporter (roughly 1/10th of serotonin).

    3. most serotonergic psychedelics are partial agonists (but particularly 5-MeO is in full agonist territory for 5HT1a like you are hinting towards).

    There have been a couple of case reports of psychedelics like LSD causing symptoms of serotonin syndrome, but these are extreme cases with extreme doses and frequencies. So it's definitely possible that the 5HT1a agonism of 5-MeO could contribute to serotonin syndrome, but I would again point against the serotonin re-uptake inhibition as being a much bigger cause for concern when combined with a serotonin precursor or releaser.

     

    8 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

    And 5HTP is barely better than a placebo.

    SSRIs are barely better than placebo.

  6. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    3 hours ago, Vincent S said:

    It’s basically another form of L-Tryptofan, which is an amino acid. Which in the body/brain, turns in to L-Dopa, which in turn, turns in to Dopamine. It’s made from a plant called Griffonia Simplicifolia.

    Now, if you want to take it, you have to take it with another amino acid called L-Tyrosine, which balances out Serotonin levels. Otherwise you will have too much Dopamine, and too low Serotonin.

    You have it the other way around: L-tryptophan is a precursor to 5-HTP and serotonin:

    Trp-5ht-pathway.svg.png

     

    L-tyrosine is a precursor to L-dopa, dopamine, noradrenaline and adrenaline:

    1600px-Conversion_of_phenylalanine_and_tyrosine_to_its_biologically_important_derivatives.png

     

    It's easy to remember it when you remember that Tryptamines (psilocybin, DMT, 5-MeO-DMT; also LSD has a tryptamine component) are the classic serotonergic psychedelics. Phenylethylamines, which have the same structure as the L-tyrosine and the monoamines, are your amphetamines (including MDMA), mescaline, 2CB, etc.

  7. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    12 hours ago, Vincent S said:

    But would it be fine with 5-MEO-DMT?

    I would be careful as 5-MeO-DMT is a weak serotonin re-uptake inhibitor which in combination with 5-HTP could drastically elevate synaptic serotonin levels and pose a risk for serotonin syndrome. Definitely never take 5-MeO-DMT in combination with a MAOI (that has actually lead to serotonin syndrome and death).

  10. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    Well, it seems like you can't link YouTube comments without adding a timestamp to the comment, but I cba. But yes, the name is @razorcarich99 (or just do a text search in your browser window for "Bernardo Kastrup").

     

    33 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

    He handsome

    8 minutes ago, blackchair said:

    U r hot AF hope u have good gf, but honestly nothing beats Painkiller in metal history, sorry not sorry.....

    My profile picture is me 10 years ago when I had a hairline xD But thanks 😂 

     

  12. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    Please go like my comment suggesting Alex O'Connor to have Bernardo Kastrup on his podcast! (Scroll and look for @razorcarich99 in the comments, I can't link it here). It is currently gaining traction with 73 likes and we need all the likes we can get. This is an important oppurtunity for spreading idealism and non-duality to the masses! I have been leaving a comment about Bernardo Kastrup every time he has had on somebody who touches on the same topics, and now we are finally getting some more attention. And this would be right in the bullseye for both Bernardo and Alex, as both are philosophically minded people and will be able to speak each other's language very fluently. This would be a fantastic talk if it happens:

     

  16. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    6 hours ago, integral said:

    People are better off using ChatGPT because at least the AI will just brute  force and tell you everything science has ever figured out about the topic.

    Ok, let's do that for one of your answers:

    Quote

    Is this an accurate representation of how doctors work? Provide statistics from actual studies to back up each counterpoint:

    "I learned how to do holistic problem-solving they have not, I have expanded my understanding to consider things far beyond their ability that caused sleep, disturbances, and sleeping problems.

    Traditional medicine is often like patching a leaking boat with duct tape, quick fixes to keep it afloat. But holistic problem-solving is more like diving beneath the surface, finding the crack in the hull, and asking why the pressure built up in the first place.

    I solved my cousins restless leg syndrome, just with straight intuition from everything I’ve learned. So he experimented with my recommendation and it stopped. I didn’t even need to go down the rabbit hole of trial and error.

    A doctor has zero ability to understand the root causes of any diseases, they’re not trained for that

    The flow chart a doctor memorizes for restless leg syndrome involves first testing to see if the claim is true and then giving a drug, there is no solution outside of that. They are taught that it is a permanent illness. If a person is thought, something is permanent, and there is no cure they will not look deeper than that and certainly cannot connect all variables together to solve the problem.

    They won’t even look at all of the scientific data on the topic and just start throwing it at you and try all the things available, they won’t even do the bare minimum of regurgitating their own science. They repeat whatever generic thing they learned in school"

    Quote

    Below I break the original text into six main claims, give a brief verdict on each one, and—most importantly—attach data from peer-reviewed studies or authoritative guidelines that speak directly to the point. Citations follow the required format.

    1. “I learned how to do holistic problem-solving; doctors have not.”

    What the evidence says

    Indicator of “holistic” trainingRecent findings

    Core medical-school content on Social Determinants of Health (SDOH)The Liaison Committee on Medical Education noted that 87 U.S. schools required SDOH content in 2018-2019 — already more than half of all accredited programs (PMC)

    Dedicated clinical-reasoning curricula (teaches systematic root-cause thinking)A 2020 study found 68 % of U.S. medical schools explicitly use a clinical-reasoning framework to teach the physical exam (PMC)

    Post-graduate (residency) SDOH exposureAmong 279 U.S. family-medicine residency directors, 41 % reported substantial formal SDOH training, and 93.9 % agreed that screening for social needs “should be standard of care.” (PMC)

    Take-away: While the depth varies by school, the majority of U.S. physicians are now trained to consider biologic and social root causes, not just “patch symptoms.”

    2. “Traditional medicine is just duct-tape; it never looks for root causes.”

    Reality check

    Preventive & lifestyle counseling – the quintessential “root-cause” work – is far from perfect, but it is routine*:

    Nutrition counseling occurs in 25 – 40 % of primary-care visits (PMC).

    For hypertension, one multi-center analysis of 1.5 million office visits found guideline-documented lifestyle counseling in 22 – 34 % of cases, with nurse-managed clinics reaching 33.5 % vs 22.5 % in usual care (PMC, PMC).

    These numbers show plenty of room to improve, but they also contradict the notion of “zero” root-cause work.

    3. “A doctor has zero ability to understand the root causes of any disease; they’re not trained for that.”

    Medical training in pathophysiology and diagnostic reasoning is both intensive and measurable.

    The median U.S. curriculum still contains ~160 contact-hours of pathology/pathophysiology over the pre-clinical years (range 40 – 450 h) (PMC).

    Adding a six-hour reasoning module in one school significantly increased students’ ability to select pathophysiologically relevant symptoms (p < 0.01) (PMC).

    That is the opposite of “zero” capacity for root-cause thinking.

    4. “For restless legs syndrome (RLS) the doctor’s flow-chart is: confirm it’s real, then give a drug; they’re taught it’s permanent and incurable.”

    Current guideline algorithm (2025 AASM)

    Measure ferritin + transferrin saturation in all clinically significant RLS cases (Good-practice statement #1) (PubMed).

    First-line: correct iron deficiency (oral or IV) if ferritin ≤ 75 ng/mL or TSAT < 20 %.

    Address aggravating factors (caffeine, certain drugs, untreated sleep apnoea) before prescribing symptom-driven agents.

    Pharmacotherapy (gabapentinoids, dopamine agonists, etc.) only after the above.

    In other words, the standard pathway starts with reversible biological causes and lifestyle contributors; RLS is very much considered treatable.

    5. “I fixed my cousin’s RLS intuitively; doctors couldn’t.”

    Iron replacement—precisely what many lay “intuitive” cures amount to—has long been evidence-based:

    Randomised trials: Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs shows iron therapy increases the likelihood of meaningful symptom improvement by a risk ratio of 2.16 compared with placebo (PubMed).

    Open-label IV iron: In 2019, repeated ferric carboxymaltose achieved an 80 % response rate among prior responders (PMC).

    So a physician following guidelines would have recommended essentially the same intervention—only with lab confirmation to avoid unnecessary or unsafe iron dosing.

    6. “Doctors don’t even look at their own science; they just parrot school notes.”

    The very existence of frequently updated, evidence-graded guidelines belies that claim:

    GuidelineYearReferencesEvidence method

    American Academy of Sleep Medicine RLS CPG202567 primary referencesSystematic review + GRADE rating (PubMed)

    International RLS Study Group iron-treatment guideline201826 referencesEvidence-based & consensus mix (PubMed)

    Regular updates (2012 → 2016 → 2018 → 2025) show constant re-examination of the data—not blind repetition.

    Bottom line

    Inaccurate to say physicians “have zero ability” or never pursue root causes.

    Partly accurate that lifestyle counseling is under-delivered (one-third of visits), but that reflects systemic constraints, not lack of training.

    Wrong that RLS is approached as “permanent” or drug-only; iron status and other modifiable factors come first by guideline.

    Put simply: modern physicians may not be perfect, but the training and the evidence base they use are geared toward exactly the kind of holistic, root-cause thinking the quotation dismisses.

    ChatGPT-o3 with internet sources: https://chatgpt.com/share/68178e30-ead4-8004-8d99-a1a32e59cb3d

  19. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    2 hours ago, integral said:

    Are you trying to do a “ gotcha” moment by revealing that I don’t know the most basic thing every YouTuber rambles on about in every single sleep video for the past 20 years? Lmaooo

    I mainly tried to trap you into conceding that doctors are more holistic than you make them out to be, but you instead only wrote what was the first two sentences on the Wikipedia, so I had to spoon-feed it to you.

     

    2 hours ago, integral said:

    The first thing they go on about when you interact with them is they try to teach you these different things that could cause sleeping problems. It is ridiculous because That never helps anyone.

    You talk in these obviously exaggerated terms that are obviously not true. Why?

     

    2 hours ago, integral said:

    People that have chronic insomnia they cannot solve the problem through sleep hygiene. That is not an effective treatment method, and it rarely works in practice, because you’re burdening them with a very strict complicated routine, that  is not address any actual health problem inside their body, which is causing the sleeping problem.

    Every doctor knows sleep disturbances are often comorbid with other illnesses and general poor health. You don't have to be a renegade holistic health scientist to know that. When they teach you sleep hygiene, that's again because it's one of the most obvious thing to start with. And again, because treatment is a recursive process, if that doesn't work, they move over to the next thing.

     

    2 hours ago, integral said:

    What magical knowledge do you think sleep specialist have that is not available to someone who put the effort, who is self-taught and whose life was on the line?

    Knowledge about problems that you personally haven't had. You don't become on expert on sleep problems by fixing your own. You become an expert (if that) on your own sleeping problems.

  20. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    1 hour ago, integral said:

    Childish debate tactics? Knowing about light exposure doesn’t mean you can solve a chronic, debilitating sleep problem.

    If you had been the "#1 sleep specialist in the world" (and you didn't just read off the first few sentences on the Wikipedia like I expected you might do), you would know that the SCN is entrained by not just light exposure but also other factors like meal times, physical activity, environmental cues like laying in bed and closing your eyes, hormone fluctuations, ambient temperature fluctuations, social interactions, and general arousal.

    This is what you learn in the "basic training" of any medicine or psychology student (at least in my country for those who want to become a "medical doctor" or "clinical psychologist"). And if this "basic training" gives you an actually rather holistic picture of what can influence the circadian rhythm alone, it doesn't take much of an inferential jump to see how much of a more holistic picture (in terms of knowledge) they have of sleep and sleep problems in general.

    But I do agree that it might be the case that the practical side of diagnosis and treatment can often seem like they push you down a simplistic path, but that's mostly by design. You of course have cost and time constraints, etc., but treatment also tends to be recursive: you try one thing and see if it helps (often the most obvious thing), and if it doesn't help, you go to the next thing.

    And I also know that maybe the current common practice in most situations might not have caught up to the cutting edge that they're teaching to us kids in university and that it's still rather reductionistic and "give drugs and problem solved"; that's definitely true. But still, you said things that were factually incorrect.

     

    1 hour ago, integral said:

    Tell a doctor a drug made you sick, and they’ll often tell you you’re wrong, because your lived experience doesn’t match the data set they trust.

    What kind of fucking evil doctors are you visiting? 😂

  22. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    23 minutes ago, integral said:

    @Carl-Richard that is a fantasy world, that’s not how the real world works. There’s nothing I could say other than to experience it yourself one day and you’ll see for yourself.

    You’re repeating the idealist ivory tower representation our society and culture puts onto these things. In practice, it is a disaster.

    You're not the only person in the world that talks with or knows doctors.

     

    23 minutes ago, integral said:

    One of the most dangerous things you could do in your life is blindly take the advice from a doctor. By the time you know it, you’re on 30 different medication’s because you resisted nothing, and your life is absolutely destroyed.

    There are definitely cases where this is true, but you are making quite wild and demonstrably false statements like "they don't have any knowledge about x y and z" and "they don't learn anything new after their basic training" (which is what exactly?) and "most of them are random people with bachelor degrees". Any critique of anything must start with a sober and grounded approach.

    I'm still curious: what entrains the SCN?

  23. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    That’s not how it works in practice.

    You said they don't have knowledge.

     

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    if you have narcolepsy, they’re just gonna give you a drug and send you home telling you that your disease is permanent and you have to take this drug for rest of your life. This is not actual holistic understanding,  were they identify a gut Microbiome problem is giving you narcolepsy, so they intelligently figure out that your gut was the problem and then they help you solve that indirectly fixing your narcolepsy. They are not solving problems in this holistic way, they instead just give you a drug and think it’s permanent which is unholistic. Can you understand why based on the explanation I just gave?

    You can criticize medical practicioners without making the demonstrably false claim that they don't have any knowledge about x y and z.

     

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    Most sleep specialists are random people with bachelors degrees that are doing a repetitive job that they do not improve at. They are not PHDs giving lectures and running a company pioneering the industry. A guy giving a lecture is not on the field, diagnosing people with parasites in their guts causing autism. Never will a doctor diagnose, autism through parasite infection…. This is an indirect thinking process that doctors do not have or do not do. 

    In what part of the world can you be a practicing medical doctor with a bachelor's degree? Medical doctors know a lot about the body and medicine in general. Their specialization just means they know extra about that thing.

     

    4 hours ago, integral said:

    If there’s 100 different research papers with unique reasons causing a sleeping problem. Your doctor will use none of them to diagnose you… they don’t even know it exists because they didn’t learn that in school.

    Medical doctors routinely take courses and go to conferences and seminars to update themselves on the newest knowledge in their field. So that is the opposite of true.

     

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    How would you know? Did you interact with 20+ sleep specialist? Did you spend 10+ years solving your own sleeping problems?  What is your epistemology?

    You interacting with sleep specialists with your specific problems does not teach you everything about what sleep specialists are capable of, because if you had had slighty different problems, they would have interracted with you in a different way.

     

    I have a question: what entrains the SCN?

  24. Posted · Edited by Carl-Richard

    4 hours ago, integral said:

    A sleep specialist has no knowledge of the digestion system, has no knowledge of allergies, has no knowledge of psychology, no knowledge of nutrition…. And so on.

    Are you insane? When we had somnologist (and professor of biological psychology) Janne Grønli lecture us about sleep, she talked about how essentially everything under the sun (pun intended) is connected to sleep. She also wrote her PhD on the effects of chronic stress on sleep. Her research group is called the Stress and Sleep Group, and is a part of the Department of Biological and Medical Psychology. And the course we had her in (biological psychology) felt specifically aimed at showing how everything in the body and brain and mind is interconnected, everything from digestion, to the immune system, to hormones, to nutrition. I learned the word "psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology" there. We also had to sit through a lecture by a dude who wrote a PhD on diarrhea and learned about different gastric diseases and related psychological conditions (and read articles on things like Giardia duodenalis, a stomach parasite, and the effects of dietary gluten on things like serotonin synthesis in the gut).