|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 21, 2021 23:09:52 GMT -5
THE POWER OF UNAWARE SUGGESTION Here is an interesting example of mass suggestibility which occurred at a San Diego military base.The headline in a local newspaper read: " 1,000 SOLDIERS GET SICK FROM RUMOR THAT WASN'T TRUE". The case reported in the American Journal of Epidemiology, explains that the recruits at the base heard and read a false rumor that they had been exposed to an airborne toxic poison. Mass hysteria resulted and caused hundreds to have the same symptoms. As the rumor spread, more and more young men started coughing and complaining of chest pains which set off a domino effect on hundreds of soldiers. Finally, authorities were forced to evacuate 1,800 of the men who had trouble breathing. Over 350 soldiers of those were taken by ambulance to a hospital for testing. Eight men felt so ill, they were actually hospitalized for several days. When clinical tests were done, the results showed there was nothing wrong with the air or the men. This points up the validity of the psychosomatic theory that illness begins in the mind. Repetitive suggestion works even when the viewer is in a light, hypnoidal level, which is what happens when we watch television. The mind opens up to record images while we focus in to the lighted screen. Suggestion is not merely words spoken, watching other people's behavior also acts as suggestion.
AN EPIDEMIC OF RESPIRATORY COMPLAINTS
EXACERBATED BY MASS PSYCHOGENIC ILLNESS
IN A MILITARY RECRUIT POPULATION JEFFERY P. STRUEWING, GREGORY C. GRAY American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 132, Issue 6, December 1990, Pages 1120–1129, doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115755Published: 01 December 1990 Abstract The authors report an episode of mass psychogenic illness exacerbating respiratory symptoms in military recruits. The epidemic occurred over a 10- to 12-hour period in September 1988, in a group initially complaining of cough and pleuritic chest pain. More than 1,800 men were evacuated from their barracks because of a suspected toxic gaseous exposure. Approximately 1,000 recruits developed at least one new symptom, 375 were evacuated by ambulance to receive further medical evaluation, and at least eight were hospitalized. Air sample testing from the area was unremarkable, and there were few abnormal physical examination or laboratory findings. The epidemiologic investigation included a questionnaire administered 2 weeks after the epidemic to 1,000 of the recruits involved. A total of 55% of those who completed the questionnaire reported the onset of at least one new symptom after supper, with at least 25% reporting the new onset of cough, light-headedness, chest pain, shortness of breath, headache, sore throat, or dizziness. A total of 18% received further medical evaluation. The development of new symptoms and the receipt of further medical evaluation were associated with evidence of physical stress, mental stress, and awareness of rumors of odors, gases, and/or smoke. This epidemic was unique because of its size and its occurrence in an all-male population.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 30, 2021 22:33:12 GMT -5
THE POWER OF UNAWARE SUGGESTION Here is an interesting example of mass suggestibility which occurred at a San Diego military base.The headline in a local newspaper read: " 1,000 SOLDIERS GET SICK FROM RUMOR THAT WASN'T TRUE". The case reported in the American Journal of Epidemiology, explains that the recruits at the base heard and read a false rumor that they had been exposed to an airborne toxic poison. Mass hysteria resulted and caused hundreds to have the same symptoms. As the rumor spread, more and more young men started coughing and complaining of chest pains which set off a domino effect on hundreds of soldiers. Finally, authorities were forced to evacuate 1,800 of the men who had trouble breathing. Over 350 soldiers of those were taken by ambulance to a hospital for testing. Eight men felt so ill, they were actually hospitalized for several days. When clinical tests were done, the results showed there was nothing wrong with the air or the men. This points up the validity of the psychosomatic theory that illness begins in the mind. Repetitive suggestion works even when the viewer is in a light, hypnoidal level, which is what happens when we watch television. The mind opens up to record images while we focus in to the lighted screen. Suggestion is not merely words spoken, watching other people's behavior also acts as suggestion.
AN EPIDEMIC OF RESPIRATORY COMPLAINTS
EXACERBATED BY MASS PSYCHOGENIC ILLNESS
IN A MILITARY RECRUIT POPULATION JEFFERY P. STRUEWING, GREGORY C. GRAY American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 132, Issue 6, December 1990, Pages 1120–1129, doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115755Published: 01 December 1990 Abstract The authors report an episode of mass psychogenic illness exacerbating respiratory symptoms in military recruits. The epidemic occurred over a 10- to 12-hour period in September 1988, in a group initially complaining of cough and pleuritic chest pain. More than 1,800 men were evacuated from their barracks because of a suspected toxic gaseous exposure. Approximately 1,000 recruits developed at least one new symptom, 375 were evacuated by ambulance to receive further medical evaluation, and at least eight were hospitalized. Air sample testing from the area was unremarkable, and there were few abnormal physical examination or laboratory findings. The epidemiologic investigation included a questionnaire administered 2 weeks after the epidemic to 1,000 of the recruits involved. A total of 55% of those who completed the questionnaire reported the onset of at least one new symptom after supper, with at least 25% reporting the new onset of cough, light-headedness, chest pain, shortness of breath, headache, sore throat, or dizziness. A total of 18% received further medical evaluation. The development of new symptoms and the receipt of further medical evaluation were associated with evidence of physical stress, mental stress, and awareness of rumors of odors, gases, and/or smoke. This epidemic was unique because of its size and its occurrence in an all-male population.
That's what A-H call creating by default. Something happens in your life, and then you have a knee-jerk reaction to it. It's the way 99.99% of people seem to live their lives. They are lazy focusers. They focus on whatever gets their attention, which means they usually focus on who screams the loudest or the stories that are the most outrageous or the stories they run in the news 24/7. And so their focus is all over the place. And with a focus all over the place, their minds are restless and their lives lack any direction and they never get much momentum going on anything and so their focus and lives are all too easily hijacked by others who are focused more strongly and have more momentum going. It's basically living on autopilot. And when you are on autopilot, the power of suggestion is a real factor, I agree. But when you are living consciously and focus deliberately, the power of suggestion has little to no impact on your life. In essence, people who create by default calibrate to their environment, while people who focus and create deliberately calibrate to their own Self. Quite simply, it's just a question of what we calibrate to, Self or others. If we calibrate to our environment, then what the people around us predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect will eventually also become what we predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect. And what we predominantly think about or focus upon equals the balance of our state of being and from our state of being we attract the things and people and events into our lives that we experience. So it follows that the more we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the more the people and things and events around us have control over our experience, and the less we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the less the people and things and events around us have control over our experience. This is where the suggestive power of television, movies and other people's behavior stands and falls. That suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which makes it entirely optional. And that's the problem with statistics, especially when we want to draw conclusions based on what other people have been experiencing. What we experience matches our state of being and our state of being depends on where our attention goes, predominantly. That's what "You get what you think about, whether you want it or not" means. And since no one can think for us, it follows that others have no actual role to play in terms of what kind of experiences we create for ourselves - unless (!) we include what others think and do in our awareness and make that a predominant factor, then indeed others - seemingly (!) - can mess up our experience. But again, that suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which again makes it optional. Which means if statistics or what other people experience will also apply to us or will be what we are going to experience as well, is up to us. So, for creators by default, I'd say these statistics usually apply more or less accurately and are therefore somewhat useful to them as guidance in terms of what to expect and what to do, because they all somewhat focus on similar things (usually whatever is on the news), therefore have their minds occupied with similar topics, therefore have a similar set point on the emotional scale, therefore have similar states of being, therefore have similar points of attraction, therefore have similar experiences. But for deliberate creators, these statistics are useless, because they don't let their environment dictate their focus or what they think and feel and so their state of being is different from the people around them, therefore their point of attraction is different and the experiences they attract are different. This is not rocket science. A 3 year old should understand this, and they probably do, intuitively. And they also live and act accordingly. Not so much adults though. So, I'm not surprised at the results of that 'experiment'. People are manipulated all too easily when they are on autopilot. What usually saves them though is that their attention is fickle and their attention span short. Which is probably a major headache for the manipulators. Because they only have power over their subjects as long as their subjects give them their undivided attention. Which is actually good news, because as easily as people can come under any kind of spell, they can as easily break free from any kind of spell. Thanks for posting this! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2021 23:12:51 GMT -5
THE POWER OF UNAWARE SUGGESTION Here is an interesting example of mass suggestibility which occurred at a San Diego military base.The headline in a local newspaper read: " 1,000 SOLDIERS GET SICK FROM RUMOR THAT WASN'T TRUE". The case reported in the American Journal of Epidemiology, explains that the recruits at the base heard and read a false rumor that they had been exposed to an airborne toxic poison. Mass hysteria resulted and caused hundreds to have the same symptoms. As the rumor spread, more and more young men started coughing and complaining of chest pains which set off a domino effect on hundreds of soldiers. Finally, authorities were forced to evacuate 1,800 of the men who had trouble breathing. Over 350 soldiers of those were taken by ambulance to a hospital for testing. Eight men felt so ill, they were actually hospitalized for several days. When clinical tests were done, the results showed there was nothing wrong with the air or the men. This points up the validity of the psychosomatic theory that illness begins in the mind. Repetitive suggestion works even when the viewer is in a light, hypnoidal level, which is what happens when we watch television. The mind opens up to record images while we focus in to the lighted screen. Suggestion is not merely words spoken, watching other people's behavior also acts as suggestion.
AN EPIDEMIC OF RESPIRATORY COMPLAINTS
EXACERBATED BY MASS PSYCHOGENIC ILLNESS
IN A MILITARY RECRUIT POPULATION JEFFERY P. STRUEWING, GREGORY C. GRAY American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 132, Issue 6, December 1990, Pages 1120–1129, doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115755Published: 01 December 1990 Abstract The authors report an episode of mass psychogenic illness exacerbating respiratory symptoms in military recruits. The epidemic occurred over a 10- to 12-hour period in September 1988, in a group initially complaining of cough and pleuritic chest pain. More than 1,800 men were evacuated from their barracks because of a suspected toxic gaseous exposure. Approximately 1,000 recruits developed at least one new symptom, 375 were evacuated by ambulance to receive further medical evaluation, and at least eight were hospitalized. Air sample testing from the area was unremarkable, and there were few abnormal physical examination or laboratory findings. The epidemiologic investigation included a questionnaire administered 2 weeks after the epidemic to 1,000 of the recruits involved. A total of 55% of those who completed the questionnaire reported the onset of at least one new symptom after supper, with at least 25% reporting the new onset of cough, light-headedness, chest pain, shortness of breath, headache, sore throat, or dizziness. A total of 18% received further medical evaluation. The development of new symptoms and the receipt of further medical evaluation were associated with evidence of physical stress, mental stress, and awareness of rumors of odors, gases, and/or smoke. This epidemic was unique because of its size and its occurrence in an all-male population.
That's what A-H call creating by default. Something happens in your life, and then you have a knee-jerk reaction to it. It's the way 99.99% of people seem to live their lives. They are lazy focusers. They focus on whatever gets their attention, which means they usually focus on who screams the loudest or the stories that are the most outrageous or the stories they run in the news 24/7. And so their focus is all over the place. And with a focus all over the place, their minds are restless and their lives lack any direction and they never get much momentum going on anything and so their focus and lives are all too easily hijacked by others who are focused more strongly and have more momentum going. It's basically living on autopilot. And when you are on autopilot, the power of suggestion is a real factor, I agree. But when you are living consciously and focus deliberately, the power of suggestion has little to no impact on your life. In essence, people who create by default calibrate to their environment, while people who focus and create deliberately calibrate to their own Self. Quite simply, it's just a question of what we calibrate to, Self or others. If we calibrate to our environment, then what the people around us predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect will eventually also become what we predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect. And what we predominantly think about or focus upon equals the balance of our state of being and from our state of being we attract the things and people and events into our lives that we experience. So it follows that the more we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the more the people and things and events around us have control over our experience, and the less we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the less the people and things and events around us have control over our experience. This is where the suggestive power of television, movies and other people's behavior stands and falls. That suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which makes it entirely optional. And that's the problem with statistics, especially when we want to draw conclusions based on what other people have been experiencing. What we experience matches our state of being and our state of being depends on where our attention goes, predominantly. That's what "You get what you think about, whether you want it or not" means. And since no one can think for us, it follows that others have no actual role to play in terms of what kind of experiences we create for ourselves - unless (!) we include what others think and do in our awareness and make that a predominant factor, then indeed others - seemingly (!) - can mess up our experience. But again, that suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which again makes it optional. Which means if statistics or what other people experience will also apply to us or will be what we are going to experience as well, is up to us. So, for creators by default, I'd say these statistics usually apply more or less accurately and are therefore somewhat useful to them as guidance in terms of what to expect and what to do, because they all somewhat focus on similar things (usually whatever is on the news), therefore have their minds occupied with similar topics, therefore have a similar set point on the emotional scale, therefore have similar states of being, therefore have similar points of attraction, therefore have similar experiences. But for deliberate creators, these statistics are useless, because they don't let their environment dictate their focus or what they think and feel and so their state of being is different from the people around them, therefore their point of attraction is different and the experiences they attract are different. This is not rocket science. A 3 year old should understand this, and they probably do, intuitively. And they also live and act accordingly. Not so much adults though. So, I'm not surprised at the results of that 'experiment'. People are manipulated all too easily when they are on autopilot. What usually saves them though is that their attention is fickle and their attention span short. Which is probably a major headache for the manipulators. Because they only have power over their subjects as long as their subjects give them their undivided attention. Which is actually good news, because as easily as people can come under any kind of spell, they can as easily break free from any kind of spell. Thanks for posting this! Nice… And thinking they would die, some folk do die and awaken to find themselves held captive by a well-meaning Hospital that gives them the full-treatment… then, when their funds are depleted, throw them out on the street. Corporations need to be fed. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 30, 2021 23:25:44 GMT -5
THE POWER OF UNAWARE SUGGESTION ..
That's what A-H call creating by default. Something happens in your life, and then you have a knee-jerk reaction to it. It's the way 99.99% of people seem to live their lives. They are lazy focusers. They focus on whatever gets their attention, which means they usually focus on who screams the loudest or the stories that are the most outrageous or the stories they run in the news 24/7. And so their focus is all over the place. And with a focus all over the place, their minds are restless and their lives lack any direction and they never get much momentum going on anything and so their focus and lives are all too easily hijacked by others who are focused more strongly and have more momentum going. It's basically living on autopilot. And when you are on autopilot, the power of suggestion is a real factor, I agree. But when you are living consciously and focus deliberately, the power of suggestion has little to no impact on your life. In essence, people who create by default calibrate to their environment, while people who focus and create deliberately calibrate to their own Self. Quite simply, it's just a question of what we calibrate to, Self or others. If we calibrate to our environment, then what the people around us predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect will eventually also become what we predominantly think and talk and worry about and expect. And what we predominantly think about or focus upon equals the balance of our state of being and from our state of being we attract the things and people and events into our lives that we experience. So it follows that the more we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the more the people and things and events around us have control over our experience, and the less we let the people and things and events around us take control of our focus, the less the people and things and events around us have control over our experience. This is where the suggestive power of television, movies and other people's behavior stands and falls. That suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which makes it entirely optional. And that's the problem with statistics, especially when we want to draw conclusions based on what other people have been experiencing. What we experience matches our state of being and our state of being depends on where our attention goes, predominantly. That's what "You get what you think about, whether you want it or not" means. And since no one can think for us, it follows that others have no actual role to play in terms of what kind of experiences we create for ourselves - unless (!) we include what others think and do in our awareness and make that a predominant factor, then indeed others - seemingly (!) - can mess up our experience. But again, that suggestive power cannot stand by itself, it takes cooperation on our part, which again makes it optional. Which means if statistics or what other people experience will also apply to us or will be what we are going to experience as well, is up to us. So, for creators by default, I'd say these statistics usually apply more or less accurately and are therefore somewhat useful to them as guidance in terms of what to expect and what to do, because they all somewhat focus on similar things (usually whatever is on the news), therefore have their minds occupied with similar topics, therefore have a similar set point on the emotional scale, therefore have similar states of being, therefore have similar points of attraction, therefore have similar experiences. But for deliberate creators, these statistics are useless, because they don't let their environment dictate their focus or what they think and feel and so their state of being is different from the people around them, therefore their point of attraction is different and the experiences they attract are different. This is not rocket science. A 3 year old should understand this, and they probably do, intuitively. And they also live and act accordingly. Not so much adults though. So, I'm not surprised at the results of that 'experiment'. People are manipulated all too easily when they are on autopilot. What usually saves them though is that their attention is fickle and their attention span short. Which is probably a major headache for the manipulators. Because they only have power over their subjects as long as their subjects give them their undivided attention. Which is actually good news, because as easily as people can come under any kind of spell, they can as easily break free from any kind of spell. Thanks for posting this! On the same lines with your comment, this seemed relevant to me: "Material world depends on intent. You see repeating patterns in your life because of your lack of focus". |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Oct 1, 2021 1:00:22 GMT -5
linkA Declassified State Department Report Says Microwaves Didn’t Cause “Havana Syndrome"Noises linked to mysterious injuries among US diplomats in Cuba were most likely caused by crickets — not microwave weapons — according to a declassified scientific review commissioned by the US State Department and obtained by BuzzFeed News. The State Department report was written by the JASON advisory group, an elite scientific board that has reviewed US national security concerns since the Cold War. It was completed in November of 2018, two years after dozens of US diplomats in Cuba and their families reported hearing buzzing noises and then experiencing puzzling neurological injuries, including pain, vertigo, and difficulty concentrating. Originally classified as “secret,” the report concluded that the sounds accompanying at least eight of the original 21 Havana syndrome incidents were “most likely” caused by insects. That same scientific review also judged it “ highly unlikely” that microwaves or ultrasound beams — now widely proposed by US government officials to explain the injuries — were involved in the incidents. And though the report didn’t definitively conclude what caused the injuries themselves, it found that “psychogenic” mass psychology effects may have played a role. “No plausible single source of energy (neither radio/microwaves nor sonic) can produce both the recorded audio/video signals and the reported medical effects,” the JASON report concluded. “We believe the recorded sounds are mechanical or biological in origin, rather than electronic. The most likely source is the Indies short-tailed cricket.”The report’s findings fly in the face of a medical report commissioned by the State Department and published by a National Academies of Sciences panel last year, which found that microwaves were the “most plausible” cause of the symptoms. That panel was not provided with the JASON report as part of its assessment, the NAS told BuzzFeed News. “We are grateful to the JASON Group for their insight, which while coming to no firm conclusions, has assisted us in our ongoing investigation of these incidents,” a State Department spokesperson told BuzzFeed News in an emailed statement. The spokesperson declined to answer questions about why the panel’s findings were never made public or provided to the NAS.
"The 2018 JASON report, which was commissioned during the last administration, is not aligned with the Biden-Harris administration’s understanding of AHI [anomalous health incidents] and it has not informed our response," said a senior administration official, in a statement sent to BuzzFeed News. "Because of the acknowledged shortcomings of previous studies, this administration has purposefully established a new panel of experts from across the Intelligence Community, academia, and the private sector with access to the full range of information available to the government to help us determine the cause of these incidents and generate new insights that can help protect our personnel.” From China to Washington, DC, around 200 possible Havana syndrome incidents have been reported worldwide since the initial cases described in the JASON report. More cases have surfaced since US intelligence agencies began conducting a review of what are now called “anomalous health incidents” and after the Defense Department asked its personnel worldwide to report suspected cases in September. In recent weeks, cases have reportedly struck an intelligence officer traveling with CIA director William Burns in India, led Vice President Kamala Harris to delay a trip to Vietnam, and triggered the recall of a CIA station chief in Vienna. On Tuesday, the US House of Representatives voted 427–0 to pass a “Havana Act” bill compensating CIA and State Department personnel affected by such incidents. News reports have widely blamed Russian spies randomly targeting CIA and State Department personnel with microwave weapons — and attributed this view to senior US officials. The JASON report provided a far less elaborate explanation. The team was given eight recordings of incidents linked to injuries and performed an extensive analysis of two cellphone video recordings from one patient. After extensive comparison with recordings of various insect species, they concluded with “high confidence” that the sounds in that case came from a particularly loud species of cricket, Anurogryllis celerinictus. (Two academic researchers who ran a similar analysis in 2019 using a recording provided by the Associated Press also concluded that the sound was caused by crickets.) The JASON scientists offered another “low confidence” theory that the sounds could have been caused by a nearby concrete vibrating machine with worn bearings. The review ruled out pulsed microwaves and ultrasound as culprits, in part because the Wi-Fi and other electronics in the house where the noises were first recorded worked fine during the incident. And by calculating the power required for such attacks, they concluded that the noises didn’t correspond to ones generated by microwave or ultrasound frequencies. But the JASON scientists left open the possibility of some other nefarious attack. “It cannot be ruled out that while the perceived sounds, while not harmful, are introduced by an adversary as deception so as to mask an entirely unrelated mode of causing illness,” the report concludes in its executive summary. “JASON puts to rest the ‘microwave attack’ theory,” University of Pennsylvania biomedical engineer Kenneth Foster told BuzzFeed News. “While we can’t rule out the idea that somebody might have been trying to harass the US officers, the idea that these were attacks intended to cause injury is supported neither by a smoking gun nor by clearly identified victims.” The NAS report from last year argued that since microwaves can trigger a painless inner ear noise called the Frey effect, they were the “most plausible” explanation for the illnesses. The JASON report analyzed the same phenomenon, but dismissed microwaves as an option. “We judge as highly unlikely the notion that pulsed RF [radiofrequency] mimics acoustic signals in both the brain (via the Frey effect) and in electronics,” the report concludes. NAS panel report chairman David Relman of the Stanford University School of Medicine did not respond to an emailed request for comment on the JASON report from BuzzFeed News. James Lin, a University of Illinois biomedical engineer who has argued that the microwave explanation for the injuries is very likely, told BuzzFeed News that the recordings of incidents analyzed in the JASON report provided by at least eight victims could not have come from real cases of Havana Syndrome. “A typical sound recorder would not be able to record the ‘microwave sound’, period,” he said by email, after reviewing the JASON report’s findings. A mainstay of the national security arena for decades, JASON contains the nation’s brightest technical minds. “This is a high powered group of expert scientists examining this question,” said former Los Alamos National Laboratory chemist Cheryl Rofer. “This appears to be a very thorough scientific analysis, the kind which wasn’t done in the National Academies of Sciences report.” Similar to a previously undisclosed 2019 CDC report on Havana syndrome, which was first reported this year by BuzzFeed News, the JASON report notes that without baseline medical data on the diplomats prior to the injuries, determining their actual cause is unlikely. The scientists also noted that, while “the suffering reported by the affected individuals is real,” mass psychology can also trigger neurological injuries in people. “JASON believes such psychogenic effects may serve to explain important components of the reported injuries.” Stigma and international politics play a role in why the mass psychology theory hasn’t been taken more seriously in the US. Meanwhile, just this month, the Cuban Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that mass psychology is the best explanation for the incidents.
While much of the released report is redacted, perhaps due to the reported involvement of CIA agents in some cases, the conclusions are clear, Rofer said. “What is available in the report is pretty dubious about directed energy weapons,” she said, “and pretty positive about crickets.” ●
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Oct 12, 2021 1:48:08 GMT -5
"Pain is subjective. When you use the energy of consciousness to make pain objective - so much like an object that it has shape, color, smell and taste - it is no longer pain." --- Magic of Psychotronic Power by Robert B. Stone (1977)
|
|
