|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 16, 2022 14:29:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 16, 2022 20:56:20 GMT -5
No one with integrity is claiming they can cure cancer because even the most knowing of healers understand that often times people will not resolve underlying issues in this lifetime. People who don't understand might claim to cure cancer (when they can't) but no one who does understand will ever claim to. I'm mostly with you on this one. I'm open to the possibility of magic and miracles, but some of the stuff Reefs says seems very unlikely to be true. He sometimes adds a point to his posts, saying that people who disagree with him are mentally/spiritually inferior – "indoctrinated with dogma", "asleep", etc. – which can make the post a bit more annoying that it probably needs to be. I suspect that the infamous "denial of death" may be in play here. I get it. It's disturbing, and can be sad, or scary. But it also seems that an honest facing of death and our situation as humans could lead to deeper truth and realization. I don't know whether Reefs has found the secret to curing cancer, or whether he is in denial of death, mortality, and human limitation. I hope he's found the secret! It will benefit all of us.  I'm with Reefs that there are no incurable conditions, but 'miracle cures' are very rare, and it's not a good idea to make false promises. I'd venture that most inexplicable recoveries occur in the medical system, where they are documented. I think it's safe to say that the Moore-esque types are embellishing to a dishonest degree. He isn't medical Dr. or a PhD or in any way accredited for a start, so presenting as 'Dr.' Moore is dishonest and misleading. Many of the diet gurus are Chiropractors, but they present as Dr. somebody to create the false impression that they have a medical background. Their nutrition information is, of course, Bogus, but they have literally thousands of testimonials. They do say true things about the metabolic process, but then they extrapolate into untruth. It's a common gamut that the best lies are seasoned with truth.
The healing which I call the purification isn't actually a 'cure' for anything. People understandably have very strong aversions to their maladies and want to be rid of them, but the purification is deeper than that. It's more like, this feeling can stay or go away and I'll just see what happens next. It will change inevitably. If we were perfect with that, pure conscious awareness or presence or whatever we call it would pervade the life-form to atomic and energetic scales and all the harder, tenser, denser aspects would resolve, but IRL we get to a stage where the intensity is too much, the reactivity starts up, and creates a bit of tension/density, and that's as far as it can go for now. That way, a malady might be cured or it might kill you, but that isn't the 'right motivation' of the purification process. That sort of motive is elicited by aversion, fear and the like, and we already know those reactions are causes rather than resolutions of suffering.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 16, 2022 21:37:02 GMT -5
A quick point about swimming dry land exercises. One thing I would recommend is doing a bit of something to supinate your shoulder joint. If you don't know what that means you can look it up and I'm sure there are exercise lists. Or I can post a followup to list some specific ones. Supination is the opposite of pronation, which is overdone by the freestyle stroke. Many swimmers get shoulders that are kind of rounded over forward, over-pronated. A rubber cord or cable machine is a good way to do the supination exercises. These are small muscles, light weight resistance. Just something to balance out the swimming movement. Reefs, if you're doing the more relaxed endurance-style stoke it's probably not as necessary, but I still think it could be useful. Supination (and pronation) is pretty much specific to rotating the hand and/or foot, mostly hand. I've never heard of supination of the shoulder. From what you say it sounds like you mean external shoulder rotation, which would counter the strength imbalances caused by the internally rotated shoulder position swimmers work in. That sounds like a good idea!
I would not do those in a supinated hand position, though. I'd just use a neutral grip (thumb point up), and a somewhat pronated grip (palm down) is also fine if using a cable or single elastic band. High external rotation (elbows pointing straight out the sides) would use a pronated grip, and rotation can be incorporated into other exercises like face pulls. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 16, 2022 21:37:37 GMT -5
I'm with Reefs that there are no incurable conditions, but 'miracle cures' are very rare, and it's not a good idea to make false promises. I think we actually might be much more in agreement than it seems. We both accept that there are many ways of going about it and that it has to be tailored to the individual and their specific situation and condition. Where I see us disagree, mainly, is when it comes to the question of what is more fundamental, nutrition or exercise? And so our list of priorities is different, we put all these different approaches into a different order, to the degree that at times I would consider your approach upside down and you would consider the naturopath approach upside down. And the counter-argument that some of these healers or therapists don't have the right papers and should therefore be disregarded and avoided, despite their impressive track records that prove their skills, is beyond silly. If you need someone to fix your toilet because it is overflowing but the maintenance guy in your apartment building is busy and can't deal with it this week, but you have a neighbor who has acquired the skills to fix a toilet because he has faced a similar problem multiple times in the past, so he's really good at fixing overflowing toilets now, would you reject his offer to help because he doesn't have the officially accepted qualification papers and rather sit in a flooded apartment for a week? Or would you be glad that he's there and has the time and skills to help you out? |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 16, 2022 21:55:10 GMT -5
Yea and the lats also put internal rotation pressure on the humerus/shoulder, which I wouldn't say is a bad thing, but countering that tendency would be a good idea, and external rotation exercises are always good.
This is fun. I've never thought about strength training from a swim specific perspective before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2022 22:15:50 GMT -5
A quick point about swimming dry land exercises. One thing I would recommend is doing a bit of something to supinate your shoulder joint. If you don't know what that means you can look it up and I'm sure there are exercise lists. Or I can post a followup to list some specific ones. Supination is the opposite of pronation, which is overdone by the freestyle stroke. Many swimmers get shoulders that are kind of rounded over forward, over-pronated. A rubber cord or cable machine is a good way to do the supination exercises. These are small muscles, light weight resistance. Just something to balance out the swimming movement. Reefs, if you're doing the more relaxed endurance-style stoke it's probably not as necessary, but I still think it could be useful. Supination (and pronation) is pretty much specific to rotating the hand and/or foot, mostly hand. I've never heard of supination of the shoulder. From what you say it sounds like you mean external shoulder rotation, which would counter the strength imbalances caused by the internally rotated shoulder position swimmers work in. That sounds like a good idea!
I would not do those in a supinated hand position, though. I'd just use a neutral grip (thumb point up), and a somewhat pronated grip (palm down) is also fine if using a cable or single elastic band. High external rotation (elbows pointing straight out the sides) would use a pronated grip, and rotation can be incorporated into other exercises like face pulls. Oops, yes, sorry for the confusion. Thanks for clearing that up. I meant those rotation directions (pronate, supinate) but at the shoulder joint, where as you said are called internal and external rotation. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 16, 2022 22:30:49 GMT -5
Well, to be fair to Morse, he wouldn't actually say that. He usually says that only nature can heal and then doctors take all the credit, haha. In a sense it's a Taoist approach, aka do not interfere with nature. But what he does say though (and other naturopaths as well) is that there are no incurable diseases. And that does resonate deeply because it's in line with the LOA/deliberate creation teachings. A-H say the same thing all the time. But when they say that, it often sounds like wishful thinking. So when I heard Morse say that and also explain why he could say that, it did resonate immediately and also made a lot of sense. But it is radically different approach to life and health, similar to the radical difference in approach to life between the western linear thinking approach and the eastern holistic thinking approach that Watts always talks about. Yes, there's a significant distinction between someone saying 'this product/technique WILL cure your disease' and 'there are no incurable diseases'. I would be cautious of anyone saying the first, even though I also fully believe the second. And certainly there have been a ton of amazing humans that have stepped forward over the years and said, ''This is what I did to cure my disease, and so I'm offering it to you''. Lester Levenson's (The Sedona Method) story is fascinating. Brandon Bays also springs to mind. Then there's the Healing Code. I used to know loads of them, but can't remember now. My Mum had a brain illness (the name of the illness even had 'Progressive' in the title....what chance did she have lol), and it had similarity to Parkinsons, so I looked on the internet to see if anyone had a story to tell. Sure enough, I found a guy that told a very authentic story of how he cured his Parkinsons (it involved meditation, yoga, bach flower remedies, and a bunch of other things). I totally believed him, and he had the videos to prove it. Now the problem is, can ANYONE do what he did? In theory, yes. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do those things. Then again, does that mean that everyone WOULD do it? Of course not. Everyone's different, has their own life path, their own interests, their own karmic sh/t to deal with. Even just in terms of 'personality', not everyone will do what might save their life, on the basis that it just doesn't suit their personality to do it. And that's kind of what I hear Lolly saying a bit....it sounds like he assesses someone, based on who they are, and where they are at, in their life, and then offers tailored guidance, based on that. Like, he'd have looked at my Mum, and said, 'well, there's no way she's going to meditate, but she might follow a good diet plan'. To be clear, I haven't read the whole conversation, I just saw the last page and jumped in. Yes, you can't really claim that because it's a matter of co-creation. Even those who heal via touch wouldn't really claim that, they see themselves as a vessel or conduit, merely a facilitator. Right, how many people every year die of fear their condition being terminal than their condition actually being terminal, because some 'trained professional' with a degree in a hospital has given them a scary label or told them they only have 3 months to live based on some funny statistics? Morse once told a story about one of his patients, an elderly woman who came to his clinic in a wheelchair, almost unable to move, final stage multiple sclerosis I think it was. He could help her and she fully recovered and eventually was able to walk out of his office with a skip in her step and could go back to her former life. But she also went slowly back to her former lifestyle and diet. And so a couple of years later, she was back in the wheelchair. Now, whose fault is that? Morse or the patient? It usually takes some major adjustment not just in lifestyle but primarily thinking. And then its easy and very intuitive. Then you don't have to carry around a do's and don'ts list, but know intuitively what to do. Let's say you have an inflammation problem and you go out and you have the choice between ordering a cup of coffee and a glass of orange juice. What would you choose? Once you understand what's going on, it's really simple and you don't need to rely on all these experts anymore. And I agree with Lolly there and so would the naturopaths. They just have a different order of priorities and also more trust in the self-organizing and self-healing capacity of the physical body. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 16, 2022 22:36:34 GMT -5
I'm with Reefs that there are no incurable conditions, but 'miracle cures' are very rare, and it's not a good idea to make false promises. [/div][/div]
I come from the messy real world where the vast majority don't succeed in their fitness/health goals, and deal with personalities. One guy in his eighties living alone was going to lunch with friends 3 times a week, and he did have 'a few extra pounds', drank too much wine etc, and though he would benefit from a more calorie conscious lifestyle, that would negatively impact the quality of his social life, so we didn't do anything nutritionally. I suggested he stick with simpler dishes, but he enjoyed 'hosting the banquet' so to speak, so that didn't happen. The guy still lifts heavy barbells at 83 and is doing the same programs as would a 40 yo. My professional peers told me an old guy like that will get hurt because I make him do really hard things, but at first he came to me because he had trouble climbing the stairs at the train station, and was scared of taking a tumble, so I trained him step by step over a good couple of years and I knew he could do all the things. Rather than hurting the guy, I restored his posture, cured his aching back, reversed muscle sarcopenia, and he can run a flight of stairs no problem. Not to mention psychological affects like confidence and esteem. People are complex and multidimensional, and everything about them has to be cohesive to say 'this works'. A raw food, fruit-only diet is a fad sort of thing. People might do that or a little while, and miss out on the participation in important festivities like wedding parties, birthday cakes, dinner parties and so forth, and become isolated by an individual-centric diet which is ridiculously restrictive and utterly impractical. Then, since it's impossible to stick with, and frankly inadvisable for so many reasons, they revert to whatever was going on before and nothing good comes of it. I'd argue that in many cases there is more harm than good and people are mislead into metabolic maladaption, food phobias, malnutrition, eating disorders and the literal dark side  ! I understand the 'to-good-to-true - miracles happen - science is lying and I know better' narratives are a crock, but I also know people buy into it and there's nothing to be done about that. It's because the true story is nuanced and the fable is such a simple truism. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 17, 2022 1:11:23 GMT -5
I come from the messy real world where the vast majority don't succeed in their fitness/health goals, and deal with personalities. One guy in his eighties living alone was going to lunch with friends 3 times a week, and he did have 'a few extra pounds', drank too much wine etc, and though he would benefit from a more calorie conscious lifestyle, that would negatively impact the quality of his social life, so we didn't do anything nutritionally. I suggested he stick with simpler dishes, but he enjoyed 'hosting the banquet' so to speak, so that didn't happen. The guy still lifts heavy barbells at 83 and is doing the same programs as would a 40 yo. My professional peers told me an old guy like that will get hurt because I make him do really hard things, but at first he came to me because he had trouble climbing the stairs at the train station, and was scared of taking a tumble, so I trained him step by step over a good couple of years and I knew he could do all the things. Rather than hurting the guy, I restored his posture, cured his aching back, reversed muscle sarcopenia, and he can run a flight of stairs no problem. Not to mention psychological affects like confidence and esteem. People are complex and multidimensional, and everything about them has to be cohesive to say 'this works'. A raw food, fruit-only diet is a fad sort of thing. People might do that or a little while, and miss out on the participation in important festivities like wedding parties, birthday cakes, dinner parties and so forth, and become isolated by an individual-centric diet which is ridiculously restrictive and utterly impractical. Then, since it's impossible to stick with, and frankly inadvisable for so many reasons, they revert to whatever was going on before and nothing good comes of it. I'd argue that in many cases there is more harm than good and people are mislead into metabolic maladaption, food phobias, malnutrition, eating disorders and the literal dark side ! I understand the 'to-good-to-true - miracles happen - science is lying and I know better' narratives are a crock, but I also know people buy into it and there's nothing to be done about that. It's because the true story is nuanced and the fable is such a simple truism. Again, I don't have any objections to what you say on the fitness front where you seem to have a solid theoretical and practical understanding. My objection is on the regenerating tissue front, where you seem to have no practical and not even a theoretical understanding. So if you stick strictly to fitness, we're good. Also, something you and Robert and the other skeptics should consider is that you only have access to what you are a vibrational match to and that you will live out your beliefs and get what you think about whether you want it or not. Which means with your attitude of extreme disbelief in practices that science can't explain yet, you are only a match to people, studies and stories about people that match this extreme level of disbelief. Yes, there are people who ruin their health by following the latest health fad. But there are also people who thrive on levels that you can't even imagine following the exact same health fad. So guess what kind of people you are a match to? The quacks, the fakers and the failed ones because they will reinforce your beliefs, the others that succeed and thrive will be out of reach for you, because based on your beliefs they don't exist. You block them out. That's the stupidity of a statistics based approach. It only shows you what other people chose to manifest, which has nothing to do with what you can choose or will choose. It only lowers your expectations and potential if you assume that what they have chosen to manifest will also have to be your choice. Baloney! It's a big world out there. Don't assume just because you haven't seen it or because you can't explain it that it doesn't exist or isn't even possible. That would be loserthink. Don't be a loserthinker, Lolly. "I come from the messy real world where the vast majority don't succeed in their fitness/health goals..." is such a bogus statement. There is no such thing as 'the' real world. There are as many 'real' worlds as there are 'real' perceivers. The world you experience is only a reflection of you, your beliefs and state of being. Change that, and your 'real' world changes accordingly. For now your door is shut. But once you loosen up your perspective a bit by saying things like "I've never seen it, I don't know anyone who has seen it, but hey, God's ways are mysterious, maybe there are some people who actually succeeded at this" you'll open the door to people who actually succeeded and then your 'real' world will look a bit less messy and your statistics will change as well and you'll look at those testimonies differently. And another thing, I see this in spirituality often, people thinking that fake gurus should be exposed and silenced. When people go to fake gurus and see value there for a while then they do that because at the time it was a vibrational match. When they are disappointed, they then move on to a real guru because at this point they are finally a vibrational match to a real guru. You know the saying, when the student is ready, the teacher appears. So the fake guru functioned as some sort of bridge. At the beginning they were no match to a real guru. The fake guru was the closest they could get. So they went there, learned a few things, had some changes in perspective and so they move vibrationally closer to a real guru. So even though the fake guru may have taught mostly nonsense, he had a role to fulfill which eventually lead to a real guru. Without that fake guru the gap would have been too wide and the seeker would have never found a real guru. And that's how many found Niz. It was some kind of pattern among Niz followers. So there's also a larger context and perspective to all of this, the spiritual circus as well as the healthcare circus. So if you are content with your messy little corner of the world, fine. But don't assume or even demand that all other should join you there in your little mess. Because others have different standards and different values, some like it very broad and wide, others more narrow and cozy. And that's all okay as long as everyone accepts each others choices. And one final point before I give this topic a rest: What we are talking about here, exercise and nutrition, that's all micromanaging well-being in my perspective. The focus should be on the mental and spiritual level, because whatever is happening there will eventually manifest in the physical. So working on the physical level is actually the least effective level and it doesn't really deserve all the attention it gets. The focus should be on alignment, not on what to do. Because in a state of alignment, no matter what you do, it will be to your benefit. And in a state of misalignment, no matter what you do, it will be to your detriment. So in the end, what you do, doesn't really matter that much. What matters is what you are, your state of being. Everything else flows from that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2022 9:24:15 GMT -5
Again, I don't have any objections to what you say on the fitness front where you seem to have a solid theoretical and practical understanding. My objection is on the regenerating tissue front, where you seem to have no practical and not even a theoretical understanding. So if you stick strictly to fitness, we're good. Also, something you and Robert and the other skeptics should consider is that you only have access to what you are a vibrational match to and that you will live out your beliefs and get what you think about whether you want it or not. Which means with your attitude of extreme disbelief in practices that science can't explain yet, you are only a match to people, studies and stories about people that match this extreme level of disbelief. [...] This is not my state of mind at all. It is possible to think certain people are quacks, frauds, or simply mistaken about something, while simultaneously being open to infinite possibilities and deeply appreciative of the fact that we don't know everything, and science can't explain everything. I like the attitude of the explorer. Good point. Another point of agreement. 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Jun 17, 2022 19:57:20 GMT -5
Fitness, to me, is happiness. It's Friday night. I feel great. And when I do feel that way, I have a whiskey. Kentucky bourbon on the rocks. It's great to be an American.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 17, 2022 22:26:21 GMT -5
The reason we try to be realistic is we don't want harm, and since I play in the dirt, I know the diet-guru stuff has a lot of shortcomings, but people are enamoured by it and that's just how life goes. Very good inormation is a lot less popular than the ludicrous. This is why the fruit freaks are different to the high-starch vegan doctors who are antithetical to the keto-warriors - because they are all missing the way things really work for real people in the real world. They have the idea that their one dimensional approach is the 'right way' and if only everyone else would conform to it.... This is the essence of their delusion. In my world, if someone was a vegan or wanted to be one, I could do that, but hardly anyone is or wants to, and of those that are, more than 90% give up the ghost within a year anyway. I'm happy to go on that journey because I'm not one-dimensional and my principles of nutrition can be applied in just about any way. It's a simple system of priorities 1) Adequate or appropriate calories
This is because starvation happens if you don't get enough calories, making this a life or death priority. In very poor communities we wouldn't get past this point. It would be about getting enough food no matter what food it is - and anything that is digestible and not poisonous would be 'food'. For people not in abject poverty, calories is the baseline, so if you're in a situation where you can't do any better, at least get the calories. 2) Macro nutrients If we have enough options and therefore control, the calories can be distributed sensibly between protein, fat and carbs. This can apply to vegans or omnivores or the in-betweens. Protein is pretty much a constant, so our variables are fat and carbs, and it really doesn't matter if you prefer high-carb or high-fat, as long as you get some fat and the essential fats. Carbs aren't actually essential, but there is no valid reason to exclude them, and it's probably not a great idea to over-consume fat. If there is a situation where you can't get all your vitamins etc, at least having enough calories and a good macro balance is better than just getting enough calories. Hence, this system is an order of priorities, and also, a scale of good-better-to-best diet. 3) Micronutrients It is at this stage that colourful fruit and veges take the stage. If you can at least get your calories and macros sorted, then you can focus on your vitamins and minerals, and basically, if you eat a pretty wide variety of different colours and smells you'll do OK. Have some raw for the phyto-stuff. Naturally, fruit and veg overlap with the macro section, and although this is a prioritising system, the sections work together, and some of the micronutrients are essential. 4) Meal timing This is for how many meals a day, snacks, fasting etc. It's just how your nutrients are distributed in a time-frame, which could be daily and/or weekly, and for those who want it, the frequency of 'cleanses' (not a real thing), fasts, meat free days etc. 5) Supplements If the above 4 stages are established there will little need for supplements. However, it is a rare being who can get all their nutrition from food, and almost everyone could perfect the pyramid with a supplemental topping stone. Of course this wouldn't be relevant to the impoverished at all, and there's no point worrying about this if your real-food diet is crap. Supplements are not food replacements.
That's the priority system. Imagine it as a pyramid with calories at the foundation and supplements at the top.
Hence, if you can get calories, that's good... if can distribute calories across all the macros, even better... if you can get all your colourful plants as well, better still... if you can do that every day, really great... and if you can top off any shortfalls with supplements, perfect.
That's how I structure it, and different strokes for different strokes is not a problem - it's flexible and adaptable to all the lifestyles. You don't have to eliminate any food or food group, and you won't be roped into a fundamentally deficient diet such as raw fruit only (which you will never stick to anyway). I you wanted a raw food phase, not a problem. It's part of 'meal timing' and we can still apply the 'pyramid' as far as is possible. I mean avo and olives are fruit, so along with all the sugars and fibre, calories, fat, carbs and a range of micronutrients are no problem, right? Since this approach is applicable to anyone and applies to the whole lifespan, it's what we can rightly call 'successful'. One dimensional, hard to adhere to, highly restrictive diets do not have considerable success rates because 1) they tend to be nutrtient deficient and; 2) no one actually sticks to them. I can go on a journey with someone as they go vegan and have a wonderful nutrient rich diet, and as they start adding dairy and revert to vegetarianism my 'pyramid' still works. I can sort out the spuds and meat guy with the exact same approach. Hence, its fine, do the Moore thing. Raw food is great. When you lapse and eat some beans and leaves and stuff, no worries, my structure would restore a balanced way of eating that suits personal preferences, lifestyles and even improves your social life. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 22, 2022 13:22:43 GMT -5
It is possible to think certain people are quacks, frauds, or simply mistaken about something, while simultaneously being open to infinite possibilities and deeply appreciative of the fact that we don't know everything, and science can't explain everything. I like the attitude of the explorer. Yes, that's certainly possible. But as a genuine explorer and believer in infinite possibilities you have to leave a lot of limiting beliefs behind, which includes science as well as best practice beliefs re: exercise and nutrition. Which means that at some point you have to part with the masses or the collective and also be at ease with that, because you will be called unreasonable, unscientific, impractical or just weird. I'll tell you a story about health and exercises that you can use to check where you are on the infinite possibilities scale. The more preposterous it will sound to you what I am going to suggest, the more you are in sync with the collective and the farther away you are from truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. The more this will ring true, the more independent you are from the collective and the closer you are to truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. So here's the story: Many years ago, Jerry asked Abraham about physical exercise and if it really was necessary, e.g. if it was really necessary to do pushups every day in order to develop strong arm muscles, because that's what Jerry's experience was. And Abe said, no. Because the rule always is, ask and it is given. And when your belief matches your desire, it is. That's basically the only requirement, alignment with your desire. But... people usually don't believe that when they ask it is given. They think they have to do something in order to get something. They think they have to put in some effort, that they have to earn it, they believe that there is no gain without pain, that they need the right genes etc. And so, Abe explained, while pushups are not necessary by default, people nevertheless have to do pushups in order to develop strong arm muscles. Because the pushups function as a bridge for their beliefs, it brings them into alignment with their desire. They believe they have to do 50 pushups every day for a month in order to get x amount muscle growth. So there are basically two ways of going about it. They could do it the easy way and adjust their beliefs to their desire and then it is, or they could do it the hard way and do the action and put in the effort their beliefs require them to do to match their desire and then it is. Both methods work, but one is going about the hard way and is very limited in terms of possibilities, the other is going about it the easy way and is unlimited in terms of possibilities. So I'd say what it basically comes down to is that we have to decide where on that spectrum (collective vs. infinite possibilities) we are going to play the game. And please don't misunderstand. This isn't a case against action. Not at all. Acting can be fun. Exercise can be fun. But if we act or exercise in order to get a specific result, very often the fun gets lost in the process and then we are just grinding it out, which then begs the question, what's the point of all of this, if it isn't fun or enjoyable or satisfying? Also, if you then do a scientific study among 100 normal people (i.e. that believe in the no pain no gain rule) and you have one group that does exercise and one group that only thinks happy thoughts and then you compare muscle growth after several months and it should turn out that the group that did exercise had very consistent results in terms of muscle growth but the happy thoughts group either had no results or no consistent results, in the context of the ask and it is given rule, what would that scientific study prove? And what do scientific studies in general prove? |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jun 22, 2022 13:32:20 GMT -5
I do quite a bit for myself so to speak that ranges from exercise to a healthy diet . My mum studied nutrition for 40 years and lived accordingly. I think just treating the physical is a bit 1 dimensional when there has to be a mind body spirit combo. The list is endless, but as the saying goes, you are what you eat, you are also what you think. So one has to watch their thoughts in the same way as watching what one eats ..
This subject is far too deep to put into a post or two but I find it's important to entwine the physical aspects with the spiritual if one wants good health .. but it also depends on what one has put forth in regards to experience because ill health at times is part of the parcel even if one lives healthily .
What I have personally been doing for years now is a type of alchemy with working on the d.n.a. and bringing light into the cells, the glands, the organs, the chakras .
Like said, it's a deep subject ..
|
|
|
|
Post by sree on Jun 22, 2022 14:46:24 GMT -5
It is possible to think certain people are quacks, frauds, or simply mistaken about something, while simultaneously being open to infinite possibilities and deeply appreciative of the fact that we don't know everything, and science can't explain everything. I like the attitude of the explorer. Yes, that's certainly possible. But as a genuine explorer and believer in infinite possibilities you have to leave a lot of limiting beliefs behind, which includes science as well as best practice beliefs re: exercise and nutrition. Which means that at some point you have to part with the masses or the collective and also be at ease with that, because you will be called unreasonable, unscientific, impractical or just weird. I'll tell you a story about health and exercises that you can use to check where you are on the infinite possibilities scale. The more preposterous it will sound to you what I am going to suggest, the more you are in sync with the collective and the farther away you are from truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. The more this will ring true, the more independent you are from the collective and the closer you are to truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. So here's the story: Many years ago, Jerry asked Abraham about physical exercise and if it really was necessary, e.g. if it was really necessary to do pushups every day in order to develop strong arm muscles, because that's what Jerry's experience was. And Abe said, no. Because the rule always is, ask and it is given. And when your belief matches your desire, it is. That's basically the only requirement, alignment with your desire. But... people usually don't believe that when they ask it is given. They think they have to do something in order to get something. They think they have to put in some effort, that they have to earn it, they believe that there is no gain without pain, that they need the right genes etc. And so, Abe explained, while pushups are not necessary by default, people nevertheless have to do pushups in order to develop strong arm muscles. Because the pushups function as a bridge for their beliefs, it brings them into alignment with their desire. They believe they have to do 50 pushups every day for a month in order to get x amount muscle growth. So there are basically two ways of going about it. They could do it the easy way and adjust their beliefs to their desire and then it is, or they could do it the hard way and do the action and put in the effort their beliefs require them to do to match their desire and then it is. Both methods work, but one is going about the hard way and is very limited in terms of possibilities, the other is going about it the easy way and is unlimited in terms of possibilities. So I'd say what it basically comes down to is that we have to decide where on that spectrum (collective vs. infinite possibilities) we are going to play the game. And please don't misunderstand. This isn't a case against action. Not at all. Acting can be fun. Exercise can be fun. But if we act or exercise in order to get a specific result, very often the fun gets lost in the process and then we are just grinding it out, which then begs the question, what's the point of all of this, if it isn't fun or enjoyable or satisfying? Also, if you then do a scientific study among 100 normal people (i.e. that believe in the no pain no gain rule) and you have one group that does exercise and one group that only thinks happy thoughts and then you compare muscle growth after several months and it should turn out that the group that did exercise had very consistent results in terms of muscle growth but the happy thoughts group either had no results or no consistent results, in the context of the ask and it is given rule, what would that scientific study prove? And what do scientific studies in general prove? I am trying to wrap my mind around what you are saying and would appreciate your clarification. Are you conflating principles of philosophy with practical matters?
Doing push ups to build arm muscles is pretty much settled science. I have no other motives for building arm muscles. It is just part of an overall body fitness program. Granted, there is more than one approach to sculpting the body into shape. What other method are you talking about?
|
|
! I understand the 'to-good-to-true - miracles happen - science is lying and I know better' narratives are a crock, but I also know people buy into it and there's nothing to be done about that. It's because the true story is nuanced and the fable is such a simple truism.