This site has a guide to meditation, including guided imagery of a very simple sort in a recorded format with music.
It’s been recommended by StumbleUpon so it’s popular. Go to the Meditation Room for the guided imagery at:
This site has a guide to meditation, including guided imagery of a very simple sort in a recorded format with music.
It’s been recommended by StumbleUpon so it’s popular. Go to the Meditation Room for the guided imagery at:
Modern wheat is not what it was before and I finally found a source confirming my observations that wheat changed specifically in the 1990s, exactly when I and others I knew started experience more severe reactions to wheat. I knew something was up.
Here it is:
In the 1980s, thousands of new wheat strains arose from hybridization experiments, many of them conducted in Mexico. Then, in the late 1980s, genetic engineering quietly got underway in which geneticists inserted or deleted single genes, mostly designed to generate specific characteristics, such as height, yield per acre, drought resistance, but especially resistance to various pesticides and weed killers. The fruits of these efforts were introduced into the market in 1994. Most of the genetically modified foods were thought to be only minor modifications of the unmodified original and thus no safety testing in animals or humans was conducted.
We now have many thousands of wheat strains that are different in important ways from original emmer, einkorn, and Triticum aestivum wheat. Interestingly, it has been suggested that einkorn wheat fails to provoke the same immune response characteristic of celiac disease provoked by modern wheat gluten, suggesting a different amino acid structure in gluten proteins. Another difference: Emmer wheat is up to 40% protein, compared to around 12% protein for modern wheat.
In other words, the wheat of earlier agricultural humans, including the wheat of Biblical times, is NOT the wheat of 2010. Modern wheat is quite a different thing with differing numbers of chromosomes, different genes due to human manipulation, varying gluten protein composition, perhaps other differences.
Somewhere in the shuffle and genetic sleight-of-hand that has occurred over the last 30 years, wheat changed. What might have been the “staff of life” has now become the cause of an incredible array of diseases of “wheat” intolerance.
I noticed a strong shift in my ability to digest grain, specifically in the 90s. This seemed to build over time for myself and others, as if we were constantly developing more reactions and intolerance to the “same” food, which was of course no longer the same. Wheat can really mess you up now; it’s full of compounds that make people a bit drugged, like on a kind of opium. Also it can be damaging to the stomach and impair digestion.
This is just the beginning. As we allow untested genetic engineering of foods into our lives bizarre and unhealthy reactions will result.
Read the original article here.
An Indian holy man says he hasn’t eaten for decades. He’s been studied for a little while They watched him for two weeks.
The claim is he hasn’t had to eat, drink, or relieve himself for about 60 years. Stories like this have been heard and told for centuries. Always interesting.
A brief excerpt:
Indian holy man amazes scientists as he lives without food or water
AHMEDABAD, India – An 83-year-old Indian holy man who says he has spent seven decades without food or water has astounded a team of military doctors who studied him during a two-week observation period.
Prahlad Jani spent a fortnight in a hospital in the western India state of Gujarat under constant surveillance from a team of 30 medics equipped with cameras and closed circuit television.
During the period, he neither ate nor drank and did not go to the toilet.
“We still do not know how he survives,” neurologist Sudhir Shah told reporters after the end of the experiment. “It is still a mystery what kind of phenomenon this is.”
The long-haired and bearded yogi was sealed in a hospital in the city of Ahmedabad in a study initiated by India’s Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO), the state defence and military research institute.
The latest fatality in the goal-setting world is the death of SMART goals – now you are to forget about this supposedly well-established way of achieving goals and move to the next hot item.
Harvey Schachter of The Globe and Mail newspaper reviews the latest study:
SMART goals are dumb. That’s the conclusion of a study by the Leadership IQ consultancy, which found that so-called SMART goals – goals that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-sensitive – don’t correlate with success.
Instead, the study of 4,182 workers from 397 organizations found that the following eight factors in the questionnaire predicted whether somebody’s goals would help them achieve great things:
I can vividly picture how great it will feel when I achieve my goals.
I will have to learn new skills to achieve my assigned goals for this year.
My goals are absolutely necessary to help this company.
I actively participated in creating my goals for this year.
I have access to any formal training that I will need to accomplish my goals.
My goals for this year will push me out of my comfort zone.
My goals will enrich the lives of somebody besides me (for example, customers or the community).
My goals are aligned with the organization’s top priorities for this year.
Leadership IQ notes that at the core there is often a challenge: For people to achieve great things, their goals require them to learn new skills and leave their comfort zone. That’s the opposite of the achievable, realistic approach called for by adherents of the SMART goals framework.
It’s a common theme that these systems don’t work for people in general. You are welcome to try any given approach and if it works for you, that’s great. But usually they are more a system of belief.
You can also easily burn up your life trying out X, Y, and infinite more approaches trying to find what works amid all the many claims (most of which are for sale).
I am not a believer in linear progress. What determines success is non-obvious and ill-described in our current culture. What is described by most of the success or self-help literature mostly does not work. Instead, it pays the bills of consultants and others who teach a practice but don’t have to data to substantiate it.
The answer lies elsewhere.
Comments From Marketers
For you internet marketing guys trying to drop your business links onto my page: I’d be a lot more likely to approve your comments if you actually had a comment that was on-topic of my posts.
What’s the point otherwise? Your stuff just ends up in the trash. You might as well never have sent the comment to my site.