A Record Number Of Americans Suffer From Severe Psychological Distress (SPD)

[lollipop]

Reminds me of smart phones,can't move forward until we improve battery supply,batteries currently not evolving.

@Drareg do you think the discoveries are out there and have not yet reached mass usage, not yet viable, or we simply haven't got there yet. I am leaning towards the discoveries are actually out there.

 

[Drareg]

@Drareg do you think the discoveries are out there and have not yet reached mass usage, not yet viable, or we simply haven't got there yet. I am leaning towards the discoveries are actually out there.

It's possible Lisa,I'm not aware of the discoveries unless there are discoveries of the "ether" kind which probably wouldn't be allowed for financial reasons,big business just like the "light bulb industry" don't want long lasting devices.

The structure to contain the power is also interesting to note.

 

[lollipop]

It's possible Lisa,I'm not aware of the discoveries unless there are discoveries of the "ether" kind which probably wouldn't be allowed for financial reasons,big business just like the "light bulb industry" don't want long lasting devices.

The structure to contain the power is also interesting to note.

@Drareg, True about the storage. I recently read about this 94 year old man who is part of the University of Texas Austin team who recently applied for a patent that would solve that mass storage problem. Pretty cool. I waiting and watching it all play out.

 

[Barliman]

Yeah I was in the same boat, divorced parents, not much day care thankfully, but the same tendencies.

What I find amazing is how children are so quick to embrace this need within themselves to be close with people and bond. They are then stronger for it! The whole being alone, being isolated makes you strong...makes you sick too.

Actually there is a huge amount of evidence that supports the idea that children need at least one close contact with a carer who will be there for them much of the time until at least 4-5 years, and who will offer unconditional positive regard (while setting appropriate limits). Teachers and carers come and go from day to day and year to year, and classmates can be fickle - loving you one day and hating you (or cyberbullying you) the next.
The nett outcome of this sort of parenting is almost inevitably going to be an attachment disorder and long term psychological difficulties.

The outcome is a sort of sullen defendedness and hostility to adults that is all too familiar today.
This book by a well known Canadian educational psychologist covers it very well:
» Dr. Neufeld’s Hold On to Your Kids

However you will get much the same from any of the works of Alan Schore, or Jaak Panksepp, who are leaders in developmental neuropsychology- though they are more theoretical while Neufeld is practical.

I get the sense that there is a bit of blaming the parents going on here. The changes that have occurred in our economies since the 1960s when i grew up, have been massive, and especially in the US there have been about 3 decades of erosion of the real income of the middle class and the poor. There is immense pressure to have both parents working, often several jobs. The risk of not doing that is homelessness.

I agree with Atman- that this change is planned, and that the aim is a new world order- one that resembles Medieval Europe though, with a multitude of serfs, a tiny minority who are fabulously wealthy, and a handful of professionals who economically are just far enough above the poor to make it worth their while to study.

The collapse is coming, and by the carry on in US politics I would say it might be very soon.
It has been planned since at least the late 1960's.

 

[Barliman]

With genetically modified babies coming along soon,all of this will be gone so "they" will say.....
Just edit out the bit you don't like about having children to fit the modern world,sounds like a joke doesn't it.......

There is no way of understanding the genome, let alone its interactions with an unpredictably changing environment, well enough to do this- nor will there ever be. The function of the genome is a gestalt, and the linear thinking of science just cannot deal with it.

Then there is the small problem that we have no idea of how even a single vertebrate or invertebrate creature actually develops from a zygote. I suspect tht Sheldrake's Morphic Field idea is going in the right direction- but it is as yet undeveloped- and it will remain that way because most scientists refuse to look at it.

Probably the best we can ever offer is screening for single gene heritable disorders.

 

[Barliman]

Most people for most of human existence have been under severe psychological distress. There's an undercurrent of edenism with this stuff: man has fallen from a state of bliss. Not so.

I don't think that is true.
I remember seeing a study done by the psychologist Robert Biswas Diener in Briabane in 2011.
He studies social welfare and happiness, and in this lecture he presented data from his time in a Calcutta slum.
While all of them agreed that they could do with more material goods he found that on the whole they scored as being happier.
In fact many of them expressed concern for "all those poor Westerners" who were working so hard that they were isolated from their families and their communities.

I have been up to a community in the centre of Bali 3 times (Kintamani) . It is in the caldera of a volcano - it has hot springs(the initial attraction) and some bushwalking, but is mostly agricultural. The community there is extremely poor, but while there is some suffering related to that, they are by and large very happy. They all know and like each other, and work together. It is actually funn going up there as they are so relaxed and happy.

 

[Barliman]

My lack of a relationship with my mother has led to a lot of emotional disregulation that I'm still dealing with.

I think feminism and female careerism will have a lot to answer for. Wjat kind of mammal abandons her infant children like that. We live in a society where your work is more important than your offspring. These women will get old and their children will leave them in the hands of uncaring nurses

Quote from the Evernotes:

"[A]t least for mice, a vital way that parenting can change the very chemistry of a youngster's genes. [A] singular window in development [is] the first twelve hours after a rodent's birth--during which a crucial methyl process occurs. How much a mother rat licks and grooms her pups during this window actually determines how brain chemicals that respond to stress will be made in that pup's brain for the rest of its life.

The more nurturing the mother, the more quick-witted, confident, and fearless the pup will become; the less nurturing she is, the slower to learn and more overwhelmed by threats the pup will be.

The human equivalents of licking and grooming seem to be empathy, attunement, and touch. If [this research] translates to humans . . . then how our parents treated us has left its genetic imprint over and above the set of DNA they passed down to us. And how we treat our children will, in turn, set levels of activity in their genes. (pp. 152-54)"



Some sort of...New world order?

Maybe that's the plan.

Good point re the mammals- we have forgotten that the same rules apply to us.
However, in third world countries babies are kept very close to their mothers and held frequently, the touch thing is vital.

It is the plan-- have you seen the interview with Aaron Russo in which he reports a conversation with David Rockefeller (who was recruiting him to be part of the NWO- they need filmmakers for their propaganda)?

So here is the quote:

Rockefeller:
"Aaron, what do you think 'women's liberation' was about?"

And I said — I had pretty conventional thinking about it at that point — I said I think it's about women having the right to work, getting equal pay with men, just like they won the right to vote.

And he started to laugh and he said: "You're an idiot."

And I said: Why am I an idiot?

He said: "Let me tell you what that was about. We, the Rockefellers, funded that. We funded Women's Lib. And we're the ones who got it all over the newspapers and televisions — The Rockefeller Foundation."

And he says: "You want to know why? There were two primary reasons." And one reason was: we couldn't tax half the population, before Women's Lib. And the second reason was: now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. So that it breaks up the family. Your kids start looking at the state as the family. As the school, as the officials as their family, not as the parents teaching them.

Now that is easily findable as a transcript and on You Tube- so it is not a fiction. Russo believed it. It makes sense- too much sense unfortunately.

Aaron Russo: Reflections and Warnings — Full Transcript - Matt Prather

 

[Tarmander]

Actually there is a huge amount of evidence that supports the idea that children need at least one close contact with a carer who will be there for them much of the time until at least 4-5 years, and who will offer unconditional positive regard (while setting appropriate limits). Teachers and carers come and go from day to day and year to year, and classmates can be fickle - loving you one day and hating you (or cyberbullying you) the next.
The nett outcome of this sort of parenting is almost inevitably going to be an attachment disorder and long term psychological difficulties.

The outcome is a sort of sullen defendedness and hostility to adults that is all too familiar today.
This book by a well known Canadian educational psychologist covers it very well:
» Dr. Neufeld’s Hold On to Your Kids

However you will get much the same from any of the works of Alan Schore, or Jaak Panksepp, who are leaders in developmental neuropsychology- though they are more theoretical while Neufeld is practical.

I get the sense that there is a bit of blaming the parents going on here. The changes that have occurred in our economies since the 1960s when i grew up, have been massive, and especially in the US there have been about 3 decades of erosion of the real income of the middle class and the poor. There is immense pressure to have both parents working, often several jobs. The risk of not doing that is homelessness.

I agree with Atman- that this change is planned, and that the aim is a new world order- one that resembles Medieval Europe though, with a multitude of serfs, a tiny minority who are fabulously wealthy, and a handful of professionals who economically are just far enough above the poor to make it worth their while to study.

The collapse is coming, and by the carry on in US politics I would say it might be very soon.
It has been planned since at least the late 1960's.

You misunderstand my post, imagine the word "strong" in quotes.

 

[lvysaur]

Lol is this why everyone is super right wing on here? They want to consider themselves "k-selected"

Pretty much

As stress rises, K selected people who invest in their children tend to have less children. This is a response to living in a very cold climate where something going wrong could mean not enough food

Methinks you should probably ditch the Peat diet and load up on PUFA. Cold climate and all that.

 

[Tarmander]

Pretty much



Methinks you should probably ditch the Peat diet and load up on PUFA. Cold climate and all that.

I think you were probably joking, but I have actually thought about this a lot. Peat makes some recommendations that are very tropical in nature, or I guess you could say R selected. However I think the key is stress and most of us here have gone through some horrible stress.

 

[Drareg]

There is no way of understanding the genome, let alone its interactions with an unpredictably changing environment, well enough to do this- nor will there ever be. The function of the genome is a gestalt, and the linear thinking of science just cannot deal with it.

Then there is the small problem that we have no idea of how even a single vertebrate or invertebrate creature actually develops from a zygote. I suspect tht Sheldrake's Morphic Field idea is going in the right direction- but it is as yet undeveloped- and it will remain that way because most scientists refuse to look at it.

Probably the best we can ever offer is screening for single gene heritable disorders.

I agree,the complexity will show another layer beyond it soon enough,this won't stop the frauds in tenure or the psychopaths from claiming determined from birth as in DNA is the sole decider of everything/inheritance from birth,there are people out there pumping this view to this day in spite of clear evidence.
They are still going to try clone humans imo,China,Russia etc ,it will be trial and error,people are treated like lemmings by those governments,60,000 people per year commit suicide in Russia and China is worse.

The level of fraud in genetics and social psychology is incredible,it changes every few years the theory/fraud,this year we have the final proof they say,the selfish gene,it's being going on for decades at this point,keeps them in tenure with 3 months off in the Summer and sells books too.
Talks and books about the ethics of human cloning make people wealthy,controversy sells.

The semantics around "genetics" needs to change,it's a con artists paradise because of this and even more so in contemporary times.
"Somatic mosaicism" different DNA sequences in different tissues and cells makes things hilarious for the heritability fanatics,their studies assume DNA doesn't change but which DNA sequence,pick one of many in the same body!