--- In [email protected], "L B Shriver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "L B Shriver" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], bbrigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > snip > > > > > Mebbe so, but what TMer has not experienced the lessening of > > breath > > > > (which subsumes lessening of oxygen consumption), so it's a just > > a > > > > measurement problem -- it's not false that oxygen consumption is > > > > significantly lower in TM. > > > > > > > @@@@@@@ > > > > > > Exactly, Bobananda. However, it would be indistinguishably lower > > than if you were just > > > sitting with eyes closed. > > > > > > L B S>>> > > > > > > I have never in my life had anything like the experience of breath > > suspension that I get from TM, by just sitting with my eyes closed. > > The two are ENTIRELY different states of physiology, and if someone > > measures me when I am in that state of breath suspension they will > > wonder how my body is maintianed. There are yogi's who can sustain > > it for days, with VERY low oxygen consumption. Mine is unstable and > > I cannot cause it at will, but it is the same thing in lesser form. > > > > OffWorld > > &&&&&&&& > > You may be correct in this. My response to Bobananda was a sweeping overgeneralization > in that I was only referring to the average readings. > > Breath suspension may be unique to meditation. I can't speak to this definitively because I > don't know if there is research on the possibility or extent of breath suspension among > those who just sit quietly with eyes closed. > > L B S > > >
Congratulations and thanks to Professor Gordon C S Smith, & Jill P Pell, of Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Cambridge University, & Department of Public Health, Greater Glasgow NHS Board respectively for conducting a systematic review of randomised controlled trials to determine whether parachutes are effective in preventing major trauma related to gravitational challenge. They were unable to identify any randomised controlled trials of parachutes and concluded that, like many interventions used in medicine, parachutes had not been as rigorously evaluated as required by evidence-based medicine. Advocates of evidence-based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data. The authors suggest that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence-based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute. This would presumably require them all to jump, more than once, from an aeroplane with a harness on their backs not knowing if it contained a real parachute or a dummy one. (For the original paper see www.bvmjjournal.com <http://www.bvmjjournal.com> and search on parachute). ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
