[FairfieldLife] Re: Posting for Brian

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> I was NOT arguing that the project showed anything
> hopeful. I don't believe that even if the ME exists,
> it could ever be demonstrated scientifically. My
> point was that Peter declared the methodology flawed
> *without knowing anything about the methodology*.
> 
> And now you've joined him.

You are simply wrong.We know there are problems with the methodology.  I 
mentioned the lack of control of confounding variables and the problems with 
the low crime rate.Any student who designed a study consistent with the 
presented facts would get an F.  I am sure any scientists here would agree. 

 
> 
> > Ruth said: If that is the case they should have known that going
> > in and thus the design was flawed for that reason alone.
> > 
> > Any number of things could have occurred to confound
> > the results.
> 
> Judy said:  Which is why I don't think a scientific demonstration
> is possible, no matter how sound the study design.
> 
Huh?  I thought you just said that we don't know anything about the methodology 
and then you quote my complaints about the methodology.  The point is that the 
study design was not sound. 

> > Ruth said:  No conclusions can be drawn about anything,
> 
> Judy said: Including whether the study design had any flaws.

I can't believe you said this. You acknowledged there are flaws.  Are you just 
baiting me into a discussion?
  
> Ruth said:  not even as a pilot study worthy of further research.
> > It doesn't even rise to the level of being inconclusive.
> 
> Judy said: Not sure that's even possible. Bit of derisive
> hyperbole based on facts not in evidence.

The derision is deserved and is based solely on the facts reported. 
> 
> > Ruth said: Well, I am off again after a quick check-in.
> 
> Judy said: Yes, leave fast, before anybody can challenge you!

Anybody?  It would only be you.   I was curious as to what you would say and 
how you would say it.   

Anyway, I see Curtis has been around so I'll check out his posts and then I'm 
out of here.  Too much time here is like having MRSA lurking on my skin.  
   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Posting for Brian

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "drpetersutphen"  
> wrote:
> >
> > I missed this post.
> 
> And apparently didn't read it when you did see it.
> 
> Every one of the commenters Brian quotes--and Brian
> himself--pointed out that the study couldn't be taken
> as conclusive because the sample size was too small
> to be statistically significant. They all said further
> study would be needed.
> 
> > This research means nothing because it is
> > methodologically flawed. How were the measures taken?
> > What was the "control period".
> 
> Well, actually you don't know whether it was
> "methodologically flawed," other than the small
> sample size, because Brian didn't say how the
> measures were taken (although he did explain the
> "control period"; apparently you didn't read that
> part).
> 
> You have to *know what the methodology was* before
> you can say whether it was flawed.
> 
> > Anyone with even a little training in doing this type
> > of research will see huge holes in it.
> 
> Again, other than the small sample size, they won't
> see "huge holes in it" from this post because the
> post doesn't give any of the methodological details.
> 


You can tell from the post that the study is methodologically flawed beyond any 
"sample size" problem.For example, according to the post people knew when 
the so called control period ran and what was the period people were 
meditating--the research wasn't blinded. For goodness sakes, they used the 
police recreation club!  Everybody had to know the meditators were in town. If 
they had reported bang up positive results I would question them because of the 
defective design.  The community  may have put more police on the streets when 
the meditators were in town. Or people could have been on good behavior because 
company was around.  I would be especially concerned about confounding 
variables because the post quoted by you and Peter said: "I compiled this list 
for a proposal to the Bermuda Police Commissioner when I was living there. He 
was so impressed with the research he offered in-kind support from the Bermuda 
Police for a demonstration of the Maharishi Effect."  Correlation research is 
problematic anyway.  They just added to the problems with their poor design.

And that is just one glaring problem.  There are others as well. 

Another example, which is raised in the linked materials, is that the crime 
rate in the area is to small to yield statistically significant results in a 
short time period.  If that is the case they should have known that going in 
and thus the design was flawed for that reason alone. 


Any number of things could have occurred to confound the results.  No 
conclusions can be drawn about anything, not even as a pilot study worthy of 
further research.   It doesn't even rise to the level of being inconclusive. 


Well, I am off again after a quick check-in.  


 

  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Anti-Authoritarian variety), plus Something Darker?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  wrote:
>
> Any psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker, etc., would never truly make a 
> serious diagnosis of someones alleged psychopathology through inspecting said 
> persons internet posts. You could certainly have your suspicions but as 
> others have pointed out to do so is more in a "poopy-pants" style of insult. 
> But I think Michael was trying to be serious. He just forgot what 
> neighborhood he was posting in! 
> 

> 

I agree. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Anti-Authoritarian variety), plus Something Darker?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  wrote:
>
> I will have to check the Florida laws, but I believe that the term
"counselor" and "therapist" are too generic to be legal terms. However,
I know Florida is quite strict on anyone using terms with any intent to
deceive the public. By this I mean if one is not a licensed mental
health counselor, psychologist or social worker (all legal terms by the
way) and one uses terminology such as "counselor" or "therapist" or even
"doctor" to imply that one is sanctioned by the state to engage in the
same practices as a mental health counselor, psychologist or social
worker, then one is in violation of the law. To the best of my
knowledge, MDG, outside of informal comments here and in person, does
not professionally present himself as performing in the role of a mental
health counselor, psychologist or social worker. I don't know if casual
comments on the internet or in person would constitute a violation of
these laws. Put it this way, if someone wanted to go after
>  MDG for fraudulent activity in the state of Florida, they might have
a case. Also, Michael's statement in his post, that he is a
"professional (Ph.D.) therapist" could be construed as misleading
because it implies that his knowledge base is from his training as a
"psychotherapist", that's the "therapist" part, and "professional",
that's the licensed part. To the best of my knowledge Michael is neither
of these. If I am wrong, Michael, please correct me.
> By the way, I am a licensed psychologist in the state of Florida
(http://ww2.doh.state.fl.us/IRM00PRAES/PRASLIST.ASP#theBottom)


I agree with what you say and this is why I asked the questions I did
and linked to the licensing site. He made certain representations to try
to "sell" a diagnosis of Vaj.   As he is representing himself as some
kind of professional therapist  someone might actually think that this
guy knows what he is talking about.   So I called him on it.

(Though IMO it would be worse if he was licensed!  )

[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Anti-Authoritarian variety), plus Something Darker?

[ruthsimplicity]

Dear Fairfield Lifers,

I'm a professional (Ph.D.) therapist . . .



Dr. Michael Dean Goodman
561-350-3930 • michaeldeangood...@...
<../../../../post?postID=ZLs7dBjEIhtnesj4xFnKSJ6urWs-KwlFmulGzbF-FLzEbtu\
O0eGci7eErmFSN5eWbdqEgAebCJ231Xmtk-LuQ_yJ99shpA>
Offices in West Palm Beach & Boca Raton, Florida
Director, PARA - The Center for Realization
Director, The Relationship Institute
Co-Director, The PremYoga Center
Member: Association of Ayurvedic Professionals of North America (AAPNA)
<>
Spiritual educator (yoga, meditation, tantra, vedanta, ayur veda)
Ph.D. Counselor • Life Coach • Speaker • Author
Offering Private Sessions • Classes • Workshops & Retreats •
Satsangs
Clients & programs in the U.S., Canada, the Caribbean, Europe, & India
Working in person, by phone, or by Skype audio or video
Free initial consultation to discuss your needs and goals

You claim to be a Ph.D.counselor.Are you a psychologist?  
Individual or family therapist?  Social worker?  Do you do mental health
counseling?  Your post (you state "I am a professional (Ph.D.)
therapist") and your signature  (you state that you are a "Ph.D.
Counselor" ) imply that you do.  "Doctor" Goodman, are you licensed in
Florida where you state that you have offices?  I do not see licensing
information for you here:
http://ww2.doh.state.fl.us/IRM00PRAES/PRASLIST.ASP#theBottom.

Where did you earn your Phd?  What is the institution's accreditation?

What ethical code do you follow?

Needless to say, I am bothered by your post and as you emphasized your
bona fides I would like to know more.

I am a rare visitor here, but I will check back.

[FairfieldLife] Stopping by to drop in a link

[ruthsimplicity]

http://home.comcast.net/~dchapman2146/pf_v3n3/NeuroWeird.htm

"I am willing to grant that [transcendent experiences] feel real, but that 
comes back to the question: 'Why does anything feel real?' said Beyerstein. 'It 
is because your brain creates a model of what feels real.'

 Our brain combines all available information, including incoming sensory 
input and previously stored memories, and creates an internal cognitive model 
of reality. This model is usually based largely on external sensory 
information, said Beyerstein, but occasionally it is built entirely from input 
from inside the head. Regardless of what it is constructed from, it will feel 
just as real, and under some circumstances it can feel more real than real."

[FairfieldLife] Re: M U M students to become Teachers of T M

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
>
> On Feb 4, 2010, at 5:50 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > "Global demand for Transcendental Meditation Teachers has been rising 
> > rapidly, as a result of programmes in many countries in which large numbers 
> > of school students have been learning the technique. 'This new wave of 
> > interest in Transcendental Meditation now offers graduates a very specific 
> > career path,' said Dr Fred Travis, Chair of the Department of Maharishi 
> > Vedic Science at M.U.M. "
> 
> And what do you want to bet they're going to use this 
> as an excellent excuse to slap a whopping 10G bill (at least)
> on the students, in addition to what they're already
> extorting...I mean paying!  Oops. :)  Just like they did
> with the Purusha men 20 years ago, insisting they
> all get their MBAs--or else.  Some are still paying
> it off and have little else to show for it.
> 
> I especially like this:
> "More students are planning to become teachers of the Transcendental 
> Meditation technique thanks to some recent developments."
> 
> Those "recent developments," are undoubtedly that
> MUM needs some cash, fast.  And the students are
> sitting ducks--unfortunately.
> 
> 
> > I transcribed the audio of the guy who tried to announce this before Fred 
> > did it:
> > 
> > Tee hee hee.  I'm predicting a huge wave of initiations..Tee hee 
> > hee...sorry...Um...no really...I'm serious...we are expecting thousands of 
> > people to need ...sorry...many teachers will be needed...tee hee hee...I 
> > can't do this..I'm dying here...let Fred announce this...HA HA HA HA HA HA 
> > HA
> > 
> >
>
It sounds like you take courses in "how to be a TM teacher" as part of your 
major or as electives.  So federal student loan money finances teacher 
training.  Plus it is cheap training for MUM to give.  

The US announcement says in part:

"Graduate students typically take their regular degree program and then take 
the teacher training course as an additional specialization.

Dr. Travis said that there are currently over 20 graduate students in Maharishi 
Vedic Science, and most are planning to become teachers of the Transcendental 
Meditation technique.

To that end, the graduate program in Maharishi Vedic Science has created a new 
version of their final project course that teaches students how to manage a 
center for teaching the Transcendental Meditation technique, covering business 
topics such as networking, following up on inquiries, and appearing on radio 
talk shows."
Graduate students typically take their regular degree program and then take the 
teacher training course as an additional specialization". 
http://www.excellenceinaction.globalgoodnews.com/2010/10-feb/feb1.html

Probably the only job that a person with a Vedic Sciences degree is qualified 
for is running a TM center and teaching TM.  

It is like the "Ask Mr. Science" programs, where they jokingly say Mr. Science 
has "a masters degree in science" and "he knows more than you do."  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hands on with the iPad

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Free Library includes new books for Kindle
> http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page
> 
This is a good way to get old classics, or anything where the copyright is 
expired.  There is lots of free stuff for the Kindle. My problem is that I am a 
cutting edge sci fi addict and have to have my new releases.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hands on with the iPad

[ruthsimplicity]

I am thinking about the iPad as it would be incredibly convenient for travel. 
Currently I use a Blackberry Storm (like an iphone) as I am a verizon user. The 
data cost for the Blackberry I believe will be the same as the iPad, IIRC. The 
Blackberry is handy as I always can get my email and some of the apps are 
really nice, like Google mapping software.One nice thing about the 
Blackberry is that you can tether it to a computer and use the computer for 
internet access.  I haul around a netbook and tether the Blackberry if wifi 
isn't available.  The netbook is small enough to fit in my purse.  This system 
works fairly well.  The downside to Blackberry is that there are not as many 
apps as their are for the iPhone and iPad. 

One development that I am not happy about is that Apple negotiated a deal with 
publishers for books that was much more favorable to publishers than Amazon's 
deal for the Kindle.  Now Amazon has changed its pricing structure to match 
Apple's and new release books prices for my Kindle will increase dramatically.  
Bummer.  I do like my Kindle.  Easy on the eyes.  

Drop me a review if you get the iPad. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 3:04 PM, ruthsimplicity
>  wrote:
> > You may not answer me because you don't give a shit, but what is nice about 
> > your program and what nice things do you think happen as a result?
> >
> 
> I have rounded for so long, meditated for so long, sponsor almost
> continuous yagnas, sponsor many CPs, have many advanced techniques.
> And unstressed out of my skull.  The result?  I have very clear
> experiences of the thousands of levels on the way down to TC.  Very
> clear TC (obviously a little bit of ego and waking state still there
> or I'd have no experience I could talk about.  I get very good hits on
> most all of my sutras.  Great depth during sutra practice.  I see that
> The Absolute actually is full of unmanifested things and events,
> seeds.  There's a fabric to the Absolute.  It's not just flat.  It's
> very full emptiness.
> 
> Outside of activity?  Support of Nature, increasingly knowing who I
> am, joy inner and outer.  The ability to strike up a conversation with
> anybody on any subject.  Things are just nice.
>

Thanks.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> Well, yes, I do know what Nabby meant, and so do you,
> because he went on to explain it (and you responded
> to that post, so I know you read it):
> 
> "Or eating a huge meal minutes before you meditate. The
> outer pressures from for example spouses and children can
> take a huge toll unless one is disciplined. That's why
> being single usually, but not always, makes things easier.
> If not disciplined small thing like overeating or not
> getting enough sleep will make experiences dull to the
> point when someone might think it's a waste of time to
> meditate or follow a time-consuming TM-Sidhi programme.
> The wast majority who drop out do so for these mundane
> reasons."

You are right, I forgot that post as it wasn't in what you quoted.   My bad and 
I apologize, especially for my comment that you were poisoning the Nabby well.  
I shouldn't try to do 10 things at once!Now I remember that I did respond 
to his marriage comment.  Now that is a lifestyle issue.  Try to be married, 
work full time, have kids, and do your sidhi program.  Something will suffer. 
You acknowledged the difficulty when you said: "(He also makes the point that 
it can be tougher to stick to a healthy routine, including regular program, 
with a spouse and children, which seems commonsensical.)" 

Arguably, the siddhi program is unnatural for people who have to work for a 
living and have a family.  But I digress. 





>
> 
> Notice that he doesn't say anything about any of what
> you called "lifestyle creep," as I suspect you were
> hoping he would so you could pounce on it and quote
> the TM promo literature again.

Don't make assumptions about me and my intentions.  You are always way off 
base.  I have no desire to pounce on Nabby, I wasn't doing that in the thread,  
and had no expectations about what he was going to say.  You sure present a 
negative view of others' motives are here and I find it insulting and tiresome. 
 



> > > But again, not even *that* much discipline is required to
> > > learn and practice TM. 
> > 
> > Well, it depends.  If you find the practice unsatisfying
> > it could take considerable self discipline to continue with
> > the practice.
> 
> Of course, regular practice (as I said earlier in this
> exchange) is a given, so this is irrelevant.

Well, you are the one who said not much discipline is required to learn and 
practice TM.  I just disputed what you said. 
> 


> >
> 
> > On courses getting enough sleep during the course was
> > emphasized.  But it did seem a bit like an excuse to
> > make people go to bed early and get out of people's
> > hair. "Here, have a starchy meal and go to sleep."
> 
> Just can't contain the malice, can you?

I would put it in the category of "snark" rather than malice.  


Well, off I go for a while.  Not enough time to joust properly.  I might check 
in to see if others responded to my questions.  Despite what Judy implies, I am 
not trying to set anyone up to be pounced on.  That is Judy's job.  (More 
snark, oops!)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Hugo  wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I have many friends who ran for the Natural Law Party, who follow
> >> every bit of Maharishi Joytish, Maharishi Ayurveda, MVVT, whatever
> >> they can afford, who are expecting me to come in the Spring to IA and
> >> are used to my supporting them on IA.  I dare not speak my heresy to
> >> them.  It is lonely when you disengage yourself from the Matrix.
> >> Suddenly it's just you and billions of other souls.  You no longer
> >> feel a kinship with a few thousand hypnotized people.
> >
> > And the further away you get the stranger it seems, until one
> > day you run into an old friend and they'll say something like
> > "I got some nature support today" and a shiver runs down the
> > back of your neck. Was I ever really like this, you'll wonder.
> >
> > TM teachers get can shocked when you reject the "knowledge" but
> > real friends don't care if you don't share their beliefs anymore, would you?
> >
> 
> Right now it's not strange.  It was ever strange.  The year of this,
> Hail President Despot, Maharishi This, That and The Other (Trademark
> symbol here), phony academic degrees, phony exalted titles.  Rush to
> build this forest academy but we won't fund it and we'll let it rot
> into the ground.   Governors (of which states?), Ministers (of who's
> cabinet?), phony countries, it's the numbers that count.  Except that
> one sidha counts for 100 unless there are N then it's N^2, but if it's
> a pandit, then you have to solve a polynomial.  Now it's neutral.  As
> in things may come, things may go but I go on forever.
> 
> Except for one guy who comes to IA from Europe but only goes to the
> Dome twice, max and does a quick 20 minute meditation in his suite
> otherwise, my friends are trying to save me from my heresy.  It's
> obviously unstressing.  Perhaps if I spoke with a sidhi administrator.
>  My doshas aren't balanced.   If only I'd go back to reading my pulse
> and eat what my pulse tells me to eat.  It's a phase.  It's a reaction
> to too much, too fast.  It's a reaction to my reporting that so much
> of the world has fallen away, leaving just me.  That's obviously just
> a sign of unstressing.
> 
> The strangest was an email from my yagna group in India that a
> "friend" had donated money for a yagna with a sankalpa of pulling me
> back into the fold.
> 
> These not be friends, methinks.
>

Be careful out there.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>

> Ruth,
> 
> If I could interject on an interesting topic for me...
> According to professionals in the field of leaving such groups the vast 
> majority drift away and dilute the belief system with other beliefs.  It 
> takes a lot of milieu control (Lifton's term) to keep the teaching pure as 
> Maharishi used to say. Most people just walk away from deep involvement and 
> allow the belief system to drift between conscious and unconscious 
> assumptions.  The beliefs that don't interfere with their lives stay, and the 
> ones do interfere fall off.  Just like most religious people do with their 
> God ideas.  You have to really work to even make the most unconscious 
> presuppositions conscious for evaluation and not too many people are 
> motivated to go there.  Few have the resources to get the professional 
> assistance in this process although there are some good resources for self 
> study.  
> 
> For me it was an intellectual tipping point that happened pretty rapidly 
> accelerated by my conscious decision to explore optional points of view on my 
> "experiences" in TM.  I may have been assisted in my interest and training in 
> philosophy because at least I recognized that I was shifting my whole 
> epistemological basis for my life and knew I had to do a lot of work to 
> rebuild the system I had left in tatters.
> 
> Just like with other religious people few dedicated TMers are really that 
> into the theology and philosophy in detail.  Internally it is not so much a 
> coherent system of thought as a jumble of phrases, Lifton's "loading of the 
> language" that represent their core identity beliefs.  It is more of a 
> feeling space than an intellectual one.  So without a clear cut awareness of 
> the actual premises the system is based on, there is little motivation to 
> root out all the mental registry fragments of their previous identity.
> 
> My two cents. 

Thank you.   Fits with my thoughts. I agree that theology and philosophy is 
generally not that relevant to most believers.  Certainty in  core beliefs is 
what is relevant and certainty is all about emotion, not evidence, logic, or 
even theology.  
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:11 AM, ruthsimplicity
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
> >  wrote:
> >>
> <<>>
> 
> >> Two songs come to mind.  One is "I haven't got time for the pain".
> >> The other is Meatloaf's "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad".  'Cept in this
> >> case it's zero out of three.  I don't want you, I don't need you and
> >> there ain't no way I'm ever going to love you.  Wait, make that three
> >> songs.  The third is Respect.  Except I'm not demanding respect, I'm
> >> granting it to myself.
> >>
> >>
> 
> RD, re-reading my words I see ambiguity.  I have not stopped doing my
> full TM-Sidhi program, including asanas, pranayama, meditating,
> research into consciousnes, flying, Jaimini, listening to chanting I
> can't mention, Sama and Rig Veda.  I just now do it for me, for my own
> edification.  I'm trying to race towards a goal.  My goal, announced
> many years ago at a preparatory course, was to meditate until I no
> longer gave a shit.  I got flunked on that prep course for saying
> that.  Machts nichts.  What matters to me is that I reached my goal
> after all these years.  I no longer give a shit.  I do my program
> because it's nice and nice things happen perhaps as a result of doing
> my program.
> 
> I feel so free having thrown off the yoke of having to accept as my
> kin those fools with phony degrees and exhaulted titles and all the
> "technology" whose name starts off with the trademark "Maharishi".
>

You may not answer me because you don't give a shit, but what is nice about 
your program and what nice things do you think happen as a result?   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Doug"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > I sometimes wonder how likely it is for a long term true believer to give 
> > > it up and lose faith.  And whether it simply is a drifting away or a more 
> > > sudden "aha" moment.
> > 
> > Usually, from my experiences meeting virtually thousands of people, it's 
> > due to lack of good experiences during meditation usually because of an 
> > undisciplined lifestyle. 
> > That ofcourse is just one of many reasons but definately the most common.
> >
> 
> Yeah, writing as an old and conservative meditator, I'm with Nablusoss on 
> this one.
> My experience too.  Simply are a lot of folks who just didn't sit up and do 
> the work of spiritual  practice.  Lot of people outright laid down and 
> actively went to sleep.  Spiritual practice is something that folks do have 
> to do, as in have the discipline to do and work at.  Not sleep at.  
>   
> Some grace may bring it along to folks as a work come to be done.  Even so, 
> some lot of people even if given everything never learn how to work in life; 
> just get by and some are just quitters in being ill-prepared as they are 
> ill-disciplined.   Either badly nurtured or cultured, just bad material that 
> might have been made more better beforehand, next time. 
> 
> So says the knowledge, people's experience, and the science together now.  
>  
> The extraordinary time now is that the spiritual bandwidth is so wide and 
> open to so many in these modern times.   A message so widely around now in so 
> many ways, "Repent your ways and come to meditation".  The opportunity of a 
> life time.  It's even on Oprah.  Hope springs eternal eternally in natural 
> law.  Know they Self.
> 
> Jai Adi Shankara,
> -D in FF
>

Please, be specific.  What work of spiritual practice?  Do you simply mean 
being regular in mediation/sidhi practice?  Or more? 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

> You're also interpreting "disciplined" (as opposed to
> "undisciplined") to mean something considerably more
> strenuous than simply healthy living.

You must be bored, making hay out of nothing. You are interpreting what Nabby 
meant by his comment about an undisciplined lifestyle. You don't know if he 
meant failure to engage in "simple healthy living."  (Though I do dispute that 
the TMO actually promotes simple healthy living).Either way, the TMO 
doesn't talk about leading disciplined lifestyle at all, it is not a phrase the 
TMO uses, so I was interested in what else Nabby had to say about it.  
> 
> But again, not even *that* much discipline is required to
> learn and practice TM. 

Well, it depends.  If you find the practice unsatisfying it could take 
considerable self discipline to continue with the practice.  If you believed 
the underlying theory, you might exercise that discipline, but if not odds are 
you would quit.  It would take a huge amount of self dis 

As noted, healthy living is simply
> recommended as the way to make the most of your practice
> (it's likely the way to make the most of *any* self-
> improvement practice).

 
> Nabby's saying that in his experience, those who ignore
> such recommendations tend to be more likely to quit TM
> because they aren't getting as much from their practice.

He didn't say that.  He said what he said and I asked for more clarification.  
I don't need you to be a Nabby interpreter. Now after your post putting words 
in his mouth who knows what he will say.  No thanks for butting in. 
> 
> (This was in response to your remark, "I sometimes wonder
> how likely it is for a long term true believer to give it
> up and lose faith. And whether it simply is a drifting
> away or a more sudden 'aha' moment.")
> 
> > There certainly has been lifestyle creep in the true
> > believer community, probably as a result of all the side
> > products the TMO has been promoting in recent years.
> 
> Unquestionably, but that's irrelevant to what Nabby
> and I are telling you.

I let Nabby speak for himself. I think it is very relevant as it can color the 
point of view of believers. 
> 
> 
> > Rest in rather vague terms has been consistently promoted,
> > usually to say you should rest a few minutes after your
> > program.  Meditation and rest afterwords is he general
> > prescription for unstressing.  But vague admonitions to
> > rest isn't really what most think of when thinking of
> > lifestyle requirements.
> 
> Not sure what your point is here. There are, as I said, no
> "lifestyle requirements" to practice TM. 

As I have said several times I am interested in  
Nabby's comment about undisciplined lifestyles leading to lack of good 
mediation experiences contributing to people quitting.  



> 
> In any case, getting enough rest at night, not just after
> meditation, is an extremely common recommendation in the
> TM context, in my experience. TM isn't a substitute for
> sleep.

Extremely common?  I don't recall my initiator mentioning it.  I don't recall 
anything in the checking notes about it.  I was checked last year, the teacher 
didn't mention it and no prior checker ever mentioned it.  On courses getting 
enough sleep during the course was emphasized.  But it did seem a bit like an 
excuse to make people go to bed early and get out of people's hair. "Here, have 
a starchy meal and go to sleep."  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > 
> 
> > > Usually, from my experiences meeting virtually thousands
> > > of people, it's due to lack of good experiences during
> > > meditation usually because of an undisciplined lifestyle. 
> > > That ofcourse is just one of many reasons but definately
> > > the most common.
> > 
> > I appreciate your perspective on this.  But TM or even the
> > Siddhis were never promoted as something that required a
> > disciplined lifestyle. Or do you just mean the discipline
> > to meditate twice a day?
> 
> Get enough rest and exercise, eat right, etc. Standard
> recommendations for healthy living (in addition to regular
> practice, of course). You must have had a very different
> TM course than I did if you never encountered them.

All I said was that TM and the siddhis were not promoted as requiring a 
disciplined lifestyle.   Of course, the TMO on www.tm.org still promotes basic 
TM  as not requiring any lifestyle changes at all.  Specifically, "The 
Transcendental Meditation technique is not a religion or philosophy and 
involves no change in lifestyle."

There certainly has been lifestyle creep in the true believer community, 
probably as a result of all the side products the TMO has been promoting in 
recent years.  I know those who believe they will live forever if they eat in a 
certain way and do program. But that has never been an official position of the 
TMO.   And lifestyle changes were not promoted as a requirement for the sidhis 
to work back in the mid 70s.   Even today when the TMO researches people doing 
the sidhis I have not seen them isolate whether the sidha is eating a certain 
way, getting a certain amount of exercise and getting a certain amount of 
sleep.  So from that standpoint, a certain lifestyle beyond regular mediation 
has not been a requirement or concern.  Rest in rather vague terms has been 
consistently promoted, usually to say you should rest a few minutes after your 
program.  Meditation and rest afterwords is he general prescription for 
unstressing.  But vague admonitions to rest isn't really what most think of 
when thinking of lifestyle requirements. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> > > > May I ask, how did you happen to disengage?  
> > > > 
> > > > I sometimes wonder how likely it is for a long term true believer to 
> > > > give it up and lose faith.  And whether it simply is a drifting away or 
> > > > a more sudden "aha" moment.
> > > 
> > > Usually, from my experiences meeting virtually thousands of people, it's 
> > > due to lack of good experiences during meditation usually because of an 
> > > undisciplined lifestyle. 
> > > That ofcourse is just one of many reasons but definately the most common.
> > >
> > 
> > I appreciate your perspective on this.  But TM or even the Siddhis were 
> > never promoted as something that required a disciplined lifestyle. Or do 
> > you just mean the discipline to meditate twice a day?
> 
> Or eating a huge meal minutes before you meditate. The outer pressures from 
> for example spouses and children can take a huge toll unless one is 
> disciplined. That's why being single usually, but not always, makes things 
> easier.
> If not disciplined small thing like overeating or not getting enough sleep 
> will make experiences dull to the point when someone might think it's a waste 
> of time to meditate or follow a time-consuming TM-Sidhi programme. The wast 
> majority who drop out do so for these mundane reasons.
>

I wonder what is the percentage of married vs. unmarried Invincible American 
course participants.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:01 AM, ruthsimplicity
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> OMG!  A year ago, despite my man heresies, I saw nothing wrong with
> >> this.  Of course Maharishi's every message, the TMO's every message
> >> made perfect sense, even if I couldn't find the sense in it.  I was a
> >> pod person.
> >>
> >> I have many friends who ran for the Natural Law Party, who follow
> >> every bit of Maharishi Joytish, Maharishi Ayurveda, MVVT, whatever
> >> they can afford, who are expecting me to come in the Spring to IA and
> >> are used to my supporting them on IA.  I dare not speak my heresy to
> >> them.  It is lonely when you disengage yourself from the Matrix.
> >> Suddenly it's just you and billions of other souls.  You no longer
> >> feel a kinship with a few thousand hypnotized people.
> >>
> >
> >
> > May I ask, how did you happen to disengage?
> >
> > I sometimes wonder how likely it is for a long term true believer to give 
> > it up and lose faith.  And whether it simply is a drifting away or a more 
> > sudden "aha" moment.
> >
> 
> Peace be upon those who follow guidance.
> 
> Self-sufficiency.  I used to be very sold out to this group.  It's
> like every post had to be responded to.  I had to set people straight.
>  Then I set up spam filters so that most of the major "contributors"
> who rubbed me the wrong way I didn't see.  At first, massive
> withdrawal symptoms.  Now, every once in a while I go into my spam
> folder and read things from those who are filtered out.  Interesting
> reading, but no emotional impact.   Curtis has returned.  We have
> nothing in common, and I don't care about the things he cares about.
> He's going to get a filter.
> 
> Now I didn't like Rick tearing into me about my statements on
> Wednesday night Satsung so I fired a salvo back at him.  He dropped
> it.  What I wanted.  I don't think this was a sign of having to set
> people right.  I stated how bored I was at Satsung, how boring the
> people were, Rick fired back untrue and not nice things that if true,
> were best kept private.   He used my post as a way to plug Satsung.
> Fine.  I slammed him back and that stopped the thread, El H-Um du
> Allah.
> 
> I felt myself getting distanced from the TMO and from my NLP and IA
> friends.  I figured they were just too sold out to a dream.  Last few
> go arounds on IA, I played "let's pretend".  I pretended to be
> interested in it all.  Once again, withdrawal.  Painful withdrawal.
> But I found answers within myself.  I felt that doing my program was
> nice, but didn't do it anymore because of some perceived deficiency.
> That perceived deficiency was a reaction to cognitive dissonance, I'd
> reckon.
> 
> I am happy within myself.  Maharishi told my group that we were about
> to get the sidhis and that would make us self-sufficient.  Well, it
> appears that happened.  I no longer feel pain if I see a picture of
> the rajas with their Burger Boy gold foil hats.  I no longer feel
> anything except "well, that's strange".
> 
> I joined the Buddha at the Gas Pump Yahoo! group.  There were all
> those shit eating, 15 page, I'm wonderful, you're wonderful,
> everything is wonderful, I just did a release upon my computer and it
> arose from the ashes and is suddenly working again posts.  My reaction
> was "not this again".  I quickly delete those posts and I'm
> identifying the email addresses and handles of those who gush (which
> might be every poster).  Those email addresses and handles go into my
> spam filters daily.  Perhaps eventually I'll get no mail from Buddha
> at the Gas Pump because I've created a filter from each of the
> posters.
> 
> As I compose this, Gmail tells me that a new message in this thread
> has arrived from Nabby.  Most likely a response to the post you
> responded to, RD.  His post is going into my spam folder.  And I don't
> feel the loss, I don't feel the pinch, I haven't got time for the
> pain.
> 
> Two songs come to mind.  One is "I haven't got time for the pain".
> The other is Meatloaf's "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad".  'Cept in this
> case it's zero out of three.  I don't want you, I don't need you and
> there ain't no way I'm ever going to love you.  Wait, make that three
> songs.  The third is Respect.  Except I'm not demanding respect, I'm
> granting it to myself.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Peace be upon those who follow guidance.
>


Thank you for your thoughtful answer.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> > May I ask, how did you happen to disengage?  
> > 
> > I sometimes wonder how likely it is for a long term true believer to give 
> > it up and lose faith.  And whether it simply is a drifting away or a more 
> > sudden "aha" moment.
> 
> Usually, from my experiences meeting virtually thousands of people, it's due 
> to lack of good experiences during meditation usually because of an 
> undisciplined lifestyle. 
> That ofcourse is just one of many reasons but definately the most common.
>

I appreciate your perspective on this.  But TM or even the Siddhis were never 
promoted as something that required a disciplined lifestyle. Or do you just 
mean the discipline to meditate twice a day? 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Vote for Consciousness-Based Education at Change.org

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:

> OMG!  A year ago, despite my man heresies, I saw nothing wrong with
> this.  Of course Maharishi's every message, the TMO's every message
> made perfect sense, even if I couldn't find the sense in it.  I was a
> pod person.
> 
> I have many friends who ran for the Natural Law Party, who follow
> every bit of Maharishi Joytish, Maharishi Ayurveda, MVVT, whatever
> they can afford, who are expecting me to come in the Spring to IA and
> are used to my supporting them on IA.  I dare not speak my heresy to
> them.  It is lonely when you disengage yourself from the Matrix.
> Suddenly it's just you and billions of other souls.  You no longer
> feel a kinship with a few thousand hypnotized people.
>


May I ask, how did you happen to disengage?  

I sometimes wonder how likely it is for a long term true believer to give it up 
and lose faith.  And whether it simply is a drifting away or a more sudden 
"aha" moment.

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > 
> > > Where ? In a supposedly genuine mail published on FFL by our own dear 
> > > truth-seeking Rick Archer ?
> > >
> > 
> > Nabby, I know that you might not care, but do you believe that Nader is 
> > married with children?
> 
> I don't belive nor disbelieve, it does not matter, either way is fine with 
> me. 
> What I object to is that people here go ballistic based on rumours posted by 
> a fellow with a, well, very liberal relationship regarding facts. 
> Until there is an official word I'll wait and see.
>
I figured that it doesn't matter to you.  I was just curious whether you had 
any information that was convincing to you.  Thanks for responding.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain  wrote:
>
> 
> Are your series of "Duh's" really called for? Seems a rather rude and 
> egotistical contribution.  
> 

Uh huh.  If you spend some time here you will see that this is the way she 
interacts with others.  

Nice to meet you tartbrain.  I stop in every few months to see what the gossip 
is. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain  wrote:
> 
> > Haiglin said he was surprised -- the us raja, presumably
> > in the inner of innermost circles -- had no idea Tony was
> > "missing" for 8 years.
> 
> Just to follow up, I had another look at the letter
> from Bevan. He says:
> 
> "Many may have heard some of this news, so we thought
> to let you know what had unfolded."
> 
> Could be they mostly knew he was married but not that
> he had kids. Hagelin didn't say what specifically had
> come as a surprise to him.
>

Or even the other way around.  Kids fine, but married! 

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:

> Where ? In a supposedly genuine mail published on FFL by our own dear 
> truth-seeking Rick Archer ?
>

Nabby, I know that you might not care, but do you believe that Nader is married 
with children?  

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
>
> On Jan 24, 2010, at 9:43 AM, tartbrain wrote:
> 
> > Could be. But that would discredit the PR wing of the TMO
> 
> The TMO has a "PR" wing?
> Oh.
> 
> Sal

Kind of like Sinn Fein to the IRA.  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Well King Tony has a nice condo in Paris paid for out
> > > > of movement funds
> > > 
> > > Do we know that it's paid for out of movement funds?
> > 
> > Didn't he get his weight in gold from the movement?
> 
> Only to fund his research.

Which takes place in his condo.  Funding to have a nice quiet place to work.

Ah, who knows.  Could be that the movement owns the condo, given the movements 
fondness for real estate.  Or that he is independently wealthy.  Or that his 
wife is rich.  Or he gets paid a huge salary and has a mortgage to match. 

 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91  wrote:
> 
> > Well King Tony has a nice condo in Paris paid for out
> > of movement funds
> 
> Do we know that it's paid for out of movement funds?
>

Didn't he get his weight in gold from the movement?  If he was about 175 pounds 
that would be about three million bucks.  It would buy a modest condo in good 
areas of Paris.  Maybe he weighs more.  :) 

[FairfieldLife] Re: More on "Raja Ram"

[ruthsimplicity]

 
 "Raja John said he thought RR is as deeply steeped in silence as any Purusha 
and maintains what could
> be called an ideal Purusha program and routine. "
>

Okay.  The ideal Purusha program allows you to have a wife and kids upstairs.  
Hear that guys?  You have permission to get married and have a family.  

How will that dissonance resolved? 



 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharaja with children is a shock?

[ruthsimplicity]

Well this is fun.

If the rumor is true it could explain why Tony is ruling from silence.  He 
never has been a front man and he can continue to be the silent king living a 
nice little bucolic family life out of the public eye.   

Hope it is true as it is fun to watch the dissonance be resolved.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Michael Persinger discovers telepathic link

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Dec 17, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Hugo wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Fascinating interview, I hope Persinger is onto something here.
> > > But if he uncovers too much quantum stuff in the brain he may have
> > > to revise his book TM and Cultmania, which would be a fine day
> > > for TM dome attendance.
> > 
> > 
> > From physicists I know how've reviewed it, they think it's BS. What I 
> > wonder is if he's just hopping onto the quantum bandwagon because it's not 
> > only fashionable, but profitable. The entanglement has nothing to do with 
> > the brain, but the measuring device (the SQUID or superconducting quantum 
> > interference device).
> > 
> > No quantum brain IOW.
> >
> 
> Hmmmaren't photons quanta of light?
> Ain't the activity of the nervous system somehow connected
> with photons? According to YS, da self is 'draSTaa' (Seer):
> 
> tataH kSiiyate prakaashaavaraNam.
> tadaa draSTuH svaruupe 'vasthaanam.
> draSTaa dRshimaatraH shuddho 'pi pratyayaanupashyaH.
>

The behavior of subatomic particles is different than the behavior of a system 
such as us.  QM is bent way out of shape and made inconsistent with what we 
know about science if it is used as a theory to explain consciousness, 
certainly is not a theoretical framework for a claim that our consciousness has 
magical powers.  

I have not read Persinger's study but I bet that it is in error, either due to 
chance or to methodological issues.  Let's see some criticism by the 
knowledgeable (and we aren't) and replication. He probably fooled himself.  

Hope y'all are well and happy holidays for those of you that have them!

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Just as a question, how exactly *does* one "control
> > > for placebo?" I'm honestly curious.
> > > 
> > Not easy in this kind of research, but you need to at least give the 
> > control group some kind of "technique" that could lead to similar 
> > expectations as to benefits and where sufficient attention is made to the 
> > control group.  For example, sitting quietly thinking pleasant thoughts for 
> > 20 minutes after a few lectures about how good it is for you to do that for 
> > 20 minutes twice a day.  Or listening to pleasant music.  Etc. 
> > 
> > Note that arguably mediation is all placebo and the only reason people 
> > benefit is because they believe they will benefit. It is hard to get past 
> > this issue and pin down any cause and effect.
> >
> 
> No doubt the placebo effect can have a powerful influence. I like your ideas 
> for structuring the control group. Placebos tend to have a temporary effect. 
> The question is how long would a person in the control group continue to 
> practice their placebo technique and what kind of benefits would they report 
> compared to the person doing TM? How do you account for someone like my 86 
> year-old mother who learned TM in 1976, has had no further involvement with 
> the TMO, enjoys TM and does it everyday? There are probably a lot of people 
> who have stopped TM for various reasons but there are probably a lot of 
> people like my mother who never had any further contact with the TMO but 
> continued TM for years, way beyond what you would expect from simply enjoying 
> the benefits of a placebo meditation. The fact that many people enjoy TM for 
> years without the influence of the TMO challenges the idea that benefits of 
> TM is due only to placebo.
>

Could be.  I cannot know why your mother continues to meditate, I can only 
theorize.  The purest placebo is a sugar pill or saline solution.  Meditation 
is more complicated. That is partly why it is difficult to design a good 
mediation study. The expectations created by the lectures, the puja, and the 
giving of the mantra are not easy to address in a control group.  But much can 
be done and the recent cancer study didn't even try. We are still left with the 
possibility that all mediation could be expectation, suggestion, and 
conditioning.  Meditation studies also suffer from a disconnect between the 
theories of the researcher and exactly what is being studied.  

 We do have at least some information which indicates that the drop out rate is 
large.  I have longed wished for better data on this issue.   For those who 
continue with the practice there are a number of things that could enter into 
why that person meditates for the long term, including those who have no 
contact with the TMO, with other mediators, and did not go on to the siddhis or 
even advanced techniques. But the answers may be mundane.  Habit and ritual can 
be persistent and rewarding when established. Some may have a belief in the 
underlying theories and this reinforces the practice.  If a meditator 
experiences a trance like or dissociative state that can be perceived as 
pleasant and reinforcing. (As an aside, overeaters can experience this when 
indulging and it may contribute to the compulsion to eat).  You can even have 
intermittent reinforcement where a person has a really good experience 
meditating and continues to meditate in search of more such experiences.  Those 
experiences may have many causes,  again with a number of mundane 
possibilities. People who stick with mediation may also have certain 
characteristics that tend not to be as strong in those who quit. 

There has been some research on this, for example I posted this before:

"Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
 that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility. In their study,
 although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale. Walrath and Hamilton
concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice. Using the
 Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
meditating." 

The b

[FairfieldLife] Re: Soldiers are supposed to die for their country, not live in it

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:

> Hospitals so degrading and poorly run that
> the definition of the group researched in this
> study was "Veterans between the ages of 18 and 
> 64 who were uninsured in 2008. Veterans were 
> only classified as uninsured if they neither 
> had health insurance nor received ongoing 
> care at Veterans Health Administration (VA) 
> hospitals or clinics."
> 
> They found 1,461,615 veterans in this category.
> 
> I think that pretty much says it all about the
> quality of VA care. 1,461,615 people went with-
> out health care rather than take advantage of
> the "free" health care at the VA. 
> 
> My premise stands. America has a "no survival"
> policy for its soldiers. If it can't get them
> killed in foreign wars, it'll finish the job
> at home.
>

NO, no, and no.  The VA is now a model of fine care and excellent outcomes.  It 
was totally restructured some years ago.  Yes, the old guys  had bad experience 
at the VA but no longer.  We now point to the VA model for a number of things 
that we should try to do in improving health care delivery in the US.  One 
thing that the VA does very well is care of chronic illnesses.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> 
> > Expanding a bit, the placebo effect to the lay person seems
> > to have a negative connotation.  In fact, the power of
> > placebo has some interesting implications.  Benson, the
> > relaxation response guy, coined the term "remembered
> > wellness" as a more positive spin on placebo effect.  So,
> > the placebo effect can be a good thing.  Suggestibility
> > isn't all bad.
> 
> Well, that's one way of rationalizing the body's self-
> healing capabilities.
>

The body does have amazing capability to heal itself.  To a point.  We still 
all die and our bodies inevitably break down with age.Some illnesses are 
almost guaranteed to kill you. Other illnesses never go away even if they don't 
kill you. 

But that is different from the concept of placebo, which is, in its pure form, 
suggestion and expectation. A form of conditioned response. It is the comfort 
we feel when someone pays attention to us and tells us this pill, this 
technique may make us feel better.  Think back to being a child and how mom 
could make your boo boo better by kissing it. 

Placebo effects are rarely big cure-alls.  The may be more prevalent where 
being a bit more relaxed about things can help with an illness.  For example, a 
placebo given to treat the effects of an enlarged prostate may make it easier 
to pee effectively as the genuine drug.  The prostate is still enlarged, but 
the expectation of a positive result can reduce nerve activity and the 
relaxation can make it easier to urinate.  

Where feelings are important the placebo effect can be more pronounced.  From 
drugs for mental illnesses to relaxation or meditation techniques to improve 
quality of life.  

The effects may be temporary.   For example, a mediation technique could result 
in some perceived benefits to a group of new meditators in a study simply due 
to placebo effect.  But there is a good chance that the perception would fade 
over time and the practice dropped. The conditioning just wasn't strong enough. 
 




 

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Just as a question, how exactly *does* one "control
> > for placebo?" I'm honestly curious.
> > 
> Not easy in this kind of research, but you need to at least give the control 
> group some kind of "technique" that could lead to similar expectations as to 
> benefits and where sufficient attention is made to the control group.  For 
> example, sitting quietly thinking pleasant thoughts for 20 minutes after a 
> few lectures about how good it is for you to do that for 20 minutes twice a 
> day.  Or listening to pleasant music.  Etc. 
> 
> Note that arguably mediation is all placebo and the only reason people 
> benefit is because they believe they will benefit. It is hard to get past 
> this issue and pin down any cause and effect.



Expanding a bit, the placebo effect to the lay person seems to have a negative 
connotation.  In fact, the power of placebo has some interesting implications.  
Benson, the relaxation response guy, coined the term "remembered wellness" as a 
more positive spin on placebo effect.  So, the placebo effect can be a good 
thing.  Suggestibility isn't all bad.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:

> 
> Just as a question, how exactly *does* one "control
> for placebo?" I'm honestly curious.
> 
Not easy in this kind of research, but you need to at least give the control 
group some kind of "technique" that could lead to similar expectations as to 
benefits and where sufficient attention is made to the control group.  For 
example, sitting quietly thinking pleasant thoughts for 20 minutes after a few 
lectures about how good it is for you to do that for 20 minutes twice a day.  
Or listening to pleasant music.  Etc. 

Note that arguably mediation is all placebo and the only reason people benefit 
is because they believe they will benefit. It is hard to get past this issue 
and pin down any cause and effect.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:

> 
> Just as a question, how exactly *does* one "control
> for placebo?" I'm honestly curious.
> 
Not easy in this kind of research, but you need to at least give the control 
group some kind of "technique" that could lead to similar expectations as to 
benefits.  For example, sitting quietly for 20 minutes after a few lectures 
about how good it is for you to rest quietly for 20 minutes twice a day.  

Note that arguably mediation is all placebo and the only reason people benefit 
is because they believe they will benefit.  It is hard to get past this issue 
and pin down any cause and effect.

  

[FairfieldLife] Re: TM and Blood Pressure

[ruthsimplicity]

Some comments on this thread and recent TM research:

--If in fact different TM mantras have different effects on BP (which I 
personally do not believe) it is at least possible that mantras were not chosen 
correctly when chosen based on age and sex, rather than whether you were a 
kapha type or whatever.

-- Bhairitu  said: "The 'deities represent the qualities. They were invented to 
explain abstract concepts to the masses."  This is an unsupported assertion.  
It could also be that the abstract concepts were developed to rationalize  
beliefs in deities.  Religion is full of rationalization. 

--IIRC most if not all the BP research was on TM meditators who were dong 
simple mediation and not using advanced techniques, though I could be wrong. 

--All the research is inconclusive and most is poorly done.  This problem 
continues.  The most recent study widely publicized by the TMO concerns the 
"benefits" of TM on breast cancer patients.  It is promoted as a controlled 
study but the control group was not controlled for placebo. Plus, even though 
people were randomly assigned to a TM or no TM group, those who volunteered for 
the study may very well have been predisposed to believing that meditation 
could be helpful for them.  

The press releases regarding the study are not appropriate or scientific, such 
as:

"It is wonderful that physicians now have a range of interventions to use, 
including Transcendental Meditation, to benefit their patients with cancer," 
said Rhoda Pomerantz, M.D., study co-author and chief of gerontology, Saint 
Joseph Hospital. "I believe this approach should be appreciated and utilized 
more widely." 

Sounds like a sales pitch. 

The study had to do with perceived quality of life only.  Not whether outcomes 
were better in the TM group.  But the researchers pushed the limits and imply 
outcomes may be improved for the meditators.  For example:

"Emotional and psychosocial stress contribute to the onset and progression of 
breast cancer and cancer mortality," said Sanford Nidich, lead author of the 
study and senior researcher at the Institute for Natural Medicine and 
Prevention at Maharishi University of Management.

"Decades of research have shown that stress contributes to the cause and 
complications of cancer," said Robert Schneider, M.D., F.A.C.C., co-author and 
director of Institute for Natural Medicine and Prevention at Maharishi 
University of Management. "The data from this well-designed clinical trial and 
related studies suggest that effective stress reduction with the Transcendental 
Meditation program may be useful in the prevention and treatment and of breast 
cancer and its deleterious consequences."

I find Schneider's quote almost shockingly inappropriate. 
 
These quotes are all over the net and can be found by a Google search.  The 
study was published in Integrative Cancer Therapies (Vol. 8, No. 3: September 
2009) and entitled "A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effects of 
Transcendental Meditation on Quality of Life in Older Breast Cancer Patients."  
The full text is not available without subscription or purchase.  The journal 
is an alternative medicine kind of journal, not a leading journal on cancer by 
any means.  
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Enlightenment Process AS Moodmaking

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> Recent discussions initiated by Hugo (richardhughes) on
> this forum about suggestibility and whether reading a
> description of higher states of consciousness can pre-
> dispose a person to imagine or, in fact, *experience*
> these higher states of consciousness has left me think-
> ing about the placebo effect, suggestibility, and the
> possibility that one valid way of viewing the enlight-
> enment process is AS a form of suggestibility or
> moodmaking.
> 

Let us do some research.  Take a group of people, randomly assign them to learn 
TM and the siddhis without any lectures or information regarding TM theory (or 
even that it is TM) and the other group getting the traditional program. Work 
out a teacher blinding procedure and some other controls.See what 
experiences happen.  

Also try with and without rounding.  

It doesn't help to equate suggestibility with weakmindedness.  What does that 
mean anyway?  People can be smart, educated, creative and very open minded and 
be suggestible.  

Doctors shouldn't diagnose themselves.  Lawyers shouldn't represent themselves. 
You just don't have enough objectivity. How objective can we be in analyzing 
our own subjective experiences?  





 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to leave a cult with style

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ShempMcGurk"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo"  wrote:
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > 
> > Or perhaps the former TMers here have lost all faith
> > in TM being able to deliver on its claims?
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 
> Seeing as TM and the TMO promises nothing less than full mental potential 
> (ie, enlightenment), it's not much of a negative reflection on TM if some 
> feel it hasn't been able to deliver on this claim.  
> 
> It's a tall order and I say bravo to MMY and the TMO for claiming that they 
> can, indeed, deliver it (and I personally think they can).
>

When?  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Passing Health-Care Reform Could Change Political Landscape

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting, Ruth. It's great to get a perspective from someone who 
> knows what they're talking about. Sometimes I wonder about Harry Reid's 
> commitment to a robust public option. Why is it so important for him to have 
> Olympia Snow's vote to move the Senate Finance health care bill out of 
> committee and on to the floor when all she wants are is a "trigger' to make 
> sure the public option is ineffectual? She probably won't vote for ANY bill 
> that hits the floor anyway. Since have a filibuster proof Senate with 60 
> votes,Reid should move for cloture NOW and ask for an up or down vote for a 
> public option. What Democratic senator in his right mind would vote against 
> it? Reid has to show more leadership and whip the vote. Check out this report 
> from Firedoglake. It makes you wonder why Arlen Specter shows more chutzpah 
> to get cloture than Reid and why Reid is seemingly dragging his feet. 
> http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/15/specter-urges-dem-unity-on-cloture-reid-thanks-for-doing-my-job/
>  
> 
> >
>

It is a dance Raunchy.   There isn't something to vote on yet as the bills 
aren't yet merged.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Passing Health-Care Reform Could Change Political Landscape

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> 
> Given your proximity to the issue and your calling
> in this regard, Ruth, I'd really love to hear what
> you have to say about the whole scene that's been
> going down in the US over health care reform. 
> 
> I would completely understand if you don't want to
> or can't talk about it, but I for one would love to
> hear your perspective. Living where I do, in a country
> with a sane approach to health care, it's been hard 
> for me to get a handle on what I see in the US news.
> It's as if I'm watching a country that has collectively
> LOST ITS FUCKING MIND.
> 
> What's your assessment, being on the "front lines?"
> WTF can people who repeat the "Death Panels" meme
> be *thinking*? Do they really not understand that
> they are describing the present system, and the
> insurance companies that run it?
>
 Too busy and can't really talk much about things. Plus, I need more distance.  
Sometimes I am amazed at how little people know about how the insurance markets 
work and thus how health care reform may work if we tweak this or that. 
There is a lot of exhaustion right now, with a few senators working hard to 
push, push, push to final legislation.  Merging the Finance and Health 
committee bills is a bear, though I have a lot of confidence in Reid. Plus 
there are a number of unintended consequence holes that need to be plugged, 
which is tedious work.  And then comes the House and the Senate.

Posturing has been tiresome, but with the August recess in dim memory it is 
less of an immediate problem.  I do love hearing statements like "we have the 
best health care system in the whole world."  Yippee America, we are number 
one!  Yup, if you are insured and live in the right community.  El Paso Texas 
vs. McAllen Texas.


I worry about how to reduce health care inflation, but as soon as people hear 
about controlling cost they think rationing.  Or that that someone might 
interfere with their doctor/patient relationship.  (Of course, insurance 
companies already interfere in that relationship and  doctors aren't 
always going to make the best decision or be efficient.) Killing Medicare 
Advantage subsidies is a small first step that is clearly warranted, but even 
that gets people up in arms. We need to get new reimbursement mechanisms in 
place to reward the practice of good medicine.  We also need to strengthen our 
primary care system. I like a public option because it can experiment with 
reimbursement in ways insurance companies have been unwilling to try. We also 
need to experiment more with Medicare and reimbursement.  This is not easy, the 
Swiss have struggled with their requirement which limits coverage to 
"effective, appropriate, and efficient" treatment.  It often isn't formulaic so 
it can be difficult.  But some things are formulaic and simple.  Tell a 
hospital it will not get Medicare money unless it has a checklist system in 
place for reducing infections.  It is proven to work. No question. But we 
shouldn't need a law for that, just give Medicare (and any other public plan) 
the ability to reward what needs to be rewarded.  

I can barely touch on it, but Medicare has to get control over drug costs and 
be allowed to bargain on drug prices. In large part economists are telling me 
that things are expensive in the US simply because they can be.  But we aren't 
a country like Japan, willing to address cost by having a system where 
government decides how much will be paid for x,y or z. 

Like it or not, we are not a country of collectivists,  and the current 
distrust of government is not helping. 

Anyway, I am rambling a bit on this gloomy evening.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Passing Health-Care Reform Could Change Political Landscape

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex"  wrote:
>
> 
> If you object to reports, maybe you should do a fact-check:

You're funny.  Health care reform is what I do full time these days.  BTW, I am 
not on a group plan, I have private insurance.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Passing Health-Care Reform Could Change Political Landscape

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex"  wrote:
>
> John wrote:
> > Passing Health-Care Reform Could Change Political Landscape
> >
> "Forty-four percent (44%) of voters nationwide now favor the 
> health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and 
> congressional Democrats. That's little changed from a week 
> ago. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey 
> finds that 50% are opposed to the plan..."
> 
> Source:
> 
> 'Health Care Reform'
> Rasmussen Reports, October 12, 2009
>


 I'm sick of the weekly MF Rasmussen polls when we don't have a plan yet.  Were 
people thinking of the House bill? The Senate Finance Committee proposal? With 
or without the Rockefeller amendments? the Health committee?  Those polled 
certainly have opinions and rarely have the facts.  For example, people tend 
not to like the requirement to buy insurance or pay an excise tax.  But they 
don't understand how adverse selection works (insurance gets expensive when 
only expensive people get insurance) and for reform to work everyone has to 
participate. 

Back to work.  I can report that the public option is not yet dead.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting MUM Developments

[ruthsimplicity]

I am just stopping in for a quick visit, after Vaj let me know about this 
development.

I note the number of "suck it up" posts.  I wouldn't be surprised if that was 
what had been done for years by the disenchanted.  Now the student population 
has changed.  Too many students no longer care about meditation.   They come to 
MUM primarily for reasons other than TM--foreign students interested in the 
computer courses, others interested in the environmental programs. Students 
talk, they get a feel of the lay of the land, and then they do a petition. 
Students are idealists.  This is the kind of thing they do.   They could have 
been kicked out, which would be in accordance with the rules.  But there were 
too many of them.  If the survey Rick mentions correctly states the attitudes 
of MUM students, unless MUM bends there will be no more university. 

I wonder what the current drop out rate is?  

There just isn't many new generation true believers in the United States. Look 
at who pisses and moans about TM pro and con on the net--a bunch of 50 plus 
year olds. Are there any new up and coming researchers or are most of them 60 
year old TBs? Who is Orme-Johnson's successor?  I would shed no tears if MUM 
went belly up. But MUM trustees may have enough sense to realize that survival 
depends on being more secular. 

In any event, it will be interesting.  

Ruth


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Death Panels Dropped?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Ruth, hats off to you for doing yeowoman's work on health care. I understand 
> you have a nursing background, how did you get involved lobbying and what is 
> GBO? 



Sorry, I had a typo, it is the CBO, the congressional budget office.  I am a 
retired MD and have been working on and off as a lobbyist for health care 
reform for several years.  http://www.pnhp.org/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation: The Dark Side

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
 
> 
> As Eigen says: ³Jessie needed simple human contact, not Enlightenment.²




> Although Wilber thinks people can through meditation reach elevated states
> of consciousness that can help them become more mature, he says there is no
> guarantee mediation will free men or women from their own narcissism.
> 


Interesting article Rick.  Stopped by today on this rainy Sunday looking for a 
thread that actually deals with meditation and picked this one.  As usual, 
there were attacks and nastiness, which fits into Wilber's narcissism comment. 

Judy mentioned the concept of meditate and act, the old dipping the cloth stuff 
we all are familiar with.  For some reason this concept always bugged me but I 
didn't think it through.  I think it bothers me because "act" doesn't mean 
much. It could be anything other than meditating. So does the meditating, doing 
anything, and meditating, and doing anything, end up meaning anything at all?  
Accomplishing anything worthwhile?  If you are a meditating narcissist, your 
acts may very well continue to express your narcissism.  If you are a meditator 
who is generous and altruistic, your act will reflect that aspect of your 
personality.  So, does the meditation make you a better person and overcome 
your faults?   I haven't seen it in the meditators that I know. They seem, as 
Curtis has said, mostly like everyone else.   The other question that has been 
addressed here many times is whether that narcissist can still be enlightened, 
even with his narcissism.  I say no, but that doesn't mean much because I don't 
believe in enlightenment in the sense that MMY talked about it. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Death Panels Dropped?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on 
> consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top 
> Republican member said Thursday.
> 
> The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare 
> reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by 
> conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.
> 
> "On the Finance Committee, we are working very hard to avoid unintended 
> consequences by methodically working through the complexities of all of these 
> issues and policy options," Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. 
> "We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the 
> way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."
> 
> The Finance Committee is the only congressional committee not to report out a 
> preliminary healthcare bill before the August congressional recess, but is 
> expected to unveil its proposal shortly after Labor Day.
> 
> Grassley said that bill would hold up better compared to proposals crafted in 
> the House, which he asserted were "poorly cobbled together."
> 
> "The bill passed by the House committees is so poorly cobbled together that 
> it will have all kinds of unintended consequences, including making taxpayers 
> fund healthcare subsidies for illegal immigrants," Grassley said. The veteran 
> Iowa lawmaker said the end-of-life provision in those bills would pay 
> physicians to "advise patients about end-of-life care and rate physician 
> quality of care based on the creation of and adherence to orders for 
> end-of-life care.
> 
> "Maybe others can defend a bill like the Pelosi bill that leaves major issues 
> open to interpretation, but I can't," Grassley added.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/p9xc5a
> http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/finance-committee-to-drop-end-of-life-provision-2009-08-13.html
> 
> This whole mess would have been unnecessary if Obama had pushed Medicare for 
> All from day one. It's a simple concept. Just gradually lower age for 
> Medicare eligibility until it covers everyone. Anyone not covered would buy 
> insurance and the insurance companies would have to compete for an ever 
> shrinking pool of customers. Getting a health care bill aimed at Single payer 
> for all could have been a painless process instead of becoming the debacle it 
> is. Polls said the people were in favor of single payer, but Congress' 
> confusing efforts will continue to lose public support and were going to end 
> up with a bill that serves insurance/big pharma, not the people.
>


I am a supporter of Medicare for all but as a long time lobbyist on health 
care, I have to say that it never had a chance.  There are a number of reasons 
for this, from the way senate rules work to the power of industry lobbies.  
There are something like 6 health care industry lobbyists per senator and 
representative.  I had hoped we could phase in to something like that by 
allowing people over a certain age, like 55, to start medicare early, but that 
has gone nowhere either.  

It is tiring and hard work to make our way through all of this. I am working on 
trying to find ways for the GBO to quantify best practices savings.  Muddy and 
difficult work and not very interesting to the public but of significant 
importance.  Too much of the so called public debate and press coverage is not 
spent on important issues, but on rumors and side issues.   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Go Ahead And Die! (Pirates Of The Health Care-ibean)

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex  wrote:
>
> do.rflex wrote:
> > Go Ahead And Die!  
> > 
> So, there's going to be a panel that
> decides who lives and who dies. Some
> will get their meds cut, others will
> be told to just go and die. And they
> call that a care plan?
>

Get a checking.  This is not true.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Transcendental Meditation deniers

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 7, 2009, at 9:23 AM, dhamiltony2k5 wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Om, the TM deniers. What is it they hate so much
> > > > about TM? On a scale of things, the things they dislike so much that  
> > > > would set them to work so hard against things TM?
> > > > Just wondering.
> > > 
> > > Om, I don't know any TM deniers, but my guess is what is so upsetting  
> > > to many people is when a group claiming to have spiritual truths  
> > > constantly bombards the media outlets with lies and exaggerations--and  
> > > then enlists their own members to cover their tracks by hiding in blog  
> > > and in newspaper article comment sections.
> > > 
> > 
> > Of the activist Transcendental Meditation haters fighting TM on these blogs 
> > and who would go out & show up in public meetings aagainst TM like at 
> > meetings opposing DLF, are the deniers mostly Christians doing their 
> > fundamentalist thing?   & some TM quitters?
> > 
> > What do you see?
> > 
> > Just wondering.
> >
> 
> 
> Reading these replies and looking at those anti-TM webpages,
> 
> seems there are at least four types of Transcendental Meditation deniers.
> 
> 
> TM deniers:
> 
> 1. "upsetting to many people is when a group claiming to have spiritual 
> truths constantly bombards the media outlets with lies and exaggerations"
> 
> 2. "Losers are provoked by success."
> 
> 3."religious fundamentalism"
> 
> 4. "It's just that it's so entertaining"  For fun.
>

For me, because I was involved with TM and know people lost to the cult of TMO, 
I sometimes comment when unsupported claims are promoted as The Proven Truth.  
I also sometimes defend critics when they get attacked by the TM'ers.  I find 
myself bothered when people assume that there is something wrong with you if 
you criticize.  So the TBs get to go on and on promoting TM, making all sorts 
of unsupported claims, but when Mike or Ruth or John Knapp says something 
critical we are accused of having an agenda, of being stupid, of being mentally 
ill (?!), or even psychopaths!  I suppose to people looking in the TBs come off 
looking pretty bad when this happens.  Frankly, one reason I came to my own 
negative conclusions about TM is due to how TMists and TBs act and sound, both 
in person and on the net.   

As far as your points, if people think TM is great for them maybe it is, maybe 
it isn't.   I'd like to know what their families think. :) 

I haven't been to a site where religious fundamentalists attack the TBs.  Bet 
they both come off looking bad.  

I don't find it fun at all to engage and often take long breaks.  I rarely post 
here anymore because it is not very enjoyable.   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sarah Palin: Feminist Receptacle for Hate

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > 
> > [quoting "Violet" at Reclusive Leftist:]
> > > "Sarah Palin's surprise resignation has brought out
> > > the crazy again, and reading through the blogs I'm
> > > reminded of how much pure bullshit has been said and
> > > believed about her and continues to be said and
> > > believed. I'm reminded of how so many feminists seem
> > > possessed of a wholly irrational hatred for this woman." 
> >  
> > > But after you've had a few of these myth-dispelling
> > > conversations, you start to realize that it doesn't
> > > matter. These people don't hate Palin because of the
> > > lies; the lies exist to justify the hate. That's why
> > > they keep reaching and reaching for something else,
> > > until they finally get to "she winked on TV!"
> > > 
> > > Read more:
> > > "Feminists and the mystery of Sarah Palin"
> > > http://tinyurl.com/kubxv2
> > > http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/07/04/feminists-and-the-mystery-of-sarah-palin/
> > 
> > Zowie, what an *extraordinarily* fine rant!
> > 
> > The comments are terrific too, at least the first couple
> > dozen that I read out of several hundred.
> > 
> > Palin and the whole spectrum of reactions to her, from
> > both sexes, feminists and non-, are revelatory of the
> > current state of relations between men and women in this
> > country, vastly more so than the reactions to Hillary;
> > those were just the hors d'ouvres.
> > 
> > The violently negative reactions of women who consider
> > themselves feminists have to be the key to it--although
> > what, exactly, they're revealing is far from clear.
> > 
> > My sister and I were just pondering an email she had
> > received in a conversation she was having with a
> > prominent male progressive blogger, one of the more
> > reasonable ones, a staunch feminist. He said he could
> > envision having George W. Bush as a neighbor and,
> > politics aside, actually liking him--but he wouldn't
> > want to have Palin as a neighbor; he thought she was
> > basically a really nasty person.
> > 
> > My sister and I were flabbergasted. As appalling and
> > irrational as we find her political behavior, we would
> > both *love* to have her as a neighbor. We wouldn't want
> > to get on the wrong side of her, but we think she'd be
> > enormous fun, even exhilarating, to be around--warm,
> > upbeat, energetic, funny, supportive.
> > 
> 
> When Palin resigned I happened to be hanging out in the hospital TV room, 
> waiting for my next rehab patient to arrive. A big burly farmer guy, waiting 
> for his physical therapy appointment, turned to me and said, "I'd vote for 
> her." Funny thing was, he wasn't an anti-abortion nut. He just liked her 
> because he hated the media's and David Letterman in particular, attacks on 
> her. The Palin hate fest from the left, right and "feminists" could backfire 
> on all of them. People love an underdog. The more they attack her the more 
> her supporters will dig in their heels. It's kind of the way I felt about 
> attacks on Hillary. My support for her grew in proportion to the vileness of 
> the attacks. Violet has a follow up article today, "...inside the mind of a 
> former Palin-hater!" of a former Obama supporter who shows remorse for 
> participating in irrational Palin hate. We could use a few more sane sisters 
> like her willing to walk it back from irrational Palin hate.  
> 
> http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/07/06/comments-from-the-giant-thread-inside-the-mind-of-a-former-palin-hater/
>  http://tinyurl.com/mjtp2x
> 
> > And this male blogger's negative sense of her was mild
> > compared to the boiling rage of the so-called feminists
> > Violet talks about.
> > 
> > Her pro-life sentiments aside, in my view Palin is more
> > of an authentic feminist than these women could even
> > dream of being. And it's clear that she isn't pro-life
> > because she's anti-woman.
> > 
> > I think Violet nails it: the truth or falsity of the
> > various ugly stories that are circulated about Palin is
> > entirely irrelevant. The hatred comes first--from where
> > is the big question--and the falsehoods are generated
> > simply to justify it.
> > 
> > Is a puzzlement.
> >
>
I wonder how popular she would be if she were a man. If it were Todd as 
governor who ran for public office and said the same things she has said. I 
doubt he would have gone far.  She was picked because she was a woman and 
religious.   I don't like Palin because she isn't knowledgeable or thoughtful 
on the issues. She says really stupid things. I wouldn't want her as my 
neighbor either. Nor would I want George Bush.   I also don't like the idea 
that we want "regular guys and gals" to be our leaders. Just because arguably 
she is an authentic feminist doesn't mean that

[FairfieldLife] Re: Long-Term TMers Watch List, revised

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>

> Good point Ruth. However, I hope you do not miss the reason I posted such a 
> list was to point out the absurdity of posting lists.
>

Yup! Though I do find it interesting to know who are TM practioners, who 
practice the siddhis, and the reasons they continue their practice.  But that 
isn't about a list.  :)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Long-Term TMers Watch List, revised

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> > 
> > > > My apologies for leaving her off the list earlier,
> > > > but I wasn't sure that she had claimed in the past
> > > > to have been a regular practitioner of TM for many 
> > > > years. Now that she has complained about being left 
> > > > off the list and proudly wants to be, I oblige.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Pompous Ass List:
> > > Barry
> > > Doug
> > > Vaj
> > > 
> > > Chime in folks.
> > 
> > Sal, of course (although she's more stupid than
> >   pompous *per se*).
> > do.rkflex
> > Bhairitu, at times
> > Ruth, at times
> > Edg, at times
> > geezerfreak
> > sattvadude
> >
> 
> Yikes! My spam filter is about to explode.
> 
> Stupid list:
> Sal
>
Sal's not stupid, she just doesn't play be the same rules of engagement that 
some others play by.  

For example, I may see a post and maybe a word or two makes me think of 
something else maybe only slightly related and I post that in response. I have 
seen Sal do the same.  

We do have a variety of styles here and it is interesting to see how they mesh. 
 From stream of consciousness to debate team. No one is stupid, some are 
careless, but who cares?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Care "Reform"?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex  wrote:
>
> "One of my law partners asked me yesterday which 
> of the Democrats' current initiatives is worse, 
> the tax on carbon or the health care "public 
> option," otherwise known as socialized medicine. 
> 
> I replied unhesitatingly that socialized medicine 
> is much worse. Carbon tax-and-trade can rather 
> easily be repealed once people realize what a dumb 
> idea it is. 
> 
> However, once our health care system has been 
> destroyed and replaced with "single payer" socialized 
> medicine, there is no going back..."
> 
> Read more:
> 
> Thoughts on Health Care "Reform"
> Posted by John Hindraker
> Powerline, June 25, 2009 


Single payer is not socialized medicine.  Socialized medicine is when the 
government owns the health care facilities and employs the workers.  Socialized 
means owning the means of production.  In this country it is simply used as a 
scary word to cut off thought. 
> http://tinyurl.com/lpk9ut
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Call your Congress Critters for Public Option Health Care

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Today I contacted Dave Lobesack's office in D.C. and suggested that Dave
> make a statement of support on his website for the public option in the
> health care reform bill. I'll be watching.
> 
> I am on the Central Committee for Dave's district 2. I campaigned for
> him and I know him personally. I called Dave's assistant on her cell
> phone today and asked if Dave agrees with the Public Option in principle
> and she said yes.


Good work Raunch!  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak Chopra's tribute to Michael Jackson

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> But what I find more interesting is the enduring
> hatred that long-term TMers seem to aim at him.
> Whatever they claim on the surface, the bottom
> line of it always has struck me as them being
> *jealous* of him for *making* money by parroting
> the same unoriginal, recycled spiritual dogma
> that they had to *pay* money to parrot.


I am very suspicious of Chopra, always finding a way to insert himself into a 
story. His writings after MMY died concerning his illnesses did not hold 
together into a coherent whole.  His speculation that drugs caused Jackson's 
death (and that he warned him) is unseemly.  Heck, he could have died as a 
result of his lupus.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: What happened to Michael Jackson?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Whatever did happen to Michael Jackson, here's 
> a video reminder of the person he was underneath
> all the glitz and neuroses:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5O61yKkdr4
> 
> This was shot for a Pepsi commercial in 1992.
> Kudos to the Pepsi folks for having the restraint
> to capture this lovely glimpse of his shining,
> gentle, tender aspect just as it was.
>

Very lovely.

I remember as a resident when the Thriller album came out and we would goof 
around moonwalking the hospital hallways.  Such fun!  I can still do a pretty 
good Micheal Jackson dance moves.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Healthcare industry spending $1.4 million - a day - on lobbyists

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> The healthcare industry is spending upwards of $1.4 million each day on 
> average to lobby members of Congress on health care legislation, a report 
> issued by Common Cause this week reveals.
> 
> Industry spending has nearly doubled since 2000. Healthcare interests 
> contributed $94 million to Congress members during the 2008 election cycle 
> alone — up from $40 million in 2000.
> 
> Common Cause's report has received almost no treatment in the press — with a 
> single article in Bloomberg News and one in the National Journal.
> 
> The industry is attempting to alter the course of Democrats' plans to provide 
> universal health coverage for most Americans.
> 
> "The top recipients of health industry campaign contributions from 2000 to 
> 2008 are new Democrat Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Sen. Blanche Lincoln 
> (D-AK) at $7.3 million and $6.3 million respectively," National Journal 
> reports. "All of the campaign finance data used in the report came from the 
> Center for Responsive Politics.
> 
> "The report concludes that members of Congress face a disheartening conflict 
> of interest: side with their large campaign donors or back reform measures 
> that have support from the public, like the public plan option which would 
> create a publicly-funded health insurance entity to compete with private 
> insurers," the site adds.
> 
> http://snipurl.com/kxmgl  [rawstory_com]
>


This is a huge problem, as it was in the Clinton years.  That is why I've been 
posting about writing your senators and representatives.  

[FairfieldLife] To hell with group consciousness (Re: What happened to Michael Jackson?)

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>
> If Obama fails on single payer, my first thought about him from then on will 
> be that he's a house N-word, bought and paid for.  He'll have denial-ability 
> in that "we don't gots the votes, blame the Repugs," but, right now, I don't 
> see him championing single payer LIKE HE COULD if he wanted to get on the 
> stump and shout about it to the masses and really get them to flood their 
> representatives with letters and phone calls.  He's not using his group 
> consciousness currency. Why? Smells like money at work.
> 
> Edg
> 
  

Get off your ass and do something. Write Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley and 
demand single payer or a federal option.  Here is their contact info:  
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=IA

Write your representatives as well.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Epilogue

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> While sitting with Maharishi in 1975, someone asked, "What did Guru Dev
> actually do?" Maharishi was quiet for a moment and then said softly and
> with the simplicity of a child, "He made me."
> 


Rank 10 on the 1 to 10 narcissist scale.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: What if Government Ran Health Care?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex  wrote:
>
> "It's really exciting giving up health choice 
> to these corrupt? politicians and their bureacratic 
> drones. Can't wait to become a total ward and 
> meat-puppet of the State."
> 
> Read more:
> 
> 'What if Government Ran Health Care?'
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPC6CqAFA4E

What choice?  You have an insurance company, yes? They most often restrict 
choice by paying less for "out of network" providers.  HMOs totally remove 
choice.  Have you ever applied for private health insurance?  If you have any 
sort of significant health condition, even if controlled, odds are they won't 
accept you.  What kind of choice is that?  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Half Measures Doom Health Care Reform

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> "...Barack [Obama]...searches for common ground where none exists, 
> and...negotiations with himself lead to policies that are far too weak...
> 
> The point is that if you're making big policy changes, the final form of the 
> policy has to be good enough to do the job. You might think that half a loaf 
> is always better than none — but it isn't if the failure of half-measures 
> ends up discrediting your whole policy approach...
> 
> Which brings us back to health care. It would be a crushing blow to 
> progressive hopes if Mr. Obama doesn't succeed in getting some form of 
> universal care through Congress. But even so, reform isn't worth having if 
> you can only get it on terms so compromised that it's doomed to fail."
> 
> Not Enough Audacity
> Paul Krugman 6/25/09


I agree.  But it is tough given the state of our legislature pool.   

So write you senators and representatives and demand a public option and demand 
that everyone get covered.  

I mean it.  Write.  Enough people who show that they care will have an effect.
> New York Times
> 
> Read More:
> http://tinyurl.com/lph4s7
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/opinion/26krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Another A-B comparison...one that makes the TMO look better

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> Folks on this list get a little...overfocused...
> on TM and the TMO from time to time, to the point
> of...uh...losing touch with the greater reality 
> of the greater spiritual marketplace. Some rant
> about the TMO as if it were the Spawn Of Satan, 
> release 2.0, unaware that *by comparison* to some 
> groups, its very inefficiency and isolation from
> the real world renders it fairly harmless.
> 
> Compare and contrast to Scientology, in this well-
> done "article portal" created by TampaBay.com:
> 
> http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2009/reports/project/
> 
> The video on the main portal page deals mainly 
> with the abuse -- and we are talking *physical*
> abuse...beating people up -- by Scientology's
> leader David Miscavige. I suspect that many here 
> will identify with some of the things said by 
> former leaders of Scientology in the video, 
> especially Mike Rinder, captured on video lying
> with a straight face to the BBC, and later admit-
> ting having been beaten over 50 times by Miscavige,
> and *before* he did that BBC interview. That level
> of denial should be familiar to many here who
> "spouted the TM Party Line" while knowing it was
> a lie.
> 
> However, I suspect that their sense of perspective 
> about the TMO's relative "evil-ness" may be restored 
> after hearing about Miscavige's musical chairs weed-
> out-the-traitors game, all to the tune of Queen's
> "Bohemian Rhapsody." Maharishi was never this crazy.
> And hearing Marty Rathburn's story of *how* he felt he 
> had to escape the Scientology headquarters and its 
> clutches is particularly chilling. At least when you 
> left TM, you were fairly sure that no one was going 
> to try to either stop you from leaving or worse, "come 
> after you" with revenge in mind. Scientologists do 
> not have that luxury.
>
 

I read the series as it came out.  It is so strange to me that people believe 
in scientology when the creator was a sci fi writer who is known to have said 
that the way to get rich is to create a religion.  

But yes, there are cults and there are cults.  

  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Cancer: shock breakthrough

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> "This is one of the Holy Grails 
> of prostate cancer research. We 
> have been looking for this for 
> years," he said.
> 
Don't get too excited yet.  This was just a phase II trial of the drug, phase 
III is still to go with a larger group.  Plus, IIRC only 3 out of about 50 
showed such dramatic results.

Trials are ongoing for lung cancer and melanoma.  I think the melanoma research 
is in phase III with encouraging results.  

People has been poking around with using antibodies to mediate the immune 
response in cancer treatment and the research is promising. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get an Ugly Girlfriend

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> After years of Americans accepting sexism in their culture, advertisers
> apparently believe women are so accustomed to sexism, that Bacardi can
> successfully sell breezers to women by attacking women.  The premise is
> that a woman thinks so little of her own gender that she will
> participate with arrogant males in laughing at women considered "ugly"
> rather than be in the "ugly" category and the brunt of tasteless jokes. 
> Do women have so little self-esteem that they are going to buy Bacardi
> Breezer because they fear being called ugly and would willing
> participate in sexist attacks on other women?  WTF?  What say you?
> 
> raunchydog
> 
> "There's a new ad for Bacardi Breezers and it certainly ain't
> pretty.  In the new "Ugly Girlfriend" Campaign
>  women> , McCann Digital has teamed up with Bacardi Breezers to target
> their beverages to women, who "want to look amazing this summer"
> by accessorizing with "an ugly girlfriend."   Of course, there
> are different options – and each is ripped apart by describing
> different  woman as having, "97 kilograms of femininity, strength
> and double chins," "rubbing thighs," and "drooping
> breasts." Apparently, having them by your side will make you,
> "the most desirable piece of meat on the grill."
> It's not clear what overly sweet wine coolers– it really
> just seems to take a very nauseating, pointless dig at women –
> displaying blatant misogyny and using it to sell their products to women
> themselves."
> 
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/l7ocnj 
> 
> http://womensmediacenter.com/wordpress/?p=813
> 
> 
> 
> If you are offended by this, you may contact Bacardi through their
> official contact page: http://www.bacardilimited.com/contact_us.aspx
>   
> A disgusting new promotional site for Bacardi Breezers
>   says all that women need to
> be more attractive is to find an more unattractive female friend to
> stand next to.
> 
>   [http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2009/06/ug2.jpg]
> 
> 
> According to
>  summer.html>  Copyranter, Israeli ad agency McCann Digital launched the
> "Get An Ugly Girlfriend!
>  " site
> in Hebrew and English along with a Hebrew-only facebook group
>   to promote the
> fruit-flavored alcoholic beverages.
> The site suggests that like Bacardi Breezers, ugly friends come in
> several different varieties and women can use them to appear more
> attractive in social situations, such as at the beach:
> 
>  
> [http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2009/06/Picture_5_01.jpg]
> 
> Or at the Mall
> 
>   [http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2009/06/Picture_6.jpg]
> 
> 
> While misogyny is rampant in alcohol advertising
>  , usually those campaigns
> are aimed at men. It's unclear why advertisers thought showing pictures
> of women they deem hideous along with degrading comments would make
> ladies line up for Bacardi.
> 
> Get An Ugly Girlfriend!
> 
> Bacardi Says The Hot Accessory This Summer Is An "Ugly Girlfriend"
>  summer.html>  [Copyranter]
> Read More:  Badvertising 
> ,   Bacardi get an ugly girlfriend
>  ,  
> Ugly girlfriend  ,  
> Bacardi breezers  ,  
> bacardi  ,   Advertising
>  ,   Ads
>  ,   Alcohol
>  ,   Alcohol advertising
>  ,   Gawker
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/mkjvug 
> 
> http://jezebel.com/5296935/bacardi-ad-uses-misogyny-to-sell-alcohol-to-w\
> omen
>  women>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  women>
>
  

That is past rude.  If I drank Bacardi products I would stop.  Here is the 
website sponsored by Bicardi:  
http://www.mccanndigital.co.il/Cannes09/Breezer_Minisite.html

It doesn't look US made so who knows what laws were applicable to the models.  
They may or may not know how they

[FairfieldLife] Re: More advice, please

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
>
> I would stay away from anything as addictive as xanax
> supposedly is, and I'm sort of surprised your doctor
> would even prescribe it.
> 
> There's got to be other things that would work without
> such a major side-effect, along with talking to  someone.
> 
> Sal
>

Many people do use Xanax for a brief period of time with no trouble at all.  
Other people use it off and on in small doses (like the one prescribed for 
Shemp) for years with no problem.The problem is that if you take it all the 
time  you will end up needing a higher dose and you will become addicted.  So, 
for generalized anxiety disorder and other chronic problems it is better to 
find another treatment.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: More advice, please

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"  wrote:
>
> So, as I told you folks a few months ago I am going through a crisis in my 
> life in which I am experiencing a lot of depression and anxiety, the likes of 
> which I've never experienced in my life (at least, since I started TM at age 
> 18...I'm 54 now).
> 
> Here's the advice I seek: three months ago when this crisis started, my GP 
> prescribed me 0.5mg of Xanax.  I have never taken such a drug before in my 
> life and, up to now, have been afraid to. But this nervousness that I feel 
> everyday, I'm fed up with.  So I am seriously considering taking it.  I 
> filled the prescription today and the bottle is sitting on my kitchen counter.
> 
> what do you think: should I take it?
> 
> Pro's and con's, please.  I'm desperate!
> 
> As this is my 49th post of the week and I won't be able to respond, I will 
> nevertheless read all of your advice on this.
>
Xanax is very effective for short term treatment of anxiety.  If you are 
concerned about the addictive potential, you might ask your doctor about BuSpar 
which is also an antianxiety agent but is not  related to the benzodiazepines 
(like Xanax), barbiturates, or other sedating anxiolytic drugs. 

If you have issues that are more long term you might look into the SSRIs 
(selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) which are very effective for anxiety 
and depression.  There are side effects (everyone hears about the potential for 
sexual side effects) and you have to wean yourself off of them carefully. 
Paroxetine (Paxil) is one example. These take a few weeks to build up in your 
system to work.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sorry to interupt;I have a question-

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "meowthirteen"  wrote:
>
> ---
> I fell*splat*
> on my left knee
> then, shortly thereafter,
> I *splat!*
> fell on my right knee
> 
> bruising
> 
> right knee looked, &felt worse.
> 
> A few days & I could do yoga again, but at a weird angle
> To avoid hurting knee
> 
> -Going to the store and *splat!*
> I feel AGAIN!this time on both knees at the same time!
> It was like an entity just stuck out it's leg for me to fall over
> nothing there to trip over,the usual shoes, etc...
> 
> my right knee was not healed up from the last fall;
> I rolled up my torn jeans and it looked like I had 2 knees!
> (swelling)
> It's been about 2 weeks now,
> since last splat,
> the bruising is settling down, but I still have 2 knees!
> I'm new to this area, and could use your advice to a person to go to for 
> advice.
> One person told me perhaps it should be drained(?)
> What would be the reasons, pro&con for draining/continuing to let it be 
> without draining?
> Anyone have experience with this?
> I am interested in your perceptions of this;
> in wellness,
> physically,
> and 
> spiritually.
> I want to make the correct descisions here.
> I value what you all have to say.
> I am stronger with you.
> 
> And how can I extend love to you,
> my friends?
> 
> 
> Go to your local urgent care.  Or if you have a doctor, call him or her.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > >
> > >  
> > > Jimi Hendrix' Native American (or "Indian") heritage also played a role 
> > > in Jimi's life. The cover work of his second album "Axis: Bold As Love" 
> > > was supposed to reflect that Cherokee legacy but because the person 
> > > designing it, had misunderstood Jimi's demand, the artwork finally showed 
> > > Jimi as a Hindu god. That just to show the misunderstandings Jimi had to 
> > > deal with.
> > > 
> > > http://mulattodebate.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=2668928
> > >
> > The Cherokee Nation, was a very evolved culture, dedicated to pursuing the 
> > 'Beautiful' in life...
> > They contributed in many ways, to the musical quality of voice and twangy 
> > ways, to the areas where, their tribe dwelt, for many centuries, until the 
> > 'White Christians' came, to 'Bring Christian Civilization' to them...
> > Nashville, and surrounding areas, have thier footprint established...
> > R.G.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: My upcoming return to Fairfield - I need your help please - (formating corrected)

[ruthsimplicity]

Micheal, the internet is your friend.  For example, this website give a lot of 
information on housing options for meditators in Fairfield:

http://invincibleamerica.org/info.html

You might also look at the website for the local paper and post classified ads 
for what you are looking for:

http://goldentrianglenewspapers.com/classifieds/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Erotic Lurking from Curtis

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> I meant "Erratic" lurking but "Erotic" had much better headline attention 
> grabbing power!
> 
> Thanks for thinking of me.  I don't want my recent non-posting to seem like a 
> negitive statement on FFL.  I apologize for not giving any explanation for an 
> obvious change in my posting behavior here.  Just dropping out sends the 
> wrong message.
> 
> I have experienced good vibes (even spontaneous kind eulogies) and a 
> fantastic opportunity to write regularly, getting feedback from intelligent 
> people whom I respect here.  FFL has been very useful for developing my 
> thinking on certain topics and has given me much more than I ever 
> contributed.  
> 
> Anyhooo, I had a profound experience in Florence of what the "Renaissance" 
> means to me, a focus on humanity rather than divinity.  Like the artists of 
> that period, my attention is shifting.  Spending time away from my 
> cyber-focused life here in the US made my time priorities change since I have 
> been back.
> 
> Anyone who cares to can contact me by email, I am the easiest person to find 
> on the Web.  I've been getting more from one-one-one emails lately.  Many 
> people here have touched me. (Well not touched-me touched me but you get the 
> idea!) My lurking is too erratic for posting to me here to be effective.
> 
> In direct contradiction to all those who posted out flipping the cyber bird 
> here: this place rocks and I my life is richer for having spent time here. 
> When I'm done with some projects I'm working on now I can reconsider spending 
> time on FFL again.
> 
> Like the best sort of old friends or neighborhood bars, I feel as though I 
> could drop in any time and my favorite drink would be in front of my bar 
> stool in no time.  Cheers!
>

Man, you are such a nice guy.  No flipping anyone off or anything.  I spend too 
much time on the net so I understand the need to step back.  

I'll miss you.  It is not the same without you. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Adept TM'ers

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M"  wrote:
> > 
> > > > > The TM technique can (or could at the time) claim uniqueness 
> > > > > as being:
> > > ...
> > > > > * Not a skill i.e. something that you develop and get 
> > > > > "better" at, as in, for example, learning a musical 
> > > > > instrument. In theory you can't say "I meditate better 
> > > > > now than I did five years ago" (unless you 
> > > > > were doing it wrong five years ago).
> > 
> > I wonder about this. I hypothesize that there are people 
> > who are very good at TM.  They transcend easily and feel 
> > good in their practice, with little if any adverse effects 
> > (unstressing).  They may be naturally good at it or it may 
> > have come from practice or both. 
> 
> Ruth, you're going to groan (and I don't blame
> you), but I chalk the differences in how some
> people react to TM as opposed to the way others
> react to TM as predilection, which I then chalk
> up to "past life experience." OK, *forget* the
> "past life experience" if you don't believe in
> that, but "predilection" is Right On in my exper-
> ience as both a meditator and as a teacher of 
> meditation.
> 
> My theory is that those who have "paid their dues"
> performing meditative practices in the past are
> more likely to "fall into" other, similar practices
> in another life. If you don't believe in past lives,
> call it pure predilection...the fact that different
> human beings have different nervous systems and
> likes and dislikes and things that they "resonate"
> with and things that they do not.
> 
> Whatever you call it, the outcome is the same. Some
> experience what they call transcendence (although I
> don't necessarily call it that) very quickly with
> TM, and some don't. For some, it takes time before
> they "settle down" enough to even sit through 20
> minutes of TM practice. For others, it's like pulling
> teeth even after years of TM practice.
> 
> In my opinion, there is "no harm, no foul" in ANY
> of these different reactions. I have known people who
> *hated* TM, and then tried a meditation practice that
> involved focus and concentration, and *loved* it. They
> "fell into" that practice immediately, and found *it*
> effortless, whereas they always found TM effortful.
> Go figure. This is completely contradictory to the
> dogma of the TM movement, and yet as a person who has
> taught hundreds of people TM and another hundreds of
> people other techniques of meditation, I've seen it
> happen. 
> 
> There is simply no predicting who will "get" a par-
> ticular practice. Some will, some won't. No harm, no
> foul either way in my opinion. Some will "get" one
> practice and not another. Again, no harm, no foul.
> 
> Ritalin -- a form of speed, an amphetamine if I am
> not mistaken -- has the effect of *calming down* 
> certain people. For others, it has the effect of
> speed in general. Same with meditation practices.
> 
> Also, contrary to what Richard suggests, there are 
> some meditation practices that one can *definitely* 
> get better at over time. Which is a good thing. 
> Imagine being one of the people who *didn't* fall
> easily into TM and being told for years that it was
> all your fault. Oh. You probably were.
>

I don't believe in reincarnation, so I don't buy your theory beyond saying that 
a persons predilection/make up very likely does effect how meditation works for 
them.  I am curious about what works for what kinds of people and whether there 
are simply those who are naturals at meditative type practices. For example, 
there is some indication that people who meditate have characteristics of 
people who are susceptible to hypnosis:

"Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication that TM is 
related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study, although only 44% of the 
non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as highly susceptible, with scores of 10 
or higher on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM 
practitioners received scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and 
Hamilton concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to 
hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient reinforcement in 
the technique to continue its practice.  Using the Harvard Group Scale of 
Hy

[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch and initiations fees.

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:33 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:
> 
> > We have correlated physiological markers to specific described  
> > experiences that occur in more than one person.  We do not know if  
> > the same markers might occur in different people in different  
> > circumstances.  We do not know if there is any "cosmic" meaning  
> > (for lack of a better word) for the experience or the markers.
> 
> 
> We also know that these traditions have for thousands of years  
> described these states as "extraordinary" in some manner. What's the  
> Sagan saying 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'?  
> Extraordinary states of mind should therefore possess some  
> extraordinary characteristics, that is extraordinary physiologic  
> evidence.
> 
> If I had to give one overriding impression of most meditation  
> research is that there's little that is truly extraordinary.
>
Absolutely agree.  That is why there is little replication work, it just isn't 
that interesting to researchers.

[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch and initiations fees.

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  
wrote:
>
> Vaj wrote:
> > I don't believe any of them consider 
> > these TM-induced apneas significant...
> >
> There is no medical evidence of a sleep 
> apnea induced by TM practice. In most 
> cases, TM doesn't cause sleeping, but a 
> 'rest-full alertness'. This was 
> demonstrated by Steve Perino, who had 
> no indications of physiological sleeping 
> apnea. 
> 
> In contrast, sleep apnea is considered a 
> sleep disorder which is characterized 
> by pauses in breathing during sleep. 
> Sleeping or sleeping apnea has nothing to 
> do with TM meditation practice. 
> 
> Read more:
> 
> Sleep apnea:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_apnea
> 
> Apnea:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apnea 
> 
> There are no 'pauses in breathing' in 
> TM practice, only a slight reduction in 
> CO2 output, but suspension of external 
> breathing in sleep apnea shows the volume 
> of the lungs to be unchanged. This has 
> been measured by Herbert Benson and Keith
> Wallace. 
> 
> "Dr. Benson verified the physiological 
> changes brought about by meditation and 
> Christian prayer, then cut away the 
> mythology, dogma, and ritual. The process 
> which remained is simple enough to fit on 
> two pages of the book..." - Anthony P. Mayo
> 
> Read more:
> 
> 'The Relaxation Response'
> by Herbert Benson, M.D.
> Harper, 1975 
> http://tinyurl.com/koptfh
>
Tex, apnea simply means breath suspension for whatever reason.  Even when you 
are awake.  Vaj wasn't talking about SLEEP apnea, but apnea.

[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch and initiations fees.

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > We have EEG evidence of Samadhi in Patanjali  
> > yogins, so we know what it looks like. If you can't replicate those  
> > findings in students, I would hope that would be a point of concern
> 
> Vaj - can you not see the methodological flaw in this? It's circular.
> 
> Let me re-phase your statement slightly:
> 
> We have tested these guys and found a pattern. We see that that pattern 
> matches what samadhi looks like. Therefore we now know what samadhi 
> looks like. Groan...
> 
> Or is it:
> 
> We don't know what samadhi is, but whatever it is, we know these guys 
> have got it (how, if we don't know what samadhi is?). So now we've measured 
> them, and as a result we now know what samadhi is. Groan...


We have correlated physiological markers to specific described experiences that 
occur in more than one person.  We do not know if the same markers might occur 
in different people in different circumstances.  We do not know if there is any 
"cosmic" meaning (for lack of a better word) for the experience or the markers. 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Adept TM'ers

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M"  wrote:

> >> The TM technique can (or could at the time) claim uniqueness 
> >> as being:
> ...
> >> * Not a skill i.e. something that you develop and get "better" at, as
> >> in, for example, learning a musical instrument. In theory you can't  
> >> say "I meditate better now than I did five years ago" (unless you 
> >> were doing it wrong five years ago).
> 

I wonder about this. I hypothesize that there are people who are very good at 
TM.  They transcend easily and feel good in their practice, with little if any 
adverse effects (unstressing).  They may be naturally good at it or it may have 
come from practice or both. In some research the TMO as specifically chosen 
meditators who have long experience meditating and have specific types of 
experiences. This includes the breath suspension person.  The issue is why some 
people have certain experiences and others do not.  Is it practice?  Is it 
there particular make-up?  I think probably both. What is it in them that makes 
them "good at it." Would they have equally positive experiences with other 
techniques? I hypothesize that they might, but that is a difficult question to 
research because of the strong mindset that develops in meditators that their 
technique is the best or "right" technique.  Lots of unanswered questions that 
are very interesting.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> >
> >  ruthsimplicity wrote:  I would describe the relationship between docs
> > and insurers as almost adversarial, hardly in cahoots.
> > 
> > Ruth,
> > 
> > You being a nurse and all, I'm hesitant to smack at the health industry
> > lest I besmirch your participation therein.  As I've noted here at least
> > several times, you have impressed me with heartfelt values.
> > 
> > And,  nurses, as a group, (doctors far less so) generally do impress me
> > with their intellects and hearts.
> > 
> > All that said (here it comes,) I think the health industry itself is
> > reflective of the profiteers that any industry finds itself infested by,
> > and those profiteers are as cold hearted as Joseph Mengle.
> > 
> > Start with the AMA's policy to keep doctors rare and rich and absolute
> > rulers of the industry.  It is scandalous, yet, and here's where I
> > intend to put it to you, where is the outcry from the nurses and doctors
> > about this policy?  So far, I don't think I've heard herein about it
> > from you.  So far, you above are posing doctors as victims.  Phihhh, as
> > if.
> > 
> > If the AMA allowed medical schools to double their production, they'd
> > have all the VERY VERY SMART and VERY VERY HEARTFUL candidates they
> > needed to fill up the new classes without having to lower their entrance
> > requirement standards.  But, noo, that would mean that doctors were
> > competing against doctors in pricing, and that would mean that there
> > would be ample supply of doctors such that hospitals could more easily
> > dump the bad ones that continue to maraud the industry with all kinds of
> > malpractice.
> > 
> > Ask anyone in poverty whether they'd rather have a doctor who was in the
> > 98th percentile (not tippy tippy top notch just top notch) or no doctor
> > at all?  Fuck the entrance requirements of the AMA -- a truly evil money
> > making cabal.
> > 
> > And as for doctors not being in league with the insurance companies,
> > that's a lie.  They're not fighting against them with any use of their
> > own or the AMA's political clout.  Your average surgeon will be paying,
> > what?, probably well over a hundred thousand dollars a year to have
> > malpractice insurance -- costs that they pass down to the clients with
> > higher fees without even apologizing to the patients that they're being
> > ripped off.  The doctors are beleagered in many ways by how insurance
> > companies prvent them from doing "all that's needed," yet we do not hear
> > a peep out of the AMA -- if we did, the AMA could, overnight, get
> > congress to stop the bastards -- yes, the AMA has that much power.  Does
> > any politician want the AMA solely supporting another candidate?
> > 
> > Where are the doctors picketing these injustices?  Where are the nurses
> > confronting the physicians about this say-nothing immorality?  I see no
> > headlines.  If there is a movement to fix all the above, it sure isn't
> > grabbing any headlines from the media.
> > 
> > I know someone who just got a $26,000 hospital bill for a stay in ICU
> > for a week.  At no time did anyone come to this person and explain the
> > kinds of prices they'd be billed for.  What other industry gets to do
> > this?  You buy a car and THEN AND ONLY THEN are you told the price? 
> > Talk about sticker shock -- and, fuck you AMA, but the stress of that
> > shock must at the very least psychosomatiically harm a percentage of the
> > patients enough to be a health hazzard in itself.  Someone who's in an
> > anxious state of mind gets the billing and, what?, suicide or the
> > patient ends up constantly bathing his mind/body system with the
> > chemicals that "hand wringing" can produce.  There's no attempt to
> > pre-handle this kind of stress.
> > 
> > And, the above person lost over $50,000 in a retirement fund's value
> > too.  Two industries ripped this person off, ya see?  Yet, everyone is
> > standing around and not shoving the noses of these bastards into the doo
> > doo of their crimes.
> > 
> > The rich get richer, and the poor are ever more being shunted into a
> > lower class status until, what?, there's no middle class and thus no
> > more chance of an uppity middle classer making headlines by showcasing
> > some sort of abuse.
> > 
> > The mas

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>
>  ruthsimplicity wrote:  I would describe the relationship between docs
> and insurers as almost adversarial, hardly in cahoots.
> 
> Ruth,
> 
> You being a nurse and all, I'm hesitant to smack at the health industry
> lest I besmirch your participation therein.  As I've noted here at least
> several times, you have impressed me with heartfelt values.
> 
> And,  nurses, as a group, (doctors far less so) generally do impress me
> with their intellects and hearts.
> 
> All that said (here it comes,) I think the health industry itself is
> reflective of the profiteers that any industry finds itself infested by,
> and those profiteers are as cold hearted as Joseph Mengle.
> 
> Start with the AMA's policy to keep doctors rare and rich and absolute
> rulers of the industry.  It is scandalous, yet, and here's where I
> intend to put it to you, where is the outcry from the nurses and doctors
> about this policy?  So far, I don't think I've heard herein about it
> from you.  So far, you above are posing doctors as victims.  Phihhh, as
> if.
> 
> If the AMA allowed medical schools to double their production, they'd
> have all the VERY VERY SMART and VERY VERY HEARTFUL candidates they
> needed to fill up the new classes without having to lower their entrance
> requirement standards.  But, noo, that would mean that doctors were
> competing against doctors in pricing, and that would mean that there
> would be ample supply of doctors such that hospitals could more easily
> dump the bad ones that continue to maraud the industry with all kinds of
> malpractice.
> 
> Ask anyone in poverty whether they'd rather have a doctor who was in the
> 98th percentile (not tippy tippy top notch just top notch) or no doctor
> at all?  Fuck the entrance requirements of the AMA -- a truly evil money
> making cabal.
> 
> And as for doctors not being in league with the insurance companies,
> that's a lie.  They're not fighting against them with any use of their
> own or the AMA's political clout.  Your average surgeon will be paying,
> what?, probably well over a hundred thousand dollars a year to have
> malpractice insurance -- costs that they pass down to the clients with
> higher fees without even apologizing to the patients that they're being
> ripped off.  The doctors are beleagered in many ways by how insurance
> companies prvent them from doing "all that's needed," yet we do not hear
> a peep out of the AMA -- if we did, the AMA could, overnight, get
> congress to stop the bastards -- yes, the AMA has that much power.  Does
> any politician want the AMA solely supporting another candidate?
> 
> Where are the doctors picketing these injustices?  Where are the nurses
> confronting the physicians about this say-nothing immorality?  I see no
> headlines.  If there is a movement to fix all the above, it sure isn't
> grabbing any headlines from the media.
> 
> I know someone who just got a $26,000 hospital bill for a stay in ICU
> for a week.  At no time did anyone come to this person and explain the
> kinds of prices they'd be billed for.  What other industry gets to do
> this?  You buy a car and THEN AND ONLY THEN are you told the price? 
> Talk about sticker shock -- and, fuck you AMA, but the stress of that
> shock must at the very least psychosomatiically harm a percentage of the
> patients enough to be a health hazzard in itself.  Someone who's in an
> anxious state of mind gets the billing and, what?, suicide or the
> patient ends up constantly bathing his mind/body system with the
> chemicals that "hand wringing" can produce.  There's no attempt to
> pre-handle this kind of stress.
> 
> And, the above person lost over $50,000 in a retirement fund's value
> too.  Two industries ripped this person off, ya see?  Yet, everyone is
> standing around and not shoving the noses of these bastards into the doo
> doo of their crimes.
> 
> The rich get richer, and the poor are ever more being shunted into a
> lower class status until, what?, there's no middle class and thus no
> more chance of an uppity middle classer making headlines by showcasing
> some sort of abuse.
> 
> The masses are kept masses, ya see?  Tended like they're in a feed lot.
> 
> Obama takes money from BigPharm -- to me, he's cherry picking his
> battles, and going up against the health industry is a low priority
> compared to other issues -- Obama is still doing battlefield triage in
> trying to manage his team's use of clout, but at somepoint, he's got to
> push for cheap drugs from Canada or elsewhere (government
> man

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> It's just a ride wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:55 PM, ruthsimplicity 
> > wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride"
> >>  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:52 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   
> >> Really?  I don't know any health insurance companies that cover lost wages.
> >>  What company was it?
> >>
> >> 
> >
> > UHC.   My friend had signed up for disability insurance with UHC through his
> > Fortune 5 company.
> >   
> 
> Look up William McGuire, UHC's CEO.  It is alleged he was given a $1.2 
> billion severance package when he left UHC.  He was also highly (over) 
> compensated in his yearly salary.  Here is a record of his campaign 
> contributions:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnitedHealth_Group
> 
> Here's a record of his campaign contributions:
> http://www.newsmeat.com/ceo_political_donations/William_McGuire.php
>
Yes, his compensation package was a scandal. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:55 PM, ruthsimplicity 
> wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:52 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Really?  I don't know any health insurance companies that cover lost wages.
> >  What company was it?
> >
> 
> UHC.   My friend had signed up for disability insurance with UHC through his
> Fortune 5 company.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > I would describe the relationship between docs and insurers as almost
> > adversarial, hardly in cahoots.
> 
> 
> Most of the people I know have UHC.  UHC is very heavily into diagnostics.
> Whereas most insurance companies will pay for one of a certain test a year,
> UHC will pay for as many as the doctor wants to order.  Want a second,
> third, fourth opinion at say Mayo, Hopkins, Menninger?  UHC will pay.
> 
> I would hardly consider it adversarial where the doctor just happened to be
> on call (and officed in the hospital complex) and made all the arrangements
> with the insurance company for pre-authorized coverage before visiting my
> friend with the option of having my friend surrender his drivers license to
> the officer outside or sign the paperwork for a week worth of wasting a bed,
> a bunch of nurses and 3 shifts of EEG technicians shared with one other
> patient (who's insurance wasn't as good so she didn't get an executive suite
> with a DVD player or Wii in it).
> 
> The doctors and their staffs in my area have learned how to play the
> insurance companies.  They know just the words needed to get those
> pre-authorizations out of the major insurance companies in my area.  It
> appears Obama's gotten to the likes of UHC.  People get calls at the
> hospital or home while recuperating from UHC asking if there's anything more
> UHC could do to help.  I know of one case where the patient was having a
> problem adjusting to her illness.  UHC offered to locate a counselor for
> her, as her company provided counseling as a benefit administered by UHC.
> I'd suspect that if you've got UHC through a Fortune 50 million company
> YMMV.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > We aren't going to get a single payer plan this time around.  There aren't
> > the votes.  At best, if we have enough legislators with balls, we will have
> > a federal option plan to go along with the private plans.  Too soon to tell.
> >
> >
> I see nothing but disaster.  We need Evidence Based Medicine.  My friend's
> trip to the ER, let alone his one week work up violated EBM all 4 miles
> round trip of the way.  Then in another part of town there are all these
> people who use the ER out of necessity as though it were a local nurse
> practicioner.  My town only has a few nurse practioners and they provide
> anesthesia survices at the high dollar day surgery clinics in town.
> 
> If we were to get EBM, nurse practicioners performing triage and giving care
> as needed, we'd save a bundle in the aggregate.  It's estimated that every
> trip to the ER in any part of town here starts at $2,000.  Cut out a bunch
> of unnecessary $2,000 visits, cut out my friend's $38,000 boondoggle and
> after a while you're talking some real money saved.  Saved by the taxpayers,
> saved by the insurance companies, saved by employers and their employed.
> 
> Instituting electronic medical records interchange isn't going to save any
> money.  My friend told his story to EMS technicians, a triage nurse, a bunch
> of ER nurses, a bunch of different ER doctors, the neurologist and then to
> nurses, EEG techs, a pharmacist and some doctors when he got upstairs.  It
> turns out that though the hospital has one of the finest records systems in
> the country and everyone is walking around with PDAs or PC tablets, the
> records are organized so poorly that staff would rather blow the time to ask
> the patient for a history, meds, etc. rather than consult the MRS.
> 
> The one good thing I see that might save a little money is the
> doctor/hospital/lab proposal to insurance companies and the governments to
> be able to submit a single bill.  Right now a single week stay in the
> hospital will generate a hundred or more different bills which have to be
> settled by the insurance company, the governments, those billing and the
> patient.
> 
> Another good thing which might come out is if the insurance
> companies/governments start refusing to pay for 2nd and 3rd admissions to
> hospitals because the hospital didn't get the care right the 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "It's just a ride" 
 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:52 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > "Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars
> > on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead,
> > underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments
> > as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay.
> > Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative
> > staffs to deal with the bureaucracy.
> >
> >
> Sometimes hospitals (which are now for profit conglomerates though
> theoretically they are non-profit), doctors and insurance companies are
> running a scam together.  A few months ago a friend of mine lost his balance
> on a stair case, tumbled and bruised himself a bit.  EMT (a public service
> which cost him/his insurance company $600 for a 2 mile ride) took him to the
> diagnostic hospital nearby.  After about 6 hours in the ER and running up a
> $7,000 ER bill as they performed every expensive scan they could on him, my
> friend was getting dressed to go home.  In walked a neurologist.  He told my
> friend that by law my friend could not drive until six months had passed or
> he underwent one week of observation, tethered to EEG leads and under video
> camera surveillance for a week.  My friend told the neurologist that he did
> not have a convulsion, no one in his family had ever had one, and anyway his
> company would not pay for him to take off a week for such a thing nor would
> his insurance company pay for it.  Plus his EEG was as flawless as a TMSP
> flier's could be with those gamma delta tau waves and all.  The neurologist
> assured my friend that he had contacted the insurance company.  They would
> foot the entire bill plus pay my friend's salary for the week.  The
> neurologist told my friend that he picked out a nice executive suite for my
> friend, with DVD, WII, Wi-Fi, gourmet meals ordered off a menu, just sign
> here.  Just a coincidence that these accommodations were the max the
> insurance company would cover, remember.
> 
> Total cost for losing balance?  One week tethered to EEG leads, privacy only
> in the bathroom, one hour of strobe lights aimed at him every day,  one week
> lost on an important project and $38,000 in medical bills, all paid for by
> my friend's insurance company.  My friend was released when the week was up
> and since his wife dropped the car off outside, he drove the 2 miles home,
> scratching his head all the time.  The biggest insult was getting a thank
> you note from the hospital conglomerate's CEO a week after he got back home.
> 
> Get this.  The insurance company also paid for guest meals.  So visitors
> were immediately given a menu when they/I went to see my friend.
> 
> Now, President Obama, tell me how this $38,000, including visitor's meals at
> $16 a pop, fits in with Evidence Based Medicine?
> 
> Meanwhile in another part of town at the city hospital where people without
> fabulous insurance go...

Really?  I don't know any health insurance companies that cover lost wages.  
What company was it? 

I would describe the relationship between docs and insurers as almost 
adversarial, hardly in cahoots.

We aren't going to get a single payer plan this time around.  There aren't the 
votes.  At best, if we have enough legislators with balls, we will have a 
federal option plan to go along with the private plans.  Too soon to tell.  


>

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Crop Circle at Knoll Down, nr Beckhampton, Wiltshire. Reported 1st June

[ruthsimplicity]

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

> > > > We've had a good bit of discussion here before, if
> > > > you want to check the archives. It does seem to make
> > > > some people very nervous, judging from the near-
> > > > hysterical tone of their skepticism.


I think this is a serious misreading of what the skeptics think.  Nervous?  
More likely exasperated. But it is interesting if you do in fact think that the 
skeptics are nervous when there is nothing to be nervous about. 

But the art is lovely. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just to show I'm not the only one to comment on her photos...

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>

> I ask you...is there an appreciable difference between
> the two photos? 

Of course. One is making a face, the other is smiling.  What is the purpose of 
your post?  Nothing good that I can see. 

If you feel that there is, please con-
> sider the words of the poster to this forum whom
> Raunchydog and enlightened_dawn11 and others
> have referred to as a "great writer." Let's hear what
> *he* has to say (as badly formatted as ever) about
> Ms. Stein's appearance, and what it might say about
> the karma of the life she has chosen to live:
>

Edg's response went over the edge.  He may have felt goaded, but his post is 
ugly. 

Is the purpose of this forum just to spew at each other, showing how 
unenlightened we are?  Does anyone feel good after any of these exchanges?  I 
hope not. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: What were the lawsuits against MMY?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>
> My own pet theory is that MMY knew the feds were a-comin' for him, so
> he made himself sick unto death using his yogic control over his body,
> and had himself flown to ENgland to get away from the Indian legal system.
> 
> Whereupon he had a miraculous full recovery
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, perfectly logical.
> 
> 
> L
>

Good one, Lawson. But I think I would pass on giving myself  pancreatitis.  
Hurts too damn bad.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Ayurvedic recipes

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> 
> Vaj in his most foolish mode.
> 
> Maharishi's teaching is perpeuating Maitreyas ideas.
>


Have some licorice and cardamom, hon.

[FairfieldLife] Re: New to this group?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5"  wrote:
>
> > > 
> > > How bout u?  U a practicing meditator,
> > > of some kind too?
> > > 
> > > Just wondering,
> > > 
> > > JGD, 
> > > -D in FF
> > > 
> > >
> > 
> > No longer in the sit and think a mantra sense.  My meditations occur with 
> > running and swimming and communing with nature.  I can transcend thought in 
> > those circumstances.  FWIW.
> >
> 
> Oh,
> just not equivalent or close as spiritual practice.  Sorry.
> Therefore
> =non-meditator.
> 
> JGD, -D
>


No need to be sorry.  I am fine with you defining me as a non-meditator. :)

[FairfieldLife] Re: The purpose of marriage - liberation

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> Maharishi on marriage -
>  
> Married life is the structure of bondage for liberation. The ideal of
> married life is that the two bind themselves into the desires of the other.
> One willingly takes upon himself to work for the desire of the other. One
> helps the other, both help each other and they take on that understanding.
> In
> practice, one lives for the other and this is the formula whereby one gives
> maximum to the other, and the formula whereby one receives maximum from the
> other. Both give to each other, both receive from each other in a most
> spontaneous manner because this is a willing contract, a contract of the
> heart, of the mind. Emotions, understanding, behaviour are sold out  to this
> contract: one lives for the other. It is a very delicate structure, living
> for the other. If one lives for the other, then one grows in the value of
> life
> as time goes on and on, and what appears to be bondage proves to be the path
> of liberation. It is path of liberation because one helps the other. This
> help and support fulfills the purpose of union-two lives rising to unity.
> All the differences begin to dissolve and what remains is all harmony. So
> the marriage is for the union, the highest level of life where perception
> and existence is for infinite value. Toward this goal both work, help each
> other to grow into this beautiful achievement of life, the real, lasting
> fulfillment.
>

OK,  how would this work?  Say a husband desires to become enlightened and to 
walk the path towards enlightenment with his wife.  The wife does not believe 
that enlightenment is as her husband sees it exists.  She views the world in a 
material sense and her working hypothesis is the scientific method.  How do 
they bind themselves to the desires of the other? They can't. 

The "ideal married life"  is sharing values, throwing in compromise, giving in 
when you can consistent with your values.  There is no formula.  You might be 
willing to die for your spouse one day.  Five years later you may be divorced. 
Liberation, bondage, liberation. 

But pay no attention to me, I have been married too many times and never 
successfully. :)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj ...

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ben"  wrote:
?> I'm new here
> 
> how is Vaj and naughty boy?
>

He isn't a naughty boy.  He has a different point of view from most here, a 
former TMer yet still interested in things spiritual and mystical.  He gets 
ragged on quite a bit here by a few. 

Lots of touchy subjects talked about here and some long standing "difficult" 
relationships, so there is lots of yelling back and forth. Part of the culture. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: New to this group?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5"  wrote:
>
> Dear Ruth;
> 
> How bout u?  U a practicing meditator,
> of some kind too?
> 
> Just wondering,
> 
> JGD, 
> -D in FF
> 
>

No longer in the sit and think a mantra sense.  My meditations occur with 
running and swimming and communing with nature.  I can transcend thought in 
those circumstances.  FWIW.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Meals of King Tony Nader

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "guyfawkes91"  wrote:
>
> >>
>  I know it is very weak "evidence", but when I see him on M Channel, I see a 
> man who feels out of place and unhappy. 
> > 
> Even though his "theories" are complete bunk he is actually quite a nice guy. 
> If he did feel uncomfortable about the book and his role in it then I'd say 
> he was one of the few people at the top who have a sense of shame and the 
> capacity to feel embarrassment, which is a very positive thing. 
> 
> We'll have to see how things develop. My sense is that he would like to do 
> more than Bevan will allow him to do. For example he does want to drop the 
> prices for learning TM by half, but he can't because the rest of the rajas 
> aren't on board, and they take their orders from Bevan. That might be why he 
> looks like he feels out of place, he's just a figurehead for the real power.

I thought it wasn't a democracy.  He is king, couldn't he just make an 
announcement?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fruit Diet

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > off_world_beings wrote:
> > > 3 months fruit diet will cure 99% of all cancers.
> > >
> > > 3 weeks fruit diet will cure all heart disease.
> > >
> > > << But there are also other methods of removing toxins. >
> > >
> > > Of course, but not as effetive as a 90% fruit diet - satisfy strong
> > > cravings for other foods when needed.
> 
> 


> > And this has been validated by research published in peer-reviewed
> > scientific journals?>>
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > Can you provide links please?
> >
> 
> I'll compile some together in the next week or so and post them for you.
> Until then, you can do the research yourself.
> 
> OffWorld
>
What a load of crap!  I  bet you aren't constipated though. :)

BTW, are tomatos, zucchinis, and cucumbers fruits in your diet?

[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL -- the blockbuster movie

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:

> Ruth, just think of the programing possibilities for a romp in the hay. Just 
> flip a switch to revv him up or shut him down. User friendly and definitely 
> not dead.  
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/otl4v3
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It1J5hbpIRw&feature=related
>


Ah, the ideal boyfriend. :)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sildenafil and prevention of wilting?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On May 15, 2009, at 8:48 AM, cardemaister wrote:
> 
> >
> > Wiki:
> >
> > Prevention of plant wilting
> >
> > A low-concentration solution of sildenafil in water significantly  
> > prolongs the time before cut flowers wilt; one experiment showed a  
> > doubling in time from one week to two weeks. The mechanism of  
> > action is similar to that in humans: nitric oxide leads to the  
> > production of cGMP whose degradation by PDE5 is inhibited by  
> > sildenafil.[26]
> >
> > Is that (nitric oxide) why some TMers look rather young for their  
> > age in years?
> 
> 
> You're confusing nitric oxide with nitrous oxide, aka, "laughing  
> gas"--however both compounds are part of the biochemistry involved in  
> meditative states of consciousness, namely the bio- and neuro- 
> mechanics of samadhi and unity.
> 
> Another controversial 70's guru, Bhagwan Rajneesh, was a big fan of  
> nitrous oxide, and of course Bhang lassis--the marijuana milkshake  
> rasayana.
>

You are on a roll, dear Vaj!  Too funny!

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Meals of King Tony Nader

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> 
> Pat-a-cake, pat-a-cake, baker's man!
> Bake me a cake as fast as you can!
> Pat it and prick it and mark it with P!
> Bake it in the oven for baby and me!
> 
> This rime is usually accompanied (even to-day in the nursery) with a  
> ceremonial clapping of hands-the symbol of Samadhi. Compare what is  
> said on this subject in our comment on the famous "Advent" passage in  
> Thessalonians.
> The cake is of course the bread of the sacrament, and it would ill  
> become Frater P. to comment upon the third line-though it may be  
> remarked that even among the Catholics the wafer has always been  
> marked with a phallus or cross.
>

Hilarious!  And you too, Guy!

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Meals of King Tony Nader

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> --- On Fri, 5/15/09, guyfawkes91  wrote:
> 
> snip
> 
> > Getting excited by this kind of thing is the equivalent of
> > people getting excited by images of Jesus in a slice of
> > toast or the Virgin Mary in a damp patch on a wall
> > somewhere. One can only feel pity for people who allow their
> > intelligence to be so degraded that they think it's
> > significant. 
> snip
> > 
> > In combination with Bevan and John Hagelin, Tony Nader has
> > reduced the status of MUM to the gutter.
> 
> I could never figure out what the big deal was in the first place. It just is 
> an example of very concrete thinking; drawing parallels and creating 
> relationships based on superficial characteristics of two objects/systems. It 
> is very much a Victorian intellectual product. One thing that always struck 
> me as quite humorous was its failure to mention anything about the 
> reproductive system. This was curiously missing! Did anyone actually take 
> this work seriously? Even within the TMO why would anyone get excited about 
> this work? It doesn't really say anything. It reminded me of Dr. Pangloss in 
> Voltaire's Candide, making pseudo-profound, scientific-sounding statements 
> that amounted to nothing.
>

I bet you or I could do the same thing in less than 450 pages!  Reminds me of a 
lawyer I know who said "I could have lost that case for a lot less money" when 
he heard how much in attorneys fees someone spent on a loser claim. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: New to this group?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69"  wrote:
>
> If you are new to this group might not immediately realize that there are 
> individuals posting here with personal and or idealogical vendettas against 
> the TM technique , Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and the Holy Tradition.
> They are willing to lie enthusiastically  and fabricate very inventively to 
> that end. So it can be good to check out other sources before you accept 
> things that are written here.
> 
> www.truthabouttm.org
> 
> www.maharishichannel.in
> 
> www.globalgoodnews.com/world-peace/htm
>

If you are new to this group you might not immediately realize that there are 
individuals posting here with such devotion to the TM technique, MMY and the 
"holy tradition" that they are are unable to recognize their own biases and 
sometimes post information that is an exaggeration to say the least. There is 
nothing so polarizing as peoples feelings about the nature of the soul. I 
hesitate to call anyone a liar as I think that there are few here who 
intentionally do not tell the truth. 

I put the sites identified above in the same category, with exaggerated claims 
and personal opinions stated as fact on these sites. 

Good luck folks in sorting through the morass.  It isn't easy but it can be 
done if you are tenacious. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mark Meredith dies

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
>
> 
> You're kidding.  That's a real shame...
> I never even connected the two.
> The mold caused an infection so bad
> even antibiotics didn't help?
> Î
> Sal
>

Mold is a fungus and can cause  fungal infections in the lungs that can lead to 
permanent damage and even death.  It is not a bacteria so antibiotics don't 
help.  Anti-fungal treatments may or may not help. Bad stuff.   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mark Meredith dies

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of feste37
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:49 AM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Mark Meredith dies
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Meredith died yesterday, in Arizona, I believe. He died of a lung
> disease. 
> 
> Some years ago Mark was a regular contributor to FFL. 
> 
> Mark was a great man who pursued truth and honored it. 
> More recently, he was boo_lives. So sorry to hear it. He was a good friend.
> His lung problems resulted from cleaning up some mold in his apartment. The
> mold got into his lungs and ruined them.
>


So sad.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL -- the blockbuster movie

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Spaced-out... the Final Frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship 
> Fairfield Life. Its endless mission: to explore unbounded banality; to seek 
> out dead horses to beat; angels to dance on heads of pins; to boldly 
> transcend where no one has transcended before.
> 
> Rick Archer: Captain James T. Kirk maneuvers FFL starship through dangerous 
> attacks and preserves its existence. 
> 
> Alex Stanley: Scotty precisely monitors the post count and retains a 
> reputation as a "miracle worker", renowned for his technical skill, 
> knowledge, determination and resolve.
> 
> Curtis: Dr. McCoy keeps the shipmates healthy and engaged in lively debate. 
> 
> Judy Stein: Uhura crushes on McCoy and courageously battles the Klingon, Turq
> 
> Edg Duveyoung: Sulu, a man of many interests and hobbies, including botany, 
> fencing, and ancient Trikke weaponry.
> 
> Vaj: Mr. Spock controls his emotions and doesn't feel much of anything except 
> superior to humans. 
> 
> Ruth Simplicity: Nurse Christine Chapel came aboard FFLife on a journey to 
> meet a man from her past that she has "history" with, who is now long dead 
> and replaced by an android.
> 
> Sal: A Wookie from Star Wars who got on the wrong star ship, and lobs zingers 
> from afar, hoping for an echo.
> 
> Raunchydog: Leila Kalomi, a beautiful botanist who was infected with 
> happiness spores. She exposed Spock to the spores hoping he would would feel 
> happy. She lost interest in the project when he refused to feel anything.
> 
> Enlightened Dawn: Amanda Grayson, the human mother of Spock and wife of 
> Vulcan Ambassador Sarek. Spock asked his father why he married such an 
> emotional woman. Sarek replied that at the time it seemed the logical thing 
> to.
> 
> Doug Hamilton: Chekov. Roddenberry, created Chekov's character in response to 
> a Pravda article that noted the international crew of the FFLife lacked a 
> Russian. Roddenberry's envisioned an ideal future in which the people of the 
> Earth were united. However, Pravda never published such an article. It was 
> just a publicity stunt and a fabrication. Chekov's character was a ruse.
>

So I get to "do" an android?  Nurse Chapel sounds fine to me provided that I 
can use McCoy's line:  He's dead, Jim. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'There's nothing to Fear, but Cheney Himself'

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> HUMANS do stupid shit. That does not mean that
> they are incapable of doing smart shit, or even
> the occasional good shit. I'd be willing to bet
> that Adolf Hitler did one or two good things
> in his life. Can you concede that possibility,
> or was he ALL EVIL?

I don't know Hitler but my guess is that he was all evil and the good things he 
might have done were for reasons that had nothing to do with goodness.
> 
> I think that using the word "evil" is an attempt
> to claim absolutes where there are none. And more
> often than not, it is also an attempt to excuse
> one of the lower emotions in the person who is
> using the term. 
> 
> "He is evil, so I hate him." Well, isn't hate evil?
> 
> "He is evil, so I think he should be executed in
> public." Well, isn't killing evil?
> 
> "He is evil, so he should be thrown in prison,
> where I hope he will be raped and tortured." See
> your own statement above. If you were to believe 
> this, then wouldn't you be just as guilty of 
> justifying rape and torture as the person you
> called evil above? And wouldn't you have prob-
> ably felt calculatingly rational *as* you 
> justified it?
>

 I do not wish evil on anyone.  I do not support the death penalty precisely 
because I find it debasing.  I do not want anyone to be raped or tortured even 
if they raped or tortured. But I still believe that some people are evil.  You 
of course are free to disagree.  Ever meet any murdering psychopaths? I have.  
Meet any child rapists?  I have.   

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'There's nothing to Fear, but Cheney Himself'

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> >
> > Once again, define evil for us...
> 
> "Evil" is a word that people who want to 
> do something nasty or despicable hurl at
> the person or entity they want to do it 
> to, to make themselves look better.
> 
> That's what it was when hurling the epi-
> thet at the "Axis Of Evil," and that's
> what it is when someone hurls it at Dick
> Cheney. They're trying to make themselves
> and the inordinate amount of hatred they
> are aiming at him and the bad things they
> want to happen to him look "less evil."
> 
> I think that throwing around the word 
> "evil" is as stupid when done by supposedly
> smart people as it is when hurled around by
> stupid, fanatical Christians and aimed at 
> gays or people who have sex or who interpret
> the Bible differently.
> 
> In short, I do not believe that any human
> being on the planet knows what "evil" is
> EXCEPT as an excuse for their own actions.
> And since I don't believe in a God, I don't
> believe that *any* entity in creation knows
> what "evil" is, either.
> 
> Killing? Then Krishna and Arjuna are evil.
> Lying? Then Maharishi was evil, many times
> over. "Predation?" Then all those Old Test-
> ament prophets who told their followers 
> to take the people they conquered and turn 
> them into slaves and concubines were evil.
> 
> When I hear someone use the word "evil,"
> the only thing I usually think is, "Avoid
> that person...they're about to make an
> excuse for something bad that they plan
> to do or want to do or hope to do."
> 
> And I think that my take on hearing the
> word "evil" is as good as anyone else's 
> "definition" of it.
> 
> Go ahead. TRY to define "evil" in concrete
> terms. No matter what example you use, I
> or others here will be able to find an
> instance of someone from religious scrip-
> ture doing that exact thing, and being
> praised and called holy for it.
> 
> The word "evil" is a thought-stopper.
> Those who use it show that their ability
> to think probably stopped long ago.
> 
> And those are my thoughts about "evil,"
> because I can still have them, even after
> you hurled the epithet.  :-)
> 
> Now riff on them all you want. I promise
> not to call you "evil" if you do.
>
We have had this conversation before, yes?  

I believe that there are evil people who do evil things.  You recognize them by 
their lack of conscience and their bad acts.  The raping, torturing, murdering 
psychopath who takes what he wants and does what he pleases at the expense of 
others is evil.  They are not crazy, they are cold and calculatingly rational.