RendHeaven

@Emerald Seems so. And I completely understand and respect your position. By the way, I re-read your first aya ceremony report from 2020 and it nearly brought me to tears. You really are a gem. I once received a little keychain that read: "don't underestimate the difference you made and the lives you touched" I'd like to forward that to you : ) Sweet. I highly recommend macadamia nuts as well.

*Lit intellectual banter ; )

and really intelligent people tend to fool themselves into thinking that what works for everyone will work for them

Fire. I appreciate the devil's advocate stance Right, and I can't eat anything dairy-related for the life of me (not even butter or whey). Most of my friends that I look up to drink milk. So there are idiosyncrasies, but I guarantee there is a general trend that incorporating red meat into your daily diet and not eating exclusively plants will yield better visceral outcomes short-term; and as long as auxiliary chemicals and toxins are avoided, no long-term problems will occur either. Ok but now we've circled back to the beginning and we're about to talk past each other again (simply because we have different epistemologies and expectations, which is totally cool because I think you're awesome. I'm just pointing out the incompatibility in thought-streams) As I've said ad nauseam now, you cannot truly extrapolate ANYTHING from a study where the WHOLE POPULATION IS POISONED and drowning in bad habits. The entirety of nutrition science right now is brilliant at telling you how to be the safest within the unconscious masses (eat primarily plants, lower saturated fat, eat plenty of fiber, etc etc etc). That's strictly and technically what you get. Safety relative to a poisoned population. Nothing of nutrition science right now gives you any insight into ascending to super human function. I'm talking about a completely different playing field - a categorical gap that doesn't translate well when I'm trying to share text with strangers. You'll have to go gym or meditation or hiking with me and my friends to really be floored lol. I will not trust any study to accurately describe my personal physiological ceiling until they manage to track thousands of health-maxing meat eaters at scale - and this is physically impossible as of 2024. "So now what?" Obvious! Either grow the curiosity and guts to experiment with yourself; or fall into line and eat mediterranean (which is not too bad - for me it gave me bloating and eczema and acne and cravings and kept my testosterone low though LOL, but I would happily recommend med over what 90% of the population is up to. CERTAINLY better than french fries and sodas) You mentioned "you can find anecdotes with seemingly similar results for any diet" but I strongly disagree. No vegan has even 1/10th of my benefits, and there's really no way to prove that other than to go find a vegan and begin a dick measuring contest, which has bad optics and lacks compassion, so I'm not really a fan of that. But to anybody reading this who thinks I'm full of BS and you want to directly compare stats (bloodwork, physique, concentration levels, whatever) hit me up. This is correct. And that is the necessary state of any discussion regarding optimal human nutrition. THERE IS NO DATA FOR THIS. It's the "wild west," still yet to be traversed or mapped. I am willing to completely reconfigure my worldview if I find even 1 example of someone going on my meat diet with my bubble of healthy habits, and they actually REGRESS or derive negative benefits. And I'm actually eager to be shown wrong (IN A TANGIBLE N=1 TRIAL) but it's basically impossible to find candidates, because it's a massive ask for someone to completely overhaul all of their habits and preferences just to test my silly hypothesis. Therefore atm it's just my ring of friends and we are in a way building our own echo chamber, but we are open to being SHOWN wrong (not "proven" wrong, but SHOWN) If I see this with my own eyes, I will be first in line to champion it, and then I will be spamming forum essays at meat eaters who will accuse me of not having sufficient data or over-extrapolating lolol I am very open to a higher paradigm. Haven't seen it yet. If I find it I will be scrap everything I know in a heartbeat and champion the better thing. But I've been loyal to my current ways for 3 years now, and the guys I've learned all of this from have been doing it for 10+ years and I see no reason to be worried for longevity. It feels a bit like Leo's "pre rational, rational, and trans rational" stages. Consensus nutritional science is basically the rational stage. I believe I have discovered the trans rational, and I am attempting to share it, but then I get mocked for not playing by the rules of the rational, and I get dismissed as pre rational. But I know I am not pre rational, because I have played the game of rational already. I've gone through the whole plant-based gauntlet. I grew up in a Japanese household eating my mother's home cooked tofu + miso soup + fish + rice + salad combo every day. I'm basically built on the Mediterranean diet and I suffered for it. I can spell out the consensus paradigm - i.e. I am able to talk about the importance of lowering ApoB and getting adequate fiber for gut microbiome and all of the meta-associations between red meat and negative health outcomes, and I float just beyond all of that because I see how limiting it is. But from the rational/consensus stage, what I am calling the "trans rational" looks almost insulting and childish, because I am advocating for heavy red meat consumption, which is something that the pre rational might also be doing. So it looks like decadence and decay and backsliding from within the rational stage. But the rational is not meta-cognitive enough to consider that maybe meat was never the problem to begin with, but rather the CONTEXT WITHIN WHICH MEAT CONSUMPTION WAS BEING MEASURED was the problem. And so pre rational and trans rational both enjoy meat, but the context (and thus results) are wildly different. But the rational is narrowly stuck on the meat itself. Generally, they shouldn't. Most people will cap out at the rational/consensus/Mediterranean stage because it is perceived safest. To move beyond takes a (seemingly) risky leap of faith. So usually it is only people in deep suffering who will make it all the way. i.e. people who do everything correctly within the rational stage, but then they get punished for it (autoimmune diseases, etc). And out of desperation they will take that leap and end up vaguely near my diet, eating lots of red meat (think: jordan peterson - although even he is not optimal because he is missing carbs but that's another conversation) Therefore my goal here is not to convince anybody of anything, but rather to share what I've discovered and at the very least open people's minds to further possibilities (I'm not interested in physically changing people, I'm interested in expanding the window of conversation)

Simple: personal experience + cross referencing anecdotes between intelligent, high-functioning people who embody a vitality which you aspire to (I do NOT trust random compiled surveys of the masses) I was vegan/vegetarian for over a year and it destroyed me (I followed recommended supplement protocols thoroughly, I am autistic about covering all bases. I slipped into vegetarianism when the veganism rapidly began to deteriorate my physical and mental state). I later reintroduced fish, then chicken, and then finally beef (as if to say that the lives of fish don't count as much, lol... such emotional bias). But I was still under the impression that veggies were good for you, so I was steaming broccoli and spinach with every meal and chugging green smoothies and eating fistfuls of nuts LOL. Good times. And then I was introduced to higher paradigms from my now best friend and mentor: I cut out the vegetables, the soy, the oats, the nuts, the spices, and this and that, until I literally only ate 4 foods (grass fed beef, white rice, eggs, and pomegranate juice) - and this is my precise diet to this day, and I am the happiest, strongest, sharpest, and most energized that I have ever been. But how do I know it's not placebo? Well I can't know for sure, but the difference is actually obnoxious and you guys absolutely won't believe me and I understand. My chronic, debilitating bloating went away I stopped farting almost entirely All my allergies went away my eczema went away my acne went away I gained 20 pounds of muscle (my diet enabled me to massively spike my training volume) my erections are ridiculous my bloodwork got better my anxiety is completely gone my sleep is perfect caffeine literally doesn't work on me because that "buzz" is my waking baseline Most importantly I have 0 junk food cravings EVER. I have authentically not craved anything in years, and this is a "feat" that is impossible to fake. No amount of willpower would have overcome the craving demons I used to struggle with back when I was plant-based, but this diet allows me to de-materialize all of that drama. Even after 3 years, I never get tired of eating these 4 foods. If anything, I crave my next meal of beef, rice, and eggs with pomegranate juice. And so to double check that i'm not just psychologically tricking myself, I have tried going back to the plant based lifestyle as an experiment, and by god is it a dark place for me, I notice all of the benefits unraveling. I am so sold on my 4 staple foods (and the absence of other BS) that I would rather eat the way I eat now and die at age 50 then go back to my old way of eating and live until 90. Well, the good news is I'll live long AND enjoy the foods I eat, so there's actually no conflict. "But how do you know that's not just unique to you? What works for you might not work for others!" Actually all of my friends are now on a rough variant of this diet, and they report identical benefits (if not more). Obviously I'm not saying everyone should only eat MY FOUR FOODS, but rather that beef should be the centerpiece of your diet, and generally you can build whatever other whole foods you want around that core. "But aren't you conflating short term benefits with long term benefits? Maybe eating meat is good for you now, but it's going to kill you later on!" Not at all. You're actually invoking a torrent of deception in assuming this, but then you ask ME for proof that I WONT DIE and we can either go down a mechanistic rabbit whole (which you won't accept as proof, because you have put all your faith in human outcome studies, which I have 0 faith in, and so we will end up talking past one another) or I can simply say "just watch me bro" and that will leave you deeply unsatisfied because you will feel like I'm dodging the quest you've given me to PROVE that meat is not harmful long term, but I've already written an entire essay on this point, which is that there simply is no study for this, and you asking me to prove the innocence of meat pre-assumes that meat is guilty, which I am saying was never a real conclusion. So thus we're at a stalemate where I eat meat every day and you observe me from afar skeptically. But that's OK because I'm having a blast and I promise I'll blow your mind with my vitality in old age. Ok but here's the thing, i'm not concerned at all about proving bad or not bad. I KNOW that meat is good, and that's simply the case in my world. We must not operate in the same reality. You seem to be waiting for permission from the outside to verify the status of meat before you have confidence in its consumption. I am perfectly happy to enjoy meat for the rest of my life, with pure faith that what I am doing is optimal for my goals. I don't need any studies; y'all do. You actually can't. Because if a vegan tried eating (any faithful variant of) my diet and actually stuck to it long term, they wouldn't be able to go back. So it's not an anarchistic free-for-all where any diet can end up being optimal. There actually IS a "right answer" to the question of optimal nutrition, but the only way to uncover this answer in our current stalemate is for every skeptic to try my damn diet + lifestyle and to personally begin enjoying meat in the "perfect health bubble" "But if what you're saying is optimal, surely the science would agree with you." NO! It wouldn't! That's my only point here, lol.

This is standard knowledge and should not be controversial. https://poe.com/s/LVYP2yXA7bDFVYmDwxHj Even plant-based advocates and scientists must acknowledge that their plants contain inferior nutrients relative to animals. They just bypass this hiccup by asserting that the benefits of plant based eating outweighs the negatives, and you can see the AI goes this route in its final comment (which is up for debate, and I clearly don't agree with this final conclusion, but to each their own) Basically all online diet advocates have their blind spots, vegans and carnivores alike. The guy who has the closest paradigm to me is Paul Saladino who recommends a red meat + organs + fruit diet (Paul admittedly has a bad rep on this forum because Michael, our resident health authority, maintains a fierce skepticism towards him) but that similarity in thinking is a happy coincidence - I've learned everything I know about nutrition from in-person mentors, and at this point I would believe what I believe even if the whole internet disagreed. You can fairly easily scout out the bias yourself without leaning on "reputable sources" (as if there's going to be a monolithic resource that exposes the whole nutrition industry - who would ever allow that source to see the light of day?), you'll have to do a bit of manual digging. For example notice how cronometer will pretend that flax seeds will cover all of your omega-3 needs (I urge you to type in 1 tbsp flaxseeds into your daily journal and notice the green bar for omega 3s at 100%+), and then do independent research into ALA (the compound found in flaxseeds) to DHA (the compound you actually need) conversion and it will become quickly apparent that cronometer is presenting you with a deceptive, misleading picture of your actual omega 3 absorption. from what I've encountered, all nutrition apps and sites have this problem. Most influencers are not scrutinizing at this level, but if they are, I would be curious to trace their work and verify it for myself before assuming malpractice. Plant based diets can be healthy, and they do have tremendous benefits relative to the standard american diet (which is 90% of modern western humans). So there is definitely merit there which I do not mean to dismiss. My only arugment here is that dismissing meat and going all-in on plants is not necessarily the highest paradigm from a strict health perspective, and that in fact, meat/animal products are rather essential for peak performance/biohacking (admittedly peak performance is my bias). Out of curiosity, what's your main dietary fat source? I believe this association is a premature epistemic jumping to conclusions. All these decades of cross-referencing and meta-analyses use a broken population as its building bricks. This will sound obnoxious, but I don't know how else to put it - There simply aren't sufficient examples of people like me, who take every possible precaution to maximize health whilst celebrating red meat daily. My lifestyle and habits are a tiny blip in the sea of degenerate, reckless meat eaters and health conscious, self-aware vegetable eaters. In essence, the concept of "health" is an echo chamber, so everyone either gets polarized into mindfully eating Mediterranean/plant based diet VS being a reckless beer-chugging soda drinking meat-eater with french fries, and this causes a cascading snowball effect where we find more positive outcomes associated with plant eating based on this initial assumptive-split that was made over half a century ago. I see this demonization of (red) meat and pedestalization of vegetables as the most epic self-fulfilling prophecy of all time, and nobody realizes that anything is wrong because indeed eating plant based is SIGNIFICANTLY better than being an unconscious average person in a western developed country! ...except nobody considers the possibility of stacking every healthy habit imaginable with daily red meat consumption. No study-able cohort adopts this lifestyle at scale for years, and so plant based eating becomes an artificial consensus ceiling. What we must study is: young men and women in their 20s who eat primarily red meat every single day, but also eat carefully curated plants and supplements; are not addicted to any substances (no caffeine no alcohol no drugs) or screens (no social media consumption, no porn); go outside and have a thriving social circle and dating life; engage in mindfulness, contemplation, self-reflection, time in nature, time in solitude, and exercise hard every single day and get 8-9 hours of perfect uninterrupted sleep every night. These people also avoid chemical cosmetics and personal care products, synthetic clothing and detergent, tap water and dish soap; they move to the country side where the air quality is less polluted, they avoid all plastics, and store and cook everything in glass or metal; they avoid as much EMF radiation and inappropriate blue light as possible; they feel absolute freedom and flow coursing through them at every moment of every day. They have 0 negative thoughts and 0 anxieties. They embrace death. They are philosophers and sages and leaders and lovers - and eventually mothers and fathers. Then study this group of people for 60 years until they're in their 80s. If we studied 10,000 such people, I promise there would be a paradigm-shattering, outrageous level of excellence and health from this community that all notions of "meat is bad" is rendered obsolete into laughingstock pseudoscience. A scholar reading my hypothesis here might laugh at (what he perceives to be) my naivete, because according to Mr. scholar, the people I'm describing must be bound to die of heart attacks and cancer and god knows what else. But I honestly and seriously challenge that assumption, because my mind is free of echo chamber limitations. I assert that not only will these people NOT die of horrible diseases, but they will THRIVE with boundless, never seen before, unimaginable energies and gifts well into old age. I would wish for nothing more than to bet my life, roll the dice, and see the outcomes firsthand of this experiment that I am proposing. But you see, nobody lives like this. No influencer, no follower; nobody. Everyone is IMPAIRED in some way, through habit or ideology. I just spent a paragraph describing nobody, because the very few people who share my ideals are themselves struggling to piece together all the moving parts, and frankly the bar I've painted is pretty damn high. Even I don't fully live up to the image I just described (I'm about 80% there, which is more than enough), but I set the stage in such a way so that at the end of this hypothetical experiment, there will be no doubt that either red meat is bad or not. To make this actually rigorous, we could even have vegans living in the same community where they share all the same habits for 60 years with the exception of meat eating. Then we will have truly isolated the variable of red meat! ...haha yeah, as if. You see how impractical this whole thing is? This study will never happen; in fact this community will never exist. Which is precisely why no health-conscious person believes in daily red meat consumption. After all, what's the difference between something being ACTUALLY bad vs something being PERCEIVED as bad? In actuality, you avoid both, and so "actual" and "perceived" is collapsed into a singular indistinguishable thing. In some ways, the more scientific and grounded your mind is, the worse off you are in this debate, because you will prioritize safety and stick to "what we know" over pushing the ante and forging into the unknown. It takes a truly free person (or an idiot) to say "I love health. I feel really really good eating red meat. let me do this forever, even if it kills me. Show me the truth. I AM the experiment." And here's the kicker - even if I live a long and happy life eating red meat every day (which I will), people will still find a way to relegate my story as being a fluke, because they are so cognitively biased against meat without having spent any time disentangling from social matrix/consensus, much less trying the thing for themselves. It's like psychedelic skeptics who say that aya ceremonies are hallucinations in the brain and you're the crazy one for seeing something that they don't and they burden you with the proof of showing THEM an official study before they accept your premise... it's totally absurd. Not only is the study physically impossible to conduct; but even if we somehow did, the scientific skeptic would still find a way to dismiss you. To access the truth, the skeptic must cross over into the event horizon of self-annihilation, where he says "fuck it lemme eat beef every day for 3 years and see what happens" - but the smarter he is, the more he will resist hahaha. And then he will spin a story about how how discerning and wise he is for avoiding the beef, or psychedelics, or whatever shadow he dares not explore. To anybody reading this, don't believe anything I wrote (but don't fight it either). Notice how I'm right; notice how I'm wrong; notice how you disagree with me; notice how you agree with me; notice that nobody - you, me, and scientists included - knows anything really; and notice what a vulnerable, beautiful predicament that is.

Unfortunately all consumer apps have the same bias. We would need to contact private, lab-quality facilities to get an accurate reading of our nutrient intakes. I agree that the carnivore diet needs supplementing. Eating only meat is very silly. I live and advocate for omnivore which is in my opinion the best of both worlds from a nutritional perspective, although I am sensitive to the moral concerns that vegans raise, having been a former vegan. (i.e. what is best from a nutritional perspective may not be the best from a moral perspective) I'm not convinced at all that vegan diets only need b12. Due to the bioavailability/conversion issue and the phytic acid issue that I mentioned above, I believe that to truly THRIVE as a vegan you would need literally dozens of pills (no joke). Creatine, Taurine, Carnosine, Anserine, Leucine, Iron, Zinc, Omega3 DHA, Vitamin D (sunlight is insufficient esp. in winter), Vitamin K2, choline, etc. I'm just glazing the surface... ... there are many underground functions in the human body served by animal flesh that even if you manage to skate by without adequately addressing all of them, your body is still not actually operating at 100%. Think Bryan Johnson who may be the only vegan on the planet that is actually approaching 100%... and he takes about 200 pills a day lol. And even then I'm skeptical. There is some truth to what Schizo is saying. You could live off of beef alone for decades before running into something like scurvy. Whereas there is not a single plant that allows you to live off of it alone. By going the plant route, you are "forced" to eat an enormous variety, which is somewhat telling of the life-sustaining-potential of each food. I read that you've been vegan for 8 years, and I see that as very impressive and I hope you don't take any of this as an attack on your lifestyle or choices, it's a simple disagreement over nutritional minutia that has no bearing on you as a human (or any vegan individual). I'm rooting for your prolonged success

I eat white rice, ground beef, eggs, pomegranate juice, and literally nothing else every single day for every meal. I put salt on my beef and nothing else. I drink distilled water and nothing else. I spot-supplement vitD3, vitC, calcium citrate, and magnesium bisglycinate I eat salmon sushi about once a month for the omega 3 DHA (perks of living in japan lol) I donate whole blood twice a year to keep my iron low. I avoid all dairy due to lactose intolerance, and I avoid organs because they taste like shit (and organ capsules are overpriced). I've been doing this for 3 years now - I am stronger, sexier, and sharper every year. 1000 testosterone, and all other blood scores are stellar (LDL is above 200 which would be cause for concern for consensus-paradigm-locked scholars, but freaking out over an invisible number while absolutely everything else is in flawless order is the pinnacle of self-deception + mental gymnastics + fear-based living + social-matrix programming. I will simply outlive these nerds so let's check back in 50 years when we're all edging 80-90. And if by some cosmic joke I happen to be on the wrong side of history, I will happily admit my wrong. But so far no signs.) I may have been doing the topic title inadvertently, but I wouldn't necessarily contribute my success to low vitamin A - I do eat eggs after all. The most important thing is to stop pouring garbage down your throat (99.9% of humans still do this for whatever reason)

Cronometer has a subtle plant-based bias which may blur the truth. For example with vitamin K, Cronometer only tracks K1 which is commonly found in plants, but it completely neglects K2 (which serves all the same functions as K1) found in animal products. Cronometer also doesn't account for the lack of bioavailability in plant nutrients. For example it will claim that carrots fulfill your vitamin-A needs, but that assumes your body actually converts all of the beta carotene to retinol successfully (which is highly unlikely). This principle is true of almost every vitamin and mineral as well as ALA and omega-3. I don't care how much flax seeds you are eating, you should count that as 0% omega-3 DHA Cronometer also doesn't account for phytic acid found in almost all vegetables, which binds to minerals and robs you of nutrients before your body can absorb anything. Eating brown rice with chicken actually yields LESS total nutrients than just eating chicken by itself. But Cronometer won't show that. Worst of all, Cronometer tells you to get more omega 6 from canola oil when you hover over the info card LOL. Your point on Manganese and Carbs is legit, which is why I would never recommend pure carnivore to anybody. I eat white rice with my beef. Vitamin C and Calcium are easily supplemented, and fiber is overrated (I have a 0 fiber diet and I have the best gut health of my entire life, including when I was vegan/vegetarian)

It is discussed, but never from a constructive, wholesome, or objective standpoint. It gets dismissed as incel ideology because it's almost always men complaining and whining and failing to take responsibility or ownership. Because the moment you take responsibility and ownership, you no longer have anything to complain or whine about, and you go out and get results. And then you become successful. And then it doesn't occur to you to start a thread about the woes of men. You see how this works? When you take action, the need to talk goes away. But when you don't take action, all you can do is talk. People resist the latter instinctively because it's dark, parasitic energy. If we want men's issues to be taken seriously, it's on us to present the case in such a way that the reader is drawn to us rather than repulsed by us.

Depends on the country, depends on the age. Globally, I would guess <1% are truly fulfilled. I would say 80% of men straight up suck with women. Of all the remaining 20% seemingly successful men I know, they all more or less fall into one of two camps: Very attractive, lots of girls, no lasting love, irresponsible, lots of drama Mediocre man, stuck with one girl, lasting veneer of love which fades every year as she loses attraction for him (while she pretends nothing is wrong) The pros of camp 1 is that the attraction is alive, the sex is real. The con is the endless treadmill and the mutual hurt. The pros of camp 2 is that they are settled and they feel secure. The con is diminishing attraction, sex, and love (which are intricately interrelated), and the stress of pretending. So ideally you would like to take the best of both worlds and discard the rest: Very attractive man, lots of options, responsible, no drama, lasting love which DOES NOT FADE, the girl stays furiously attracted, and she does not have to pretend, ever. So yeah, how many men globally can truthfully say that's where they are in life? <1%.

A lot of the best sources are basically high-quality larpers, and they will genuinely help you improve your life. So it's not that you should avoid them at all costs or that they're doing anything malicious or bad. It's more like, we're all larping, and we all just want a good life. So why can't we just admit that? Why do we have to usurp the word "Truth" and turn our human pursuits into some Divinely ordained path? Learn from whoever ya want, just maintain construct-awareness and don't treat their fantasies as REAL (so whenever someone says the word "shift to 5D consciousness" you hold that idea lightly, with a chuckle, fully aware that this person just MADE THAT SHIT UP, but you can still play along with their words if you find it useful for your life)

And yet, as you know better than anybody else, you DID design it all!.. before quickly storing the source code behind a locked vault with infinite deceptions and veils, and further giving yourself amnesia, to the point where it's more accurate to say that you did not design anything hahaha

Plain beef*

big key here. people love to point out that vegan/plant based diets cover all of your needs (other than B12 lol) but i'm not interested in treading water with my nutrients. I want to smash the gauge and maximize everything to as close to "ideal" I don't want acceptable zinc - I want SO MUCH zinc that it threatens my zinc-copper balance, and I have to take excess copper. Ruminant red meat + organs, eggs, variety of fruits, and clever spot supplementation will take you to the very very top of ideal, while furiously munching leaves and beans will keep you treading water for life (while your hormones plummet + farting the whole time)

I read this as he came after 2 strokes of his dick pump Subway is so trash. I feel like it "gets away with it more" because it doesn't sell burgers or fries. And people stuff their subs with lettuce to feel better about their purchase. Nope, it's still ultraprocessed & will probably give you cancer in 40 years.

To fill the void left by childhood neglect 😀

Really good point. I've been contemplating recently how all of my "healthy" arrangements are still damaged/damaging in subtle ways that I don't comprehend. It goes depressingly deep, but at the end of the day - effortful, conscious discernment is everything. Stay strong homie. Feel free to ask the forum for support. Quitting without accountability is like doubling the difficulty for no reason. Set a specific date so that "sometime this week" doesn't devolve into "sometime next week."

No just take a low does of MALT lol

i laughed

Become construct-aware, and notice them spinning constructs in real-time. It's always in their rhetoric, their mannerisms, their agendas. On some level they actually believe in their constructs, lol. It's RARE that you'll find a human who will happily admit "yeah I just made that up :)" - but not in a defeatist or flippant manner, but in a highly intelligent manner where they can articulate the construction and deconstruction of said construct

They're usually not. 99% of self-proclaimed truth-seekers (even on this forum) are just larping. They don the aesthetic of "truth-seeker" simply for the existential comfort and security that this identity provides. Real truth-seeking is like drowning naked in the middle of the Atlantic ocean at night with unseen creatures of the dark lurking beneath you, and no humans, no land, no warmth, no light to grasp onto. And then willingly plunging deeper into that lonely, vulnerable, cold without any guarantee of ever coming back... only then is the REAL light revealed, but you can easily tell that none of these folks would dare go there. Their whole ""global awakening"" is a cute fiction on stilts to avoid the real abyss - and thus the real love and light eludes them. I would be HIGHLY suspicious of any youtube persona that claims to deliver spiritual insight - ESPECIALLY if they have any new age or Buddhist roots in their rhetoric/mannerisms. Dead givesaways of larpers: "vibration, frequency, reality-shifting, timelines, manifestation, 5D, numerology, astrology, law of attraction, law of assumption, no-self, nonduality, jhanas, nothingness, reincarnation, lifetimes, spirits, entities" and so much more. And who am I to cast such judgement upon these kind, sincere people who do genuine good work in the world? I'm just a guy who has glimpsed the Abyss: The total collapse of the Entire Universe - held together by a single, tender, Self-Aware thread of Infinite Intelligence, gawking at its own majesty and magnitude, not yet ready to cross to the other side. And every day I avoid this truth just as much as anybody else. You could say that the very fact that we are alive today on earth as humans is in every sense a temporary defiance of Truth - but Truth is so Absolute that it merges with this defiance, and thus here we are today in Absolute Reality - The most Perfect Gift that Consciousness could give itself, made of itself unto itself! And so, with all of this context and reference experience, it's patently clear to me when I see my fellow souls donning a spiritual costume to avoid the heat death of the universe (aka Truth). After all, I too do the same. They're me.

Correct, but I recommend you use a very little amount at rare intervals (like once a month). Passive swallowing happens, yes, but it's completely negligible because it's so low-dose. Carbamide peroxide poisoning would cause acute symptoms which neither I nor my friends have ever experienced. I'm all for "natural" solutions, but don't kid yourself that daily strawberry rubbing will whiten your teeth even 1% of what carbamide peroxide will do with a single treatment. Sometimes the synthetic thing actually works better and has negligible drawbacks - but you have to be discerning and cherry pick carefully and calculate your own risk-benefit gamble. This is coming from a guy who uses 0 shampoo/conditioner, 0 hair product, 0 washes or scrubs, 0 deodorant, 0 creams and moisturizers other than tallow - and I have perfect hair and skin and I smell great. So I'm no stranger to the ineffectiveness and redundancy of most chemical care products. Less is usually more, and simple whole ingredients usually win - but there are exceptions.

easily, by miles

lmfao thats why they're the goats