Osaid

Interestingly, I've seen multiple accounts of people with POIS saying that masturbating differently fixes or reduces their symptoms. There seems to be something different happening energetically. I have also noticed that you retain more sexual energy or libido through different forms of masturbation, to the point where you can climax multiple times.

Coffee withdrawals? Is that some term made up by the Matrix? Nice try Agent Smith, but I'll stick to drinking copious amounts of coffee, as real men do.

You only scored 17? Pathetic. I got 18. Get on my level, bro.

@Leo Gura Case in point, Andrew is now ranting on Twitter about how caffeine addiction is for real men lmao:

It seems to be very environment-dependent. They use honey as a bio-indicator. Depending on how it is processed, some honey will have a certain heavy metal and then one honey will have an undetectable amount of that same heavy metal, just because they used some different equipment in their processing. Otherwise, the amount of heavy metals found are all well within "safe" levels. Note that any heavy metals you don't see in the chart were undetected across all honey. Here's a chart from this study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311932.2020.1764182#:~:text=Honey is known to accumulate trace metals%2C cadmium%2C nickel%2C,(Hernández et al.%2C 2005 As for pesticides, I would say they are the bigger problem, although I still wouldn't be that concerned about it. They are very common in honey but the amount varies a lot depending on the environment it is in. If we compare the amount of pesticides in honey to something like fruit, it isn't really out of the ordinary. In fact, it probably has less pesticides than fruit. You'll probably get more pesticides in strawberries than honey. Not to mention, you don't really consume that much honey to begin with, you only need a small amount. You could also go for organic honey which ensures the area the bees are in don't have pesticides and that the bees are at a reasonable distance from industrial agriculture. Otherwise, most of the environmental toxins are absorbed by the beeswax, not the honey.

Taste-wise, maybe. Honey is probably better health-wise though. Also, there are different varieties of honey. Most common is from clovers, which is the golden one you typically see. But, I've had some from blueberry bushes and buckwheat. Buckwheat honey tastes like caramel combined with molasses, the taste is amazing, especially the one I have right now. Not all buckwheat honey tastes exactly the same. The taste and composition of honey seems to be very dependent on the environment specific to the bees you get it from. I've also had a clover one that had a natural cinammon/petrichor type of flavour to it, which is up there with buckwheat for me. Buckwheat honey is black, looks like straight caramel/molasses and tastes like it too.

I remember @Someone here ran a poll here to test this exact point and the majority said it doesn't decrease their energy levels. They literally just don't bother to comment on these threads.

Oh man, you should see Andrew's take on psychedelics. He literally says something like "true spirituality is survival". It's like the devil himself is speaking lol.

Right. This tendency to construe morality seems to be seriously exaggerated in the mind of a psychopath, though. And the way they go about construing that morality seems to be different, it's much more flamboyant and self-centered. A normal person smoking a cigar who wants to construe morality might say: "Well, one cigar won't hurt me. I can ween off the cigar anytime I want anyways. Plus, all my friends are doing it as well." But, someone like Andrew Tate would completely double down on it and make himself seem like some sort of hero for smoking it. He would say something like: "I know exactly why I am smoking this cigar. The reason I smoke this cigar is because it makes me seem more manly. Who cares if it's shortening my lifespan? I don't care. There are risks you need to take in life and this is one I'm willing to take. Plus, cigars are proven to increase testosterone (yes, he actually said this)." He would exaggerate the shit out of his reasoning and macho it up.

I've always had this impression from Andrew that all his ideologies and tenets that he preaches are carefully crafted around his psychopathic behavior. They're just so unique and idiosyncratic sometimes, and they fit in perfectly with his own unique behaviors. You'll notice that he preaches morality and ethics for the most random and mundane things, almost like he's created a compulsive habit out of it. For example, he has an entire monologue prepared for why smoking cigars is ok but smoking vapes isn't. He's trying to make it seem like his psychopathy is logical and coherent and moral. It's his form of PR so he doesn't look absolutely insane in public. The order that he pursues his morality in is backwards. Normally, a person comes up with morals and virtues that they should follow and then they try to approach the world with that lens. With Andrew, it seems that he simply acts impulsively and selfishly, and then afterwards, he realizes he needs some sort of moral code so he can fit in, and so he crafts one around his actions. To him, it's just a tool for fitting in. It's like, in his mind, it's completely impossible for him to be wrong, so there must be some sort of moral logic he can conjure up to explain himself, and he just brazenly sticks with that.

Primary: 2.6/5 -- (a lack of empathy for other people and tolerance for antisocial orientations) Secondary: 2.3/5 -- (rule breaking and a lack of effort towards socially rewarded behavior) I think my scores are pretty average according to the graph.

Or, if you want sugar that isn't refined, just go for honey. Cutting refined sugar is really easy. Make sure the honey is legit though and use it in moderation.

18/40 Your score was higher than 73.1 of the sample. I'm not even a celebrity, though, so I don't even have a good excuse for the score

I don't think your body is trying to preserve it, though. You literally start getting wet dreams after abstinence. How do you deal with that?

I can vouch. I don't lose energy at all from climaxing. It feels refreshing and it clears my mind, like I just stepped out of a shower. I also feel super happy afterwards, probably cause of the rush of hormones.

IIRC maltitol still has a notable effect on blood sugar, although to a lesser degree than sugar. You see it a lot in sugar-free stuff but it still adds up pretty easily. My personal favorite is erythritol or monk fruit, or a combo of the two. They both have no effect on blood sugar and they taste exactly like sugar. Also, erythritol is apparently good for your oral health.

Like, do you feel fatigued? Brain fog maybe? If so, it might be POIS (Post-Orgasmic Illness Syndrome): Is it sustainable and practical in the long run? Is it having a noticeably negative effect? Simply look at what kind of effect it will have on your life and decide from there. I would say this is normal to a certain degree. Something new and novel will be more exciting, yes. But it shouldn't ruin sex or make sex hard to enjoy. I think that indicates an imbalance. You could try abstaining for a while to build up libido.

He seems drunk AF lol. Probably the only reason he's even talking to the guy recording. He's being way too technical and scientific for it to be some sort of joke IMO. A lot of the stuff he's saying is legit. If he's trying to play into the idea of a conspiracy theory or something he would have exaggerated it more and made it shorter instead of passionately rambling on about it for like 10 minutes.

Gain of function is a thing, yes. It's not like this guy is talking about some scheme to take over the world or anything. He's just talking about gain of function research. That being said, I still think it's likely that COVID originated in a lab due to that type of research.

He also said that he makes the guy sending the money mad on purpose. He'll make the woman come up with a stupid excuse for not coming like "I have a headache" to make the guy aggressive after already investing thousands of dollars, and then he makes the woman tell the guy that he's scaring her so that they have an excuse for not meeting up. Something along those lines.

Some bottled waters taste like plastic for some reason. I noticed that these waters are also acidic, so there seems to be a correlation of some sort. For example, Aquafina is one. I wouldn't trust it, even if it's labelled reverse osmosis or whatever. Stuff like Evian tastes fine though. Maybe the acidity causes the plastic to leech or something.

I asked the AI to compare your perspective on hallucinations against a more materialistic perspective on hallucinations: I want you to do a qualitative analysis of two pieces of texts on the topic of hallucinations. Tell me which has a more holistic and intelligent interpretation of the topic. Here is what we will call "text number one": A hallucination is a false perception of objects or events involving your senses: sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. Hallucinations seem real, but they’re not. Chemical reactions and/or abnormalities in your brain cause hallucinations. Hallucinations are typically a symptom of a psychosis-related disorder, particularly schizophrenia, but they can also result from substance use, neurological conditions and some temporary situations. A person may experience a hallucination with or without the insight that what they’re experiencing isn’t real. When a person thinks their hallucination is real, it’s considered a psychotic symptom. Here is what we will call "text number two": What ordinary humans consider to be "hallucinations" not really hallucinations (since everything is a hallucination), they are just God's imagination — Infinite Imagination — at work in non-ordinary states of consciousness. You can't really understand things like Schizophrenia without God-Realization. Schizophrenia is like an extreme form of open-mindedness. Your mind/consciousness is so abnormally open that reality itself becomes less material and more fluid — similar to being on mushrooms. This kind of openness correlates with high creativity because a lot more novel ideas are floating into your field of consciousness. But your mind is so open that these ideas literally start to morph your material world. A coffee table could start talking to you and giving you novel ideas. The trade-off is that your mind is less buttoned-up, so it literally starts to feel like you're going insane. How would you react if all the sudden your coffee table started to talk to you? Would you be open to listening, or would you freak out and run to the doctor to put yourself on meds to suppress it? Most people would freak out because they don't have a proper context for it. Under the materialist paradigm the only context is that you're going insane. But if you understand how consciousness works then there's really nothing wrong about it, you just have an extra-open mind. The notion that talking to your coffee table is "irrational", "crazy", or unscientific is just wrong. There's nothing unscientific about it. In fact, it is unscientific to call it unscientific because under the right states of consciousness people can talk to their coffee tables and this is not a bug, it's a feature. You have to be very careful about privileging one state of consciousness over another. This is an unscientific bias. No state of consciousness is superior to any other. No state of consciousness is truer than any other. They are just different, with various pros and cons. But humans are very judgmental and demonizing of states of consciousness which are unlike their own. This is just another form of bigotry. When a scientist says that some non-ordinary state of consciousness, like schizophrenia, is irrational or crazy, he is being a bigot. Rationality does not have a monopoly on reality, as it is commonly assumed. With that said, of course not all states of consciousness are equally functional. Some forms of schizophrenia may be highly maladaptive to living in modern society. Evolution and natural selection have carefully shaped mankind's default state of consciousness over millions of years to be hyper functional for survival in the kinds of environments that humans usually find themselves in. This is what creates the illusion of material reality. Reality is not at all material, but it seems that way because all the immaterial, dream-like aspects have been pruned off in order to make it possible for humans to excel in activities such as business, engineering, socialization, and war. You know what happened when the US military gave LSD to soldiers to make them better killers? The soldiers refused to fight each other because they experienced too much love. You literally have to be very closed-minded to kill people! In other words, the reason humans are so materialistic, rational, and business-like by default is because all the humans with dreamy default states of consciousness were killed off by the business-minded ones. Consider the possibility that 2000 years ago all humans were much more dreamy by default than they are today. But war killed them off and selected for the most materialistic, rational, and business-minded ones. Which is to say, all the most spiritual humans were killed off long ago. Which is why humans today struggle so much with being spiritual whereas in the ancient past people were much more mystically inclined. This wasn't merely a cultural shift, it was a shift at the genetic level. Nobody understands this! Ta-Daaaaa! It's even possible that Neanderthals were more spiritual than humans but were killed off by the more business-like and war-like humans. Science & history has yet to appreciate such matters because they take state of consciousness for granted. Text number one provides a more holistic and intelligent interpretation of the topic of hallucinations. It provides a clear and scientific explanation of what hallucinations are and the various causes, such as chemical reactions and abnormalities in the brain. It also explains that hallucinations are typically a symptom of a psychosis-related disorder, particularly schizophrenia, and can also result from substance use, neurological conditions and some temporary situations. Text number two, on the other hand, presents a more speculative and less evidence-based interpretation of hallucinations. It suggests that hallucinations are not really hallucinations, but rather the work of God's imagination and that understanding schizophrenia requires "God-realization". While it does mention the idea that the states of consciousness are different, with various pros and cons and that some forms of schizophrenia may be highly maladaptive to living in modern society, it also presents the idea that talking to a coffee table is not irrational or unscientific and that a scientist calling it so is a form of bigotry. This perspective is not widely accepted or supported by scientific evidence and it's not the way hallucinations are typically understood by the scientific and medical communities. While it raises some interesting points, it lacks the clear, evidence-based information that text number one provides. Which perspective is more dogmatic, though? Text number two is more dogmatic. The author presents their perspective as the only correct one and dismisses alternative perspectives as "wrong," "unscientific," and "bigoted." They also make bold claims about the nature of reality and consciousness without providing scientific evidence to support them. In contrast, text number one presents a more balanced and evidence-based view of hallucinations, describing them as false perceptions caused by chemical reactions and/or abnormalities in the brain and noting that they can be a symptom of a psychosis-related disorder or result from substance use or neurological conditions.

This thread is just gonna lead to endless mental masturbation. Just like all the other solipsism threads.

Hell no. Not gonna mess with serotonin receptors after seeing all the PSSD threads.

I don't think he's afraid of entertaining it. He did have Sadghuru on his podcast. Understanding it is a different matter though.