Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

Happines way of life Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

In part 3 of these Hap­pi­ness blogs, we saw some of the processes that mod­ern Pos­i­tive Psy­chol­ogy has found to increase Hap­pi­ness. There are three things that have been shown to change the way the ‘Ele­phant’ relates to the ‘Rider’ (Hap­pi­ness 1 – 3). They are med­i­ta­tion, cog­ni­tive ther­apy, and Prozac. We added in two ther­a­pies from a Herbalist’s point of view: Med­i­c­i­nal Mush­rooms and Flower Essences.

Med­i­ta­tion

Many reli­gions and tra­di­tions through­out his­tory have incor­po­rated med­i­ta­tion into a person’s daily prac­tice. I have used it as a fun­da­men­tal part of my per­sonal rou­tine since I was 15 years old. There are many types of med­i­ta­tion, but at their core they strive to have a per­son focus atten­tion in a non-analytical way. This is done either through sit­ting still, or some pre-prescribed form of exer­cise. Aware­ness is focused on breath­ing, or a word (mantra), image, or move­ment. This on the sur­face seems quite easy, but it often takes weeks, if not months, before a per­son can get into the ‘flow’ of the med­i­ta­tion. The goal is to change the auto­matic thought process, thereby tam­ing (train­ing) the ele­phant. The proof of the tam­ing is the break­ing of attach­ments. This brings us to one of the state­ment from the Dali Lama in our first blog on Happiness:

“I believe com­pas­sion to be one of the few things we can prac­tice that will bring imme­di­ate and long-term hap­pi­ness to our lives.”

For Bud­dhists, attach­ments are like a game of roulette in which some­one else spins the wheel and the game is rigged: The more you play, the more you lose. The only way to win is to step away from the table. And the only way to step away, to make you not react to the ups and downs of life, is to med­i­tate and tame the mind. Although you give up the plea­sure of win­ning, you also give up the larger pain of losing.

Med­i­ta­tion tames and calms the ele­phant. Med­i­ta­tion done every day for sev­eral months can sub­stan­tially reduces fear­ful, neg­a­tive and grasp­ing thoughts. This in turn improves the one’s affec­tive style, or the way you approach life.

Bud­dha said: When a man knows the soli­tude of silence and feels the joy of quiet­ness, he is then free from fear and sin.”

After a per­son has med­i­tated reg­u­larly for sev­eral months it can be seen on brain scans, light­ing up the same cen­tre for hap­pi­ness in the brain. It is sus­tain­ably increas­ing in bright­ness, and the more a per­son med­i­tates it becomes eas­ier to get into that state, because the ele­phant is trained.

happines responsibilty 300x250 Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

 

Cog­ni­tive Therapy

Med­i­ta­tion has been tra­di­tion­ally an East­ern way of approach­ing this state of Hap­pi­ness, but has now been employed by many in the West since the 60’s.  Dur­ing that same era, Aaron Beck started devel­op­ing cog­ni­tive ther­apy. Beck was a psy­chi­a­trist at the Uni­ver­sity of Penn­syl­va­nia, who was trained in the Freudian psy­cho­an­a­lyt­i­cal approach. He found that it was not as effec­tive for his patients as he would like. So he took a new approach; instead of re-hashing old thoughts and behav­iors from child­hood, he got his patients to catch and chal­lenge neg­a­tive thoughts. This did not sit well with many of his Freudian col­leagues who though he was treat­ing symp­toms instead of the real cause of the prob­lem. But it didn’t take long before he could prove his form of cog­ni­tive ther­apy was very effec­tive for treat­ing depres­sion, anx­i­ety and many other problems.

As we saw in ear­lier blogs, the con­scious mind (the rider) often uses rea­son not to find the truth, but to invent argu­ments to sup­port our deep and intu­itive beliefs (resid­ing in the ele­phant). From depressed peo­ple Beck describes a ‘cog­ni­tive triad’.

  1. I’m no good
  2. My world is bleak
  3. My future is hopeless

A depressed person’s mind is auto­mat­i­cally filled with thoughts sup­port­ing these dys­func­tional beliefs, espe­cially when things appear to be going wrong. These dis­torted thoughts are sim­i­lar across patients. Beck called these cog­ni­tive processes ‘per­son­al­iza­tion’, ‘over­gen­er­al­iza­tion’, ‘mag­ni­fi­ca­tion’ and ‘arbi­trary infer­ence’.  These make a depressed per­son get caught in a feed­back loop of dis­torted thoughts caus­ing neg­a­tive feel­ings, which of course dis­tort think­ing fur­ther. Beck’s break-through was to stop the cycle by chang­ing the thoughts. The client is trained to catch their thoughts, write them down, name the dis­tor­tion and find an alter­na­tive and more accu­rate way of think­ing. Over a period of sev­eral weeks the client’s thoughts become more real­is­tic and the feed­back loops are bro­ken. This will result in the cycles of anx­i­ety or depres­sion being sig­nif­i­cantly reduced.

This type of ther­apy works because it gets the rider (con­scious mind) to train the ele­phant instead of try­ing to defeat it with log­i­cal argu­ments that the ele­phant can’t under­stand in the first place. At first of course the rider does not know that ele­phant is con­trol­ling him, that it is really the elephant’s fears and dis­likes that are dri­ving his con­scious thoughts. The thing is that in cog­ni­tive ther­apy, home­work needs to be done daily (like med­i­ta­tion) instead of just vis­it­ing a therapist’s office once a week. The ele­phant can only learn by daily prac­tice that goes on for more than the 21 days, but often for sev­eral weeks and even months. The prac­tice has to become a habit. With each refram­ing and each sim­ple task of accom­plish­ment, the client receives a lit­tle reward in the form of dopamine with its flash of relief and plea­sure. It is like train­ing an ele­phant by giv­ing it a peanut each time it does the trick right. You can­not win a tug-of-war with an angry or fear­ful ele­phant, but you can grad­u­ally reshape the behav­ior cre­at­ing the auto­matic thoughts and affec­tive style.

Cog­ni­tive ther­apy has been shown to achieve results faster than most other psy­cho­log­i­cal ther­a­pies, pro­duc­ing sus­tain­able results even after the client stops the daily exer­cise once they have gone through the ini­tial train­ing stages. When done well, it has been shown to be as effec­tive as drugs like Prozac for the treat­ment of depres­sion. Besides, cog­ni­tive ther­apy does not have some of the side effects of Prozac, and it still works after the ther­apy, as the ele­phant has now been retrained. Prozac ther­apy only works while it is being taken, with the behav­iours com­ing back after a month or so of stop­ping the drug.

Of course there are many other forms of ther­a­pies that will fit spe­cific peo­ple bet­ter than cog­ni­tive ther­apy, but it has shown a great track record.

Happiness an inside job 300x296 Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

Prozac

Prozac is a mem­ber of a class of drugs known as selec­tive sero­tonin reup­take inhibitors (or SSRIs). There are sev­eral oth­ers, such as Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Lexapro and oth­ers. I am going to only use the name Prozac for sim­plic­ity, but I really mean all of the SSRI cousins. Prob­a­bly the first thing we should state is that even though Prozac has been used since 1974, they still don’t know how it works! As the class indi­cates, it appears to affect the sero­tonin uptake at selec­tive synapses. It results in increased sero­tonin within days, but the action takes at least 4 — 6 weeks (and some­times longer) to be noticed by the con­sumer. Even though it is not known how it works, it can be used affec­tively in a vari­ety of men­tal issues includ­ing depres­sion, anx­i­ety, panic attacks, social pho­bias, pre­men­strual dys­phoric dis­or­der, some eat­ing dis­or­ders and some forms of obses­sive com­pul­sive disorder.

Prozac is con­tro­ver­sial for sev­eral rea­sons. Some feel it is a short cut and it often changes the consumer’s per­son­al­ity dra­mat­i­cally (not always to the bet­ter). As a Herbal­ist I don’t really like the use of it, but have to con­cede this group has often saved the lives of many of my patients. I have seen sig­nif­i­cant improve­ment of many clients, so I would have to say I have a love/hate rela­tion­ship with the SSRI. We sug­gest it should only be used for as short of a period as pos­si­ble, with other strate­gies to replace its use. It can often do what no talk ther­apy can do, chang­ing the per­son in as lit­tle as 5 weeks. What I object to is ‘cos­metic psy­chophar­ma­col­ogy’ where peo­ple take it just to have an upbeat per­son­al­ity. Often this will back­fire some­where down the line. If a per­son can take the time to do other work to train the ele­phant while on the SSRI, this is best.

Bot­tom line is, the SSRIs do not train the ele­phant, as evi­denced by the fact that the per­son is back to the same place 5 weeks after stop­ping them. This usu­ally means tak­ing another form of the SSRI until they are all used up. These drugs appear to cage the ele­phant and make it so they can­not com­mu­ni­cate with the rider, thus the rider appears to be in con­trol until the drug does not work any­more. Often I have had patients state that it makes them feel they are cut off from the old self or even their spirit while on the SSRI, but at least they can func­tion inside soci­ety. I feel that these ‘easy fixes’ are overprescribed.

Med­i­c­i­nal Mushrooms

Ganoderma 1 Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

Any­one who is famil­iar with my lec­tures or who has fol­lowed these blog for a while knows this is one of my favorite areas. Sev­eral of the med­i­c­i­nal mush­rooms work on ‘calm­ing down the rider’, but my favorite for this is cer­tainly Reishi (Gan­o­derma lucidum).  One of my beloved by-lines for Reishi is, “To pro­tect an aca­d­e­mic from their own brain”. Reishi is great for reduc­ing cir­cu­lar argu­ments, get­ting a per­son out of the head (the rider) and into their body (ele­phant). It can be very spe­cific for this, as it helps move a person’s cen­ter of grav­ity from the ‘head’ to the ‘heart’. I real­ize these are metaphors for mov­ing from the lin­ear log­i­cal world, into the non-linear emo­tional world, but the side effect is to make both the rider and the ele­phant become much more calm. It has often been said that Reishi is like an addi­tional ½ hours worth of med­i­ta­tion a day.

Yes it works on the immune sys­tem, car­dio­vas­cu­lar sys­tem, the liver and sev­eral other part of our body, as listed in other of my blogs, but ulti­mately its calm­ing effect is its basic func­tion. This effect helps the rider and the ele­phant cre­ate a flow, dance, or syn­chro­nized Tai Chi. This form of calm­ing also is quite sus­tain­able. It is nowhere as fast and as dra­matic as the SSRIs, but retrains the ele­phant sim­i­lar to med­i­ta­tion.  The med­i­c­i­nal mush­rooms in gen­eral, Reishi specif­i­cally, help a per­son ground, help­ing them keep their feet on the planet, instead of up in the clouds.

FE cover 1 300x272 Happiness Part 4: The Remedies

Flower Essences

This too is an area of strong inter­est for me, being the sub­ject of my last book, Flower Essence: Emo­tional Alchemy and Spir­i­tual Evo­lu­tion. Flower essences work on the much more sub­tle level of vibra­tional med­i­cine. I have talked about them more exten­sively in other blogs.  They work directly on the non-linear realms, com­mu­ni­cat­ing directly with the ele­phant. They can help train the ele­phant, but this time on very spe­cific issues. You can use pre­pared for­mu­las for depres­sion, focus, SAD, anx­i­ety, ADD, Insom­nia, children’s anx­i­etiessen­si­tiv­ity and shield­ing, self esteem or addic­tions, but many cre­ate a spe­cific cus­tomized for­mula. Often a per­son does both, because you can use up to five for­mu­las at a time. By cre­at­ing a cus­tom for­mula, you deter­mine the right flower essences to hone in on the issues that need to be trained in your ele­phant. One of the eas­i­est ways to do this is by fill­ing in a flower essence ques­tion­naire, as found here. We usu­ally use a spe­cific for­mula for about a month or two, repeat­ing the ques­tion­naire each month to see if you need to change the blend. Through this method we can slowly change the way the ele­phant relates to the world, thus increas­ing our Hap­pi­ness Lev­els. Often we keep one of the pre­pared for­mu­las going at the same time. Each for­mula should be taken at least 5 – 15 min­utes apart.

Again the func­tion of flower essences is quite sus­tain­able, as it retrains the ele­phant and as a bonus has no side effects. Con­sis­tency is impor­tant here; they need to be done 1 – 4 times daily (more if needed) for at least a month. Their action is quite fast, mak­ing dra­matic changes in a person’s emo­tions within min­utes. Increas­ing the amount of flower essence taken at each dosage does not increase their effec­tive­ness, tak­ing them more often does.

In this blog we have reviewed five dif­fer­ent tech­niques to work on increas­ing a person’s Hap­pi­ness Lev­els. In the next blog on Hap­pi­ness we will con­clude this area and look at the under­ly­ing phe­nom­ena that con­nects these tech­niques together. By see­ing this, we will be able to get a bet­ter han­dle on how to cre­ate and sus­tain more Hap­pi­ness in our lives.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Prostate and PSA: No Longer Recommended

prostate Prostate and PSA: No Longer Recommended

It was once thought that a PSA (Prostate-Specific Anti­gen) test should be rou­tinely (yearly or so) given to all men over 40 years old. This was sug­gested to reduce the inci­dence of prostate prob­lems as well as early detec­tion of prostate cancer.

I have rec­om­mended for many years that this test­ing was not as impor­tant for most of my patients as the media and allo­pathic med­i­cine were claim­ing. Not only has it been proven to not be that accu­rate in deter­min­ing a prostate prob­lem (includ­ing prostate can­cer), it was also shown to lead to many false pos­i­tive and thus unnec­es­sary biop­sies. The biop­sies were some­times fol­lowed by med­ical com­pli­ca­tions (like infec­tions) and even more com­monly psy­cho­log­i­cal trauma, which made more dif­fi­cult to war­rant the PSA tests.

Mem­bers of the Amer­i­can Uro­log­i­cal Asso­ci­a­tion (AUA) recently got together and made a series of new rec­om­men­da­tions con­cern­ing prostate can­cer screen­ing. They now dis­cour­age screen­ing men who are at average-risk under the age 55.

The AUA sug­gests cau­tion when mak­ing a deci­sion to go through with the screen­ing and to weigh the ben­e­fits against the poten­tial harms.

 “It was stressed that it was impor­tant to con­sult a doc­tor about whether being screened is the right deci­sion for men in gen­eral espe­cially before the age of 55. Instead the old rec­om­men­da­tion of encour­aged healthy men over the age of 40 to con­sider PSA screening.”

Why has the AUA changed its rec­om­men­da­tions regard­ing PSA screening?

Even though PSA screen­ing may help pre­vent a small per­cent­age of prostate can­cer deaths, it can also be the cause of painful biop­sies in “healthy” men, along with some other unnec­es­sary treat­ments. Researchers from John Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity reported in The Jour­nal of Urol­ogy (Novem­ber 2011 issue) that prostate biop­sies are asso­ci­ated with a 6.9% hos­pi­tal­iza­tion rate within 30 days of the pro­ce­dure because of complications.

Dr.H. Bal­len­tine Carter (Urol­o­gist), the chair of the panel, who wrote the new guide­lines, said: “There really was no high-level evi­dence sup­port­ing the use of screen­ing with PSA.”

He added that while the gen­eral pub­lic may be enthu­si­as­tic about PSA screen­ing “the idea that screen­ing deliv­ers ben­e­fits may have been over exaggerated.”

Carter added: “I look upon this guide­line… as the begin­ning of a targeted-based screen­ing.” Men­tion­ing that “instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, we’re try­ing to empha­size that there is a group of men between age 55 and 69 that are much more likely to benefit.”

Men above the age of 70 who are only expected to live 10 or 15 more years “are not advised to be screened”.

The Amer­i­can Can­cer Soci­ety esti­mates that close to 239,000 men are expected to be diag­nosed with prostate can­cer this year, with an esti­mated 30,000 dying from the disease.

Carter said: “The evi­dence for the ben­e­fits of prostate can­cer screen­ing was mod­er­ate, but the qual­ity of evi­dence on the harms was high. I think men need this infor­ma­tion, they deserve to have this infor­ma­tion and when they get it, some men will take the same infor­ma­tion and decide they want to get screened” and oth­ers won’t”

It’s very impor­tant that men are aware of the pos­si­ble harm that PSA test­ing can lead to, as well as the pos­si­ble ben­e­fit of it being able to detect cancer.

Many experts now agree with these new guide­lines, but express con­cern about the impact it will have on doc­tors and their patients.

There are other more accu­rate tests that have been employed by some. A study done 2 years ago at UCLA’s Jon­s­son Com­pre­hen­sive Can­cer Cen­ter, a test for prostate can­cer called A+PSA assay, which mea­sures lev­els of PSA and six spe­cific anti­bod­ies found in the blood of men with prostate issues to be more sen­si­tive and more spe­cific than the con­ven­tional PSA test used.

Last year researchers reported in the New Eng­land Jour­nal of Med­i­cine (March 2012 issue) that while PSA test­ing reduces prostate can­cer mor­tal­ity, it does not appear to reduce all-cause mor­tal­ity.

For almost 2 years, the USPSTF (US Pre­ven­tive Ser­vices Task Force) rec­om­mended against PSA-based screen­ing for prostate can­cer. They empha­sized that men with­out symp­toms pres­ence should not be tested.

The USPSTF wrote:

The evi­dence is con­vinc­ing that PSA-based screen­ing pro­grams result in the detec­tion of many cases of asymp­to­matic prostate can­cer. The evi­dence is also con­vinc­ing that the major­ity of men who have asymp­to­matic can­cer detected by PSA screen­ing have a tumor that meets his­to­log­i­cal cri­te­ria for prostate can­cer, but the tumor either will not progress or is so indo­lent and slow-growing that it will not affect the man’s lifes­pan or cause adverse health effects, as he will die of another cause first.”

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Happiness Part 3: How to Train the Elephant

happy elephant 300x215 Happiness Part 3: How to Train the Elephant

In the last two blogs we have been look­ing at Hap­pi­ness, try­ing to cre­ate a model for it and of course learn­ing how to obtain an abun­dance of it in our lives. Research basi­cally has shown us that:

Hap­pi­ness is both an action and a result. Accord­ing to cur­rent research, hap­pi­ness is made up of:

1. 50% genetics

2. 10 – 20% life cir­cum­stances, such as age, gen­der, eth­nic­ity, mar­i­tal sta­tus, income, health, occu­pa­tion, and reli­gious affiliation

3. The rest is how a per­son thinks and acts.”

Some researchers have cre­ated this into a formula:

H(appi­ness) = S(etpoint, genet­ics) + C(ondi­tions) + V(olun­tary activities)

It was shown that: The deci­sions a per­son makes on how to live their lives is the strongest fac­tor in effect­ing their happiness.

In the last blog we used an exam­ple of a human being sim­i­lar to a rider on the back of an ele­phant. Most of us put too much impor­tance on the rider, but we are really made up of the ele­phant and the rider. Most pop psy­chol­ogy is focused on the rider, by guid­ing it into cog­ni­tive insights and refram­ing its thoughts. Yet once these insights are put into action they very rarely are still func­tion­ing 2 – 3 months later. You are often back doing the same things you where when you started. The thing is that the rider really can’t just change the direc­tion the ele­phant is head­ing by pure will power. The rider just doesn’t have that author­ity. Last­ing changes have to come from retrain­ing the elephant.

The pro­grams that seem to have last­ing effects on a person’s hap­pi­ness take the ini­tial insight and involve the ele­phant long enough to retrain it. It has often been shown it takes at least 21 days to cre­ate a habit. This is why it often takes up to a month to head the ele­phant in the direc­tion you want it headed. We will look at this in more detail later in our next blog.

The basic prob­lem is the ele­phant in many peo­ple nat­u­rally tends toward worry and pes­simism, not hap­pi­ness. There are some very sig­nif­i­cant bio­log­i­cal and even sur­vival rea­sons behind this. Remem­ber the ele­phant does not really have the sophis­ti­cated lan­guage and logic skills of the rider. It can­not string together ratio­nal­iza­tions. Its basic func­tion can be coined as a Like-O-Meter. It either ‘likes’ or ‘dis­likes’ some­thing or ‘approaches’ or ‘with­draws’ from some­thing. This comes from the evo­lu­tion of the most prim­i­tive organ­isms. From go to stop, and eat or don’t eat; these binary func­tions guide most of the behav­ior of the ele­phant. If a mon­key tastes some fruit the like-o-meter reg­is­ters ‘I like it’; there is plea­sure derived from the fruit so it eats on. If it tastes bit­ter, the flash of dis­plea­sure makes the mon­key throw it away. There is no need to go into the long pros and cons of the rea­son­ing sys­tem. Just like and dislike.

We have an ongo­ing like-o-meter also. These deci­sions are often made in microsec­onds, as sev­eral stud­ies have shown. One such study had peo­ple focus­ing on a dot in the cen­ter of a com­puter screen, with a word flash­ing over the dot every few sec­onds. They had to decide if the word was ‘good’ or ‘bad’ or ‘dis­like­able’ (death, tyranny, bore­dom). Quite straight­for­ward, but unbe­knownst to the par­tic­i­pants the com­puter flashed another word for a few hun­dredths of a sec­ond before the word being rated. These instant flashed words were sub­lim­i­nal, (way below the observer level of aware­ness). The intu­itive sys­tem (ele­phant) is so fast that it picked up the words with­out the rider even know­ing it. This influ­enced the ‘likes’ or ‘dis­likes’, or the time it takes to make a deci­sion on the word they were meant to eval­u­ate. The thing is, we respond to the ‘neg­a­tive’ words faster and for a longer period of time than the pos­i­tive words. Why?

This insight has shown researchers we can by-pass the rider and talk directly to the ele­phant; and what was dis­cov­ered was a bit dis­turb­ing to some. The ele­phant has all kinds of pre­pro­gramed biases that the rider might con­sider not to be polit­i­cally cor­rect. There is an inter­est­ing exper­i­ment you can take on www.projectimplicit.com. It can show you what your biases are for skin color, reli­gion, sex­ual bias, etc. It does this by bypass­ing your con­scious rider and ask­ing the ele­phant. Yes, you can do it anony­mous if you desire. You might be sur­prised at what you will find out.

Some of these under­ly­ing biases can have a strong influ­ence on how we view the world around us. If we want to enjoy the world more, we need to know we usu­ally can’t change the world, so we have to change our­selves; and that of course means retrain­ing the ele­phant. The thing is for most peo­ple; the ele­phant often sees more bad things faster than it sees good things.

Now from a bio­log­i­cal point of view this makes sense. All ani­mals need to respond to threats faster than they need to respond to oppor­tu­ni­ties. If an ani­mal misses the odd oppor­tu­nity to feed, or mate, it is not that dis­as­trous. There will most likely be more oppor­tu­ni­ties in the future. If they miss a threat, they are likely to become the food and it is game over, end of the line for those genes. These biases seem to be hard-wired into a stronger response to bad than good. Some of these biases can be trained out, while oth­ers can­not. Our responses to a threat and unpleas­ant­ness are faster and stronger than our response to oppor­tu­ni­ties and pleasure.

Thalmus from visual 300x277 Happiness Part 3: How to Train the Elephant

The rea­son why our ‘dis­like’ or ‘with­drawal sys­tem’ is so quick and com­pelling is that it gets first crack at the incom­ing infor­ma­tion. All neural impulses from the eyes and ears go first to the thal­a­mus, a sort of cen­tral switch­ing sta­tion for the brain. From here, the neural impulses are sent to their spe­cial sen­sory pro­cess­ing areas in the cor­tex. The impulses are then relayed to the frontal cor­tex, where they are inte­grated with higher men­tal processes and into our stream of con­scious­ness (the rider). Lets say at the end of this process you rec­og­nize the hiss­ing of a snake. You could sig­nal your legs to run away (with­drawal) to pro­tect your­self. Neural impulses travel about 30 meters per sec­ond, then there is the decision-making to con­clude with a 1 – 2 sec­ond delay before you can decide to with­drawal. This delay can in some cases mean bad injury or even death. For this rea­son there is a short­cut. The amyg­dala sits right below the thal­a­mus where it dips into the river of unprocessed infor­ma­tion flow­ing through the thal­a­mus. If it per­ceives a pat­tern of dan­ger, it will trig­ger an imme­di­ate ‘fight-or-flight response’ before the higher cen­ters even know what is going on. The ele­phant responds to threat way faster than the rider even knows there is a threat.

Amygdala20La20doux 300x147 Happiness Part 3: How to Train the Elephant

You have felt this hap­pen in real life and moviemak­ers love to play this up espe­cially in hor­ror movies. The amyg­dala has already cre­ated a response in the first tenth of a sec­ond, clearly 10 to 20 times faster than the rider per­ceives it. This ‘red alert’ sys­tem has kept the ele­phant alive through­out the evo­lu­tion­ary process, for a long time. The thing is that the amyg­dala does not have a ‘green light’ alert sys­tem for hap­pi­ness and plea­sure. These deci­sions can wait a sec­ond or two. The rider can tell itself all it wants about not being afraid of snakes, but if the ele­phant has a fear of snakes, then it reacts every time unless it is trained out.

The amyg­dala doesn’t just reach down the brain­stem to trig­ger a response to dan­ger, but it reaches up to the frontal cor­tex to change our think­ing. It shifts the whole brain into a with­drawal ori­en­ta­tion. This can cre­ate an anx­i­ety that raises fil­ters to make you see the world as an aggres­sive place. The feel­ing of sad­ness blinds you to all the plea­sures and oppor­tu­ni­ties. Or as Shakespeare’s Ham­let says, ‘There is noth­ing either good or bad but think­ing makes it so.” We might want to add that neg­a­tive emo­tions make neg­a­tive think­ing, which makes every­thing bad.

So at this point, what are the most effec­tive ways to change ones affec­tive style – to train the ele­phant – so we can move more into hap­pi­ness? There are three meth­ods that have been found by mod­ern pos­i­tive psy­chol­ogy researchers in Hap­pi­ness: med­i­ta­tion, cog­ni­tive ther­apy and Prozac (and its SSRI cousins). From a herbal­ist point of view, I would like to add Flower Essences, and some of the Med­i­c­i­nal Mushrooms.

In our next blog we will look at these and the pros and cons of these techniques.

 

 

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

 

happiness 400 300x225 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live? In my last Blog, we started on our dis­cus­sion of Hap­pi­ness. We looked at sev­eral peo­ples’ inter­pre­ta­tion of hap­pi­ness through­out the ages and real­ized this has been a fairly cen­tral theme for a lot of peo­ple in the past. Sev­eral peo­ple have asked, “Why are we not pur­su­ing this field of hap­pi­ness now in present time?” Actu­ally we can say that there is lots of research on hap­pi­ness over the last decade. In fact we can say that we are in a Hap­pi­ness Rev­o­lu­tion, to coin Dr. Howard Cut­ler, co-author with the Dali Lama of the The Art of Hap­pi­ness, 10th Anniver­sary Edi­tion: A Hand­book for Liv­ing. Since their book was first pub­lished in 1998, it has hit the main­stream, becom­ing a:

cul­tural milieu in Amer­ica, spon­ta­neously show­ing up on TV sit­coms, game shows, even MTV—the very icons of pop­u­lar cul­ture in Amer­ica at the time: Friends, Sex and the City, Jeop­ardy!, Who Wants to Be a Mil­lion­aire, MTV Cribs—and even the season’s open­ing game on Mon­day Night Football,”.

The Art of Happinees 10aniversity 197x300 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

Even though when the Dali Lama was first inter­viewed for this book, there was very lit­tle research done by psy­chol­ogy on hap­pi­ness, this is def­i­nitely not the case today. A whole new area of psy­chol­ogy has opened up:

The for­mal birth of this new branch of psy­chol­ogy took place in 1998, when a highly influ­en­tial psy­chol­o­gist, Dr. Mar­tin Selig­man, the newly elected pres­i­dent of the Amer­i­can Psy­cho­log­i­cal Asso­ci­a­tion, decided to ded­i­cate his term as pres­i­dent to the estab­lish­ment of this new field, which he dubbed pos­i­tive psy­chol­ogy. “

Before this, most study in psy­chol­ogy was on prob­lem areas and phys­i­cal loca­tions for var­i­ous behaviors.

How things have changes, as Dr. Cut­ler (a psy­chi­a­trist) says:

At Har­vard Uni­ver­sity, for instance, “The Hap­pi­ness Course” has now replaced Intro­duc­tory Eco­nom­ics as the most pop­u­lar under­grad­u­ate course, with enroll­ment quickly soar­ing to well over 1,400 stu­dents each semes­ter. The impact is even being seen on the gov­ern­men­tal level in nations around the world, with the coun­try of Bhutan, for instance, replac­ing GDP (Gross Domes­tic Pro­duc­tion) with GNH (Gross National Hap­pi­ness) as its most impor­tant mea­sure of suc­cess as a nation. Pol­i­cy­mak­ers in many nations are now even explor­ing the idea of shap­ing pub­lic pol­icy based on hap­pi­ness research. As one gov­ern­ment offi­cial in Scot­land exu­ber­antly asserted, “If we can embrace this new sci­ence of pos­i­tive psy­chol­ogy, we have the oppor­tu­nity to cre­ate a new Enlightenment.”

In the past decade there has become a sig­nif­i­cant level of evidence-based sci­ence on Hap­pi­ness. The Neu­ro­science of Hap­pi­ness is pretty much under­stood. But unfor­tu­nately know­ing the neu­ro­phys­i­ol­ogy of hap­pi­ness does not make the researchers and grad stu­dents study­ing it hap­pier. With all this work on hap­pi­ness, you would think we would have more happy peo­ple, but this is plainly not hap­pen­ing. Hap­pi­ness can­not be pegged down by hard facts.

When the Dali Lama was asked for the 10 anniver­sary of his book, what was the most impor­tant thing to take home from his book after a decade, he sim­ply repeated,

If you want oth­ers to be happy, prac­tice com­pas­sion; and if you want your­self to be happy, prac­tice compassion.”

Now this is not to say the Dali Lama is not inter­ested in sci­ence; he def­i­nitely is, hav­ing hosted many sum­mits on sci­ence. It is that hap­pi­ness is just more mer­cu­r­ial than sci­ence, seem­ing to slide between the cracks, not really art and not really science.

Happiness Dali Lama 266x300 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

Hap­pi­ness is both an action and a result. Accord­ing to cur­rent research, hap­pi­ness is made up of:

1. 50% genetics

2. 10 – 20% life cir­cum­stances, such as age, gen­der, eth­nic­ity, mar­i­tal sta­tus, income, health, occu­pa­tion, and reli­gious affiliation

3. The rest is how a per­son thinks and acts.

Some peo­ple lucked out, hav­ing won the cor­ti­cal lot­tery and have a strong genetic dis­po­si­tion for hap­pi­ness, but this does not assure hap­pi­ness. Life sit­u­a­tions, even income, seem to have very lit­tle influ­ence. It is how a per­son thinks and acts that can push them to the top, or the bot­tom, of their per­sonal hap­pi­ness range. The deci­sions a per­son makes on how to live their lives is the strongest fac­tor in effect­ing their happiness.

Happy eckhart Tolle 300x250 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

When I was a kid grow­ing up on the edge of Cal­gary, Alberta — a city with a dis­tinct West­ern fla­vor — it wasn’t uncom­mon to go horse­back rid­ing. I didn’t spend a lot of time rid­ing horses, but I was at least famil­iar enough with it to real­ize rid­ing a horse was a process of two-way com­mu­ni­ca­tion between the rider and the horse if you wanted to have a good time. In sub­se­quent years I noticed younger rid­ers had a harder time enjoy­ing rid­ing. It seemed they tried to over ‘steer’ the horse. When I wanted to go for a back­coun­try trail ride with a friend, they were wor­ried that they weren’t a good enough rider. They were afraid they would steer the horse over a cliff. The dif­fer­ence was that they grew up play­ing with go-carts and learned to drive a car. These were mechan­i­cal devices that needed to be steered. The horse on the other hand is a con­scious par­tic­i­pant and was not going to go plum­met­ing to it death over a cliff, just because some­one on its back was poor at steer­ing. The rider is just that, a rider and not the ulti­mate deci­sion maker on where they are going. The rider, espe­cially a neo­phyte rider, is just a guide.

In fact it is pretty hard to get a 1000 pound (450 Kg) horse to do some­thing that it doesn’t want to do. If there is agree­ment between the rider and the horse, the ride will be smooth and all are happy.

Happiness Hyposis paperback cover 200x300 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

In our last blog, we saw from Jonathan Haidt’s book The Hap­pi­ness Hypoth­e­sis, his use of an anal­ogy of the con­scious mind being a rider on an ele­phant, with the ele­phant being the sub­con­scious (un-conscious) mind. Even though the rider has some influ­ence over the ele­phant, it can really only has influ­ence when it makes the ele­phant happy. Even though our con­scious, ego dri­ven, log­i­cal brain thinks it is in con­trol, it is ulti­mately just along for the ride. Bil­lions of years of evo­lu­tion has given the ele­phant bio­log­i­cal momen­tum over the lat­est arrival on the scene, the human grey mat­ter of the brain.

As mod­ern research has proven, and we see daily in the clinic, this anal­ogy is true. For a per­son to have har­mony in their life, there has to be com­mu­ni­ca­tion and agree­ment between the ele­phant and the rider. But ulti­mately the ele­phant is much larger and more pow­er­ful than the rider, even though the rider wants to pre­tend it is in control.

We saw in our last blog that the ele­phant is pro­cess­ing a half a mil­lion times more pieces of data per sec­ond than the rider. This means that the ele­phant is often per­ceiv­ing dif­fer­ent data and mak­ing ‘deci­sions’ on dif­fer­ent sets of fac­tors than the rider.

Gut brain 1 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

Some­times we get a gut feel­ing about some­thing, but instead of fol­low­ing it we fol­low our log­i­cal, deci­sion mak­ing conscious-mind instead, ‘know­ing’ that the rider is bet­ter at mak­ing deci­sions. There is nowhere in the body other than the gut where this ele­phant anal­ogy rings truer from my clin­i­cal expe­ri­ence. The bow­els have been shown in recent years to be the loca­tion of a ‘sec­ond brain.’ Our intestines have a vast net­work of 100s of mil­lions of neu­rons used to han­dle all the needs of run­ning a chem­i­cal refin­ery that processes and extracts nutri­ents from food. This ‘gut brain’ is like a regional admin­is­tra­tive cen­ter that han­dles stuff the head brain does not need to bother with. You might expect that this gut brain takes its orders from the head brain and does as it is told. This is not true as the gut brain pos­sesses a high degree of auton­omy, and it con­tin­ues to func­tion well even if the vagus nerve, which con­nects the two brains together, is severed.

In fact we often see the oppo­site, when the head brain does not pay atten­tion to gut brain. If the head brain doesn’t lis­ten to early sig­nals sent by the gut about stress, diet, and lifestyle, it sends stronger sig­nals pro­duc­ing con­sti­pa­tion, diar­rhea, irri­ta­ble bowel syn­drome, col­i­tis, or Crohn’s. Again the ele­phant per­ceives dif­fer­ent data than the con­scious brain. Unfor­tu­nately the con­scious brain is too eas­ily influ­ence by mar­ket­ing and the opin­ions of oth­ers, and has a hard time pay­ing atten­tion to what the gut voice is try­ing to communicate.

Gut brain 2 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

The auto­nomic ner­vous sys­tem has been shaped by nat­ural selec­tion to trig­ger quick and reli­able action in the face of emer­gen­cies. This includes parts of the brain that makes us feel plea­sure and pain (such as the orbitofrontal cor­tex) and parts that trig­ger survival-related moti­va­tions (such as the hypo­thal­a­mus). This auto­matic sys­tem has its fin­ger on the dopamine (plea­sure hor­mone) release but­ton. The rider-controlled sys­tem, in con­trast, is bet­ter seen as an advi­sor. A rider is placed on the elephant’s back to help the ele­phant make bet­ter choices. The rider can see far­ther into the future, learn valu­able infor­ma­tion by talk­ing to other rid­ers or by read­ing maps. One thing the rider can­not suc­ceed at is to order the ele­phant around against its will. We can say that the rider is an advi­sor or ser­vant; not a king, pres­i­dent, or char­i­o­teer with a firm grip on the reins. The ele­phant, in con­trast, is every­thing else. The ele­phant includes the gut feel­ings, vis­ceral reac­tions, emo­tions, and intu­itions that com­prise much of the auto­matic sys­tem. Both the ele­phant and the rider each have their own intel­li­gence, and when they work together well, they enable the unique bril­liance of human beings. Then we have a happy camper. Unfor­tu­nately they don’t always work together well.

When you see a paint­ing, you usu­ally know instantly and auto­mat­i­cally whether you like it. If pushed to explain your judg­ment, you con­fab­u­late. You don’t really have rea­sons for why you think some­thing is beau­ti­ful, but your inter­preter mod­ule (the rider) is skilled at mak­ing up rea­sons. The rider searches for plau­si­ble rea­sons for lik­ing the paint­ing, and latches onto the first rea­sons that makes sense (maybe some­thing about the light, or color, or the reflec­tion made in a tear drop).

Moral argu­ments are much the same: if two peo­ple feel strongly about an issue, their feel­ings come first, and their rea­sons are invented on the fly, to throw at each other. When you refute a person’s argu­ment, do you gen­er­ally change their mind to agree with you? Of course not, because the argu­ment you defeated was not the cause of their posi­tion; their argu­ment was also made up after the judg­ment was already made.

When lis­ten­ing closely to moral argu­ments, you can often hear some­thing sur­pris­ing: it is really the ele­phant hold­ing the reins, guid­ing the rider. It is the ele­phant that is decid­ing what is good or bad, beau­ti­ful or ugly. Gut feel­ings, intu­itions, and snap judg­ments hap­pen con­stantly and auto­mat­i­cally, but only the rider can string sen­tences together and cre­ate argu­ments to give to other people.

In moral argu­ments, the rider goes beyond being just an advi­sor to the ele­phant; he becomes a lawyer, fight­ing in the court of pub­lic opin­ion to per­suade oth­ers of the elephant’s point of view. Our minds are loose con­fed­er­a­tions of parts, but we iden­tify with and pay too much atten­tion to one part: con­scious ver­bal think­ing. Because we can see only one lit­tle cor­ner of the mind’s vast oper­a­tion, we are sur­prised when urges, wishes, and temp­ta­tions emerge, seem­ingly from nowhere.

Elephant ride 300x199 Happiness Part 2: Where Does Happiness Live?

We are the rider, and we are the ele­phant. Both have their strengths and spe­cial skills. In future blogs we will dis­cuss how har­mony between these two gives us a greater glimpse into the area of Happiness.

 

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

 

happiness bulldogdrummond 300x225 Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

In my daily life I see all kinds of peo­ple. In the clinic I see many peo­ple with var­i­ous health mat­ters. Of course, many of these prob­lems are founded on phys­i­cal issues. But, at least 80% of their health prob­lems are related to lifestyle issues, mean­ing these peo­ple do not have hard­ware prob­lems, they have soft­ware prob­lems. These soft­ware prob­lems are usu­ally related to diet, lifestyle and stress. As I travel around North Amer­ica lec­tur­ing, I also inter­act with many dif­fer­ent types of peo­ple, and most of them are ask­ing the same ques­tions about how to improve their life. Even though these, too, on the sur­face come down to an over­all state­ment of, ‘I want to be happy.’

So of course what I do is ask both of these groups, what would it take to make them feel bet­ter? They feel that they would be hap­pier if they lost some weight, or if they had more energy. Maybe they would feel hap­pier if they were not so stressed in their rela­tion­ships. They would feel hap­pier if they could exer­cise more, but because they have to work so late they can’t. The clas­sic of course is that they will feel hap­pier once the econ­omy gets bet­ter. “Just wait till I win the lot­tery, and then I will happy.”

It doesn’t take long to real­ize that there are a lot of unhappy peo­ple out there, and their real goal it not the weight, energy, health or finan­cial solu­tion; it is that they just want to be happy. So, let’s look at bypass­ing all of the health prob­lems and go straight to the hap­pi­ness issue, and see if this will resolve both the health and finan­cial issue.

When was the last time you can say you where really Happy?

 

Happiness 21600 e1360982246121 300x218 Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

Over the next sev­eral Blogs I am going to look at the idea of hap­pi­ness and explore what peo­ple through­out his­tory, as well as mod­ern psy­chol­ogy and med­i­cine, have to say about hap­pi­ness and how we can bet­ter obtain it. Hey, it might be win­ning the lot­tery — who knows? The first place we will start though is to see what peo­ple think hap­pi­ness is.

If we go to Wikipedia we get this answer:

 “Hap­pi­ness is a men­tal or emo­tional state of well-being char­ac­ter­ized by pos­i­tive or pleas­ant emo­tions rang­ing from con­tent­ment to intense joy.”

It is quite inter­est­ing to see what many dif­fer­ent peo­ple feel hap­pi­ness is. Here are some of the more famous quotes about what hap­pi­ness is:

 “Hap­pi­ness is the mean­ing and the pur­pose of life, the whole aim and end of human exis­tence.” ― Aris­to­tle (330 BCE)

Hap­pi­ness depends upon our­selves.”― Aris­to­tle (330 BCE)

I am a happy camper so I guess I’m doing some­thing right. Hap­pi­ness is like a but­ter­fly; the more you chase it, the more it will elude you, but if you turn your atten­tion to other things, it will come and sit softly on your shoul­der.” ― Henry David Thoreau (1854)

For every minute you are angry you lose sixty sec­onds of hap­pi­ness.”  ― Ralph Waldo Emer­son (1886)

San­ity and hap­pi­ness are an impos­si­ble com­bi­na­tion.”  ― Mark Twain (1880’s)

Hap­pi­ness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in har­mony.”  ― Mahatma Gandhi (1930)

It isn’t what you have or who you are or where you are or what you are doing that makes you happy or unhappy. It is what you think about it.”  ― Dale Carnegie, How to Win Friends and Influ­ence Peo­ple (1936)

You will never be happy if you con­tinue to search for what hap­pi­ness con­sists of. You will never live if you are look­ing for the mean­ing of life.”  ― Albert Camus (1940’s)

The most impor­tant thing is to enjoy your life—to be happy—it’s all that mat­ters.”  ― Audrey Hep­burn (1960’s)

Love is that con­di­tion in which the hap­pi­ness of another per­son is essen­tial to your own.”  ― Robert A. Hein­lein, Stranger in a Strange Land (1961)

Hap­pi­ness is hav­ing a large, lov­ing, car­ing, close-knit fam­ily in another city.”  ― George Burns (1984)

Hap­pi­ness is not some­thing ready made. It comes from your own actions.”  ― Dalai Lama XIV (1998)

I believe com­pas­sion to be one of the few things we can prac­tice that will bring imme­di­ate and long-term hap­pi­ness to our lives. I’m not talk­ing about the short-term grat­i­fi­ca­tion of plea­sures like sex, drugs or gam­bling (though I’m not knock­ing them), but some­thing that will bring true and last­ing hap­pi­ness. The kind that sticks.”  ― Dalai Lama XIV (1998)

Hap­pi­ness is the con­se­quence of per­sonal effort. You fight for it, strive for it, insist upon it, and some­times even travel around the world look­ing for it. You have to par­tic­i­pate relent­lessly in the man­i­fes­ta­tions of your own bless­ings. And once you have achieved a state of hap­pi­ness, you must never become lax about main­tain­ing it. You must make a mighty effort to keep swim­ming upward into that hap­pi­ness for­ever, to stay afloat on top of it.”  ― Eliz­a­beth Gilbert, Eat, Pray, Love (2006)

Happiness Hyposis paperback cover 200x300 Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

Bud­dha also used an anal­ogy com­par­ing the mind to a wild ele­phant. Jonathan Haidt has per­fected this anal­ogy in his book The Hap­pi­ness Hypoth­e­sis. He states that the con­scious mind is like a rider on an ele­phant, hav­ing some influ­ence over the ele­phant, but really only when it makes the ele­phant happy. Notice he put the rider closer to the front than I do. I guess that is why his book is so pop­u­lar and is used in many Uni­ver­si­ties as a text.

Happiness The Art of Happiness 189x300 Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

Over the next few blogs, we are going to see if the rider and the ele­phant can ride in har­mony enough to enhance hap­pi­ness. Using research from Haidt’s book and look­ing at what the Dali Lama says in the Art of Hap­pi­ness as guides, we will see if our trek on the back of an ele­phant can help us tease a for­mula for cre­at­ing Hap­pi­ness into our lives.

Happy Woman Riding Elephant 300x194 Happiness: In its Pursuit, Is it Possible? Part 1

But before I leave, I would be amidst to not list a great Tedx talk by: Shawn Achor: The happy secret to bet­ter work. I know you will enjoy this video as every­one else has. He gives us some nice sta­tis­tic in a very enter­tain­ing way. Be pre­pared to laugh!

http://www.ted.com/talks/shawn_achor_the_happy_secret_to_better_work.html

 

 

 

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

VEGGIE NASI GORENG (INDONESIAN FRIED RICE)

VEGGIE NASI GORENG INDONESIAN FRIED RICE 300x199 VEGGIE NASI GORENG (INDONESIAN FRIED RICE)

This is another Eth­nic dish that is very tasty and fairly easy to make. You can vary many of the veg­eta­bles for what you desire and have avail­able. It will become an old stand-by to eat any­time of the year after you try it a cou­ple of times, not just enjoyed on a D-tox.

For 4 servings:

240 ML. (1 cup) of uncooked Wild, Brown Rice or mixture

4 Eggs

2 Yel­low, Red or Orange Pepper

4 Red Onions

2 Car­rot (sliced with a potato peeler)

4 Red Chilies

5–10 Gar­lic Cloves

4 Spring Onions (cut lengthwise)

2 hand­fuls of Cashews

60 ml (1/4 cup) Peas

Cilantro (large hand­ful, to desired)

8 table­spoons Sesame Oil

Cook rice as directed and set-aside.

Scram­ble eggs and also set aside.

Add two onions, half a chili, and gar­lic to blender to make a paste. Add oil and the paste (from blender) to fry­ing and fry 3 min­utes, then add thinly sliced onions, red chilies, yel­low pep­pers, peas and car­rot for another 3 minutes.

Add the rice and cashews and cook for 2 min­utes, then the eggs, thinly sliced spring onions and cilantro for another minute and serve.

Posted in Main Blog Page | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment