Spiritual Portal

I've been studying this subject and the latest evolution in science and research for the last 5 years. Hundreds of hours in book reading, article reading, blog reading, podcasts listenings.

What do you guys think about the subject? What about its relationship to Raja Yoga and karma?

My quick take:

-The time of our death is governed by karma, but in a probabilistic context, I think. Unless the probability for some specific occurrence si very, very high, we can lower it by careful behavior, besides burning the seeds of karma by meditation
-For example, we may have a karmic predisposition to obesity or heart disease, with a consequent increase in death hazard, but we can lower our probability of fatal events by better diet, exercise, better lifestyle, and so on, even if we shall have to devote much more effort than some other people who have a karmic predisposition to health
-We may have a karma of dying in a car accident, but if we drive carefully, don't drive when very sleepy, don't text while driving, and so on the probability of that accident will decrease significantly.

Great masters sometimes do not exhibit longevity. for example, Yogananda died at a relatively young age of heart attack. JAmes Lynn died of brain cancer at 61. There may be many reasons for that, not excluding absorbing the bad karma of disciples, or overcoming all karma of past incarnations and obtain full liberation.

Uwe, let's assume you are perfectly right, that is, we cannot increase our karmically pre-determined lifespan with better food, exercise, sleep, and stress management.

Then, what about shortening that same lifespan? That's in our power. If we eat too much and the wrong foods, do not exercise, sleep little, or overwork, we are probably going to get ill and maybe die prematurely, before our karmically predetermined time. That because we have created fresh bad karma which overpowers previous karma.

So, by not eating the wrong foods and so on, we can at least avoid a decrease in karmically pre-determined lifespan.

I am more optimistic than you are, that is, we can probably manipulate our health karma by material means and by metaphysical means. But at the same time I agree with you in that I think that if the karma of our death is set very strongly, for example, we should die because of the injuries after an accident, or we carry a strong genetic predisposition for some disease, then the governing factor is the grace of God, gained by prayer and meditation. But that works rarely. More often than not, in some cases, nothing works. Sometimes karma is simply too strong. And that is also right. If we committed some heinous crime in the past, we cannot hope for an easy escape.

Uwe, Ok, your view heads toward strong predetermination by the overwhelming power of karma.

My view si based on a model with more power of the subjective individual and free will, although of course free will is often very much influenced by actions done in the past and overwhelms discrimination.

The two distinct views may even be compatible, in some situations there may be a very strong predetermination, in others there may be more room to manipulate our karma.

You might be interested in tomorrows Satsang with Swami Vidyadhishananda

"Can Freewill Overcome Chance and Destiny?"

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/can-freewill-overcome-chance-and-destiny-tickets-708859707467?aff=oddtdtcreator

Eric, I won't be able to log in to the streaming talk, if you are going to watch it, pls report if you can

Good morning Mccoy!

I will be at work but I will report back later as the recording will be available after the fact. I will make sure to include the link and password so you can listen to, for however long they keep it up.

thanks!

Perhaps 🤔 so mccoy but it also may be that they were spared having to live any longer in this dungeon, compared to the wonders of the higher astral and causal realms. I just hope my karma takes me quickly so I do not have to endure a long descent in for instance; the shadowy life of dementia, or the slow and painful death of bodily deterioration. All reminders to those who believe this is a place to delight in, while others suffer.

I notice you have not brought up the subject of protein since you came back to join us mccoy. It was a quite an important topic for you a few years back and you corroborated it with many cutting edge reports about the lessoning need for protein as the body ages. And, that protein can actually decrease the number of years we live if indulged in extensively. I wonder if you have somewhat backed tracked from that idea since then?

Mccoy I really see nothing wrong with revising our opinions. I often have to do that myself as new circumstances and people enter my life or leave my life. Or if changing conditions in my physical, material and spiritual life make it apparent I need to revise my own behaviors.

Steve, yes, during the latest years I've been studying and I've been experimenting with myself. There are several narratives, and I don't know where to begin, the topic is far, very far from having been elucidated, especially because we don't have biological markers that indicate which is the best amount of protein and essential aminoacids (EAAs) for longevity.

Since you asked I'm going to try and write a synthesis, not now though since I'm almost going to hit the hay. And then I'm going to try and frame the scientific knowledge into the metaphysical knowledge of Raja Yoga.

For now, the opposite narratives are these:

1) The vegans, who say that low(ish) or better moderate protein is best for health and longevity

2) The school of Valter Longo, who say that moderate protein (the official RDA) is best for longevity until about age 65, and then more protein is best for longevity.

3) The school of Dan Layman (the muscle-centric theory) , who says that high protein (2 X the RDA animal protein mainly) is best for longevity since muscles are organs that favor longevity

4) The school of Peter Attia, who says that avoiding sarcopenia, the atrophy of muscles with age, is essential to increase longevity, then a very high protein intake is recommended to capitalize on muscle and bones hypertrophy. He suggests almost 4 X RDA amount of protein, mainly of animal origin)

Having said the above, as Dr. Luigi Fontana says (one eminent longevity expert), we have no biomarkers for EAAs or protein, so we really don't know what's the better amount for longevity.

Another basic aspect is that the optimum amount for longevity is different for different people, according to genotype, activity, exercise, diet and so on.

It appears that you have lost your enthusiasm for the very low use of protein while aging. I recall articles you produced that suggested as we grow older protein is no longer needed as it was when we were young and still growing muscles and bone structure. In fact that too much protein while aging had a deleterious impact on aging.

I find for me that often such subjects - more than having to defend them or explain - they remind me that after years of spiritual practice, I have tempered some of my more obstinate tendencies and ideas. I find for me that often such subjects - more than having to defend them or explain - they remind me that after years of spiritual practice, I have tempered some of my more obstinate tendencies and ideas. It is fascinating to me, now,  because of karmic factors I have gravitated quite emphatically towards certain view points and opinions.  Much later, I  find myself dwelling on them and find ways to expand my consciousness beyond their seeming to be quirks of addictive behavior.

For the most part, I have found that our consciousness has brought us together with a sense of tolerance for the views of others- that is often missing in relationships - and is the cause of many impasses that eventually surface, although sometimes taking years to become annoyingly apparent. So though are benefits in longevity, in the sense that we are humbled by time itself.

Steve, that's true, I remember that, although I don't remember exactly the articles. Maybe I cited the 2014 article in the very authoritative Cell magazine by Morgan Levine (I call her the Barbie doll with a giant brain) and Valter Longo, a renowned longevity expert (of Italian origins like Luigi Fontana). It underlined the fact that until a certain age it's best to eat a moderate amount of protein, whereas after a certain age (65 years according to the study) it's best to increase protein to avoid sarcopenia or frailty. This same study told that eating meat is very bad for longevity and health. The title is maybe misleading because it says 'low protein' but in reality it should read 'proper amount of protein'.

Presently, in consideration of the very differing views existing on this subject, I use some criteria to navigate. In a few words, I try to use God-given power of logic and discrimination.

What are the opinions of the great masters on the subject? They suggested moderation in eating, a plant-based diet but with the presence of animal protein, like fresh dairy products (sattvic food like SY writes in his book) and eggs. The lacto-ovo vegetarian diet of SRF monks and nuns. Yogananda supported a 'proprietarian diet'. The proper variety and the proper amount of vegetarian food.

All in moderation. So, protein should be eaten in moderation, which means it should be in the right amount, not too much but not too little. Exercise, a very good ingredient for longevity, increases the demand for protein.

If you are curious, this is the article on cell metabolism. It is a milestone, highly praised by the vegans, highly criticized by the paleo and lowcarb guys.

Low Protein Intake Is Associated with a Major Reduction in IGF-1, Cancer, and Overall Mortality in the 65 and Younger but Not Older Population

https://www.cell.com/fulltext/S1550-4131(14)00062-X

By the way, Steve (this also extends to Eric, Uwe and other friends here), if you are interested, I can analyze your average diet and see the amounts of the macro and micro nutrients, perhaps give some suggestions according to what I perceive presently as the unbiased state of the art in nutrition science, from a vegetarian perspective.

A little like you interpreting my horoscopes.

By the way, presently my opinion about protein is that it is better to eat them in moderation (a little more than the RDA, so a little more than suggested in the 2014 Cell article), but to eat most of them in highly absorbable amounts and efficient combinations. Dairy products, eggs, and soy products mainly (but also roasted pistachio nuts and some other combinations of vegetable and animals protein). Also, it is good to follow the istinct and to eat more when needed, that is, when the pure neurological signals, devoid of any attachment to food, suggest eating more and eating more protein. This has been hinted at by Sri Yukteswar when he wrote among other things that we should eat according to our digestive power. Digestive power which is not always the same at all times.

LOL, you re welcome!

Ditto, that is a nice service you'd be willing to offer- considering how extensively you've researched nutrition.

Mccoy

It is very difficult to respond to your post since you appear to have accidentally typed it out on my name and avatar, look at the post directly above. You have directed your comment to me seemingly accidentally using my avatar and name. I left it for awhile for you to correct. But it appears you have not noticed it.

I am not disappointed with your change of view but rather the fact that all the comments associated with it have either been deleted or vanished into thin air in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to take away old threads and posts. Do I have any further comment or knowledge of such events? Ofcourse not … I was not associated with such views . But I have changed my views in the past. I have no reason to have to be right. But accept the fact that we all change and evolve in our vision and views. This is part of spiritual understanding and growth.

Steve, I tried to clean out a little of my mess. This is my original answer:

Steve, I don't know where those posts are, I barely remember I wrote them!

Are you disappointed that I changed my mind about protein? I simply cited very credible scientific material which would point to the opposite of what I said. Which made me change my mind. The important aspect is that protein does not equal meat, also nobody says (barring a few ones) that we should go to extremes in eating protein.
The path of yoga is the path of moderation. Presently, I would translate it in scientific terms, this is the path of optimization, we should optimize everything, consumption of food and protein included, in such a way as to use the  minimum amount that provides the best results.

Speaking of protein, the optimum is usually an amount that sits within a range and varies according to individuals and many other factors, including age, activity, biological cycles and so on. The optimum also depends upon protein composition, content in essential amino acids and ileal digestibility.

And, I agree it would have been much better to have all those posts, but I really do not remember, my mistakes usually consist of clicking 'modify' instead of 'quote', so I may overwrite a post of another user, as it happened with you. But I really do not remember having deleted intentionally a post, let alone multiple posts.

To get back to the protein issue, in the 'war of religions' between vegans and carnivores, few protein is a concept supported by the vegans, many protein is supported by the carnivores or paleo followers.

We should support the concept of proprietarianism, as explained by Yogannda, that is, follow a proper diet with the proper amount of protein.

What is the proper amount? Not very much according to most credible sources. Not very little either.

But the concept, rather than protein in general, should be extended further to essential aminoacids, which are not synthesized by the body.

I think SRF still suggests a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet because a vegan diet may bring about deficiencies. Also, meditation and not diet is the focus of SRF. Too much thinking about diet, as it often happens with vegans, may be counterproductive to spiritual life.

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=568,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/154/931/754/original/f320a4a5a60838b4.jpeg)

I concur, too much junk and overprocessed food at Xmas.

Known for its mild flavor, canola oil is a staple ingredient in many kitchens. However, there’s been a lot of controversy over how healthy it actually is.

Read on for an overview of both sides of the argument, how to select and store, and when to use this oil in baking or cooking.

The Basics

Created by Canadians, the word “canola” is actually a combination of “Canadian” and “oil.”

While rapeseed plants on their own contain toxic compounds, canola plants were created through cross breeding of rapeseed plants with one’s that don’t contain those toxic compounds.

Canola oil comes from pressing the seeds of the canola plant (plus some additional processing); the leftover pressed seed is then used for animal feed.

Currently, the majority of canola plants are genetically modified to increase plant tolerance to herbicides. But we’ll get to all the GMO-stuff later in this guide.

Nutrition Overview

I’m going to be completely honest: writing and researching this post shook my (nutritional) world.

During my time in grad school and working in the field, I was always taught that canola oil was the second healthiest oil, after extra-virgin olive oil, as it is high in monounsaturated fats and low saturated fat. However, the more I started looking into it, there seems to be very mixed messages as to the level of processing and its effects on the nutrient quality of canola oil.

Nutrition Basics:



1 tablespoon of canola oil contains 124 calories, 12% RDA for vitamin E, and 12% RDA for vitamin K.

As for fat, it contains 7% saturated fat, 65% monounsaturated fat, and 28% polyunsaturated fat, with 21% of the PUFAs being omega-6 and the remaining 11% omega-3.

Controversy:

From the nutrition basics, you can understand why dietitians have always been a fan: not a lot of saturated fat and a good amount of healthy fats. Plus there have been numerous observational studies showing an association between canola oil consumption and decreased risk of heart disease.

However, many of those studies are actually funded by the canola oil industry (such as this one).

In a more recent 2018 review (that wasn’t industry-funded), participants (all of whom were obese or overweight) who regularly used canola oil in cooking were more likely to have metabolic syndrome, while those who cooked with olive oil were significantly less likely to have metabolic syndrome.

As briefly talked about above, most canola oil that we buy in the store has gone through heavy processing, involving exposure to chemicals and high heat. While this refinement process makes canola oil able to withstand higher temperatures, it also decreases the amount of healthy fats, antioxidants, and vitamins in the oil.

And while you can buy unrefined, cold-pressed canola oil, its smoke point will be lower, making it unsuitable for high-heat cooking.

Another concern is that while it does have a good amount of MUFA’s, canola oil is relatively high in omega-6 fatty acids. Check out my previous post here to see why the balance between omega-6’s and omega-3’s is so important.

Finally, over 90% of canola crops in the US are genetically engineered; while GMO’s have been approved for human consumption, we still don’t have sufficient data to show what regular consumption of GMO foods may have on our health in the long-term.

Bottom line:

While I wouldn’t say that canola oil needs to be avoided completely, until we have more robust evidence I think it’s a good idea to try to use extra-virgin olive oil or avocado oil in place of canola for everyday cooking. Instead, reserve canola for the occasional baked goods that require a more mild-flavored cooking oil.

https://www.thehealthytoast.com/meet-your-ingredients-canola-oil

An improper balance of excessive omega-6's and not enough omega-3's can cause depression, aggression, suicidal tendencies and other negatively associated mental behaviors. Mental illness is rampant in the West, in part because our greed from the industrial revolution went unchecked. We dumped excess chemical toxins in our natural water resources. We opted in for cheaper producing methods favoring immediate gratification. We created depravity in the name of profitability for some. The majority of, "food stamps" are spent on highly processed foods, sugary beverages and unnatural products that contribute to the pandemic that is mental illness.

The experimental injections were rushed, and it wasn't because it would save lives. It was because the pharmaceutical companies, who are exempt from legal persecution from any damages their product creates, make excessive profit. Former President Trump was tricked by his Ego and a two-faced cabinet into thinking mass distributing these nontraditional 'vaccines' would paint him as a national hero. We are barley entering the time requirements to compile long term side effect data, and what is being presented around the world is censored by governing officials- the whistleblowers that do come forward are attacked by their nations institutions and the world continues to spread the lie that these injections are safe and effective, despite their efficacy rate dramatically dropping in less than a year.

Some reports are showing that authorities knew myocarditis as a common side effect prior to the launch of the injection campaign- not only did they proceed gung-ho they attacked any initial claims that the injections were to linked to heart irregularities or blood clots. SAD, "Sudden adult death" syndrome was on the rise, and the world pretended like it was a mystery.

Like with food, science can be bought and, the truth of a matter can take years to reach an already marred population. 

“They contribute to an unhealthy amount of consumed food”. I wonder if you ever hear phrases in your head, like that? It supports the notion that Eric wrote in another thread that we are dreaming all the time . All 24 hours. At any rate as I woke up this morning from a sound sleep I heard that phrase so I decided to include it in what seemed like the most related thread upon awakening. Then I started  to read some of the posts here and decided I placed the phrase in a seemingly appropriate spot.

I myself am attempting to lower the amounts of, gluten, wheat and sugars in my diet in an attempt to regain some of the energy I had in being a younger man. And it does appear I’m making marginal success, although fresh vegetables and fruits are abundant where I live in the summer and are priced much lower. I have found that as the body ages it is more important to be observant about what we put in it. Although in many ways I was more health conscious as a younger person. Perhaps 🤔 it was because I was more disciplined as mccoy pointed out about his life, when he was younger. However, at the same time I think I may have gone overboard in my attitude about discipline and cramped my social life. For what ever worth that may have had on my balance in being happy, and doing the most appropriate things to enhance a spiritual life, and in my interaction with friends.

In the long and short of it I believe that I may have just had a moment of writing thoughts welling up from some inner source than well thought out replies for this topic.

Re. Canola oil: I've never been interested in this product because here, in the realm of Mediterranean, it is not used at all.

Presently, one of the best sources on nutrition in the tubesphere is Gil Carvalho, MD and Phd in biology, he really shows no bias and appears to construe correctly the complexity of the interaction between food and body health.

What he often says when speaking of a health aspect, underlining the extreme complexity of biological processes and their interaction with the individual genetic makeup:  there are a million moving parts, nothing is simple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8tzaXQH1G4

Steve, most probably the energy as a younger man cannot be completely retrieved late in life, not even with the best dietary regimen. My diet has never been objectively better than today, but I certainly have not the energy I had until 15 years ago. Perhaps some targeted supplements may do, I am going to experiment for example with NMN and some other molecules.

In a very few words the best diet appears to be, according to the main nutritional authorities, a Mediterranean diet in all its variations. It is what the SRF lessons suggest. The backbone of it is vegetables, fruit, nuts and seeds, whole grain cereals, legumes, some animal protein (dairy mostly) , for those who don't have ethical issues fish or a little white meat.

As a young man I had a very strong willpower, but less discrimination. I wish I had both back then, I would have been formidable. But I do not complain, willpower as a whole has served me well, and discrimination was sufficient, due mainly to the Mentoring of the SRF masters.

Canola oil again. It was interesting to listen to Dr. Carvalho's podcast. Scientific evidence so far is favorable to canola oil, in moderate amounts, even if refined or heated. It compares to olive oil and because of the high smoking point is good for cooking.

Of course, when eaten within junk food the whole is not healthy, also when eaten in high amounts it may provide an excess of calories.

I have a couple of observations here to add to this mccoy which may or may not warrant a response from you. First I have noticed there is a lot of talk about GMO’s these days. Which can be extended to oils as well, especially oils taken from genetically modified plants, like corn. I’m not sure that scientists even take this into account when doing their so called studies.

Secondly I find that though as this body ages, the harmones that once drove me as a teenager have substantially changed in my attitudes as an elderly man. So in some ways we are fortunate in our years of aging.

Lastly and possibly most importantly for the interchange between you and Eric and I bring in very good contrasts , from science, the food industry, governmental regulations and in my case mostly spiritual sources and experiences. So when it comes to reading dietary guidelines that involve any kind of meat products or bottom feeding fish I am not very receptive to hearing them for myself. Not that I object to them being included, but I find they have little to no value to psychic and spiritual healing and attainment.

Steve, Re. GMO. Canola oil comes from a genetically modified variety of the original rapeseed, which contained erucic acid, seemingly detrimental to cardiovascular health. The modification has been apparently beneficial. The studies on metabolic parameters, CV health and all cause mortality cited by Dr. Carvalho suggest that canola oil, a modified variety of rapeseed oil, is all right for health, in many aspects comparable to olive oil (not necessarily EVOO though). This is the result of present scientific evidence.

Re. hormones: of course they influence many organic and behavioral aspects—some in the worst, some in the best. A key aspect in this context is to keep good cognitive health while aging so that we can compensate for less energy and strength with more rationality and experience-derived wisdom. Alzheimer's is terrible because it undermines mental health and makes a hell of a time when we could enjoy a clear and rational vision of life.

Re. fish and meat. Fish has a relatively good reputation in the dietary literature, whereas meat has not so much. IT is all in lien with the SRF dietary suggestions.

Both fish and meat are not necessary for health. Many experts, including Dr. Carvalho, avoid fish and meat because of health and ethical reasons, but they usually agree that fish can be good for physical health (although is very expensive and sometimes polluted) and meat in moderate amounts can be not so unhealthy (processed meat and red meat have been declared cancerogenic). Meat as well, like beef cuts, can be expensive or very expensive.

The guidelines presently suggest the consumption of meat only in modest amounts.

Diet for spiritual evolution should be probably devoid of fish and meat.

I have been at many thousands of spiritual meetings and centers, as well as lived at them, in my life. And, have yet to find even one that has any fish or meat at any of their occasions. Although Christian people are different, Even in their communities there are people that refuse any fish or meat, most notably the 7th day Adventists. I have frequented many of their restaurants and hospitals for dinners and lunches.

While the Mediterranean diet you speak of is my favorite, I find that it is usually quite expensive here in the States, so I often go to Mexican restaurants, their food is usually less expensive, and they have many vegetarian dishes. That is, if you make sure they do not use lard in their refried beans.

Mexican cuisine is great, I love guacamole

Indeed so, if one is able to eat enough legumes.

Soy is a legume as well and is particularly rich in an easily absorbable matrix of aminoacids. Besides,  it can be eaten in many forms, like soymilk, tofu, tempeh, edamame and of course the unprocessed bean itself.