Secretforlife.com

Archive for February, 2010

Do you want to be an icon? Can an icon come to you live?

If a newscaster was a zombie, would he be reporting live, dead, half-live or half-dead?

Oh, you say, some newscasters definitely are zombies – “the walking dead.” Especially those reading teleprompters or scripts without knowing what they’re reading.

Television news programs particularly like the word live. That word, they think, gives the event special significance, presence, exclusivity. I’ve been watching the Vancouver Winter (that’s win’er for many broadcasters) Olympics. And the TV promotion says “coming to you live from Vancouver, Canada!” But actually the report is at least three-hours delayed.

But, “it’s recorded live!” How else could it have been recorded? Maybe to keep costs down, NBC could occasionally record something dead. Like the headline I saw on AOL News: “Terrorist Shot Dead Live.”

Now another common term is icon, as in “living icon,” “a movie icon,” “a baseball icon.” My question is: Can an icon come to you live?

Primary meaning of icon: “In Eastern church [Orthodox church], a representation of some sacred personage, as Christ or a saint or angel, painted usually on a wood surface and venerated itself as sacred.” Secondary meaning: “A picture, image, or other representation.” I won’t get into computer “icons” as that technology has redefined hundreds of old words, like “mouse.”

An “icon” is an artistic representation of a dead holy person. So how do stars like Michael Jordan, Muhammad Ali, Hank Aaron, Sidney Poitier, etc., become “icons”? Simple. Through live TV, which as we have seen could be delayed broadcasting.

The media is getting sloppy in its use of language, and it is changing many of its viewers in the same way. Gone is the preciseness of speech by broadcasters like Walter Cronkite, Edward R. Murrow and more recently Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings.

Now we have copywriters writing error-filled scripts read by broadcasters who spend little time editing or understanding what they’re reading. So we get NBC’s “iconic” Meredith Vieira coming to you more or less live from Vancouver: “Classic mix-up: NBC confuses Terry Fox and Michael J. Fox.” To top it off, the Yahoo news writer used the word “classic” to mean – I have little idea what. Perhaps “embarrassing” or “ignorant.” Certainly not “classic.”

Do you want to speak good English well? Don’t trust the media to teach you.

Thanks for reading this classic article, written live by the iconic Robert the Robert.

The Face That Can Boil You To Death

Ideas have consequences. Harmful ideas have harmful consequences.

For several years I have tried to show people the weaknesses and dangers in the so-called LAW OF ATTRACTION, particularly as taught in the book and film THE SECRET by Rhonda Byrne. Such notables as Oprah and Larry King mindlessly promoted some of the gurus in that book, such as James Arthur Ray.

James Ray uses the illustration of the genie in the lamp and “your wish is my command.” There is a power, he maintains, in the Universe that will grant us our wishes if we just put them out there….the Universe says, ‘Your wish is my command.’” THE SECRET, pp. 46, 89.

So do we conclude that three people who attended Ray’s sweat lodge wished for a painful death?  And 18 others wished for hospitalization? Mr. Ray himself must have wished to be arrested for manslaughter and civil lawsuits amounting to millions of dollars.

The irony of this sad situation is that Ray and his lawyers refer to this event as “an accident,” yet the Law of Attraction does not allow for “accidents.” Basically, it teaches that we get what we put out to the Universe. (Don’t ask me what Universe means here—it’s one of those esoteric, hazy words often used by self-help teachers.)

“Every great teacher who has ever walked the planet has told you that life was meant to be abundant.” THE SECRET, p. 148. So, James Ray is not a great teacher, for he has led trusting people into huge expenses, illness, delusion and even death.

He’s not the only one like that. There are so many other “gurus” who say much the same thing, touting the so-called “Law of Attraction” as the mantra for success. Although most of these teachers have not caused death to their participants, they have lead them to false hopes, racked-up credit card bills, and a belief in some magical formula for success.

Now, James Ray has been given the opportunity to show the “power to create your world.” He has been arrested for three counts of manslaughter. He is also being sued for millions of dollars by those wrongfully harmed. But, Mr. Ray, no problem–just send your positive thoughts into the Universe, rub that magic lamp, and these problems will just go away–and you might even get more abundance in in their place.

Here’s one of Ray’s favorite teachings: “I’d ask you, ‘Are the results you have in your life what you really want? And are they worthy of you?’ If they’re not worthy of you, then wouldn’t now be the right time to change those? Because you have the power to do that.” THE SECRET, pp. 164-5.

Ray and his attorneys blame others: “…the people who built the sweat lodge and the people who own the property where this occurred.” But they propose that the greatest blame rests on a “freak accident.” Said one attorney: “Mr. Ray claims that this is just a freak accident and takes not even a one percent responsibility for what happened.”

Ray’s modus operandi is simple: If good comes out of your teaching, it is from the Universe. If bad comes out of it, “It was an accident.”

Who is a Who and not a That.

Why do I make a big fuss about some grammar errors or changes in our English language?

It is not so much for the defense of correct grammar. It’s because there are some rules that have to do with attitudes toward personhood. My resolve is strengthened by the title of a book written by Yvonne Oswald called EVERY WORD HAS POWER. But even more so by the truth in the Gospel of John: “The word was made flesh.”

Years ago an unborn baby of unknown sex was generally referred to as “he” or “him.” That was a generic pronoun and could refer to either male or female. Then the libbers came and changed that to “it.” Even “manhole cover” became “utility cover.” Fortunately, it didn’t become an “it-hole cover!”

Special interest groups must first abrogate the humanity of people, make them appear less than human, before controlling them, or destroying their right to life. In wars, each side seeks to demean the personhood of the enemy so that killing them is easier on the conscience. To some extent, modern English has done that to unborn babies and, to a growing extent, to babies in their early years.

What does this change in pronouns signal? Infanticide—the killing of handicapped babies?

I predict that in time elderly folks who are severely handicapped will be referred to by the pronoun “it.” “I tried to talk to the Alzheimer’s patient, but it didn’t respond to my questions.” Seems far-fetched? About as far-fetched as if 50 years ago people would call a newborn baby an “it.”

We are approaching that itness, though, with sentences like: “I tried to talk to an Alzheimer’s patient that didn’t respond to my questions.” I hear the non-human pronoun that used frequently for humans, even in sermons from the pulpit.

Now we have a Bible translation—Today’s New International Bible—that is supposed to be gender friendly. Why? Because some modern folks are no longer able to accept “he” as a generic pronoun to describe someone whose gender we don’t know or who may not have a gender. That’s why to me it is correct to refer to God as “He,” not because God is male but because he is neither male nor female.

When an unborn baby becomes “it,” abortion is easier on the conscience than if one referred to the baby as a “him” or “her.” It is just easier to kill an “it” than a “him” or “her.”

I’ve seen a growing trend among journalists, commentators, preachers and politicians to refer to a child up to two years old as an “it.” I’ve even seen Christian writers fall into this habit, even if they know the gender of the child. Is that laying the groundwork for infanticide, killing of born babies with defects? After all, if the child is an “it,” infanticide can’t be murder.

The use of the relative pronoun “that” is now also supplanting the use of “who.” A simple rule: “Who” refers back to a person and sometimes a pet. “That” refers back to a thing, event or idea. To refer to a person as a “that” is to call him an “it.”

“The carpenter WHO built my cabinet was one of the best. The cabinet THAT he built was a beautiful one.”

If we want to maintain the personhood of people, we need to describe them in terms referring to people, not things.

If we honor God’s creation of mankind and his redemption of man (used in the generic here), then we should honor people with the human pronoun “who.”

What about “whom?” I’ll let that go, for it is now acceptable to use “who” for both subjective and objective cases. I’m all right with “I’m happy that you gave the ring to whoever wanted it. He is the person who I referred to.” That use doesn’t lessen the idea of personhood.

It’s near midnight—so now I’m off to bed to join the woman that is sleeping!

A SHARP MIND ALL YOUR LIFE

Alzheimer’s…dementia…memory loss…fuzzy thinking—all frightening terms, not just for older folks but even for today’s younger adults.

Are these conditions unavoidable, a crap shoot in something called life, a penalty for growing old, a result of mixed-up DNA, an inheritance from our parents and grandparents? It’s estimated that one out of eight of today’s “Baby Boomers” will develop Alzheimer’s. That’s scary.

Lifestyle, of course, has much to do with the disabilities we earn as we grow older. But there are other reasons for some diseases.

Let’s investigate something more positive—how to avoid or lessen the impact of brain drain.

Most media has ignored an astounding discovery. In the last few years researchers discovered that nicotinamide can restore memory loss, even from Alzheimer’s. Dr. David G. Williams writes extensively about this in his ALTERNATIVES newsletter, February 2009. I’ve also researched other sources. I am convinced that this protocol could help without causing any harm.

Jonathan V. Wright, M.D., also published a similar article his March 2009 Clinical Nutrition and Healing newsletter –http://ahha.org/Alzheimers.htm

During this last year, I’ve been on the nicotinamide regimen as Dr. Williams recommended. I believe my memory and my creatively has sharpened substantially. In November, I even wrote a novel of 50,000+ words. Some days I got physically tired long before my mind wanted to rest.

My 87-year-old mother-in-law has also been using nicotinamide and she reports positive results.

Nicotinamide is also known as niacinamide, an inexpensive water-soluble vitamin part of the B-group. A year’s supply should cost less than $40. Don’t confuse this vitamin with niacin, which could cause a flushing effect.

Dr. Kim Green at the University of California at Irvine did one study on mice with Alzheimer’s. After using his treatment for just four months, he declared, “Cognitively, they were cured. They performed as if they’d never developed the disease.”

Dr. Green also added: “The vitamin completely prevented cognitive decline associated with the disease, bringing them back to the level they’d be at if they didn’t have the pathology.” In his study, he also found that the vitamin improved memory and behavior in the control group of mice without Alzheimer’s. On www.pubmed.gov, there were 16 other current studies reported, all showing benefits of niacinamide supplementation.

OK, you say, that’s mice, not humans. There are ongoing studies now with humans. It’ll be months before we know the findings. But here’s the main point: this vitamin is cheap and with no harmful side effects, but with the potential of many benefits.

Dr. Williams’ concludes: “If I had a friend or family member with the disease, or if I were predisposed to Alzheimer’s…I would immediately start taking higher doses of niacinamide. And remember, the research also strongly suggests that it could improve memory in healthy individuals as well.”

Dr. William Kaufman was a pioneer in the 1930s and 40s in researching niacinamide in regards to problems associated with its deficiency, such as arthritis as well as mental acuity. “He discovered that many of the physical and mental problems associated with ‘normal’ aging are actually the result of inadequate amounts of niacinamide in the diet.”

But here’s one problem. Being water-soluble, this vitamin was absorbed quickly into the bloodstream and central nervous system. The benefits peaked after about 90 minutes and were almost gone within three hours. So one would have to take it at least every three hours. The recommended amount is 250 mg. However, even ingesting it less often could benefit people, especially those who don’t have mental deterioration as yet.

I have a handy dispenser on my desk and carry it with me when I go away, even for half a day. I hardly ever miss taking a tablet on time—after all, it does improve your ability to remember!

You can order it from www.swansonvitamins.com – 250 caps of 250 mg. for less than $4. At six a day, that’ll last you 40 days—ten cents a day. If you want preservative-free, you can buy them at www.freedavitamins.com – 500 caps of 250 mg for about $20. (I have no connection with these companies and get no commissions.)

Of course, no single food supplement is the answer. A total wellness lifestyle is. The right supplements just make that lifestyle more effective.

Let me know your thoughts and experience with this niacinamide regimen.