Friday, 26 February 2016

There is No Such Thing as Too Much Dopamine as an Ailment


Serving as an example of another perfect inaccuracy in medical attribution, there exist recommendations of lowering dopamine to deal with certain behavioural issues, such as impulsive behaviour, including addiction - neither of which are caused by having too much dopamine, but by the connectivity of a brain having considered in a manner, or been collapsed into a manner, which guides behaviour down such avenues. The high dopamine is caused by the low consideration - and not the impulsiveness (which is a product of low consideration) caused by high dopamine.

Diverting attention from the actual root causes of those behaviours, which is the consideration that guides them, to dopamine, has deadly repercussions for millions of people around the world, and creates an atmosphere of ignorance that prevents truthful physiological understanding arising so that and real and positive resolutions can be had.


Considering is the work of a brain that requires dopamine, and which forms the connections in a brain that guide a person's behaviour - and well-considered connectivity is what normalizes a brain.

A person who has reduced normalization in their brain by making determinations can be vulnerable to impulsive tendencies, and may also have a surplus of dopamine availability from reducing the amount of work their brain is doing. The issue there isn't too much dopamine, but a lack of connection-forming consideration to make use of the dopamine that's available - and this state is called being a sociopath / psychopath.

When a person has impulsive tendencies (which can occur where there is dopamine deficiency as well), the sickness is not the dopamine that is available, but the manner in which the person has considered their mind. Dopamine doesn't make a person impulsive anyway - it is what gives a person all their control over their mind, and their potential for the mental work that is considering. And what they consider will develop the pathway that will guide their behaviours.

It is not justified, or appropriate to blame dopamine availability for particular people's behaviour, and then restrict everyone's access to dopamine so that hundreds of millions of mental stress sufferers are tortured and exploited, just so that sociopaths and psychopaths do not need to admit to and confront their personal flaws and selfishness.

As it is, the people with the problems inside of themselves are the ones designating institutional ailments and treatments. They're saying that any number of innocent people need to suffer and be denied their deserved cure, so that they can continue being well-comforted while playing out a facade.

In an act of ultimate irresponsibility, they are imposing the penalty of their own guilt onto people who have done nothing wrong. And they profit heavily as the main benefactors from the torture it causes those people, both financially, and in ill-gained reputations within society as carers of people - whose problems they are the cause of, as well as obstructions to the needed cure, as if profiteering off the suffering of others is the sociopath's reward for ensuring that the suffering persists.

Now that I have elucidated the matter and corrected the attribution of fault in an impulsive person from dopamine to a lack of sound consideration, there is no longer justification for withholding the proper treatment from those who need it. Sociopaths need to learn to consider, and people with mental stress need powerful dopamine increases.


If a person has impulsive tendencies, then it isn't directly because of dopamine in any way. Though if a person has allowed pathways to consider which cause impulsiveness, having dopamine available will have a role in helping enable those pathways to be engaged. But having dopamine available is also what will enable it to be corrected by considering - a person cannot make one change in their brain, for good or bad, apart from having available dopamine.

Addressing an issue by clamping down dopamine is only masking the problem, and is not addressing it at its root. And thinking of dopamine reduction as a tool to avoid the problem has very harmful, including deadly consequences for millions of people who require increased dopamine to be healthy and in control of their lives.

Decreasing dopamine is not a solution to anything, and is running away from personal responsibility. And it is only even conjectured to be a solution because those who suggest it are only personally familiar with having a consistent high level of dopamine, and with no alternate experience to contrast their own with, they are left egregiously unfamiliar with dopamine's actual effect and importance - and this makes the things that they propose and impose on other people based in ignorance and hypocrisy.

A person who is familiar with dopamine is not going to choose to lower it to address any specific problem, because lowering it will reduce the capability and quality of a great many things. Lowering dopamine only stands a chance to reduce impulsive behaviour by reducing work potential of a brain enough so that there's no extra capability to engage considerations further than basic awareness. Awareness itself will be decreased, as will positive experience of senses, critical thinking capability, creative expression, visual depth perception, aural articulation, energy, and more.

Lowering dopamine lowers a person's capability to experience, perceive, and engage life, and lowering dopamine to address a particular behavioural problem would be like a person responding to having a messy home by having their sight, smell, and touch disabled so that they don't encounter their messy home's unpleasantness, rather that tending to the mess by cleaning it up.

Lowering dopamine is avoiding a problem, rather than dealing with it, and it is a selfish approach because it also encourages the continued victimization of many people who are being denied the dopamine they fundamentally require to be healthy, and to experience and enjoy life.


Thursday, 25 February 2016

Regarding Cocaine's Applicability for Treating Migraines (2nd Addendum)

Related posts:
1. Just a Tip (Regarding news of genetic mutations being responsible for such or such a condition)
2. Adendum - Migraines are Dopamine Deficiency - and also: The Importance of Tact in Dopaminergic Application - and also: The Importance of Considering the Truth


Self-Medication of Migraine Headaches with Freebase Cocaine


He first tried smoking freebase cocaine at age 27 at
the urging of a friend who suggested that it might
help a headache he had at the time. Indeed, he
noticed immediate and complete relief lasting between
five and fifteen minutes, after which the euphoric
peak subsided and his headache returned. He found
that he could sustain relief with each additional “hit
off the pipe” for another five to fifteen minutes, after
which the headache returned again. Eventually, he
depleted the supply of cocaine, “crashed,” and fell
asleep. When he awoke, the headache was gone. He
repeated this pattern for the next three headaches he
had. After his fourth episode of smoking cocaine, he
began to use cocaine even when he did not have a
headache. The cocaine never brought on a migraine
headache if he did not already have one at the beginning
of use.

Now, the part of most value from the above quotation is " Indeed, he noticed immediate and complete relief". This is because migraines are an expression of dopamine deficiency, and their perfect solution is increasing dopamine availability, while restraining adrenaline - which is the effect of cocaine. So, like I said elsewhere, there is no room for a greater perfection in cure than the state of +1 being applied to a state of -1, to address and treat the ailing state of -1.

The effect of cocaine is the 1:1 solution to all dopamine deficiency ailment. There is no more accurate solution, and none which addresses the root cause of dopamine deficiency, as cocaine does. Anything less than this is not addressing the root of the problem, and is avoiding the real issue.

This awareness of the real cure for people's ailments is the place to start when trying to treat them. And people cannot be properly treated so long as their one and only cure is avoided, as though it is a negative thing. And if a person's curing is a negative thing, why are people seeking treatments at all? If they don't want to be cured, well, that's already the situation - then their desire is fulfilled. If they do want to be cured, then they're going to have to accept the cure.

A secondary, but notable consideration from the above quotation include the duration of relief, which is mentioned as being 5 - 15 minutes. That is also the specific duration of crack cocaine's effect, depending on how much is smoked. Insufflated, or cocaine that is inhaled through the nose, lasts 40 - 50 minutes, and cocaine that is swallowed (such as in a capsule) lasts 50 - 60 minutes. Though oral cocaine can take up to an hour to kick in, and so isn't ideal for immediate relief. An exception is if cocaine is dissolved in liquid, and drunken - then it can take effect almost immediately.

Smoking crack every 5 - 15 minutes is a lot of upkeep, but inhaling a line of cocaine every 50 minutes or so, or talking a gulp of water every hour, is not significant upkeep, and is a miracle to resolve what has no other genuine cure.

There are things to be done with this knowledge to resolve the returning of migraines for good - and they also involve starting with the truth, which is the information that I've now provided above. The root cause of migraines, and their cure, is now openly known.


Also of significance in the above except is that there are non-substantiated and purpose-undefined ad hominem used to describe the anecdote. And that is a common liberty taken, and abused by doctors when engaging in subjects for which they hold trained prejudices. Examples include:

- "after which the euphoric peak subsided". What did euphoria have to do with the person's motivation for smoking the crack, or the measurement of its effective timeline? And did the person use the word euphoria to describe their alleviation from migraines? If having the availability of dopamine which a brain naturally requires simply to accomplish its work and not be suffering in terrible agony is considered to be the state of euphoria, when concerning mental stress sufferers, then every mental stress sufferer deserves euphoria, as a fundamental right. Was the doctor who wrote the above quote themselves in a state of euphoria, not suffering migraines, themselves?

The word's use appears to be arbitrary and without merit, connecting to no other provided consideration, and so giving no possible positive contribution to the description, though offering potential negative interpretation by feeding pre-existing prejudice in readers. The word's use is therefore not an objective use, but a biased and slanted expression, denoting that the writer is expressing themselves through socipathic brain-wiring.

- and also "Eventually, he depleted the supply of cocaine, “crashed,” and fell asleep". How was crashing measured, and how is it defined here beyond patronizing quotation marks which evoke sentiment, rather than consideration? How does crashing differ from sleeping? This addition appears to be sentiment in lieu of consideration, which is a sociopathic conduct.

There is no objectivity apart from having consideration to illuminate the truth of a matter. But because of their egregious lack of consideration, doctors typically do not have an understanding of what objectivity is to be capable of being it. And to the typical doctor, objectivity is but a peer-approved mode of behaviour towards a particular thing - Objectivity™. And they can be predisposed to forming their arbitrary concept of what objectivity is, when it comes to discussing the matter of drugs which they did not prescribe themselves, out of a monkey see monkey do, or, sociopath see, sociopath do, type of mentality. Basically, they often just parrot each others' abject stupidity, and invest their sentiments into the determinations they pick up from one another.

Because they lack a substantiation of truth within their brain's consideration structure, the layering of identical agreeing voices upon one another to give a +1 to a shared determination, such as peer approval or a peer review, is like crack to a sociopath, because there is little else to offer validation to the sociopath's sense of worth.

The expressions that I've noted above matter, as they spread consideration among readers, and all consideration is contributing towards a movement. Mental stress ailment persists in society because of seemingly innocuous callousness. As I said before, "Essentially, a person who believes in dopamine as reward thinks that deactivating their brain after doing nothing truthful is a state of reward, while not understanding that all they actually accomplished is the bringing of some negative consideration-value into the world, which will exist as an offence to the truth until somebody else does the work to righten the perceptions which were influenced by it."


Now, elsewhere, you can read it said that migraines might be, or are caused by a hyper-sensitivity to dopamine. A sociopath lack connectivity between considerations, and this is what's behind scientists and doctors commonly using words without there being any connectivity between the considerations of the subjects involved - which is the definition of mindless.

A sensitivity to dopamine would imply that dopamine's effect is experienced more strongly. But none of the descriptions of a purported 'sensitivity to dopamine' reflect any of dopamine's effect or experience.

The effects of a migraine cannot be caused by sensitivity to dopamine, because dopamine's effect, when increased and amplified, is not any of the elements of migraines - and therefore the experiences of a migraine do not befit a description of sensitivity to dopamine. A sensitivity to dopamine would be like getting a cocaine high, or a stronger cocaine high - which a brain handles to a very, very large capacity, and which is a positive experience, and which actually alleviates all the things which are described in migraines. So whatever the reasoning behind such a misnomer, it's incorrect. And that fuck-up is typical when a scientist or doctor makes determinations based off of their blind and prejudice observation.

The antagonizations described actually correlate very accurately to how increasing adrenaline in an already-stressed brain experiences. And as I said in the previous post, "sufficiently increasing dopamine availability relative to other things will alleviate a migraine - but try to not also increase adrenaline and noradrenaline at the same time, because that would be counter-productive, and could exacerbate part of the migraine". Also, increasing dopamine via common prescription drugs incurs a significant increase in adrenaline / noradrenaline, and even cocaine can cause an increase in adrenaline / noradreanline. So, the connectivity between the considerations of the subject appears to lead to a well-reasoned conclusion, which is converse in very primary ways to a suggestion that migraines could be result of a sensitivity to dopamine. It gives account for many more considerations that the alternate, and as a consideration is a quantum of truth, it is the greater truth by default.

With scientists and doctors, just as with government, when a surface picture enables for a framing that caters to held prejudices, then all standard qualifications for assessing the truth of a matter are thrown out the window. And there are many more problems with the 'migraines / dopamine sensitivity' convention than what I've mentioned here, but responding to all parts of what is succinctly a pile of garbage is not my main mission, but rather to address the root cure for mental stress ailment.

Even when doctors use terms like "root cause", they don't mean it literally, but mean it only as a buzz-word, like Root Cause™. And they use this term as a buzz-word, despite them not having any experience or knowledge that would grant them any tangible understanding concerning actual root causes of the things they apply the term to.

What I mention in this blog discusses the actual, genuine root cause of ailments such as ADHD, depression, anxiety, psychosis, schizophrenia, PTSD, alzheimer's, parkinson's, bi-polar, and more.

Btw, you'll notice that the allotment of exacerbation of migraine symptoms due to dopamine, rather than adrenaline / noradrenaline increases (which commonly releases in response to dopamine) represents a perfect inaccuracy, much like the labelling of dopamine as reward rather than as physio-fuel. As I said, making determinations aligns a person's considerations against the truth. As I've long said, all conventional medicine is tailored to the perceptions of sociopaths.


Having identified the perfect cure for migraines is great, and let's a person know where to begin when addressing their own migraine, and it enables people who actually intend to cure migraines to start behaving positively towards that end. The place to start is with the knowledge of the cure. There is just one perfect cure, which is whatever delivers the perfect counterpart to what's causing the issue, and this is it.

If every component of a resolution of migraines in society forms a concept, which is an ordering of considerations that resolves into a ring of truth, and the greater concept of resolving migraines in society is comprised of these rings, which are each a concept yet also each an individual consideration within a greater concept, then a migraine's cure as being precisely dopamine presents the primary consideration, which all other secondary considerations will conform to, and are to serve. And with a migraine's cure now being resolved, then secondary considerations can begin to be worked to resolution. Each successive consideration in the greater subject of resolving migraines in society will be easier to resolve once the primary consideration is established.

However, sociopaths tend to obstruct primary considerations, using secondary and lesser considerations as excuses for why primary considerations cannot be allowed to be considered by those who they are to serve. This is the only reason why mental stress ailment persists within society.

Now that I have made clear that increasing dopamine availability is the cure, as in the actual and exact cure, for mental stress ailments, surely those who present themselves as those who treat people's afflictions will be eager to deliver and make it accessible to those suffering ailments caused by its lack. Surely, their primary consideration in treating people is the genuine curing of them, and not something else - like ideology, reputation, profit, sentiment, control, ego, etc.

As I said in a previous post, by having the knowledge of dopamine, mental stress ailments become choices - both for the individual, and for society.


Wednesday, 24 February 2016

Adendum - Migraines are Dopamine Deficiency - and also: The Importance of Tact in Dopaminergic Application - and also: The Importance of Considering the Truth

Related post: Just a Tip (Regarding news of genetic mutations being responsible for such or such a condition)


Oh, and it should go without saying, but migraines are also a product of there being insufficient dopamine for a brain to handle work that is processing through it, and, yes, sufficiently increasing dopamine availability relative to other things will alleviate a migraine - but try to not also increase adrenaline and noradrenaline at the same time, because that would be counter-productive, and could exacerbate part of the migraine.

To do this is to treat the dopamine deficiency symptom at its root and source. To do anything other is to either be in denial of one's real problem, or to be self-spiting of one's own human being.

The pain of a migraine is a part of a brain's voice, and it is crying in anguish precisely for dopamine, which it essentially needs. Does a person ignore a baby that is screaming in pain if there is some anomaly afflicting it? Why would they act so inhumanely towards their very own brain, leaving it in a state of torture while it tries to do good work for the person? Such is an ultimate irresponsibleness and self-spitefulness. A person who cannot come to grips with the state of being a human is not worthy of being one, and is a danger to themselves, and a harmful influence within society.


But in all dopaminergic application, tact is all-mattering. Robin Williams, someone who endured various dopamine deficiency ailments, and took cocaine, and yet in the end wasn't helped by it, would be a text-book example of how not to pursue dopaminergism, if the knowledge to develop an understanding of these things to be put into a book had been pursued by any in the previous century, instead of engaging the quintessential sociopathic conduct of insisting sentiment-base determinations to people, to lying to people about the nature of dopamine and dopaminergics and building walls of propaganda and indoctrinating doctors using institutional falsehoods to turn them into agents of fallacy.

Robin Williams could have straight-forwardly been cured of his Parkinson's, anxiety, and depression using cocaine. He, too, was a victim of institutional misinformation on drugs, and of those who perpetuate that misinformation.

One of the most essential things to avoid in dopaminergic application is any sense that it is wrong to take these drugs, however a person feels they would like to take them. Regardless of whether a person harbours insecurities about increasing their dopamine, their brain still fundamentally depends on, and operates on dopamine. When a person is insecure about taking cocaine, or other dopaminergic, which is only from a century of false messaging by doctors, scientists, and government, that uncertainty and worry is a belief held by consideration, which is represented as synaptic connections within their brain.

Considerations have polarity, and receive their identity as relative to one another. And such a belief aligns certain considerations in a negative manner, and for as long as it evaluates as True towards the activity a person is engaging in, all signals relating to that activity will pass through that consideration, and receive an antagonistic influence, a quantum of negative consideration-value, which can infect the whole mind. And increasing adrenaline and noradrenaline will accelerate the considering of those things that are worries, and progressively amplify the presence of negative consideration-value in the brain until a time when things settle down and they can be reconsidered into normalcy. This is where drug-induced anxiety and psychosis come from - there is nothing inherent in the drugs taken themselves that cause these things, but it is a contagion created by doctors, scientists, and government, out of their sociopathic inclinations to attempt to justify their own statuses by demeaning and harming those of others, who they deem as targets for their prejudice.


All anti-drug propaganda bears a negative consideration-value within society, and the accrued negative consideration-value in society because of the previous century of anti-drug propaganda is tremendous, and it has killed many people, and has destroyed many families.

Despite its awful influence in society, every human being's brain and body still fundamentally runs on the things people have been taught to be scared by - and much unfortunate drug behaviour is no different than a you girl who is abused by their parents, being told she's a worthless slut who won't amount to anything, growing up to become a promiscuous and alcoholic vagrant (though these individual activities, if done within their control and awareness, and by their own choosing, would not be wrong). Such a person is not a statement against the harms of the alcohol or drugs they may use, but delivers an indictment against those who delivered to her the hateful messaging which considered through her, shaping the neurological pathways that guide her behaviour.

It is the same with negative drug usage patterns in society - none of them were caused by drugs, themselves, but were created by scientists, doctors, and governments, who then profit from their existence, and use them as false-justification to further the messaging that created them in the first place.

In the end, the Truth itself will require there to be full justice for those who were unfairly subjected to and manipulated by anti-drug propaganda, and who received mistreatment at the hands of those those who peddled that propaganda.


Also, ironically, when anti-drug propaganda is being administered to a society, there is a growth in sociopathism within that society, and a reduction in intelligence within that society, and the harms put into children and teenagers are those very ones which anti-drug propaganda would have them think come from drugs: Considering is the mechanism behind evolution, and a brain develops its connections through the course of considering. Those connections themselves represent the considerations of a person's mind, and greater Truth is manifest the more considerations are accounted for within an environment - and considerations which resolve into one form concepts. A determination is like a road-block that prevents considering from occurring - and the more determinations held in a mind, the less presence of truth there is in that mind, and the more selfish and sociopathic it is likely to be.

Anti-drug propaganda is not based in truth, but in sentiment-based determinations, disseminated and practised by truth-lacking sociopaths - and its influence is killing of the mind of society, and creating of all kinds of diseases. Conversely, taking many of the drugs anti-drug propaganda frightens people away from commonly greatly improves a healthy development of mind, and fortifies both physical and mental health.

So when anti-drug propaganda told people "this is your brain on drugs", that imagery and message was, in truth, what was being done to the brain of every person who believed that message. While the drugs they were being warned against did and do the opposite - they provide a person with the physio-fuel that makes them healthier, smarter, and more capable for good (though to use it is a person's choice). As I've said, a determination is a falsehood by nature, which reduces consideration (a consideration being a quantum of truth, and a quantum of mind), and which aligns a person's considerations antithetically to the truth.

Doctors and scientist and governments have brain-washed people into being scared of the very thing that cures them - and so they are made to suffer all kinds of artificially-created ailments. But in the end, just as in the beginning, the human brain effectively runs on the effect of cocaine, which is actually literally good by nature. And if a person is encountering an issue within themselves, particularly within their mind, the effect of cocaine would be a reliably good place to start addressing it, as a first recourse. It is good, normal, and healthy for a person to use drugs which they recognize by their own judgement as contributing positively inside of themselves - and no one on the outside is capable of casting a judgement over that.

The Truth is real, and cannot be determined, but can only come to be known by being considered.

Continued in this post: Regarding Cocaine's Applicability for Treating Migraines (2nd Addendum)


Tuesday, 23 February 2016

Just a Tip (Regarding news of genetic mutations being responsible for such or such a condition)

You can view this type of news all over the place, and regarding a host of different ailments and conditions:

Genetic mutation 'is responsible for BOTH migraines and IBS'

Genes are an output of considering, and the work that is considering requires dopamine. If something is going wrong in the development and maintenance of a gene, then there was likely an insufficient availability of dopamine to provide the pathways that were relevant to that gene's creation with enough dopamine.

Further, conditions such as anxiety, depression, psychosis, etc, in all their details, are ultimately merely symptoms and expressions of dopamine deficiency.

Modern medicine has taken a falsehood regarding dopamine, that of it being "reward", rather than physio-fuel, and turned it into trillion-dollar industries, as well as a container for their prejudice. Those complicit in this are mass murderers, and those administering this charade and farce, such as doctors, who uphold the forced obsolescence of people, are no different than nazi guards who held posts at death camps during WW2, who, too, believed they were enforcing a righteous paradigm, and were just doing their job and what they were trained for.

When looking at events in history like the Crusades, people often use that as a notation of how many religion has killed. Well, by the same measure, looking at those who have been killed by decades upon decades of corroborated institutional medical science, through defamation of dopamine, it is true to say that those killed by their science in the previous century number in the hundreds of millions, and those victimized by science number in the billions - and therefore more people have been killed in the name of science than in that of any other dogma.

Humans have not yet achieved a more efficient tool of death, suffering, and inequality than the mischaracterizing of dopamine and dopaminergics. And those delivering these false representations are the most proficient of mass murderers in history.

This post is part of a series:

1. Just a Tip (Regarding news of genetic mutations being responsible for such or such a condition)
2.  Adendum - Migraines are Dopamine Deficiency - and also: The Importance of Tact in Dopaminergic Application - and also: The Importance of Considering the Truth
3. Regarding Cocaine's Applicability for Treating Migraines (2nd Addendum)


Sunday, 21 February 2016

Article: What Causes Autism?

Article: What Causes Autism?

Well, just as medications which alleviate symptoms of depression, anxiety, psychosis, tend to increase dopamine, so also do medications which alleviate symptoms of autism tend to increase dopamine. This all makes sense, since increasing available dopamine increases healthy development in a brain, while lack of dopamine leads to all types of mental stress ailments, general health problems, and impoverished brain development. So I would venture that autism, a development issue, is caused by a pregnant woman experiencing dopamine deficiency during their pregnancy, at least in some regions of their brain.

If so, then addressing the problem at its root would be to increase dopamine during pregnancy, to avoid unwanted development issues.

Of course, having more dopamine leads to improved health and development in general, while lacking dopamine means a greater vulnerability to health issues in general, and impoverished development in specific:

And use of cocaine during pregnancy is shown to improve fetus development:

Also, cocaine, whose effect is to increase dopamine's availability while inhibiting adrenaline's release, delivers literally the antithetical influence as schizophrenia on brain development, boosting growth in the region associated with learning and memory, and like all dopaminergics, including the "smart drug" modafinil, enhancing a brain's capabilities (which would be relevant to enhancing fetus development):

And the myth of crack babies, babies being born with issues do to their mother using crack during their pregnancy, has appropriately been debunked:

It may well be that the very best thing for a pregnant woman to do to prevent health issues for their child, while fortifying their child's development, is put aside time to relax and smoke crack, or to take cocaine, while in their pregnancy.

But medical research cannot be relied upon to inform a public concerning this, because all scientific research, and particularly drug and health research, is egregiously biased, contrived, and unreliable, with at least (I will clarify this in another post) 60% of researchers publishing biased, and therefore False information as conclusions. And when it comes to drug research, I think virtually all conclusions are slanted (and therefore directing away from the truth). I would even say that a medical researcher is, by default, in the position of being an unreliable witness, since they, their field, and their funding providers stand to benefit from falling short of delivering real solutions (and this is a recipe for disaster in Reward-oriented mindsets, who are also sociopathic by nature, and therefore predisposed to being untruthful):

Particularly when it comes to drug and health research:

Which requires government license to study, and governments are not that likely to approve research which they don't like the objectives of, particularly when there is a history of such research being shut down, to go alongside with a history of such research delivering fabricated, or conniving conclusions:

I would put forth that 90%+ of what is read as health research is not true at all, and is either wilfully directed, or conducted by people who are sociopathic, who cannot arrive at unbiased conclusions because they have corrupted the connectivity in their brain that gives a person their perception - with the inter-connectivity between all considerations substantiating what is being what manifests truth.

Related post: Cocaine Use During Pregnancy Can Prevent Autism


Monday, 8 February 2016

The Placebo Effect is Belief Freeing Up Dopamine to Help Healing Consider

Related previous post: Overview of Why Placebo Works, and Isn't Really Placebo After All

This post completes the understanding and the picture of what placebo actually is for human health.

Considering is the means by which a brain accomplishes all work, and dopamine's availability is what gives a brain its capability to consider.

Whatever a person's ailing state is, the brain addresses it by trying to consider its healing - and as it does, everything that's involved in its healing is called into effect. If there is little dopamine available, it will require more effort for a brain to positively address an ailing state. If there is more dopamine available, it will be easier for a brain to address an ailing state, and address it more comprehensively.

When a person believes anything uncertain regarding their health, or anything indefinite, or worrying, the considering processes that stem from those beliefs deplete a person's dopamine availability, reducing a brain's capability to address any afflictions. When a person believes, accepts, has faith and hope that their health is improving, that things are OK, that their medication is real and helpful, the effect on a person's brain is relaxing, resolving and desisting many considering processes and freeing up much dopamine.

The positive belief that a person has of their improving state creates a 'This is' point and understanding in the brain, engaging all the things involved in that concept and considering them towards a unified True, and available dopamine will be allocated towards completing that considering. Freed up dopamine contributes to the considering-unto-resolution any afflicted states, bolstering their overcoming and mending.

The greater a person's genuine belief in their healing, the more their brain will be considering towards that state of being healed - because of Reason, which uses dopamine to bring a person closer towards the state of being healed.

Likewise, just as cocaine boosts all positive mental capabilities by producing a proficient and healthier-than-natural release of a person's own dopamine, it can also be an excellent means to fortify healing from all things in general - whether that's physical wounds, mental health issues, emotional trauma, chronic pain, recovery from surgery...

Dopamine is key to a person's good physical and mental health, and their forward development. But while dopamine is promoting of beneficial physiological maintenance and development, adrenaline is antagonistic upon already-afflicted states. So, the secret formula to maximize speed of health recovery, and positive further development is to restrain adrenaline while proficiently boosting dopamine - which is the effect of cocaine.

Cocaine used to be regarded a miracle cure, useful for treating just about anything. Then sentiments, politics, ideologies (including racial prejudices), uncertainty, and fears came into play, but cocaine never changed. It still is the miraculous curative power it was initially regarded as being, greater in potential to restore and fortify health than any other medicinal means available to this world at this present time.

Cocaine is the penultimate poster-child of what thing is good for a person to put into their body to increase its health, and their positive growth. And all perceived threats regarding cocaine came not from cocaine, but from some of society's reaction to it - just as the outcome to Portugal's decriminalization of all drugs shows that the biggest threat involving drugs has always been the effects created by governmental and institutional opposition to them, and their failure to react sensibly.

There are questions regarding dopaminergics, health, and individual behaviour, and all of them have complete answers and positive resolutions, none of which indict dopamine, or cocaine - whose dopaminergic effect is already fundamental to all positive human experience, accomplishment, and potential. And all mental stress ailments, and many things which are not conventionally perceived to be a matter of mental stress, emerge only downstream from the malnourishment of having a lack of dopamine availability. To address all these things at their root is to accept dopamine as the fundamental mental-task processing-fuel that it is.

Placebo works according to a person's belief because Reason Is, and because dopamine / cocaine is the consideration which enables a brain to accomplish all its work. Placebo works because cocaine works because dopamine works.

In making known the "placebo effect"'s mechanism of action, I have now given full clarity to what has been yet another "long-standing mystery" to those who practice and preach institutional medicine.

Clearly, the understanding I work with is one and the same as truth, while that of those who call themselves scientists evaluates as False next to mine. And, clearly, the means by which I work are confirmed by the connecting of all points and accounting for all things, to be truth, just as by the things those means reveal - but the means of scientific methodology are falsehood-bearing jalopies in the face of reality. Therefore, a single person speaking in Reason is greater than the collection of all not yet in Reason. How many more miracles are needed to be spoken by me?


Calling Out Research Duplicity and Falsity for What It Is... and some stuff regarding addiction

In the previous post, I said that I'd speak more regarding the matter of institutional duplicity and bias in framing dopamine increases as a health boon when it comes from some sources (coffee, modafinil, etc), while a threat, and "addictive" when it comes from others (basically any non-licensed dopaminergic use), and so I will.


In the article Mice Fed with Cocaine Show Growth in Brain Areas Linked with Learning, Memory, there was speculated and proposed the idea that the same growth in brain regions associated with memory formation and learning that occurs during cocaine use corresponds to drug-seeking behaviour - implying that cocaine guides a brain to form an addiction.

The suggestion wholly ignores the reality that only a small minority of people develop any behavioural habit from cocaine use, fewer than develop habits to many common prescription medications that are prescribed even to children to help them get better grades in elementary school. It also ignores that the same brain growth occurs from caffeine use, and from modafinil use - but in the latter, that growth is praised as healthily boosting a person's smarts, while regarding cocaine the same growth is talking about as if with distrustful paranoia of ill intent.

Cocaine, caffeine, modafinil, and many others, are all dopaminergics, and the reality is that increasing dopamine simply improves a brain's healthy development, including regarding all the efforts that a person puts their focus towards while engaging the dopamine increase. Because cocaine boosts dopamine in a healthier and more proficient manner than both caffeine and modafinil, the amount of brain development that occurs while taking cocaine is more significant than that which occurs while taking caffeine or modafinil, and or doapminergics. Everything said beyond than that is only sentiment, bias, politics, ideology, non-objectiveness.

The basis for the referred-to sentiment and speculation in the above linked-to article is simply an attempt to rationalize and provide a counter-weight against recognizing and publishing an apparent positive about the subject. It is in no way truthful, or objective. It is propaganda, and an offence to the truth, and a betrayal of the greater subject of truthful human physiology and health.

The reality is that dopamine is the means by which a brain accomplishes all work, and when increasing dopamine with a dopaminergic drug, whatever a person puts their focus towards will receive enhanced development. And not only the things that a person consciously puts effort towards, but also subconscious matters. The whole brain will be improved for work. It is through and through a positive, and is the basis for why Modafinil boosts mental capacities – although modafinil does so nowhere near the extent to which cocaine does. As I said, increasing dopamine is like turning a dial up on all a brain’s power and control of thought, its ability to work with more details at once, its experience processing (which is memory formation) to beneficial resolution, and memory recollection, perception of senses, etc.


The choice to misrepresent a subject is a fairly common impulsive tendency exhibited by those who conduct medical research (and also in doctors) regarding illicit drugs, where interpretations are typically being tapered in a manner to reinforce a pre-determined negative framing of the subject. In other words, authorized research on illicit drugs is typically conclusions in search of data. And this is for a variety of reasons, one of the bigger ones being that consideration is what overlays and forms the structure that is conduit for emotion, and provides mental articulation - but a sociopath lacks consideration. And so instead of considering things, a sociopath is guided by their ambiguous sentiments, and makes blunt determinations based off of them.

And when a person makes determinations, it polarizes their brain even more, to the point that the person can be looking at the same thing, presented under two different labels, and in one presentation, they will deem the thing to be of no harm, and even a positive characteristic of great boon to health and life, while in the other, will deem the same thing to be nefarious and the cause of every minutest problem that can be spoken for in a person’s health and life - or they'll omit, downplay, or dismiss one particular detail regarding pharmaceutical medications, while while egregiously over-hyping the same detail when it appears in a non-licensed medicine.

Yet the thing will have been exactly the same in both presentations. This is what we see happening regarding dopamine being released via cocaine vs being released via coffee, or modafinil, and actually cocaine is significantly healthier than either coffee or modafinil, and is phenomenally greater at increasing a person’s mental capabilities than either coffee or modafinil.

Yet the exampled prejudist and senseless conduct is par for the course when it comes to researching and reporting on illicit drugs, and really has hardly improved since 1936’s reefer madness – the bullshit today is just more subtly presented, being dressed up with a bunch of technical jargon, which itself is a worthless mass of disconnected determinations.

Many hacks and frauds are willing to use and praise modafinil, while spreading deluded sensationalism regarding cocaine, yet the root mechanism in both of them is one and the same: dopamine. And dopamine is not addictive when released by one dopaminergic and then miraculously not addictive when released by another.

Addiction doesn’t even come into play here, and is itself a false concept – both in the instances of so-called “physical addictions” and also “chemical addictions”. When a doctor or scientist refers to these things, they’re tapping into sentiments within themselves, and not truthful understandings. And the various types of so-called treatments for these things reflects the ambiguity of the understanding regarding what these things actually are, where they come from, and why they’re happening.

A major reason why certain dopaminergic drugs becomes more common for impulsive use than others is exactly because of the same reason why advertising sways opinions and leads to consumer uptake. It’s all a result of the messaging chosen and expressed by doctors, scientists, and government. When these sources tell people that a certain thing is addictive, then Reason’s principle applies as the message is considered through the minds of people who don’t know better, and then there will be an uptick in the number of people who develop behavioural habits regarding that certain thing – even if that certain thing actually does nothing itself to create behavioural habits, such as is the case of cocaine.

Yet a minority of people start using cocaine in a habitual way – some of those cases are completely valid, while others are uncontrolled impulsiveness, and the direct product of years of public brainwashing from doctors and governments.


Consideration is what normalizes a brain and gives structure to emotion, and consideration is what a sociopath is lacks. Consequently, the more sociopathic a person is, the more they are guided by sentiments and the more easily they can be influenced by the power of suggestion.

This is why so many doctors and scientists write and believe things about illicit drugs such as the example I’ve given at the beginning of this post. Doctors and scientists’ efforts of trying to convince people that a lot of various illicit drugs are addictive, when they’re not at all, is also the reason why behavioural habits are as big of issues that they are in present society. Just as telling a person without understanding of the matter that they're addicted will commence connection-forming considering processes within their brain to reason what that means, telling a person a different, better message would also render a different, better influence in society.

But a lot of what doctors and scientists would judge by appearance to be an “addiction” is nothing more than the sensible practicality of a person who lacks dopamine fundamentally needing it - and there’s no way around that, and to try to avoid that is to be in denial of reality, and a hypocrite. The difference in dopamine between a healthy and functional person, and a person suffering mental stress is the ‘why’ for everything regarding the state of the person with mental stress and their behaviours. Just as a person who is dehydrated in a desert needs water, and their feeling is as such, it is no less the case regarding a person who is enduring dopamine deficiency. And the effects of dopamine deficiency within a human body and brain are terrible, and costly, and life-ransoming.

At the root of it all, despite a small minority of people who use cocaine developing behavioural habits for specific and resolvable reasons, cocaine is non-addictive. And it never was addictive, and it can’t be addictive, because its favourable effect is only the greater and healthier release of the very same dopamine which a person’s brain runs on from the day they are born, and which is present in every mental and physical action they make. It is the means by which all a person’s accomplishments are achieved, and is fundamental to their better mental and physical health. 

If what cocaine does is addicting, then every human being is already an addict, and so the term addiction in regards to cocaine no longer holds any meaning because it doesn’t identify something that’s particular. As I said before, in this present society, those who profess to treat others of mental stress ailment are responsible for the very things they claim to oppose.