The events in Newton, Connecticut

I've been doing research on what people say under deep hypnosis about the afterlife - and the between lives realm.  It's based on the extensive work of Michael Newton, who gave his lifetime to this research.  Over 7000 people have said basically the same things about the process, about the journey, about what and how and why we show up on the planet.

I started filming people under deep hypnosis that I chose - people I knew who were skeptical, or who had never heard of Michael Newton.  They all had the same results.  I've published that in my book "Flipside: A Tourist's Guide on How to Navigate the Afterlife" and in my documentary "Flipside: a Journey into the Afterlife."

When tragedy strikes, as it did in Newton this past week, it's difficult to try to put anything into perspective.  We are all suffering as a result of this tragedy.  My children have a teacher who knew the principal - so I have the extra benefit of hearing about how wonderful and bright and captivating she was.  I have also wept at the stories of individual courage and fearlessness... but I wanted to say a few words of solace.

Sandy Hook Principal Dawn Hochsprung

I ran across this message on the internet this morning, it comes from "Matthew's Messages" - Matthew is a young man who passed away a few years ago, but has been able to keep in touch with his mom.

He weighs in on the tragedy, and all I can say is that it's pretty much what people say from the spirit realm about why tragedies occur.  I might add that whether one believes that Matthew is talking to his mom is beside the point - what he says (or what her subconscious is saying) is identical to what thousands under deep hypnosis have said about why tragedies occur.  Here's an excerpt from her blog "Matthew's Messages"


"Their soul level agreement to participate in their respective roles was for the higher good of all humankind, and the participants who are in Nirvana (Note: "between lives realm") are rejoicing about the agreement’s success. The massacre’s profound message, now ingrained in the collective consciousness, is that the human heart and mind no longer can be inured to killing, killing, killing, no longer is humankind willing to endure it! The shock and grief in Newtown, Connecticut, shook the world and unified people in an outpouring of prayer for everyone affected by the tragedy. 

Matthew

For many years the abhorrence of similar inexplicable acts of violence has been registering with increasing strength in the collective consciousness. A powerful occurrence—the shooting of those youngsters in school—was needed to solidify the collective desire into the intention to end senseless killings everywhere. And the intensity of high vibrations that are affecting everyone in your world is expanding that intention to include all preventable deaths—international wars, genocide, “legal” execution, and starvation and disease in the impoverished populace."

There are some predictions of future events, and an ultimate reason for why and how - I add a note of caution that no particular individual can predict the future, even our spirit guides, as after all, they aren't all knowing or infallible. However when they communicate with us, it's from a place of higher knowledge - people have free will and can screw up the future at any time. But in terms of the "why" of some events occur, it's quite similar to my research.

It's not that "Karma" is involved - "The law of karma" as its been translated (sanskrit: action) doesn't seem to apply to the research that Michael Newton has done regarding between lives. It's been translated as reincarnation is dictated by past actions, and free will has nothing to do with who and what we are. If you read Michael Newton's research, his accounts of what thousands say under deep hypnosis about the afterlife, we find there are a myriad of reasons for why someone might choose a difficult lifetime - and those reasons are thought out in advance. So there is free will involved - people choose lifetimes to examine a myriad of issues, many that are extremely difficult to conceptualize or examine from a learning perspective. But that's what the research shows. We don't suffer as a result of something we did in a past life - rather out of compassion, love, caring - we choose difficult lives to help other people.

Again - I think we all have to translate whatever messages come from spirit into our own consciousness - but in essence, he's saying that the event was planned so that others can benefit from their sacrifice. That gun laws will be passed, that mental illness issues will be addressed, and that many more lives will be saved as a result of this selfless act.

In terms of the gun laws issue: it's about gun safety, not control.  We have a myriad of laws that protect us in the workplace, at home, we need to craft laws that prevents certain kinds of weapons from coming into the marketplace (as they did with plastic guns) and we need to examine how people can obtain permits for what kinds of weapons. We need to address these issues whether or not the gun makers want us to.

In terms of mental illness, nearly all of these incidents from Columbine to Aurora include an SSRI drug element.  These drugs are being used, prescribed, to medicate depression, mental illness - and the end result (according to a Doctor I know, 15% of the population can't tolerate them because of an enzyme issue, and there's a simple test to measure for that enzyme) - is suicide or mass shooting, or some other psychic break.  it's not just video games and culture of violence - we have kids whose brains have been altered by these drugs, and as a result they can't help but commit these acts of violence.  (The film director Tony Scott was taking an SSRI drug when he suddenly decided to kill himself.)  We have to address this issues whether or not the drug makers want us to.

Here's testimony given before Congress by a victim of Columbine in 2004:

Mark Taylor and his book re: Columbine

Mark Taylor'stestimony before the FDA 9/13/2004

"I am Mark Allen Taylor and I am a victim of the SSRI antidepressant era. I took six to thirteen bullets in the heart area in the Columbine High School shooting when Eric Harris on Luvox opened fire that now infamous day. They almost had to amputate my leg and my arm. My heart missed by only one millimeter. I had three surgeries. Five years later I am still recuperating. I went through all this to realize that SSRI antidepressants are dangerous for those who take them and for all those who associate with those who take them.

I hope that my testimony today shows you that you need to take action immediately before more innocent people like me, and you, do not get hurt or die horrible deaths as a result. As Americans we should have the right to feel safe and if you were doing your job we would be safe. Why are we worrying about terrorists in other countries when the pharmaceutical companies have proven to be our biggest terrorists by releasing these drugs on an unsuspecting public?

How are we suppose to feel safe at school, at home, on the street, at church or anywhere else if we cannot trust the FDA to do what we are paying you to do? Where were you when I and all of my classmates got shot at Columbine?

You say that antidepressants are effective. So why did they not help Eric Harris before he shot me?
According to Eric they "helped" him to feel homicidal and suicidal after only six weeks on Zoloft. And then he said that dropping off Luvox cold turkey would help him "fuel the rage" he needed to shoot everyone. But he continued on Luvox and shot us all anyway. So, why did these so called antidepressants not make him better? I will tell you why. It is because they do not work.We should consider antidepressants to be accomplices to murder."

For a graphic display of how invovled these drugs are, here's a LIST OF SSRI RELATED SHOOTINGS.

Then there's the story of the mom who is dealing with trauma from her son's illness:

Liza Long's Blog

In the story she speaks of how they gave her son SSRI drugs and sent him home.  It's a viscious cycle - we are poisoning our children (with chemicals in our food, in our furniture, in our plastics, who knows what else?), then when they're ill from what we've given them, we give them drugs, and when they act out we give them more drugs.

Richard Davidson's breakthrough research

There are solutions: check into the research or Richard Davidson at the University of Wisconsin where he's shown that practicing the ancient Tibetan meditation of "Tonglen" can alleviate or end depression.  That "one session alone" can actually change the shape of the amygdala in the subject.  (the locus for depression in the brain).  I attended a lecture he gave at UCLA and the room was filled with psychiatrists trying to find a way to get kids off of SSRI drugs.

Study of depression and meditation

Proof that Tonglen can help alleviate depression

I mention this because there is light at the end of the tunnel.  Just as Matthew said above - there is a reason for these events happening, and it's to help save others from the same fate.  Whether you believe that or not is moot - we have come to a crossroads in our civilization on this planet - and we can choose to move forward to help the rest of humanity, based on their sacrifice.

 No question that this act has brought trauma, heart ache, sadness and horror - but as a selfless act that is a sacrifice to all of humanity - even just to conceive that might be the case - is to really see that we are all connected, all part of source, and that in order to stop senseless killing and violence we have to come together and consider the common good. At the very least we need to honor their sacrifice through action that helps humanity. At least that's my two cents on it.

Death by Prozac: curing yourself from depression via Tibetan meditation

FROM THE BBC.CO.UK WEBSITE:

Anti-depressants' 'little effect'

Anti-depressant prescription rates have soared

New generation anti-depressants have little clinical benefit for most patients, research suggests.

A University of Hull team concluded the drugs actively help only a small group of the most severely depressed.

Marjorie Wallace, head of the mental health charity Sane, said that if these results were confirmed they could be "very disturbing".

But the makers of Prozac and Seroxat, two of the commonest anti-depressants, said they disagreed with the findings.

A spokesman for GlaxoSmithKline, which makes Seroxat, said the study only looked at a "small subset of the total data available".

Reviewed data

And Eli Lilly, which makes Prozac, said that "extensive scientific and medical experience has demonstrated it is an effective anti-depressant".

There seems little reason to prescribe anti-depressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients Professor Irving Kirsch University of Hull Q&A: Anti-depressant study Popularity of 'happy pills'

Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, has announced that 3,600 therapists are to be trained during the next three years in England to increase patient access to talking therapies, which ministers see as a better alternative to drugs.

Patients are strongly advised not to stop taking their medication without first consulting a doctor.

The researchers accept many people believe the drugs do work for them, but argue that could be a placebo effect - people feel better simply because they are taking a medication which they think will help them.

In total, the Hull team, who published their findings in the journal PLoS Medicine, reviewed data on 47 clinical trials.

They reviewed published clinical trial data, and unpublished data secured under Freedom of Information legislation.

They focused on drugs which work by increasing levels of the mood controlling chemical serotonin in the brain.

These included fluoxetine (Prozac) and paroxetine (Seroxat), from the class known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs), alongside another similar drug called venlafaxine (Efexor) - all commonly prescribed in the UK.

The number of prescriptions for anti-depressants hit a record high of more than 31 million in England in 2006 - even though official guidance stresses they should not be a first line treatment for mild depression.

There were 16.2m prescriptions for SSRIs alone.

The researchers found that the drugs did have a positive impact on people with mild depression - but the effect was no bigger than that achieved by giving patients a sugar-coated "dummy" pill.

People with severe symptoms appeared to gain more clear-cut benefit - but this might be more down to the fact that they were less likely to respond to the placebo pill, rather than to respond positively to the drugs.

Lead researcher Professor Irving Kirsch said: "The difference in improvement between patients taking placebos and patients taking anti-depressants is not very great.

"This means that depressed people can improve without chemical treatments.

"Given these results, there seems little reason to prescribe anti-depressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients, unless alternative treatments have failed to provide a benefit."

Professor Kirsch said the findings called into question the current system of reporting drug trials.

Reviewing guidance

Dr Tim Kendall, deputy director of the Royal College of Psychiatrists Research Unit, has published research concluding that drug companies tend only to publish research which shows their products in a good light.

These medicines have been licensed by a number of regulatory authorities around the world, who looking at all the evidence, have determined that they do work better than placebo Dr Richard Tiner Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry Readers' experiences

He said the Hull findings undermined confidence in the ability to draw meaningful conclusions about the merit of drugs based on published data alone.

He called for drug companies to be forced to publish all their data.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is currently reviewing its guidance on the use of antidepressants.

Marjorie Wallace of Sane commented: "If these results were upheld in further studies, they would be very disturbing.

"The newer anti-depressants were the great hope for the future.... These findings could remove what has been seen as a vital choice for thousands in treating what can be a life-threatening condition."

Dr Andrew McCulloch, of the Mental Health Foundation, said: "We have become vastly over-reliant on antidepressants when there is a range of alternatives.

"Talking therapies, exercise referral and other treatments are effective for depression.

"It is a problem that needs a variety of approaches matched to the individual patient."

Dr Richard Tiner, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said there was no doubt that there was a "considerable placebo effect" from anti-depressants when treating people with mild to moderate symptoms.

But he said no medicine would get a licence without demonstrating it was better than a placebo.

Dr Tiner said: "These medicines have been licensed by a number of regulatory authorities around the world, who looking at all the evidence, have determined that they do work better than placebo."

Some years ago I met this Swiss filmmaker in Moscow. She was there with her husband's film at the film festival, and was in mourning because he'd just killed himself. I asked what she thought happened. She said "I don't know - he was happy, ready to come to this festival, and he went to his doctor because he was exhausted, and he gave him some pills and the next thing I know he kills himself." I asked if the pills were Prozac. She said yes.

I told her about another friend, in Italy near my ancestral home town in Cadore. This guy was in his 60's, a happy go lucky fella who didn't have a care in the world. He told his doc he was tired, and needed something to help him sleep. Same story. Started taking Prozac, killed himself.

Most people don't know that Congress had hearings to try and figure out why so many people were killing themselves after taking psychotropic drugs. The results? Zippo. Inconclusive. Hard to prove someone didn't want to kill themselves.

Look at most of the gun shootings in high schools and you'll find psychotropic drugs were involved with the students (Columbine included) Here's the deal as I see it:

We have a fight or flight part of our brain that keeps us on the planet. When you're driving down the street, you don't turn into oncoming traffic because of this modulator in your head. I once did a series of interviews with severely depressed people, one of whom described walking "around the planet, trying to figure out ways to kill himself." This part of his brain was malfunctioning - telling him to kill himself instead of to protect himself.

Apparently, up to 10% of the people who take psychotropic drugs have a 'side effect' which disrupts this mechanism in the brain. So.. they stop having the ability to feel happy or sad, because they're being modulated, and they lose the ability to tell the difference between their inner and outer worlds - if they feel rage, but have no outlet for it, it can translate into 'let's pick up a gun' or 'let's kill ourselves.' Or as I call it "Death by Prozac."

When history looks back on this era, it's going to be the time of the drugs which altered people's psyches. I'm not a fan of Scientology, I firmly believe that it's a fantasy religion created from L. Ron Hubbard's psyche, and has no more roots in reality than Joseph Smith did. (I also believe they probably had similar psychic experiences that influenced them profoundly, but that's a topic for another time). However, the Scientologists, Tom Cruise included, are spot on when they try to point out that psychotropic drugs are bad for you. Where we differ greatly is how to cure depression. I don't think getting clear is the answer, as it's another panacea, and leaves your treatment in someone else's hands. I think the most promising research in the area has been done by Richard Davidson of the Univ of Wisconsin.

(Davidson with HHDL, photo Waisman Center, Univ. of Wisconsin)

I recently attended a conference at UCLA, filled with psychiatrists, who had come to hear Davidson talk about his research into the amygdala, the part of the brain that regulates depression and happiness. And basically, as Time magazine noted, he laid out the skills that people can learn to make themselves happier, less depressed, and drug free. The questions from the audience were from doctors concerned about giving teenagers psychotropic drugs. Davidson's work is profound, and I think should be included in every doctor's bag - even pediatricians. Here's an article from Science Daily a few days ago.

The cure is pretty simple. A Tibetan meditation called "Tonglen." (I know it's Tonglen because I asked him after the lecture which specific Tibetan meditation he asked his subjects to use to get the profound results.) I won't describe the meditation here, because in order to learn it requires a certain amount of skill, education, and perhaps a guided teacher. You don't have to study under the Dalai Lama to learn it, however, it would be better if you sought out a teacher of meditation, a yoga class for example, which can teach the breathing meditation to begin. Once you've mastered ten minutes a day, you could graduate to a next level. However, Davidson did tell me that in his version of the Tonglen meditation, he asked his subjects not to meditate on curing the ills of a particular person, but on the society in general. This note will make sense to those of you who know about Tonglen meditation, and for those who might be depressed and want to learn about it, check out Davidson's work, or Tibetan meditation in particular.

Anyways, if you have a loved one who is depressed, or if you're depressed, I'd think it would be worth trying to figure out a natural method to cure it, before risking that you'd be part of the ten percent who die from this drug use. What have you got to lose?

That's a wrap.