Dont underestimate nocebo effect as a driver of perceptions and behaviours

On meeting a commenter of an established norm with a another's dumping opinion on 'virus as unreal't hat offered no real support or basis for its opinion and thus misrepresents it and offers no real communication - while insinuating self-righteousness. 

​https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaP5sjwFt3IqOWmmpOsMK7A

Dont underestimate the power of the nocebo effect as a driver of perceptions and behaviours. But don't let that be used to simply deny evidences either. Question from a place of heartfelt honesty or be deceived by a mind of habit. A belief can be acted upon as the reality, become reinforced by reaction and generate its own reinforcing supports. If you look at the past you see so many beliefs powered cultures that cannot now be fathomed - AS IF we are NOW 'awake' or in the real world and they are effectively used as a prop to the current era or discarded.

The challenge to the virus theory is not the existence of code fragments wrapped in protein, produced by living cells, but their functions. Cholesterol was falsely flagged as the cause of heart disease and a vital function was demonised and undermined that left us weaker systemically. There are parallels.

If the virus is not itself the cause, does not mean it is not a form of extra-cellular cellular communication. What we know about biology is always at the cusp of so much that we don't know - but stories are taken from the leading edge as if the light from the gods - with Promethean consequence for the underbelly of a false light!

A computer virus only exists and runs in a specific set of conditions. These we know can be malign - as products of a manipulative intent that we all recognise or share.

But because we have identified in a psycho-pathy of conflict that uses communication as a weapon against itself, does not mean the Cell or Self of which we are budded is evil and that its messengers must be killed or denied as contagion to our bubble. Yet that is the way a manipulative sense of self withholding, operates.

The arrogance of an era that thinks AS IF - it NOW understands and controls and improves nature, frames all that is natural as either weak, unreliable, threat, broken etc - or to be exploited, enslaved, used up and replaced. This says more about our conscious (sic) ness. By our reactions and their fruits our mind is revealed. Science is an attempt to rigorously control our actions so as to uncover what is rather than discover our own artefacts - and there are challenges to virus theory in terms of the artefacts introduced by our methods of 'seeing' or measuring en vitro. Rife's dark field microscopy found en vivo a world that did not support vested interests of its day and it was 'lost'. 'Kill the messenger' rather than lose possession and control under the existing masking beliefs of dominant self-interest. (There is a circular self-definition there and the negative binding loop is characteristic of a false or self-circular reasoning or referencing).

But in any case, the human experience is one of diversity of beliefs, definitions and perspectives that is a feature, not a bug, once a field of relational communication is respected.

When people take their normal as The Natural, they have remade the world in their own image. These bubbles operate as conditioned responses for the most part.

The current intent to manually reset and recondition the human 'normal' or conditioning patterns - not just to sell crap or induce dependency for private gain - but as a global and granular control system, reveals the mind from which we have been operating under masking 'virtues' - coming out 'from the Deep'.

Question: Can fictitious thinking hijack or take over and destroy the very mind in which those thoughts arise, are attended, and valued as a basis to 'think some more'?

What does fictitious thinking mask in, but a mind in a body in a world?

We have experience of the mind in its body in its world, but where exactly is the realm or domain of experience?

Do thoughts actually leave the mind that thinks them, or do we operate a temporal spatial model in which we live the experience as a psycho-physical expression?

Even before we collectively replicated the pattern of embodied mind into this computing medium of packets of code that interface digitalised data streams of results that seem to be a self evident and normal communication. (Hi there 'SON OF SHEM!').

As a witness FOR the field of relation and communication, I speak to the choice to integrate by expansion and inclusion - rather than masking out, locking down and limiting so as to subordinate all else to a control system. And in terms of psychic sensitivities, I see our current models are far too set in masking out and masking over a deeper level of relational conflicts that are generally associated viscerally with intense and strong emotional reactions that are no less active for being masked - but we learn not to look or speak there. Virus theory has become a defence or masking cover story for a pile upon pile of denials and like the banks and toxic debts - too big to fail. yet it it too false to stand - even if humanity is sacrificed upon its altar - as we do. Conflict is not the way to resolve a bug in thinking, even if it can temporarily block attention and awareness by displacement.