View Full Version : What is a stressor?


mildadhd
05-07-14, 04:18 PM
A stress response requires a stressor.

What is a stressor?


P

mildadhd
05-07-14, 04:27 PM
A stressor is the stimulus (or threat) that causes stress, e.g. exam, divorce, death of loved one, moving house, loss of job.


Sudden and severe stress generally produces

-Increase in heart rate

-Increase in breathing (lungs dilate)

-Decrease in digestive activity (don’t feel hungry)

-Liver released glucose for energy


Firstly, our body judges a situation and decides whether or not it is stressful. This decision is made based on sensory input and processing (i.e. the things we see and hear in the situation) and also on stored memories (i.e. what happened the last time we were in a similar situation).

If the situation is judged as being stressful, the HYPOTHALAMUS (at the base of the brain) is activated.

The hypothalamus in the brain is in charge of the stress response. When a stress response is triggered, it sends signals to two other structures: the pituitary gland, and the adrenal medulla.

These short term responses are produced by The Fight or Flight Response via the Sympathomedullary Pathway (SAM). Long term stress is regulated by the Hypothalamic Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) system.

What is the Stress Response? (http://www.simplypsychology.org/stress-biology.html)

mildadhd
05-07-14, 04:52 PM
There seems to be two general types of stressors?

Eustress stressors promoting stability?

Distress stressors promoting instability?


Opinions?

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 05:33 PM
There seems to be two general types of stressors?

Eustress stressors promoting stability?

Distress stressors promoting instability?


Opinions?

I think the difference between Eustress and Distress are subjective.
I found some examples in an article I read.

The following can be ways through which one gets stess either positive or negative:

Injury or illness (oneself or a family member)
Being abused or neglected
Separation from a spouse or committed relationship partner
Conflict in interpersonal relationships
Bankruptcy/Money Problems
Unemployment
Sleep problems
Marriage
Buying a home
Having a child
Moving
Taking a vacation
Holiday seasons
Retiring
Taking educational classes or learning a new hobby
Habitual behavior patterns eg procastination or lack of proper planning,overscheduling and lack of assertiveness.
All these despite being positive or negative,leads to stress i.e eustress or distress

mildadhd
05-07-14, 06:00 PM
I think the difference between Eustress and Distress are subjective.
I found some examples in an article I read.

The following can be ways through which one gets stess either positive or negative:

Injury or illness (oneself or a family member)
Being abused or neglected
Separation from a spouse or committed relationship partner
Conflict in interpersonal relationships
Bankruptcy/Money Problems
Unemployment
Sleep problems
Marriage
Buying a home
Having a child
Moving
Taking a vacation
Holiday seasons
Retiring
Taking educational classes or learning a new hobby
Habitual behavior patterns eg procastination or lack of proper planning,overscheduling and lack of assertiveness.
All these despite being positive or negative,leads to stress i.e eustress or distress

Thanks,

In the past, I thought eustress was "good" stressors and distress was "bad" stressors.

I think I was wrong.


Because to much positive stressors may promote instability, and negative stressors may promote stability (homeostasis).


In my previous post I think I should have wrote..

Both negative and positive stressors that promote stability are eustressful.

Both negative and positive stressors that promote instability are distressful.

What is a "good" stressor and what is a "bad" stressor seems subjective, depending on personal circumstances.


Opinions?


P

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 06:25 PM
Thanks,

In the past, I thought eustress was "good" stressors and distress was "bad" stressors.

I think I was wrong.


Because to much positive stressors may promote instability, and negative stressors may promote stability (homeostasis).


In my previous post I think I should have wrote..

Both negative and positive stressors that promote stability are eustressful.

Both negative and positive stressors that promote instability are distressful.

What is a "good" stressor and what is a "bad" stressor seems subjective, depending on personal circumstances.


Opinions?


P

Just my personal opinion homeostasis is achieved when you can eliminate distress and can control eustress.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 06:38 PM
In the spirit of this section of the forum, my answer is completely speculative:

Imagine the human being not as a single blob but as a confluence of many processes, where each process has a usual level of function, absolute upper and lower limits of function, and some processes also with safe or normal upper and lower limits smaller than their absolute ranges. I think a stressor might be something that causes one or more of the processes to have increased or decreased function compared to their usual levels, and that bad stress might be something that causes too many processes to undergo too much change, or causes some processes to move outside safe levels, or causes one or more processes to be stuck near their minimum or maximum levels for too long.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 06:42 PM
IMO: Eliminating distress equals eliminating the environment. Distress can only be managed or avoided, never eliminated. Complete isolation without potential for distress would in itself be greatly distressing.

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 07:13 PM
IMO: Eliminating distress equals eliminating the environment. Distress can only be managed or avoided, never eliminated. Complete isolation without potential for distress would in itself be greatly distressing.

I think eliminating Stress would eliminate the environment.

I think the world would be a great place without Distress. I think distress may be impossible to totally avoid but the less the better.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 07:23 PM
I think eliminating Stress would eliminate the environment.

I think the world would be a great place without Distress. I think distress may be impossible to totally avoid but the less the better.
I think we agree completely.

Of course the world would be a great place without distress, except we can't remove distress directly, we can only remove the potential for it, which means (just in case) removing everything that might happen, which essentially means no more environment at all, which leads to death or insanity or a meaningless life.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 07:30 PM
There may be a hidden wish to just remove certain kinds or categories of distress, just to see how much it would help.

Real elimination of distress means no more earthquakes, floods, famines, fires, accidents, no more death of loved ones, no more wars, etc. Even living alone in a windowless concrete bunker (with no one to love because they might die, no electricity in case of fire, etc) still can't prevent distress.

mildadhd
05-07-14, 07:41 PM
Thanks, I agree, with everyone.

Hopefully all people experience healthy balance of punishments and rewards found in the world.

A healthy balance of emotional stressors/experiences promotes over all balance. (whole brain functions)

FEAR, ANGER, GRIEF/PANIC are negatively charged basic emotions.

SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY are positively charged basic emotions.

Overall emotionally healthy balance of both charges is the goal.

When a healthy balance does not occur, emotional imbalance occurs.

Specifics would depend on personal experiences, but I think this natures goal in general.

P

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 07:54 PM
There may be a hidden wish to just remove certain kinds or categories of distress, just to see how much it would help.

Real elimination of distress means no more earthquakes, floods, famines, fires, accidents, no more death of loved ones, no more wars, etc. Even living alone in a windowless concrete bunker (with no one to love because they might die, no electricity in case of fire, etc) still can't prevent distress.

I agree with you. I was referring to perfect conditions where stress doesn't dip into distress would be great. Ending all distress is only a dream and in my dream it wouldn't destroy the environment. Just the stress of distress would keep people in check.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 07:57 PM
I agree with you. I was referring to perfect conditions where stress doesn't dip into distress would be great. Ending all distress is only a dream and in my dream it wouldn't destroy the environment. Just the stress of distress would keep people in check.
Maybe right... but not all distress comes from people.

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 08:32 PM
Maybe right... but not all distress comes from people.

True, but people could prepare much more to prevent a lot of distress from other factors.

Such as, not building in a flood plain, having a plan for a natural disaster, eating properly and exercising to prevent disease, practicing good disease prevention practices. Things like that. Someone could potentially avoid most distress, maybe all by preparation, diligence and luck.

dvdnvwls
05-07-14, 09:28 PM
True, but people could prepare much more to prevent a lot of distress from other factors.

Such as, not building in a flood plain, having a plan for a natural disaster, eating properly and exercising to prevent disease, practicing good disease prevention practices. Things like that. Someone could potentially avoid most distress, maybe all by preparation, diligence and luck.
In practical terms, we've had lots of time to do that and not done so. I think the reason is essentially the law of diminishing returns - we'd be working so hard at that last 5% or 10% of disaster prevention that we wouldn't have time to do anything else.

mildadhd
05-07-14, 10:00 PM
Stressors are required for life.

That is why we have a stress response system.

P

mildadhd
05-07-14, 10:20 PM
In practical terms, we've had lots of time to do that and not done so. I think the reason is essentially the law of diminishing returns - we'd be working so hard at that last 5% or 10% of disaster prevention that we wouldn't have time to do anything else.

There are emotional environments that promote healthy psychological development and there are environments that don't.

I partially agree, if the emotional environment doesn't promote healthy psychological development, forcing development won't work.

But I partially disagree, because with the right emotional environment, psychological development occurs naturally, with little effort.

There is something really special about free play.

Mammals don't play when exposed to emotionally distressful environmental stressors.

Mammals only play when exposed to emotionally eustressful environmental stressors.

Healthy Play is a natural sign that the psychological environment, perceived or real, is emotional healthy.

No extra work required.


P

Greyhound1
05-07-14, 10:27 PM
Stressors are required for life.

That is why we have a stress response system.

P

Agreed, they are required for life and helpful in sustaining it. When the stressors overwhelm and become distress is usually when the problems begin.

mildadhd
05-07-14, 11:59 PM
Stress is a physiological response mounted by an organism when it is confronted with excessive demands on its coping mechanisms, whether biological or psychological.

It is an attempt to maintain internal biological and chemical stability, or homeostasis, in the face of these excessive demands.

The physiological stress response involves nervous discharges throughout the body and the release of a cascade of hormones, chiefly adrenaline and cortisol.

Virtually every organ is affected, including the heart and lungs, the muscles and, of course, the emotional centres in the brain.

Cortisol itself acts on the tissues of almost every part of the body--from the brain to the immune system, from the bones to the intestines.

It is an important part of the infinitely intricate system of checks and balances that enables the body to respond to a threat.

..Ultimately they all represent the absence of something that the organism perceives as necessary for survival--or its threatened loss.

The threat itself can be real or perceived.

The threatened loss of food supply is a major stressor.

So is the threatened loss of love--for human beings.

"It may be said without hesitation that for man the most important stressors are emotional," wrote the pioneering Canadian stress researcher and physician Hans Selye. (*25)



-Gabor Mate M.D., "In The Realm Of Hungry Ghosts", P 196.


P

dvdnvwls
05-08-14, 12:30 AM
I partially agree, if the emotional environment doesn't promote healthy psychological development, forcing development won't work.

But I partially disagree, because with the right emotional environment, psychological development occurs naturally, with little effort.

I'm sorry but you can't partially agree and partially disagree with things I never said nor even hinted at.

mildadhd
05-08-14, 12:44 AM
I'm sorry but you can't partially agree and partially disagree with things I never said nor even hinted at.

I am sorry I misunderstood.

P

Amtram
05-08-14, 02:04 PM
I think eliminating Stress would eliminate the environment.

I think the world would be a great place without Distress. I think distress may be impossible to totally avoid but the less the better.

My mother has two types of lymphoma and is getting both chemo and radiation, and my father's dementia is progressing quickly. The only way I can eliminate distress would be by not having parents. None of the alternatives for achieving that are terribly stress-free!

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 03:36 PM
My mother has two types of lymphoma and is getting both chemo and radiation, and my father's dementia is progressing quickly. The only way I can eliminate distress would be by not having parents. None of the alternatives for achieving that are terribly stress-free!

I am very sorry to hear about your mother and father and your distress.

I am by no means implying that eliminating all distress is even possible.

All I meant was that the world would be a better place if we didn't have to go through the pain and distress you and your family are going through now.

I wish you and your family the best.

SB_UK
05-08-14, 03:41 PM
Combination of:

Eustress - a stressor which the individual chooses.
Distress - a stressor which the individual cannot escape.
&
Eustress - a stressor which the individual believes results in his own improvement.
Distress - a stressor which the individual believes worsens his lot.

So - I'd suggest non-competitive sport and non-competitive 'Jack of all trades' education.

As soon as sport becomes competitive, or education becomes for a paid job
- ie money, power etc become involved all of the fun drains out from *any* exercise
- as the point becomes to beat others, obtain more money than others

- and not to become as good as one can be.

There is no doubt that the average person could become a pretty good tennis player or computer programmer
- but there's no doubt that the average person won't become the best tennis player or computer programmer the world can offer.

Why compete against others ?
Compete against oneself within a globally collaborative backdrop.

-*-

In summary - what is eustress ?
Volitional striving towards a personally rewarding goal.
what is distress ?
Enforced (by society) striving towards a goal which the individual does not desire.

SB_UK
05-08-14, 03:52 PM
Our own mortality (the mortality of others) as distressor

I think that a large part of achieving wisdom (nonattachment) is an acceptance of the impermanence of life.
^^^
post-edit this sentence looks like it's copied from standard Buddhism - apologies for that ... ... but it's right.

We can all tend towards a life which is (ostensibly) free from disease until immediately prior to death; I think this - since eternal youth/health is not an option - is where we should be placing our chips.

If global society embraced:
An optimally eustressful life through optimising aerobic metabolism and individual/group understanding/application of morality
- then we'd be able to live that life.
A life which guarantees acquisition of a state of mind (wisdom) where desiring permanence/material world attachment is no longer maintained.

Amtram
05-08-14, 04:14 PM
I am very sorry to hear about your mother and father and your distress.

I am by no means implying that eliminating all distress is even possible.

All I meant was that the world would be a better place if we didn't have to go through the pain and distress you and your family are going through now.

I wish you and your family the best.

Thanks. I deal, because I have to, and I still know people who are way worse off than I am. However, my point is that it is simply impossible to create a world in which there is no stress. All you need is other people (or worse, other people you care about) and distress is a given.

Rather than eliminate stress, we should learn to accept it and figure out how to handle it - and that process naturally makes it less stressful.

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 04:31 PM
However, my point is that it is simply impossible to create a world in which there is no stress.

Rather than eliminate stress, we should learn to accept it and figure out how to handle it - and that process naturally makes it less stressful.

I think you are onto how this could be possible in your last sentence.

If we could change our response to stress to the point it didn't reach distress. You can't change or control the stimuli but it is very possible to change ones response to it.

This leads to a question.
Is stress still considered stress if it doesn't cause a stressful experience?

dvdnvwls
05-08-14, 05:13 PM
Is stress still considered stress if it doesn't cause a stressful experience?
No, because a stressful experience is exactly what stress is. An event is not stress - stress is purely a response.

If I'm desensitized in such a way that somehow I don't perceive some of my own stress responses, that is still stress. We've all seen a person who is badly stressed but has ceased to notice his own stress.

mildadhd
05-08-14, 06:44 PM
Originally Posted by Greyhound1
Is stress still considered stress if it doesn't cause a stressful experience?


Thanks,

This is a really interesting discussion.

I think it depends on if the stressor(cause), causes stability(eustress) or causes instability(distress).

The stressor is the cause of the stress, the type of stress, depends on the type of the stressor.

Opinions?

Another question is, what is a emotional stressor?






P

mildadhd
05-08-14, 07:04 PM
Originally Posted by Greyhound1
Is stress still considered stress if it doesn't cause a stressful experience?


What is the severity of emotional stress? (stressfull verses stressless)?


What is a acute emotional stressor?

-acute emotional distress?

-acute emotional eustress?


What is a chronic emotional stressor?

-chronic emotional distress?

-chronic emotional eustress?


P

mildadhd
05-08-14, 07:23 PM
Severity of emotional stressor. (depends cause/stimulus/threat/safety..)?

Severity of emotional stress. (depends on emotional temperament, type of emotional stressor..)?



P

Amtram
05-08-14, 07:34 PM
I think you are onto how this could be possible in your last sentence.

If we could change our response to stress to the point it didn't reach distress. You can't change or control the stimuli but it is very possible to change ones response to it.

This leads to a question.
Is stress still considered stress if it doesn't cause a stressful experience?

There are things that cause stressful experiences that aren't stressors. It's a highly individual situation. I've spent a lot of time with young people as a volunteer (and, by extension, their parents) and seen a lot of unnecessary drama. Some people create stress because they thrive on it. Some people look for stress to distract themselves from other stress. Some people seek out stress because it fulfills some other psychological need.

We can arrive at some generalized conclusions, but most of what comprises "stress" among normal, diverse individuals is highly subjective.

Amtram
05-08-14, 07:37 PM
No, because a stressful experience is exactly what stress is. An event is not stress - stress is purely a response.

If I'm desensitized in such a way that somehow I don't perceive some of my own stress responses, that is still stress. We've all seen a person who is badly stressed but has ceased to notice his own stress.

Again, subjective viewpoints are highly relevant here. On the other side of people who deliberately create stressful situations, we have people like firefighters, EMTs, emergency room physicians and nurses, and so on, who thrive on stress and come out the better for it.

mildadhd
05-08-14, 09:02 PM
Focusing on internal and external environmental emotional stressors, and emotional stress responses, influencing psychological development:


-emotional stressor (cause of stress response, biological and psychological, acute and chronic)

-emotional stress response system (HPA)(depending on severity of emotional stressor, age, severity emotional hypersensitive temperament, hereditary,etc)

-emotional eustress (positive and negative, emotional stressors and emotional stress responses, promoting stability)

-emotional distress (positive and negative, emotional stressors and emotional responses, promoting instability)



Opinions?

P

mildadhd
05-08-14, 09:55 PM
Stressor is the cause, stress is the response?

Opinions?


P

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 10:25 PM
No, because a stressful experience is exactly what stress is. An event is not stress - stress is purely a response.

If I'm desensitized in such a way that somehow I don't perceive some of my own stress responses, that is still stress. We've all seen a person who is badly stressed but has ceased to notice his own stress.

Do you think it is possible for a stress response to change? Can they change through things like mindfulness, yoga and meditation? If they can change then in theory it could be possible to end distress but highly unlikely.


I wasn't referring to being desensitized to the awareness of stress but to the lack of a negative response to it.
No negative response would mean no stress by your definition.

dvdnvwls
05-08-14, 10:50 PM
Do you think it is possible for a stress response to change? Can they change through things like mindfulness, yoga and meditation? If they can change then in theory it could be possible to end distress but highly unlikely.


I wasn't referring to being desensitized to stress but to the lack of a negative response to it.
This gets tied up in "What is stress" a little more tightly. There must be several ways to measure stress - can any of those methods be considered normative?

Let's say (true story from my past) I'm driving, I'm in an intersection, and I see a truck coming very fast from my left, toward my door. The truck is not stress; the crash is not stress; stress is something that happens inside me. How should we measure my stress? By the action of my internal organs? My skin conductivity? My verbal reports? Something else? ... and if the various measurements disagree, which one is my "true stress level"?

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 11:07 PM
Again, subjective viewpoints are highly relevant here. On the other side of people who deliberately create stressful situations, we have people like firefighters, EMTs, emergency room physicians and nurses, and so on, who thrive on stress and come out the better for it.

Sure, there are plenty of people that thrive on stress. Stress and reality are both ones perception.

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 11:12 PM
Stressor is the cause, stress is the response?

Opinions?


P

I agree. What type of opinions are you looking for? I am sorry if I veered your thread off course.

Greyhound1
05-08-14, 11:40 PM
This gets tied up in "What is stress" a little more tightly. There must be several ways to measure stress - can any of those methods be considered normative?

Let's say (true story from my past) I'm driving, I'm in an intersection, and I see a truck coming very fast from my left, toward my door. The truck is not stress; the crash is not stress; stress is something that happens inside me. How should we measure my stress? By the action of my internal organs? My skin conductivity? My verbal reports? Something else? ... and if the various measurements disagree, which one is my "true stress level"?


I agree with you about "what is stress" and how can you measure it. It is ones perception and subject to change and often.

Also, where is the line between the stress being a good thing like say from a quick response and avoid being hit
and the stress causing a heart attack before the accident even occurs?

Interesting topic though

dvdnvwls
05-09-14, 12:45 AM
I agree with you about "what is stress" and how can you measure it. It is ones perception and subject to change and often.

Also, where is the line between the stress being a good thing like say from a quick response and avoid being hit
and the stress causing a heart attack before the accident even occurs?

Interesting topic though
I'm not convinced that stress is one's perception. I think it's possible that stress might be measurable independent of perception. If (for a rough example) I feel an adrenaline rush but I enjoy that, I think technically I am stressed - the fact that I'm enjoying my stress doesn't make it not stress. But I may be wrong about that.

mildadhd
05-09-14, 12:53 AM
I agree. What type of opinions are you looking for? I am sorry if I veered your thread off course.

Thanks, opinions, interests, additional thoughts, etc, I think your on track and more.

Say whatever you think is important, I am really interested.

I would like to consider everything.

Sorry, sometimes it takes me a while to reply.

I really appreciate everyones interest, have lots of things I want to discuss and learn more about, mindfulness, awareness, etc, in relation to stressors and stress response.

What ever anyone thinks is important.

(It might be better for me to listen than discuss, when it comes to mindfulness and awareness etc. I have been stuck on getting myself to write things down, but I know that is the next step, because that is the point, when I keep going off track)

This thread discussion, reminds me of a experience I had..

I was working grave yard shift, in a very large cold storage warehouse, with one other employee.

In the middle of the night, I was working by myself in one section of the warehouse and the other employee was working by himself in a different section of the warehouse.

I was bending over to pick up a box and I saw a shadow move.

My heart started pounding with fear, I thought someone was coming up behind me, and as I turned to see who was there?

Nobody was there.

What happened was the giant refrigerator fan turned on and was blowing the light, hanging from the ceiling, giving the appearance of a shadow moving.

What I find fascinating is..

I had a real stress response, caused by stressor that I perceived as real, that was not really what I perceived.

Perceived stressor?

Opinions?



P

dvdnvwls
05-09-14, 01:19 AM
I had a real stress response, caused by stressor that I perceived as real, that was not really what I perceived.

Perceived stressor?

I think there's no such thing as a "perceived stressor". In terms of stress, it doesn't matter if a threat is real or imagined. Imaginary threats count exactly the same as all others.

SB_UK
05-09-14, 03:52 AM
Distress
Sitting perfectly balanced on a see-saw (not moving)

Eustress
Both sides moving gently up / down

Distress
Moving up/down so viciously that both sides clatter into the ground.

- However -
with practice - the amount of force/speed which the 2 people on the see-saw will be able to put in/travel at will become greater - whilst remaining in the 'eustressful' zone.

-*-

So - 'eustressful' redefines with mastery.

Your 'zone' becomes (in this case) a greater level of fitness.
However - if this analogy were to take place in the mind - something like more adept at 'whichever procedure' we would become.
Speaking a foreign language, progamming a computer, writing a story ... ... ...

So - aspiring towards lifting one's eustressful zone ?
Mastery

What motivated human beings (Steven Pink) ?
Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose
The individual becoming better at something the individual considers worthwhile.

However what happens when there's nowhere left to take your physical/psychological discipline - ie distress from broken bones as one attempts to push one's discipline into more extreme territory
- well maybe try another ... ...

However - the general point I'm trying to get at is that we can obtain reward from:
[1] Selfish behaviours ie beating other people <- which will never mean anything - anyone can win an Olympic medal if the rest of the competitors boycott the game.
[2] Social (compatible) behaviours (eg above on the see-saw) <- which is nice, where you'll see improvement, but beyond aerobic fitness/having a mind which is moral - there's no overarching point to excellence in the see-saw versus eg the roundabout; there's very much a point to generating an optimised aerobic engine - but take it too far and before you know it, you've Tour de France riders keeling over dead from hypertrophied hearts, or Olympic medal winning rowers with T2D from massive carb. loading.

Finally
[3] State wisdom (enlightenment/pair-bonding) - the need for reward is transcended (loss of material world attachment) - at which point you are allowed (since you no longer need reward) to adopt the rational viewpoint - that either beating other people (selfish reward) or trying to be the best in some given discipline (social reward)
- are both (from a higher perspective) doomed to failure.

With aerobic fitness and a mind of morality - having lost material world attachment -
we tootle through life without the same exposure to distressors which underlie disease (particularly premature disease).

I think that the state of wisdom permits an individual to maintain (unswervingly) - the essential physiological parameters (ie blood glucose, ionic concentration, protein levels) where the intention is to point a finger at sugar, salt and umami taste receptors and their 'wiring' up into reward - being transcended ie I'm pretty sure that the fundamental distress to man is not having grown - both physically/mentally
- growth (completion) triggers a shift in reward systems which takes us away from the desire for growth promoting foods -
- which (in turn) renders us no longer programmed to hasten our own demise.

The point being that we encode our own distress through material world attachement (pre-programmed desire for growth promoting foods which we can only discard when we've completed physical/mental growth trajectories).

So upon growth (completion of mind) -> No distress (partic from losing attraction to growth promoting foods) -> No chronic cortisol production (caused both by incomplete mind/inappropriate food intake) -> No cortisol resistance -> No loss of inflammatory control -> No common disease (since inflammation underlies all common disease).

-*-

The prospect of living a life without disease is there - all we need is a redefinition of society away from money/law (hierarchy).

SB_UK
05-09-14, 08:09 AM
In Peripheral's example above of 'stress' for no apparent reason
- some people - certainly not me - court stress (horror movies, rollercoasters) because of the stimulation it provides.

I think that the silent average monastery is far too noisy (crazy loud prayer/hymn singing and tapping wooden sticks) - and over stimulating for me

and I want continuous perfect silence.

It's the stress of over-stimulation which drove me into taking stimulants (paradoxical effect) ie to be relaxed by a stimulant (SNS/cortisol resistance in the stress sensitive).
This is how they worked at first - but now no longer - now a stimulant stimulates me and I hate them.

Question - whether the urge to chatter is inversely propertional to mind ie on completion of mind - there's nothing else you want to do - and so won't engage in idle chatter (should I wear blue or green Y-fronts ?) because none of that nonsense matters ?

Though I accept it might be uncomfortable not to wear underpants - and that in principle - the are one of the few things in this world - which the next world will retain.

-*-

What do I think we need to consider wrt stress ?

[1] Stress simply relates to incompletion - the goal is to complete some growth trajectory, after which stress dissipates.
[2] In the case of man - stress relates to completion of mind (wisdom).
[3] Upon completion of mind - a reward system changes from motivation through blood glucose elevation and we accommodate by altering our diet/lifestyle.
[4] Net effect reduced 'growth' - we adopt a steady-state metabolism which ensures a long and disease-free life.

Take home message - the goal is to grow up (mind) - when it occurs - you will have escaped innate programming (to grow up and its affiliated reward system - to seek out the foods and behaviours of growth ie high GI) and will be free to life a life which is not blighted by diseases of excess growth - ie no longer compelled towards food/behaviours which hasten your death.

Greyhound1
05-09-14, 08:48 AM
I'm not convinced that stress is one's perception. I think it's possible that stress might be measurable independent of perception. If (for a rough example) I feel an adrenaline rush but I enjoy that, I think technically I am stressed - the fact that I'm enjoying my stress doesn't make it not stress. But I may be wrong about that.

I think stress must be ones perception. If the mind and body don't perceive something to be stressful than it wouldn't be. No perception of stress would lead to no response to stress. The same reason as we mentioned earlier, stress is subjective.

SB_UK
05-09-14, 08:51 AM
So trying to draw a connection between 'stress' and 'stimulation'
- and how the ideal is to transcend the need for 'stress' / 'stimulation'

ps can't drink >1/2 cup of coffee before over-stimulation now

- and so if we look at what I appear to have learnt

- there is the exact same basis for the need for 'stress'/'stimulation'
- and that's completion in mind (wisdom) - completion in the growth trajectory of man

- and freedom from material world attachment.

You no longer need to prove yourself to another (primitive reward system) or to yourself (socail reward system)
- you're good to go

off and just plain breathe.

(though I'd really like a happy dog to breath alongside in the sun - noting that of course the pair bond partner is a given)

- trying to find any social organization which doesn't build from a stable lifetime pair-bond of EQUALS (effectively) won't work
- or no babies no life
-- Bob Marley.

SB_UK
05-09-14, 09:10 AM
Distress
Sitting perfectly balanced on a see-saw (not moving)

Eustress
Both sides moving gently up / down

Distress
Moving up/down so viciously that both sides clatter into the ground.



So the confusing thing about distress is that moving too fast or moving too slow from the set-point results in distress.

Distress must then represent deviation from physiological set-points in eg blood glucose, pO2, ionic concentrations, pCO2, pH etc etc

- where growth introduces us into a di-stressful reward system (blood glucose elevation/drop - the dualistic pleasure/pain paradigm)

-- but where the goal is to be happy (maintain physiological set-point) at one optimal physiological state - unswervingly so.

But you don't get to live happily in that state unless one overcomes the blood glucose elevation paradigm which comes with completion of mind/wisdom.

IE we're distressed until our mind makes sense - and until we've a world which a mind which makes sense specifies for that mind to live within
- otherwise distress.

SB_UK
05-09-14, 09:25 AM
The answer to the question of what is supposed to motivate human beings ?

Is to escape a model of existence which requires motivation in order to comply ie you're happy if you can live life without the need to satisfy motivation.

Noting that this idea shouldn't be confused with apathy - which is unhappiness which accompanies a loss in motivation.

What's the difference ?
Escaping the need for stimulation/reward results in the individual being as happy imaginable in a state without stimulation ('sugar rush',blood glucose elevation) - not wishing to be elsewhere - for s/he's arrived

- apathy would rather be in another place.

-*-

The sun and a bouncy dog would be nice though; wifey prefers gardening and cats (o+) to running and dogs (o->).

Amtram
05-09-14, 09:48 AM
Do you think it is possible for a stress response to change? Can they change through things like mindfulness, yoga and meditation? If they can change then in theory it could be possible to end distress but highly unlikely.


I wasn't referring to being desensitized to the awareness of stress but to the lack of a negative response to it.
No negative response would mean no stress by your definition.

To some degree, yes. But it depends on not only the stressor but on the context. If a loved one comes down with a deadly illness or gets into a horrible accident, the suddenness of that means that the reaction is going to be intense and immediate. If it occurs while you are also having other stressful issues (children being difficult, finances being tight, going through a divorce, etc.) then your reaction to the new stress is going to be even more intense.

If the outcome looks good, that will change your reaction. If the outcome looks bad, then your reaction will change - if it's bad and then over, that's one thing, but if it's bad and is going to require you to make long-lasting changes in your life, that's another. In the latter case, you could be the type of person who rises to the challenge and makes peace with the situation, or you could be so overwhelmed with the new set of responsibilities that you crack.

And when you're in the middle of a crisis, that's the worst time to be working on building your coping skills. However, it's also the only time you'll be able to learn how to cope with this specific crisis. Catch-22.

Amtram
05-09-14, 09:58 AM
I think stress must be ones perception. If the mind and body don't perceive something to be stressful than it wouldn't be. No perception of stress would lead to no response to stress. The same reason as we mentioned earlier, stress is subjective.

I think it's probably more nuanced than that, but somewhere along these lines. What's missing from the picture is the reaction that the stress causes, and that varies completely from individual to individual. To go to an extreme, not all children who are severely abused or soldiers who suffer serious war injuries end up with PTSD. As well, not everyone who loses a job or gets a divorce ends up so depressed that they can no longer function without medications. Part of your perception of stress comes from your vulnerability and resilience - and you can be both at the same time depending on what is initiating the stress.

Greyhound1
05-09-14, 07:24 PM
I think it's probably more nuanced than that, but somewhere along these lines. What's missing from the picture is the reaction that the stress causes, and that varies completely from individual to individual. To go to an extreme, not all children who are severely abused or soldiers who suffer serious war injuries end up with PTSD. As well, not everyone who loses a job or gets a divorce ends up so depressed that they can no longer function without medications. Part of your perception of stress comes from your vulnerability and resilience - and you can be both at the same time depending on what is initiating the stress.

I completely understand and agree for the most part with you. You are describing reality and how we as humans usually perceive and respond to stress.

My only point about this was that in a crazy totally unscientific theory it could be possible to eliminate distress. I think there is only a very slight possibility only if one could totally control their perception of stress and or their response to stressors. The way could be using cryogenics I have no idea.

I just believe the possibility is clear if we use DVD's definition of stress. It is solely ones response to stressors. If you could control your response before it becomes toxic and distressed could make it possible.

This only started because I said the world would be a better place without distress. I feel like I have been forced to prove a statement of a dream world. I just don't understand why people say things are impossible.

There is just so much we don't know about the universe, ourselves and what will be possible in the future. I believe anything could be possible however slim it may be.

mildadhd
05-09-14, 11:01 PM
Greyhound1

Thanks, I really like your response below.

I am realizing, that in prior thread discussions in general, that I didn't specify in my own head: what is the stressor, and what is the stress response.

In this thread, "What is a stressor?" I am making a conscious decision to be more aware of what the stressor is, and what the stress-response is.

Example,

Originally Posted by Greyhound1
I think stress must be ones perception. If the mind and body don't perceive something to be stressful than it wouldn't be. No perception of stress would lead to no response to stress. The same reason as we mentioned earlier, stress is subjective.

Building on Greyhounds1's post above, with the additional questions, what is the stressor and what is the stress-response, in mind.


I think the stressor and the stress-response must be ones perception.

If the mind and body don't perceive something to be a stressor, than it wouldn't be.

No perception of a stressor, would lead to no stress-response.

The same reason as we mentioned earlier, stressor and stress-response are subjective.


If i limit using the word stress with the response, "stress-response" only, and use the words eustress (promoting stability) and distress (promoting instability), to describe the specific type of stressors and the specific type of stress-responses.

The terminology become much less subjective.

And I the roles of the terms: stressor, stress-response, eustress and distress, become more clear.

I find the general terms stress and stressful, to be very misleading, because they don't appropriately address, both types of stressors and stress-responses. Always leaning toward the negative, and while misrepresenting cortisols essential role for life, etc.



Opinions/additions, etc?



P

dvdnvwls
05-09-14, 11:20 PM
I believe no event or thing can be called a stressor until it is actually evoking a stress response. Events in themselves are neutral in terms of stress.

Greyhound1
05-09-14, 11:23 PM
Greyhound1

Thanks, I really like your response below.

I am realizing, that in prior general thread discussions, that I didn't specify in my own head: what is the stressor, and what is the stress response.

In this thread, "What is a stressor?" I am making a conscious decision to be more aware of what the stressor is, and what the stress-response is.

Example,



Building on Greyhounds1's post above, with the additional questions, what is the stressor and what is the stress-response, in mind.




If i limit using the word stress with the response, "stress-response" only, and use the words eustress (promoting stability) and distress (promoting instability), to describe the specific type of stressors and the specific type of stress-responses.

The terminology become much less subjective.

And I the roles of the terms: stressor, stress-response, eustress and distress, become more clear.

I find the general terms stress and stressful, to be very misleading, because they don't appropriately address, both types of stressors and stress-responses. Always leaning toward the negative, and while misrepresenting cortisols essential role for life, etc.



Opinions/additions, etc?



P
I think that is a great idea. The more defined the parameters and terminology the better we can discuss it. There will be much less confusion and better understanding.

dvdnvwls
05-09-14, 11:25 PM
I think stress must be ones perception. If the mind and body don't perceive something to be stressful than it wouldn't be. No perception of stress would lead to no response to stress. The same reason as we mentioned earlier, stress is subjective.
I think you and I are using the word "perception" differently. I might, for example, not know that my adrenal glands are working harder, and therefore not have perceived anything at all, but still be stressed.

Or be working in a room where there's a constant loud noise, which at some point I stop perceiving even though it continues to stress me.

Greyhound1
05-09-14, 11:47 PM
I think you and I are using the word "perception" differently. I might, for example, not know that my adrenal glands are working harder, and therefore not have perceived anything at all, but still be stressed.

Or be working in a room where there's a constant loud noise, which at some point I stop perceiving even though it continues to stress me.

I think we are using perception differently. I see your point about a mental conscious perception. I was referring to perception including conscious, unconscious and ones body's responses. Which ever sensor in ones body that perceives stress/distress that excites a response.

I think we need to work on clarifying and defining several key points to help with this as P. suggested.

What should we call these below to help clarify the discussion? Potential stressors?

dvdnvwls
Re: What is a stressor?
I believe no event or thing can be called a stressor until it is actually evoking a stress response. Events in themselves are neutral in terms of stress.

dvdnvwls
05-10-14, 12:05 AM
What should we call these below to help clarify the discussion? Potential stressors?

dvdnvwls
Re: What is a stressor?
I believe no event or thing can be called a stressor until it is actually evoking a stress response. Events in themselves are neutral in terms of stress.
Sure - works for me, anyway. With the proviso that any and every event, any and every thing, is a potential stressor.

mildadhd
05-10-14, 12:59 AM
When I was 7.

I went to Disneyland.

I remember feeling tense with everything going on around us, and also thinking everything was going to be ok, because I could see my Dad's shirt, as I watched the dolphins, through the crowd.

I remember watching the dolphins for a long time, while always staying close to my Dad's shirt.

When being knee high, I tugging on my Dad's shirt to ask him a question.

"Dad"...

And a stranger with the same shirt on as my Dad, stared down at me, wondering why I was tugging on his shirt?

I was scared stiff, my heart felt like it froze, stopped and dropped out of my chest.

What I think is most fascinating is I remember feeling safe standing next to that man, because I thought he was my Dad, for quite a while, before realizing I was really separated from my Dad, resulting in a emotional stress-response.





Opinions/additions, etc.

Greyhound1
05-10-14, 01:06 AM
Sure - works for me, anyway. With the proviso that any and every event, any and every thing, is a potential stressor.

I would say that is a fair statement. I think everything can be.
Good call on clarifying the proviso.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:16 AM
Stress is anything that deviates the body from physiological biochemistry (pH, blood glucose, ions) and Eustress is stress that works to restore physiological balance post-application and deviation away from the set-point (a more resilient organism)
- whereas Distress is stress which works to impede balance post-exposure (a more fragile organism).

So - distress isn't limited to perception - it also consists of factors which the individual may have a positive perception over (ie my doctor told me that this medication is good for me) - but which causes actual physical distress.

How do we know which factors result in stress sensitivity as opposed to stress resistance ?
I think we all know what leads to a stronger and what leads to a weaker individual.

Perhaps there would be some element of experimental proof required - since too much of what's good (eg exercise) can lead the body into distress.

But how is the individual to know how much of a good thing and how much of a bad thing they're allowed before eustress descends into distress ?
People often say no pain no gain.

What if too much pain leads not to a better physiological state, but to a less resilient physiological state ie one which is incapable of resisting stressors.

I guess the first point to make - is that stressors are used as a consequence of stress - and so morphine (which must stress the system as it leads to dependency ie a less sensitive/resilient physiology) was shown to be self-administered by rats in a poor living environment
- and so perhaps attraction to use of stressors to the point of distress will be alleviated in a world in which people are free from the major distress.

The entire body of evolution states that 'survival' is the key concept.

What determines whether we survive ?
Money.

Is money a Universal birthright ?
No.

So - I'd suggest that the key distressor is lack of certainty over access to money and hence food/shelter acquisition leading to stress leading to distressor-seeking like behaviour (drugs) which worsens the individual's lot.
In a benign psychosocial (no conditionalities placed on survival ie eradication of money) and benign physical (exercise and healthy food for all) environment
- perhaps we can trust our own physiological/psychological feedback loops to thrust us towards eustress and away from distress.

Noting - that I'm suggesting that the bad things in this world occur through environmental considerations which thrust people down the addictive distressor (drugs,money,power) route, and that in a benign phys/psych environment we'd be thrust into a eustressful paradigm
- which'd culminate with the acquisition of wisdom
- whereby the individual no longer feels a compulsion (need for reward/motivation) to 'prove' himself.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:46 AM
I'm torn though.
If the point is cortisol sensitivity - then the point'd be (ultimately) to arrive at a point at which neither eustressful/nor distressful stimulus is felt ie where there's NO cortisol production - because with low cortisol production we step back towards cortisol sensitivity (ie insulin sensitivity is restored through low carb intake - low calls on insulin secretion).
So - now I'm suggesting that the ultimate point is to eliminate eustress/distress.

However - to be fair - that's pretty much what I suggested above.

I think the point is - that until completion of mind - and we're trapped in growth phase - there is going to be blood glucose fluctuation.

We need to ensure that this 'stress' takes us towards completion of mind (loss of the primitive reward system / blood glucose elevation as pleasure paradigm)
- there're 2 choices.

Eustress - we make our own body more sensitive to its own nts/hormones eg caloric restiction,fasting,aerobic exercise, meditation,immersion in complete silence ie we under use our endogenous nt/hormonal system - making our own system more sensitive ie capable of activation by itself - without external factors.
<- So we've a clear link into material world detachment here - as mateial world factors aren't required for reward/motivation.


Distress - addictive (the acquisition of money, power, sex, drugs) incompatible with wisdom as the endogenous nt/endocrine system is rendered resistant to its own production of nts and hormones ie we become dependent on exogenous activation.
<- So we've a clear link into material world attachment here - as material world factors are required for reward/motivation.

-*-

So summarising
The process of growth imparts a growth trajectory which carries with it a reward system.
The object is to complete the growth trajectory and thereby overcome the growth-promoting reward system.
Failure to complete mind - will leave the individual drawn towards growth promoting behaviours which'll lead to the familiar diseases of over-growth (autoimmune, cancer, obesity).

In order to live a healthy life - it would be wise to adopt eustress + global education towards acquisition of wisdom.
However - in the interim period - perhaps it would be sensible to optimise the system prior to attaining wisdom - by developing optimal endocrine/neurot. sensitivity by engaging in activities which 'under' crank these systems - leading (presumably) to optimal sensitivity.

So - fasting, all manners of exercise, organic vegan keto diets, low BMI, meditation - resulting in eg optimal sensitivity in insulin, leptin, thyroid hormone and cortisol.

Ever feel you've been allocated a hormone ?
And the short straw is cortisol.

At least - it can be, if not used appropriately.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:51 AM
So - eustress = optimal physiological functioning as defined through hormone/neuroT sensitivity.
distress = blunting / resistance of our own body's endocrine / neuroT functioning - generally by immersion in external activators
- noting that this type of behaviour is most often driven (eg Rat Park) by an adverse psychosocial environment
- though where noting that an adverse psychosocial environment (eg requiring money and having to buy the cheapest food) - results in an adverse internal physiological (in the absence of psychological) environment) - which (in effect) has the same effect.

IE if we were to live in a world without money - but all the food that we could acquire was salt-encrusted treacle tarts with aspartame and cigarette ash coulis
- then blunting/resistance of our physiological system 'd occur to persistent/chronic distressor exposure.

-*-

What is the physiological set-point ?
As far as I can see it's simply the conditions which make aerobic respiration optimally efficient.

Meaning that the effective meaning of life is simply to obtain a mind/body state ir=e completion in mind and optimal physiology which simply breathes.
Happy existence through no more than simply breathing.

Ahhh! But without any motivation - surely you'll feel as though you're a slacker ?
Well - and not that anybody who hasn't escaped reward system activation will be able to see - but who actually succeeds in anything ?
It's all an illusion cast by a hierarchical reward system ie that the worldd's no. 1 tennis player feels good about himself.
That's simply the primitive reward system in expression.
There's nothing objectively good about being a better tennis player than everybody else - in fact, a large part of escaping the primitive reward system is escaping this internal motivation to be 'better' than others - because as anybody who thinks will concur - deriving any satisfaction from beating another human being is a pretty poor behaviour to find motivational.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 05:08 AM
So - now I'm suggesting that the ultimate point is to eliminate eustress/distress.


Personally I hate stimulation/stress.
http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1646413&postcount=46

Truly - the amount of noise in monasteries - even those in which a strict code of silence is adhered to

- are grossly over-stimulating.

What's the problem with words ?
They seldom mean anything - and certainly whatever is meant is lost in translation when conveyed,
Do the words mean what the individual wants them to mean ?
Are the words translated in the way that the individual who speaks them, wishes to convey ?

What do you actually want to tell anybody ?

An internet resource with validated observations should be enough.

Why tell people not to smoke because they'll die of cancer ?
Just point them to an Internet resource which presents the evidence.

What is the point of talking to anybody else ?
If it's to build mind - then a simple scientific summary of how to live one's life healthily based on validated observations should be enough.

Presumably some element of communication is required in synchronizing efforts to conduct studies aimed at defining a scientifically appealing mode of existence ?
But that's a very different form of communication to offering up unsubstantiated views as facts.

-*-

Ultimately though - all we need to see is that the physical and psychological systems have ideal set-points and hitting those set-points by the way we live is the goal.

If you stuff pizza down yourself morning, noon and night - you'll blunt your own neuroendocrine systems - we need to define what it is about pizza (chronic high GI exposure) which is harmful - and aspire to the opposite diet ie high fresh, organic MUFA which also ticks all the boxes for restoring body pH (alkaline ash) and ionic concentrations.

Similarly - if we spend every waking hour trying to acquire money - we'll find that we change towards requiring ever more money (addictive propensity fed) - which similarly we can combat by taking the opposite direction of attempting to live a sustainable life without the use of money.

All definable (the optimal lifestyle) through simply identifying addictive behaviours which lead to blunting/resistance in our neuroendocrine integrative physiological system.

Pretty sure that all that we'll find is that being the most efficient aerobic reaction vessel for burning fat and generation of water - will be the core factor which characterizes optimal physiological functioning.

Why is the clonal expansion of water so strongly promoted ?
That's an interesting question.

IE what's the Universal imperative in filling up the Universe with water.
Something to do with the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 K - just above absolute zero.

Presumably CMB represents a fundamental substance which itself evolves to generate structures.
Presumably - since water is heated by microwave (tenuous link) - that an efficient way of transducing energy from an enforced evolution of CMB arises through water - ie water acts as a conduit between fundamental substance (creator) and creation.

Don't know - but it really does look as though there's a strong Universal imperative to fill up the Universe with water - which is interesting because water is generally ignored as a byproduct in reactions - but it may well be the point (the imperative) in evolution.

Holy water - that's fundamental substance transferring energy via water into creation.
Water's the absolute pre-requisite for evolution of life from the ground up.
Planetary deserts without any water are completely sterile.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 05:41 AM
Missed the edit deadline.

Addition

-*-

Now back around to cortisol (adrenal glands) and what does it sit over (kidneys)
- representing water expulsion.

We're just a means by which sunlight (plants) are converted (aerobic respiration) into water
- better than plants because by virtue of movement we're much more efficient at biosynthesizing water.

-*-

Conclusion to what is a stressor ?Any factor which deviates core physiological parameters - essential in growth - compatible with healthy ageing only post completion in mind
- growth (Insulin/IGF-1/GH) trajectory if remaining open for longer than absolutely required - and as expressed (its program enforced) through the primitive reward system (sweet, salt, umami receptors) - results in diseases of over-growth (cancer, autoimmune diseases).

-*-

So what is a stressor ?
A motivation to overcome a stressor.

Stressor - pizza -> change diet (use science to guide you)
Stressor - love of money -> eliminate dependence on money
Stressor - sickness in relatives -> change environment to permit healthy ageing ie little disease prior to death
Stressor - fear of strangers in Disneyland -> cultivate global community (through elimination of money and legal systems)
Stressor - giant shadows at night in warehouse -> introduce automated systems which detect movement and no longer require security guards

Stressor - having an incomplete mind -> go over and over and over everything you know until everything you know is globally logically consistent.

-*-

That's all too complicated though - simply develop a mind which knows morality and generate a society which is compatible with that mind - and everything else 'll fall into place.

Amtram
05-10-14, 11:30 AM
It's so easy if you make it just one big picture and everyone's exactly the same as you. Unfortunately, that's not the case.

The stress from waiting to give an acceptance speech for an award you're going to get, or going on stage to perform something you know you're just going to totally nail or any number of other good things produces many of the same physiological effects as other stressors.

To be honest, the only solid data that we have is that really, really traumatic stuff (like emotional, physical, or sexual abuse, war experience, long-term or terminal diseases) produces psychological problems that have a consistent pattern among the sufferers. Beyond that, everything is a matter of individual perception.

mildadhd
05-10-14, 11:43 AM
I love this thread's discussions and additions.

I have a few questions:

Are all perceptions of stressors and stress-responses, primarily emotional?



p

SB_UK
05-10-14, 12:17 PM
Are all perceptions primarily emotional?I think a major aspect of completion of mind is that the individual ceases from a judgemental stance.

So - using this basic idea - a perception shifts from emotional to rational.

So - let's say one racial group commits many of the crimes in your country.
The emotional response might be of hatred towards the racial group.
The completed mind perspective 'd see that there's nothing evil about the racial group - most likely reactive criminality in response to poverty.

A little more complicated though because emotion is still involved in desiring an end to inequality to improve the lot of the marginalised community, whilst consequently improving the lot of society.

-*-

Is the question of whether emotion can be transcended.

The point in life is to be happy.

Happiness is an emotion - and so I don't think that what we're looking at is an elimination of emotion
- more placing emotion under moral guidance as opposed to shifting it away from selfish governance.

So - that'd be a transition from feeling good doing the selfish thing to feeling good doing the right thing.
It's important to note that only when it feels good doing the right thing - will doing the right thing hang true.

And that requires the development / completion of mind (acquisition of wisdom).

Greyhound1
05-10-14, 12:25 PM
I love this thread's discussions and additions.

I have a few questions:

Are all perceptions of stressors and stress-responses, primarily emotional?



p

I would think that potential stressors and stress response would be both emotional and physical. Many times we have an illness and are bodies are responding to the distress way before it becomes known in the conscience mind.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 12:47 PM
In a comparison between the emotional mind and the conscious mind.

I don't particularly care how much I know.
But I do want to feel good.

The mind simply shifts our model from feeling good when others feel bad to feeling good when others feel good.

So - the mind (with completion) only really contributes a transition in the model which we apply towards feeling happy.

A change in reward systems - absolutely required if a functional society is desired.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 01:34 PM
I would think that potential stressors and stress response would be both emotional and physical. Many times we have an illness and are bodies are responding to the distress way before it becomes known in the conscience mind.


Are all perceptions of stressors and stress-responses, primarily emotional?I think that the effects of stressors are all physiological.
To a large extent we may not be aware of stressors - and so will have no perception of them.
And so if we're slowly being poisoned by a polluted air supply or water supply - we'll have no perception over stressor - ie will be none the wiser.

All that we can say about a stressor is that it will affect our physiological system in some way.

What human beings appear to like doing is introduce some novel (patented) chemical (at great cost).
Only to find out several years down the line that we've introduced an adverse stressor into the environment.

For instance the miracle antibiotics ... ... only to discover that we're composed of 10 times more bacterial than human cells - and that these are necessary for our functioning
- and we're wiping 'em out with antibiotic usage.

It wasn't possible to intuit that we'd embraced a distressor until many years later - and technology had improved.

In general, I'd suggest that the very vast majority of material world factors (chemicals, chemical fuels, pesticides, fertilizers, pharma drugs, illegal drugs, GM crops) that we've introduced are distressors to the human condition
- and that the developments we've made in information ie the generation and dissemination of art, education, communication over the wireless internet have been for the benefit of mankind.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 02:17 PM
We can't engineer the natural world - it's a system put in place and far more sophisticated than we can imagine -
we must work with the natural world.

The informational world, however, is something quite different - we're Gods of this environment - and can use it to generate a completely open playground for all people to contribute their wares.

Which is what we've done.

All that's left is to eliminate the pesky kids who profit from dabbling irresponsibly in the material world.

We're not granted that power - because we cannot determine what the consequences of our modifications will be.

So - sustainable buildings which can be recycled, crop rotation to protect the carrying capacity of land, human waste recycling to fertilize land, desert solar power harvested through hydrogen generation, a global high speed train transport system
... ... the VERY few material world systems which we're put in place - incredibly carefully sculpted to be planetarily protective with negligible footprint in nature.

Not concrete car parks, sphagetti junctions, industrial wastelands, decaying infrastructure
- we've pushed beyond all of that filth

and who wants to be a labourer ?
Unleash innate creativity - and see where it leads us.

mildadhd
05-10-14, 02:52 PM
Levels of Control in Brain Emotional-Affective
State controls (#1) and information Processing (#2 & #3)


1.Primary-Process, Basic-Primordial Affects (sub-neocortical)

i) Emotional Affects (Emotion Action Systems; Intentions-In-Actions)

ii) Homeostatic Affects (Brain-body Interoceptors: Hunger, Thirst, etc.)

iii) Sensory Affects (Exteroceptive-Sensory triggered pleasurable and unpleasurable/disgusting feelings)


2. Secondary-Process Emotions(Learning via Basal Ganglia)

i) Classical Conditioning (e.g. FEAR via basolateral & central amygdala)

ii) Instrumental & Operant Conditioning (SEEKING via Nucleus Accumbens)

iii) Behavioral & Emotional Habits (Largely unconscious-Dorsal Straitum)


3. Tertiary Affects and Neo-cortical "Awareness" Functions.

i) Cognitive Execution Functions: Thoughts & Planning (Frontal cortex)

ii) Emotional Ruminations & Regulations (Medial Frontal Regions)

iii) "Free-will" (Higher Working-Memory functions-Intention-to-Act)



Figure 1.4 A summary of the global levels of control within the brain: (1) Three general types of affects, (2) three types of basic learning mechanisms, and (3) three representative awareness functions of the neocortex (which relies completely on loops down through the basal ganglia to the thalamus, looping back to the neocortex before it can fully elaborate both thoughts and behavior).



Panksepp/Biven, "The Archaeology of Mind", (Chapter: Ancestral Passions) (Figure 1.4) Page 10.


Thanks,

Potential stressors and stress-responses. (Built upon unconditioned instinctual responses)

-Emotional stressors and emotional stress-responses.

-Homeostastic stressors and homeostatic stress-responses.

-Sensory stressors and sensory stress-responses.


Opinions/additions/subtractions..


P

Greyhound1
05-10-14, 02:52 PM
I think that the effects of stressors are all physiological.

What about the mental or emotional stressors that effect the mind. Are they a physiological effect due to ones emotional perception? I am not sure.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:10 PM
What about the mental or emotional stressors that effect the mind. Are they a physiological effect due to ones emotional perception? I am not sure.

I think that for a mental/emotional stressor to qualify as a stressor it must alter human physiology ie affect a physiological parameter ie must translate from an informational (eg fear) into a material world (eg cortisol production) effect.

Without any alteration on physiological parameters - a mental/emotional experience can't be classified as a stressor.

So - imagine fear - alteration in breathing patterns - altered blood gases - an informational stressor translates itself into a material world/physiological deviation from the norm.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:22 PM
Potential stressors and stress-responses. (Built upon 3 unconditioned instinctual responses)

-Emotional stressors and emotional stress-responses.

-Homeostastic stressors and homeostatic stress-responses.

-Sensory stressors and sensory stress-responses.

The Panksepp quote is a little difficult to understand.

However your choice.

How about - in this order:

[1] Homeostatic stressor (lowest level)
- maintaining physiological parameters

[2] Emotional stressor (post-reptilian brain)

-- completion in mind --

[3] Sensory stressor
-- opening of the doors or perception ---

Homeostatic stressors will attempt to re-establish physiological set-point.
Emotional stressors will propel an individual into 'social' behaviours.
Sensory stressors will propel an individual into having ever richer sensory (music,art) experiences.

In combination we'd have a system which motivates the individual towards creating the highest quality of experience (sensory stressor) for all human beings (emotional stressor) whilst maintaining the perfect physiological milieu (homeostatic stressor).

That's a perfect specification for a social organism.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:39 PM
[A][1] Homeostatic stressor (lowest level)
- maintaining physiological parameters
[C][2] Emotional stressor (post-reptilian brain)
[D]-- completion in mind --
[E][3] Sensory stressor
[F]-- opening of the doors or perception ---

As far as I can see - we've accrued enough information on diet, exercise, lifestyle to ensure [A], which results in , now [C] should be a given in a moral society ie all for one and one for all - we won't need to expend any energy worrying about human wellbeing, and employing the idea of male archetype, female archetype child - we should be able to ensure [D] also - maybe meaning
- that as long as the world specified above is sculpted

- that ADDer is born into a sensory stressor model - where the ADDer's reward system is to employ creativity.

So - the development of sensory experience from first mind to wisdom - when the individual transcends the need.

-*-

Just thinking - it is certain that sensory experience [musical chills (http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/musical-chills-related-to-brain-dop-11-01-09/)] is rewarding.
And that education (a society which places the thinking (but not globally logical) mind on a pedestal - doesn't do it for us).

Morality must be a core value.
Maintaining optimal physiological parameters too.

-*-

[B][1] Homeostatic stressor -> reward from movement <- I've experienced this
[2] Emotional stressor -> reward from social interaction (as demonstrated by Panksepp) <- I've experienced this
[3] Sensory stressor -> reward from music (chills) <- I've experienced this
[B]
In fact - we could summarise walking in the sun [1] with a dog you're bonded to [2] whilst looking at the trees around [3] as a combined application of the three eustressful experiences.

Yet again - there's a real sense of relegation of the thinking, analytical mind.

I know that I know nothing.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 03:54 PM
The ultimate stressor must be awareness of your inevitable death - undoubtedly preceded by physical decay.
molecules are afraid of death

I think that as soon as we achieve completion - we cease to be phenomenological constructs and may be considered as in the frame of boson (ie in Heaven)
- and so disengage mind -
no longer fear death - for no reason other than we've disengaged the agent (the thinking, analytical mind) which is responsible for the fear.

Immersed in sensory experience, having discarded mechanical analytical deconstruction
- we're freed from the tyranny of needing to know why.

If you're happy you're happy.

The mind and its incessant need to have answers to questions which it really does know (but suppresses the knowledge) that it'll never answer is a distress which we can only overcome through bypassing the mind.

Why are we here ?
Is not going to yield a satisfying solution.

Some higher ideology to existence ?

To die and go to Heaven (moksha) - is as good as it gets.
Is it good enough?
Yes.

But you won't believe it until you experience moksha.

Up until then - there's rather the expectation that something unimaginable will reveal itself - though it should be mentioned that ceasing to care about one's own inevitable death - is unimaginable to a state which desperately scrambles for a way out.

Uploading one's mind to a computer whilst cryogenically freezing one's body
- what a nonsense!

Get used to death and then go live life.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 04:20 PM
So shifting the subject again.

And employing the idea of post-modernism (post modern man).

Homo sapiens sapiens have taken us up to completion of mind - thereafter something new is to be expected.

We've (ADDers) lost any motivation towards analytical mind and wish to live an exhilarating sensory experience relating to quality of sensory informational upload.

That's the reward system we're born into.

Sure we're required to develop mind - but the educational schemes we're subject to break as opposed to construct a complete mind/wisdom.

So - we're hungry - in a world without reward - trying to follow everybody else into high paying jobs only to find that we don't want anything that money buys.

Yes - to understand context - but more to enjoy the sensory world.

Of course - musical chills are without evolutionary precedent.

The idea of beauty as rewarding is peculiar to man.

To enjoy sensory experience is uniquely human (post-modern).

-*-

ADDer as custom designed to divine beauty - and instead we find ourselves in educational and workplace hell - where our role is to learn information which matters little and then to use the certificates we gain to enter a fine job where we robotically transfer widgets onto gadgets until we die.

Denis Dutton was a philosophy professor and the editor of Arts & Letters Daily. In his book The Art Instinct, he suggested that humans are hard-wired to seek beauty. http://www.ted.com/talks/denis_dutton_a_darwinian_theory_of_beauty

<- the next generation.

-*-

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beyond-Evolution-Nature-Evolutionary-Explanation/dp/0198250045
O'Hear examines the nature of human self-consciousness, and argues that evolutionary theory cannot give a satisfactory account of such distinctive facets of human life as the [1] quest for knowledge, moral sense, and the [2] appreciation of beauty

So - post-modernism heralds the exploration of beauty as our next task.

That sounds nice.

Egalitarian - no more rentier capitalists stealing the hard work of others - you only get out what you put in.

Greyhound1
05-10-14, 05:04 PM
I think that for a mental/emotional stressor to qualify as a stressor it must alter human physiology ie affect a physiological parameter ie must translate from an informational (eg fear) into a material world (eg cortisol production) effect.

Without any alteration on physiological parameters - a mental/emotional experience can't be classified as a stressor.

So - imagine fear - alteration in breathing patterns - altered blood gases - an informational stressor translates itself into a material world/physiological deviation from the norm.

If emotions trigger a physiological response wouldn't that be an emotional stressor? Take fear for example, it can trigger the fight or flight response just from a thought.

SB_UK
05-10-14, 05:13 PM
What is beauty ?
Thinking resonance between emergent structures.

That'd make sense.

"what is If beauty is a universal, as for example Plato maintained, it is reasonable to hold that we do not know it through the senses."Beauty - resonance between emergent structures.

That does sound correct and is nice - we're looking at a transition which helps us into feeling - through a newfound relationship with the emergent structures of nature
- that we belong.

Greyhound1
05-10-14, 11:50 PM
Could the stress a new born has endured from creation to safe healthy birth be the ultimate Eustress?
And
Death is the ultimate Distress.

Life and death are the greatest psyiological responses we know of?

mildadhd
05-11-14, 12:17 AM
Potential stressors(stimuli) --->(complex)mammalian stress-response systems --->(conscious and/or subconscious) stress-responses.

(Top-down)

Neocortical

***Tertiary(awareness) emotional stressors(stimuli)--->conditoned emotional stress-response systems---> (self regulated)emotional stress-responses

***Tertiary(awareness) homeostastic stressors (stimuli)--->conditioned homeostatic stress-response systems--->(self regulated)homeostatic stress-responses.

***Tertiary(awareness) sensory stressors(stimuli)--->conditioned sensory stress-response systems---> (self regulated)sensory stress-responses.


Upper-limbic

**Secondary(learned) emotional stressors(stimuli)--->unconditioned emotional stress-response systems--->(conditioned)emotional stress-responses.

**Secondary(learned) homeostastic stressors(stimuli)---> unconditioned homeostatic stress-response systems--->(conditioned)homeostatic stress-responses.

**Secondary(learned) sensory stressors(stimuli)--->unconditioned sensory stress-response systems--->(conditioned)sensory stress-responses.




*Primary(genetic memories) emotional stressors(stimuli)---> unconditioned emotional stress-response systems---> (instinctual)emotional stress-responses.

*Primary(genetic memories) homeostastic stressors(stimuli)---> unconditioned homeostatic stress-response systems-->(instinctual)homeostatic stress-responses.

*Primary(genetic memories) sensory stressors(stimuli)--->unconditioned sensory stress-response systems--->(instinctual)sensory stress-responses.


Subcortical(brainstem area)

(Ground-up)


Opinions/additions/substractions?

P

dvdnvwls
05-11-14, 12:32 AM
Could the stress a new born has endured from creation to safe healthy birth be the ultimate Eustress?
And
Death is the ultimate Distress.

Life and death are the greatest psyiological responses we know of?
I don't think the divisions between good and bad stress can be anywhere close to that neat and tidy, especially when considering groups of events as if they were one larger event. Birth being safe and healthy is not an on/off switch but a continuum of possibilities. Death is a welcome and happily anticipated event for some people.

Greyhound1
05-11-14, 01:05 AM
I don't think the divisions between good and bad stress can be anywhere close to that neat and tidy, especially when considering groups of events as if they were one larger event. Birth being safe and healthy is not an on/off switch but a continuum of possibilities. Death is a welcome and happily anticipated event for some people.

I think you are missing my point. The most psyiological responses or changes occur during the creation of life and at it's destruction during death. Distress can be both emotional and/or physical. When distress becomes to much for your emotional and/or physical state is when death occurs.

Maybe it makes more sense to say that the psyiological processes at work during death is pure distress.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 09:47 AM
Potential stressors(stimuli) --->(complex)mammalian stress-response systems --->(conscious and/or subconscious) stress-responses.


Is the point you're making that anything which drives any response in man from a photon landing on the retina, to the sensation of wind on the skin
- because they're eliciting some effect
- are stressors.

Naturally not distressors.
So - is a stressor which is not a distressor an eustressor ?

I'd prefer to define eustressor as leading somewhere positive ie increased fitness through eustressful activity - but why not consider any stressor which is not a distressor as an eustressor - because at least it's having no effect on your body.

Now - in the example above - because ATP is going to be required in transmitted a neural impulse of photon landing on the retina, gentle wind being sensed on the skin

- do we have a situation where ALL stressors required us to expend energy ie to charge us energy in order to react to stressor.

Where's this general idea leading ?
That stressors cost us energy in the form of (ultimately) food.

And the most efficient organism 'd be one who is in a place freed from all stressors (stimulation) - since this'd mean that the least possible energy is required to maintain such an organism alive.

Of course, 'stimulation'/stress appears to be courted by the majority.

But you'd think that the compulsion to be stimulated (encounter a stressor which has some physiological consequence with associated energetic cost to the organism)
... ... is not good.

Now - I've tried to suggest that from earliest memory I have not wanted ANY stimulation.

So - we've yet another connection between the ADD type and energetic efficiency.

But but but - why are ADDers stimulant junkies if we're programmed to be happy in sensory deprivation/stressor deprivation/stimulation deprivation ?

It's because we're not seeking stimulation - stimulation appears to be being used by ADDers as stress relief ie to combat a level of stress felt through being placed in a world which is in itself over-stimulating.

Back around to the idea of being happy in the theta/alpha EEG interface (low freq therefore low energy requiring).
Back around to the idea of ADDers reflecting emergence of a thrifty genome/histome.
Also - it's likely that if we operate more on the neural than physical level ie are attracted to informational quality than material world quality - that the energetic cost would be lower ie energy expenditure via the nervous system 'd be less than energy expenditure at the level of the physical world.
Also - plain meditation - which cements a brain EEG at around 8 Hz ie no motion, low freq. neural activity - 'd represent low energy expenditure.
Yoga similarly in comparison to other sporting activities ?

-*-

What's the general point I'm getting at ?
There's a spectrum from the materialistic vain 100m running model who's always in the news to a monastery monk
- where one represents the pinnacle of the growth paradigm ie living fast dying young and the other ages gracefully.

ADDers are born more into the low energy mode of existence - and are destined to have decent lives
- if and only if ADDers are permitted by social convention to live the life specified by their make-up.

This is not possible in a world where there's strong selection for:
the materialistic vain 100m running model

People are not permitted to choose the social route - because there is no way to survive if monastery morality is aspired to in a life in a Western society where all that matters to people is eating the head of thy neighbour.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 09:52 AM
Interesting idea ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB5A8TtyRpE

SB_UK
05-11-14, 12:16 PM
Now sensory deprivation takes us to some remarkable information.
wikiP/sensory tank
One hypothesis was that the energy sources are biological and internal and do not depend upon the outside environment. It was argued that if all stimuli ['STRESSORS] are cut off to the brain then the brain would go to sleep.
The last twenty minutes often end with a transition from beta or alpha brainwaves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillation) to theta, which typically occurs briefly before sleep and again at waking. In a float tank, the theta state can last indefinitely without the subject losing consciousness. Many use the extended theta state as a tool for enhanced creativity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity) and problem solving (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_solving) or for super learning. The more often the tank is used the longer the theta period becomes.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_tank#cite_note-About_Floating_Guide-7)
Because adders live in the EEG state described above.

It really does make sense that the physiological set-point of the psychological construct 'd be theta EEG or the EEG between sleep and wake.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 01:04 PM
The line of thinking above takes us naturally into theta EEG as a 'telepathic' frequency.

An idea from previously is that non geographically juxtaposed real-time communication - using writing could result in telepathic transfer of reward.

That'd certainly be a useful property in a social organism.

Surely telepathic synchrony of social organisms makes sense.

But why doesn't this idea do it for me ?

Perhaps it's because it's difficult to remember a single positive association that I've had with a person - a lifetime of exposure to money grabbing psychopaths places the only attractive life as complete silence in the sun with a dog miles from any other human being.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 01:22 PM
So just to summarise the series of posts above.

What is a stressor ?
Well somebody thought to eliminate all - stressors / stimulation / physiological effect (energetic cost) - by suspending an individual within an isolation tank.

No stressor / No stimulation - you'd kinda' think that the individual would just fall asleep.

But that's not what appeared to happen.

Theta EEG appeared to be recruited.
Numerous expts conducted arguably validating telepathy.
Out of Body Experiences reported.

And it's well known that ADDers are theta EEG predisposed.

And also that we hate (at least I HATE) stimulation.

-*-

So - I guess the evidence above suggests that individuals who have physically met one another ('tuned') should be able to communicate in real-time if both set at theta EEG and writing as opposed to speaking which shifts the individual out of theta EEG.

Neat re-inforcement of the social organism - but but but - at least up until now - 'Hell is with people'
- there's no particular affinity (doesn't attract) to this idea.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 02:02 PM
So what is ADHD ?

One final time.

Emergence of a social species.

SB_UK
05-11-14, 02:38 PM
Results showed a significant increase in very specific Theta brainwave amplitude in the pre-frontal cortex only during Adamís telepathic connection.

Maybe - but but but - well - maybe.

A redefinition of the PFC.

Certainly explaining why PFC EF is impaired in ADDer.

Amtram
05-11-14, 03:11 PM
Could the stress a new born has endured from creation to safe healthy birth be the ultimate Eustress?
And
Death is the ultimate Distress.

Life and death are the greatest psyiological responses we know of?

If the stress of being born had serious or long-lasting negative physiological effects, our species would have died out quite some time ago.

Recent studies have uncovered evidence that neonates actually do, for a short period of time, experience neuronal cell death and reproduction, which explains at least to some extent why we have no memories before about two years of age. With neuron death, memories are lost. This information lends credence to the idea that the psychological stress of birth is likely a non-issue if the neurons that held the memory destroyed themselves.

Amtram
05-11-14, 03:14 PM
If emotions trigger a physiological response wouldn't that be an emotional stressor? Take fear for example, it can trigger the fight or flight response just from a thought.

This is actually a very complex chemical process involving an intricate interplay between several parts of the brain and the endocrine system. And adrenaline and norepinephrine are not the only chemical players in this, either. Nor are their only functions, chemically, to trigger/mitigate this response.

Amtram
05-11-14, 03:19 PM
I think you are missing my point. The most psyiological responses or changes occur during the creation of life and at it's destruction during death. Distress can be both emotional and/or physical. When distress becomes to much for your emotional and/or physical state is when death occurs.

Maybe it makes more sense to say that the psyiological processes at work during death is pure distress.

I have to agree with dvdnvwls. If you've spent enough time with people who were injured, sick, or dying, you'd see that there is no neat, clean correlation between stress/distress and death. As he pointed out, death often comes when a person has achieved a relaxed, peaceful state. On the less pleasant side, some people endure extreme, and sometimes long-lasting states of distress without getting the relief of death.

mildadhd
05-11-14, 08:14 PM
I need some help..

-I know there are 7 raw complex unconditioned emotional stress-response systems present at birth.

Does anyone know..

-how many and what raw complex unconditioned homeostatic stress-response systems are present at birth?

-how many and what raw complex unconditoned sensory stress-response systems are present at birth?

If you know please fill in the blanks below..

*What raw complex unconditoned emotional stress-response systems are present at birth?

-SEEKING System
-FEAR System
-RAGE System
-LUST System
-CARE System
-GRIEF/PANIC System
-PLAY System

*What raw complex unconditoned homeostatic stress-response systems are present at birth?

-?
-?
-?
-?
-?
-?
-?


*What raw complex unconditoned sensory stress-response systems are present at birth?

-?
-?
-?
-?
-?
-?
-?

dvdnvwls
05-11-14, 08:37 PM
I think you are missing my point. The most psyiological responses or changes occur during the creation of life and at it's destruction during death. Distress can be both emotional and/or physical. When distress becomes to much for your emotional and/or physical state is when death occurs.

Maybe it makes more sense to say that the psyiological processes at work during death is pure distress.
Stress is a specific physiological response, not necessarily (directly) related to organ shutdown and failure of processes.

Birth is an extremely stressful (I mean distressful) time, especially compared to the periods of time immediately before and immediately after.

I think you might be taking too big a view, encompassing life itself, in which your idea basically relates to conception (NOT birth) at one end of life and final end of life (AFTER the stress responses have already shut down) at the other end. Sort of an existential thing. :)

Many religious and/or spiritual people would probably say they aim for death to be the ultimate eustress.

Greyhound1
05-11-14, 09:28 PM
Stress is a specific physiological response, not necessarily (directly) related to organ shutdown and failure of processes.

Birth is an extremely stressful (I mean distressful) time, especially compared to the periods of time immediately before and immediately after.

I think you might be taking too big a view, encompassing life itself, in which your idea basically relates to conception (NOT birth) at one end of life and final end of life (AFTER the stress responses have already shut down) at the other end. Sort of an existential thing. :)

Many religious and/or spiritual people would probably say they aim for death to be the ultimate eustress.

I was thinking about life thru healthy birth to be very a stressful event for a developing fetus. This is stressful on the molecular level but will have very positive psyiological changes which are beneficial. This type of stress which is beneficial is Eustress.

I was referring to the distress ones cells and organs go thru when they are dying. I wasn't meaning the stress was caused by the organ shutdown or failure. I was trying to say that when an organ is in great distress is when it shuts down or fails.

Does this make more sense? If not, let's move on. I don't want to get this thread off track. It was just an idea I thought was interesting.

dvdnvwls
05-11-14, 09:52 PM
I was thinking about life thru healthy birth to be very a stressful event for a developing fetus. This is stressful on the molecular level but will have very positive psyiological changes which are beneficial. This type of stress which is beneficial is Eustress.

I was referring to the distress ones cells and organs go thru when they are dying. I wasn't meaning the stress was caused by the organ shutdown or failure. I was trying to say that when an organ is in great distress is when it shuts down or fails.

Does this make more sense? If not, let's move on. I don't want to get this thread off track. It was just an idea I thought was interesting.
I think in this context we ought to be talking about the specific signs and processes of psychological stress, not the separate processes of cell death etc.

Greyhound1
05-11-14, 10:21 PM
I think in this context we ought to be talking about the specific signs and processes of psychological stress, not the separate processes of cell death etc.

Please participate and bring some of the processes of psychological stress up then.

mildadhd
05-11-14, 10:28 PM
... The most psyiological responses or changes occur during the creation of life and at it's destruction during death. Distress can be both emotional and/or physical. When distress becomes to much for your emotional and/or physical state is when death occurs.

Maybe it makes more sense to say that the psyiological processes at work during death is pure distress.



Positive and Negative Eustressors(stimuli) that promote survival (stability).

Positive and Negative Distressors(stimuli) that do not promote survival (instability).

I can understand how conception could promote stability(start)(life), and how death could promote instability(end)(death).


Eustress goes toward homeostasis.

--Eustress-->Homeostasis<--Eustress--


Distress goes away from homeostasis.

<--Distress--Homeostasis--Distress-->


Opinions/additions/subtracts?


P

Greyhound1
05-11-14, 10:44 PM
Positive and Negative Eustressors(stimuli) that promote survival (stability).

Positive and Negative Distressors(stimuli) that do not promote survival (instability).

I think I can understand how conception could promote stability(start)(life), and how death could promote instability(end)(death).
Opinions/additions/subtracts?


P

I am confused as to what a negative Eustressor and a positive Distressor are,
Isn't that determined by the response?
Eustress=beneficial stress
Distress=negative stress

How can they be both?

mildadhd
05-11-14, 11:41 PM
I need some people to correct this post, add/subtract/etc..

Mammalian Primary Affects?

Emotional Affects

SEEKING System

FEAR System

RAGE System

LUST System

CARE System

GRIEF/PANIC System

PLAY System

Homeostatic Affects

Circulatory System?

Lymphatic System?

Nervous System?

Endocrine System?

Respiratory System?

Digestive System?

Urinary System?


Sensory Affects

Visual(seeing) System?

Auditory(hearing) System?

Somatosensory(touch, temperature pain) System?

Gustatory(taste) System?

Olfactory(smell) System?

Vestibular(balance) System?

mildadhd
05-12-14, 02:20 AM
I am confused as to what a negative Eustressor and a positive Distressor are,
Isn't that determined by the response?
Eustress=beneficial stress
Distress=negative stress

How can they be both?


FEAR, RAGE, GRIEF/PANIC are negative feelings.

SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY are positive feelings.

Focusing on primary emotional affective systems, involved in fight freeze, or flight stress-responses.

A healthy balance(exercise) of both positive and negative emotional stress-response systems, promotes psychological stability/survival throughout life.

Example: negative eustressor.

A human is was walking in the woods and noticed a polar bear coming. Acutely stimulating negative anxious feelings, that are built into the FEAR (emotional) stress-response system (involved in the fight, freeze or flight (emotional) stress-response systems), and the human runs away and hides, promoting the human's survival.

Example: positive distressor

Chronic substance addiciton/self medicating undiagnosed ADHD, causing chronic chemical imbalance,over-stimulation of the positive feeling SEEKING System (emotional)stress-response system, resulting in mania psychosis.

(I will work on a better example).



I am learning please leave room for error/addition/subtraction.

*SEEKING* (incentive) (+)feeling

*FEAR* (runaway/hide) (-)feeling

*RAGE* (anger/fightback) (-)feeling

*LUST* (sexual desire) (+)feeling

*CARE*(attachment/reward) (+)feeling

*GRIEF/PANIC* (sad) (-)feeling

*PLAY* (joy) (+)feeling


*= Reptilian Emotional Systems

*= Mammalian Emotional Systems

* = Social Emotions


P

SB_UK
05-12-14, 05:50 AM
Eustress goes toward homeostasis.

--Eustress-->Homeostasis<--Eustress--


Distress goes away from homeostasis.

<--Distress--Homeostasis--Distress-->

Very definitely agreed.

Attempting to keep things as simple as possible.

[1] We are attempting to reach a defined point - homeostatic set-point.

[2] Oscillations occur on either side ie blood glucose level elevation AND reduction, pH elevation AND reduction, Na+ concentration elevation AND reduction.

[3] If stimulation can be re-interpreted as stressor - then the goal appears to be to transcend stimulation/stressor because this'd result in us being able to sit happily at our optimal physiological homeostatic point.

[4] So - to transcend either positive or negative deviation (pleasure / pain paradigm) around the homeostatic set-point as the optimal physiological state ?
Give an example - well sugar rush on blood glucose elevation and a depressing reactive hypoglycaemic low ~ 4 hours later.

[5] So to adopt a lifestyle which sits at optimal physiological homeostatic set-point ?

[6] But wouldn't that be dull ?

[7] Well - the point is that if the individual has overcome the reward system (ie pleasure from blood glucose elevation) - and no longer feels it
- then NO.
Sitting quietly under the sun is as good as it gets.
However - if the blood glucose elevation reward system (the need for speed) is still in place - you'll be bored rigid without any stimulation.

[8] So stimulation potentially synonymous with stressor
- and the goal which man is set to overcome the reward system which courts stressor/stimulation
- such that man can be happy at the precise point at which the optimal physiological state is set at (homeostatic set-point)
- which clearly will be the optimal physiological state to prevent falling victim to disease.

Noting that 'need for speed' reward system is growth-permissive (ie attraction to carbs/protein)/.
Transcending 'need for speed' reward system ie imparting a motivational/reward system which is happy in steady-state ie simply breathing is the point.
Where all of our common diseases arise from failure to switch rewards systems from 'growth' (virulent) to 'steady-state' (imagine your average enlightened chap doing nothing particularly under a tree in the sun) - ie from setting an excessively growth promoting environment to an organism that has only so many growth cycles in him/her until telomere shortening heralds the end of our capacity to regenerate.

Summarising
Attraction for stressor need be transcended reflecting as it does completion in human life cycle (completion of mind = wisdom) so that people are happy to live in a physiological state which guarantees them a long and disease free life.
Fail to make the transition and you'll simply fall prey to an addictive reward system which compromises your life as you feed it with alcohol and cigarette ash coulis treacle and MSG filled beef and processed white flour industrial omega-6 oil shaped and baked into the form of a gun
- which you hold up to the side of your head and make a 'boom' noise before ingesting.

SB_UK
05-12-14, 06:03 AM
The interesting bit which then follows is that if human beings are attempting to switch from a growth permissive (stress/stimulation courting) reward system to a steady-state permissive reward system which should reveal itself as a desire to be free from stimulation (sensory stimulation).

Then why is it that ADDers pretty much from day 1 report over-stimulation.

The most obvious conclusion is that ADDers are born into the reward system which I'm attempting to describe nonADDers as acquiring with wisdom
- ie are happy without stimulation
- and are only driven into stimulation (stress-relief) through the over-stimulation (violent competition) which is necessitated by life in thicko nonADD hierarchical world.

What's the point which I'm making from the post above and this ?
That 'learning' to be happy - fixedly at the homeostatic set-point (ie pH at 7.365) is earned by nonADDers, or born into by ADDers - makes for the place to be if disease-free happy longevity is desired.
This is prevented in nonADDer due to reward system in place prior to enlightenment and also prevented in ADDer through stress-relief operating in a nasty societal infrastructure (hierarchical) as put in place by nonADDer (because it floats their boat - hierarchical structures to put in place)

- meaning that if we want nonADDers/ADDers alike to stand a chance of healthy ageing
- then we need nonADDers to develop wisdom asap and to assist in putting in place a moral framework for ADDers to live in.

To make the point once again that ADDers are gifted in an easier path to enlightenment - but only because the 'growth' (selfish, virulent) reward system doesn't work for us
- and so to obtain reward - we need to go in a different direction.

Instead of finding any reward in money, power, sex
- our boat is floated by generating a globally consistent model of reality (consistent with species wellbeing)

- and this will become the dominant model held by all people in time with communication
- because the general pattern of evolution of fundamental substance (see frame of boson) is to create 'social' structures - held together through resonance back with the fundamental substance state from which we evolved, from which we are evolutionary forms.

SB_UK
05-12-14, 06:13 AM
*SEEKING* (incentive) (+)feeling
*FEAR* (runaway/hide) (-)feeling
*RAGE* (anger/fightback) (-)feeling
*LUST* (sexual desire) (+)feeling
*CARE*(attachment/reward) (+)feeling
*GRIEF/PANIC* (sad) (-)feeling
*PLAY* (joy) (+)feeling

*= Reptilian Emotional Systems
*= Mammalian Emotional Systems
* = Social Emotions


So - all of the above sounds correct.
But if I'm suggesting that nonADDer goal is to overcome the need for speed/stimulation and stress
- and also that nonADDers are born into the 'enlightenment' reward system

- then I'm also suggesting that we're born out of the attraction for any of Peripheral's +/- distressors
- since they all lead to physiological homeostatic dysfunction.

So - no to any of those.

However what do i see as eustressful ?

Well - the only thing that I'm reporting back are factors which strengthen maintenance of the homeostatic set-point which appear to be factors which make us more aerobically fit.

So - a certain state of mind (theta held) a certain type of exercise and a certain type of diet.
All alongside factors which drive mitochondrial biogeensis.

IE stabilization of physiological homeostatic set-point through optimal resilience/sensitivity in the neuroT and endocrine systems which physiology uses to maintain human physiological state.

So once again - maintain physiology combat pathophysiology.

SB_UK
05-12-14, 07:03 AM
Where's the irony in this basic idea ?

Society worships the individual who is most successful in the growth paradigm (ie the most selfish).
Because they've the most money, the most partners, the most cars, the biggest muscles, most clothes, best holidays etc etc etc

Evolution then comes along and puts out the VERY opposite of the type which society worships as the nonADDer goal, ADDer set-point.

It's fairly interesting, and not entirely surprising.

We see why human beings have been programmed to kill themselves off (the desire for money elaborating into corporate crimes against the environment)
- and how the mind to nonADDer and life in a moral societal framework to ADDer combats (by virtue of transition or birth into a reward system which is happy without homeostatic variation (no need for speed))

- places 'equality' (in material world possessions) as (in effect) - because it's the evolutionary process specified by fundamental substance
- God's will.

-*-

Ahhhh! But without selfishness we won't progress.

Wrong - without selfishness we'll generate the most efficient, elegant, appropriate technologies for human use
- in this current world it's technical/perceptual obsolescence (I can't use that phone it's so last month) - which drives behaviour.

IE - freed from selfishness - we arrive at a world where elegance and not manufactured inefficiency is key.

Amazing how nearly everything I have (not much) goes wrong the day after the warranty runs out.
Mind you - apparently companies are now avoiding warranty repairs by claiming that it's wear and tear/caused by user abuse not covered by the warranty.

The world of a monetary based economy is FUNDAMENTALLY STUPID.

mildadhd
05-13-14, 02:54 PM
Lowering social/family distressors and promoting social/family eustressors, with an emphasis on the early years of psychological development, would be a step in the direction.

Early learning is a smart investment.

Investing in early learning is not only the right thing to do, but it’s also the smart thing to do. Research shows that for every dollar invested in high‐quality preschool programs, at least $7 is saved in future costs related to social services, remedial education, public safety and juvenile justice. Pay now, or pay more later.

Thrive by Five Washington (http://thrivebyfivewa.org/why-early-learning/)

P

SB_UK
05-13-14, 03:22 PM
Lowering social/family distressors and promoting social/family eustressors, with an emphasis on the early years of psychological development, would be a step in the direction.



P

Sounds good though the problem we run into is the uniform notion around the Internet that educational system destroys creativity (http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity)
- and so there'd need to be some time spent identifying what an optimal educational scheme 'd be like, by age.

Just to nail down what form this should take:
Early learning

At the moment there's outright warfare between teachers and students, and in competitive schools - between students themselves for top spot

- I think that somebody's going to need to work out what an optimal educational scheme will look like.

-*-

I think I'd suggest that learning which reinforces naturally is to be encouraged ie reading/writing.
Reading, writing, speaking are re-inforced through daily life.
I'd also suggest that there's a mathematical nature to language ie there has to be a very strict logical consistency in whatever we write - to 'make sense'.

A focus on personal expression ?? (the new education)
Sounds like a close fit with philosophy.

The same cannot be said to be true for >95% of the information fed and examined in a student thereafter - information which finds itself only the most transient of stop-overs in an individual's mind before being lost forever.

SB_UK
05-14-14, 03:12 PM
identifying what an optimal educational scheme 'd be like


Everything follows from here

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/from-knowledge-to-wisdom

so that the basic aim [OF EDUCATION] becomes to promote wisdom by rational means, instead of just to acquire knowledge.

So let's assume a 35 year program where the goal is nothing more complex than for people to be able to answer all important questions by themselves.

So the goal wouldn't be to start 5 years olds on Latin, Greek, the original texts of the classical philosophers and religious books
- but it'd be to get the individual up to a point that they've sufficient information in their head for wisdom to crystallize at some point as early as possible into adulthood.

As soon as it does you lose ALL affiliation with materialism AND ARE FREE.

There's no more chasing around for Apple computers, drop top cars, designer trainers and golden teeth
- you're given the eyes to see that all of the above is complete nonsense.

SB_UK
05-14-14, 03:23 PM
The point then becomes to attain 'reason'ing capacity.

Where reasoning capacity 'global logical consistency' simply relies on the individual rationalising their knowledge into a format which is consistent.

In the dialogues Socrates presents himself as a simple man who confesses that he has little knowledge. With this ironic approach he manages to confuse the other who boasts that he is an expert in the domain they discuss. The outcome of the dialogue is that Socrates demonstrates that the other person's views are inconsistent. In this way Socrates tries to show the way to real wisdom.

-*-

The path to wisdom arises through individuals learning to reason
- and in generating a worldview which is consistent.

Globally logically consistent.
Complete mind.

Wisdom represents a mind which is globally logically consistent
- and is generated by the individual going over and over what the individual knows until it's self-consistent
- with (if necessary) additional areas thrown into destabilize - eventually restabilize the knowledge structure until it crystallizes/completes

- and wisdom is (said to have been) acquired.

-*-

Absolute revulsion by materialism/capitalism/consumerism which cannot be stifled is (as far as I can see) the sign that you're nearing/have attained wisdom.

SB_UK
05-14-14, 03:44 PM
That's really tough though - because eg the politician has developed a mechanism of so confusing their own mind - that doublethink does not result in cognitive dissonance.

The point being that despite Socrates employing his technique on sophist lawyer/politicians

- it's in addled minds that this technique won't work - since we require cognitive dissonance on doublethink - which is what the lawyer/politician/broken mind (generally materialistic loving money,power) has at their disposal.

The connection to psychopathy here is evident - with morality arising as the antithesis of psychopathy
- noting that in precise parallel exist hierarchical and egalitarian (anarchic) control structures.

You'll find that the mind which permits cognitive dissonance, is happy in doublethink, lawyer, politician, psychopath, lovers of money and power, lovers of hierarchical control structures are one and the same.

Amtram
05-14-14, 07:45 PM
I happen to think that this obsession with stress takes away from some genuinely interesting issues, while overstating the negative impact of something which, when you come right down to it, is responsible for the continued survival of many species on earth. Stress in its various forms, and a creature's reaction to stress, have evolutionary roots that cause us to care for our young and protect other members of our groups, find food, avoid predators and other dangerous situations, and remember these things so we and our offspring continue the line.

It's ludicrous to imagine a world without stress, and since stress reactions are normal, eliminating all stress could very well be harmful to our health and to the societies to which we belong. Extreme, prolonged stress is a negative thing, but that does not in any way imply that complete absence of stress (even unpleasant stress) is automatically going to guarantee some sort of invulnerability.

mildadhd
05-15-14, 12:57 AM
I happen to think that this obsession with stress takes away from some genuinely interesting issues, while overstating the negative impact of something which, when you come right down to it, is responsible for the continued survival of many species on earth. Stress in its various forms, and a creature's reaction to stress, have evolutionary roots that cause us to care for our young and protect other members of our groups, find food, avoid predators and other dangerous situations, and remember these things so we and our offspring continue the line.

It's ludicrous to imagine a world without stress, and since stress reactions are normal, eliminating all stress could very well be harmful to our health and to the societies to which we belong. Extreme, prolonged stress is a negative thing, but that does not in any way imply that complete absence of stress (even unpleasant stress) is automatically going to guarantee some sort of invulnerability.

What is a stressor?


P

Twiggy
05-15-14, 01:08 AM
Somebody telling you to go wash dishes when the sink is full of dirty dishes and they keep telling you to wash the dishes.

SB_UK
05-15-14, 03:27 AM
What is a stressor?


P

Anything which can have any effect whatsoever on the human engine.

So the slighest almost imperceptible whisper is a stressor - because some nerves will have been driven to operate in reaction to the stressor.

SB_UK
05-15-14, 03:36 AM
Early learning is a smart investment.


page 1 Times newspaper, Thursday May 15th 2014

"School pupils don't know right from wrong says top teacher"
"More time learning knowledge than ... ..."

Familiar ?

Early learning is a smart investment as long as there's a model of learning which leads the individual to freedom (morality) soon into adulthood.

Note that article applies more so to Private than to State schools.

Amtram
05-15-14, 12:31 PM
What is a stressor?


P

Explaining this over and over and still being asked.

But only a tiny stressor, that.

mildadhd
05-15-14, 01:14 PM
Explaining this over and over and still being asked.

But only a tiny stressor, that.


I don't remember asking anyone, "what is a stressor?", before this thread?

(that is why I started this thread)

Does me asking "what is a stressor?", cause all your emotional affects, homeostatic affects and sensory affects stress-response systems, to respond stably(eustress-response) or unstably(distress-response)?


P

mildadhd
05-15-14, 01:53 PM
A stressor is the stimulus (or threat) that causes stress..

see Post #2 (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1645767&postcount=2)


Stressors(stimuli) cause stress-response systems to have stress-responses.

-Distressors(stimuli) cause stress-response systems to have distress-responses.(promoting unstability)

-Eustressors(stimuli) cause stress-response systems to have eustress-responses.(promoting stability)


P

SB_UK
05-15-14, 02:53 PM
If we define all physiological parameters (blood glucose, ion conc, pH) at their optimal level - then a distressor alters them (the more the greater the distressor) and a eustressor assists us in maintaining at or very close to them.

So having absolutely anything to with human beings is a basic distressor (to me)
- and not having anything to do with human beings (I can feel the relief) is a eustressor.

Amtram
05-15-14, 09:02 PM
I've lost count of how many times you've asked in various contexts what a stressor is, and how many times you and certain others have stated outright that stress causes disease without committing to a specific stress with a known relevant outcome.

When you say "stress causes X," then you need to be specific about the stress. There's no need to define each individual stressor, unless you're trying to establish correlation or causation. Whenever this causation has been declared as fact, I have asked what stress would be suspect, because in that particular case the type, severity, onset and duration of the stress is paramount. I have come right out and said that pretty much every event in life, positive or negative, is a stressor. And then you ask me what a stressor is. That's redundant, and it's unnecessary, because I am not the one stating that "stress" causes "disease."

If you're going to state specific cause and specific outcome, then don't be vague. I was illustrating exactly how vague (and obfuscating) it is to make this case that "stress" causes "disease" when both categories are so broad that the statement does not have even the most marginal usefulness.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 01:40 AM
I've lost count of how many times you've asked in various contexts what a stressor is, and how many times you and certain others have stated outright that stress causes disease without committing to a specific stress with a known relevant outcome.

When you say "stress causes X," then you need to be specific about the stress. There's no need to define each individual stressor, unless you're trying to establish correlation or causation. Whenever this causation has been declared as fact, I have asked what stress would be suspect, because in that particular case the type, severity, onset and duration of the stress is paramount. I have come right out and said that pretty much every event in life, positive or negative, is a stressor. And then you ask me what a stressor is. That's redundant, and it's unnecessary, because I am not the one stating that "stress" causes "disease."

If you're going to state specific cause and specific outcome, then don't be vague. I was illustrating exactly how vague (and obfuscating) it is to make this case that "stress" causes "disease" when both categories are so broad that the statement does not have even the most marginal usefulness.

I find not using the words "stress" and "stressful" really helps me understand better, what are stressors, the stress-response systems and the stress-responses. (see discussion post #54 (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1646708&postcount=54)).


P

mildadhd
05-16-14, 01:57 AM
If we define all physiological parameters (blood glucose, ion conc, pH) at their optimal level - then a distressor alters them (the more the greater the distressor) and a eustressor assists us in maintaining at or very close to them.

So having absolutely anything to with human beings is a basic distressor (to me)
- and not having anything to do with human beings (I can feel the relief) is a eustressor.


Stressors(cause), hypersensitive stress-response systems(temperament), and stress-responses?



P

mildadhd
05-16-14, 02:12 AM
Stressors(cause), hypersensitive stress-response systems(temperament), and stress-responses.

-Positive and negative eustressors(cause), hypersensitive stress-response systems(temperament) and eustress-response.

-Positive and negative distressors(cause), hypersensitive stress-response systems(temperament) and distress-response.


P

SB_UK
05-16-14, 02:18 AM
What is a stressor ?
Stressor = any event in phenomenological reality ie the sun shining is a stressor because it alters our physiological processes eg Vit D production, mental wellbeing.
If we state that having Vitamin D at a very precise level is neccessary for optimal human physiology - then it would be eustressful to have sufficient sun exposure to obtain precisely that amount of Vitamin D.
Too little / Too much sun exposure would be distressful.

Hypersensitive stress response ?
Loss of resilience in handling restoration of optimal and very precise physiological parameters following (di)stressor exposure.
Noting - that there's a line drawn between a sensitive and a hypersensitive reaction.

Resistant - Optimal sensitivity - Hypersensitivity.
It's not good if you have an immune system which is resistant to operation.
It's not good if you have an immune system which is so over-sensitive to activation that it reacts to itself or common allergens.

Stress response ?
Restoration of optimal and very precise physiological parameters following (di)stressor.

-*-

So - we can view the entire Universe as comprising a series of event - all of which combine to generate stressor.
These stressors will either help us to maintain optimal physiological parameters, restore optimal physiological parameters after stressor exposure
- or not.

Distressor reflected by magnitude of deviation from optimal physiological parameters.
Distressor reflected by acute vs chronic nature of deviation from optimal physiological parameters.
Distressor reflected by sensitivity of human physiological engine to restore optimal physiological parameters post-exposure to stressor.

So magnitude (too small or too much) of a stressor can force a stressor from distressor into eustressor into distressor.
So length of exposure (too short, too long) can shift a stressor from eustressful into distressful.

And where - the effect of magnitude/length exposure of stressor and its definition as distressor vs eustressor - can be defined by examining the sensitivity of the human physiological engine in restoring optimal physiologicla parameters post-challenge.

Resistance (loss of sensitivity) in neuro- and endocrine- systems is the sign that the life which an individual is living is distressful.
High resolution sensitivity in the neuroendocrine system - that the life which an individual is living optimal.

Sensitivity should be relatively easy to define eg for insulin using a glucose tolerance test.

SB_UK
05-16-14, 02:31 AM
For the most part though - all of that is over-complex.

Just simply - physical and psychological stress exist.

A certain level of stress is necessary to build the body/mind.

That optimal level of stress can be defined by the body/mind for itself unless it's placed under an environment where it's exposed (by life and inescapably) to blunting physiological stressors (eg Western diet) or an environment where it's exposed (by life and inescapably) to blunting psychological stressors (eg education/workplace).

Noting though that all physical distressors will melt away given elimination of psych. distress - of which there is only 1 sort
- and that is the development of people with minds which are not aligned with morality.

The simple basis to this idea is that people need to grow towards telling the difference between right and wrong for themselves.
This is not the same as not committing crimes through desire not to be imprisoned, through having been told that it's the wrong thing
- it's actually to have built a mind which knows what is right and what is wrong
- and for one's own mind to propel the individual into doing what's right.

None of this is forced - it involves the very personal development of one's own mind - and then its stipulation over your behaviour.
You don't have to catch yourself from performing immorality - you just won't be able to do them.

The entire education/workplace through its allegiance to materialism (money, power, sex) ie to worship the usual tax dodging, woman using, powerful politician (demagogues)
- is teaching the wrong message.

IS the cause of all human disease.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 02:42 AM
Sounds good though the problem we run into is the uniform notion around the Internet that educational system destroys creativity (http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity)
- and so there'd need to be some time spent identifying what an optimal educational scheme 'd be like, by age.

Just to nail down what form this should take:


At the moment there's outright warfare between teachers and students, and in competitive schools - between students themselves for top spot

- I think that somebody's going to need to work out what an optimal educational scheme will look like.

-*-

I think I'd suggest that learning which reinforces naturally is to be encouraged ie reading/writing.
Reading, writing, speaking are re-inforced through daily life.
I'd also suggest that there's a mathematical nature to language ie there has to be a very strict logical consistency in whatever we write - to 'make sense'.

A focus on personal expression ?? (the new education)
Sounds like a close fit with philosophy.

The same cannot be said to be true for >95% of the information fed and examined in a student thereafter - information which finds itself only the most transient of stop-overs in an individual's mind before being lost forever.

SB_UK

I need some time to think about this post and other related posts/ideas, I wanted to let you know, I am not ready to discuss these topics yet, but am really interested,

In this thread I would like to understand in general what is a stressor, I am learning lots in this thread, and feel I understand more than ever before.

Somethings seem easy to you, that I never thought of, that I am learning for the first time, might take me a little longer to comprehend, I like the topics you are presenting about future education structure, I just don't have the words to discuss the topics in depth.

I have noticed some improvements in the way some schools approach different ways of learning, since I went to school, obviously there is more work to do, but I would like to explore what ideas are out there, etc.

To discuss in the future.

Might need a month or so, on some of the topics, but am always interested in reading your ideas, (but might not reply until I research more).

(I also think the approx age related idea, is great idea. in my opinion, and hope to discuss all those topics more)

Thanks

Side Note: Have you seen the video, Epigenetics 101, Why Grandmothers are important? (See post/thread (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1648328&postcount=7)).

P

SB_UK
05-16-14, 03:26 AM
what is a stressor

anything/everything which can have an effect on a human being

The effect means that something about the human being has changed - defines the 'anything/everything' as a stressor.

Of course an idea is a stressor.

SB_UK
05-16-14, 04:01 AM
Sadly anything/everything that can have an effect on a human being can be simplified to anything/everything.

There's no way of making this idea more general - anything/everything covers it ALL after all.

So - any stressor which results in homeostasis is good.
Any stressor which results in loss of homeostasis is bad.

It's not too useful to list things that are good stressors / bad stressors - because although some will be shared ie toxic levels of cyanide are uniformly bad stressors

- eg some people might be ridiculous enough to find other human beings eustressful.
Personally I find is that Hell is with people.

All people want is what they want.

An entirely immoral society of grasping idiots - with the rich as bad as the poor aspiring to be rich.

Lunacie
05-16-14, 09:44 AM
A stress response requires a stressor.

What is a stressor?


P

A stressor is anything that causes stress. Seems pretty obvious to me.

Amtram
05-16-14, 10:28 AM
And while that is absolutely true, it's also too reductionist to study. Which is the exact same problem with trying to categorize stress by dividing it into two neat little boxes ("eustress" and "distress".) If you want to make a statement about cause and effect, you need to look at individual causes and individual effects - or, at the very least, causes that share very specific characteristics and create the same effect/causes that create effects that share very specific characteristics.

Oversimplification doesn't make it more understandable; oversimplification makes it wrong.

Lunacie
05-16-14, 10:52 AM
I agree about dividing it into two categories (eustress and distress).

I think of stress as being a spectrum, from helpful to harmful and everything in between.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 11:46 AM
And while that is absolutely true, it's also too reductionist to study. Which is the exact same problem with trying to categorize stress by dividing it into two neat little boxes ("eustress" and "distress".) If you want to make a statement about cause and effect, you need to look at individual causes and individual effects - or, at the very least, causes that share very specific characteristics and create the same effect/causes that create effects that share very specific characteristics.

Oversimplification doesn't make it more understandable; oversimplification makes it wrong.

I haven't discussed any specific cases, yet.

If the terminology, distress(promoting instability) and eustress(promoting stability) are oversimplifications.

What would categorizing things into a single box, be considered?





P

Greyhound1
05-16-14, 12:08 PM
Some vague cause and effects of stress I found.

Diseases Caused by Stress
The number of diseases caused by stress is increasing day by day. Read the following article to get to know what some common stress-induced illnesses and disorders are.



I try to avoid stress - it makes me feel like I'm rubber-stamping all my organs "Urgent."
~ Berri Clove

Absolutely! The entire phenomenon of stress, or rather, the way we react to stressful situations, puts enormous pressure on every biological organ without discrimination, not to mention the distress it causes to the mind! Right from the nervous system and the vital organs to the integumentary system on the outside, stress leaves its mark all over those who become willing victims of it - yes, you heard it right, WILLING VICTIMS. You see, the psychological and physical effects that we experience on facing stressful situations is nothing but our response to such a situation, which is but an external stimulus. While we may not be able to have complete control over all sorts of external stimuli, how we respond to them is always in our hands. Remember when Peter Parker said "We always have a choice" to Sandman in Spiderman 3? Well, he didn't exaggerate one bit! Now, before you write me off as yet another health preacher, let's move on and take a look at some common diseases caused by stress.

What are the Diseases Caused by Stress?

With so much talk about stress related diseases inundating newspapers, magazines, the television and the Internet, it would come as no surprise that most of us are fairly aware of the long-term bearings of stress on the body and the mind. While the negative effects of stress are borne by almost all organs and physiological processes of the body, the organs and biological systems that get hit the hardest are the cardiovascular system, the nervous system and the endocrine system. All these three systems are very closely related and anything that affects one of these invariably goes on to affect the other two. Here are some common diseases and disorders that affects these three systems as a result of biological burnout owing to inappropriate response to stressful stimuli.

Common Cardiovascular Diseases Caused by Stress
High Blood Pressure
Myocardial Infarction (Heart Attack)
High Blood Cholesterol
Ventricular Aneurysm
Palpitations
Cardiac Dysrhythmia
Ischemic Heart Disease
Poor Blood Circulation
Common Neuro Psychological Disorders Caused by Stress
Anxiety
Panic
Depression
Altered Temperamental States
Cerebral Stroke
Psychoneurosis
Insomnia (and various other sleep disorders)
Headaches (can be neural as well as vascular such as migraine)
Eating Disorders
Drug Addiction and Substance Abuse (especially pertaining to psychoactive drugs, antidepressants and tranquilizers)
Common Endocrine System Disorders Caused by Stress
Hormonal Imbalances
Hormonal Headaches
Frequent and Unhealthy Mood Swings
Metabolic Illnesses owing to hormonal imbalances (such as Diabetes)
Thyroid Abnormalities
Sexual Dysfunction (and possible infertility)
Hypoglycemia
Irregular Menstrual Cycles and Ovarian Cysts (in females)
Impotence and Erectile Dysfunction (in males)
Acne and Pimples
Other Stress-induced Diseases
Skin diseases such as eczema, psoriasis, hives, rashes, etc.
Various types of cancers and tumors
Alcoholism
Asthma
Chronic Fatigue
Neuromuscular Tension
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Gastrointestinal Disorders (acidity, indigestion, etc.)
Obesity (owing to binge eating and sluggish metabolism)
Peptic Ulcer
Allergies and similar outbreaks
Viral and Bacterial Infections (colds, flu, etc.)
Respiratory Diseases
Muscular Cramps
Repetitive Stress Syndrome
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (in extremely severe cases)
Most of the diseases that are brought on by stress are nothing but dysfunctions of the immune and metabolic systems which lead to disorders and illnesses of various other physiological systems and organs. A lot of infections and pathogens get an opportunity to invade a stressed out body as the immune defenses are low when a person is under a lot of stress. You see, stress often leads to unhealthy habits such as skipping meals, eating junk food, staying up late, etc., which wreak havoc on the normal metabolic rhythm. This, in turn, weakens the immune system because the body neither gets the right amount of nutrition nor sufficient rest to be able to repair damaged tissue and replace worn out cells at a healthy pace. All this leaves the doors open for a large number of diseases and infections to nest inside the body and weaken it further.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 12:21 PM
Sadly anything/everything that can have an effect on a human being can be simplified to anything/everything.

There's no way of making this idea more general - anything/everything covers it ALL after all.

So - any stressor which results in homeostasis is good.
Any stressor which results in loss of homeostasis is bad.

It's not too useful to list things that are good stressors / bad stressors - because although some will be shared ie toxic levels of cyanide are uniformly bad stressors

- eg some people might be ridiculous enough to find other human beings eustressful.
Personally I find is that Hell is with people.

All people want is what they want.

An entirely immoral society of grasping idiots - with the rich as bad as the poor aspiring to be rich.


I am personally trying to stop using terms, good, bad, since in post #5

Avoiding the 4 most subjective terms, (good, bad, stress and stressful), and trying to use the terms, positive-eustress, negative-eustress, positive-distress and negative-distress, really help me understand, by making terminology less subjective, one step at a time.


There are two different, subjective issues in this thread

-terminology
-perspective(individual experience)


So far I have been focusing on terminology, that can cover all perspectives.

There seems to be 3 major parts involved.

-Stressors(positive-eustressors and negative-eustressors , positive-distressors and negative-distressors)

-Stress-response systems(emotional affects, homeostatic affects, sensory affects)(temperaments)

-Stress-responses(depends on the first two, and other factors like, age..that can be clarified on an individual basis)


See post #5 (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1645809&postcount=5)


Thanks,

In the past, I thought eustress was "good" stressors and distress was "bad" stressors.

I think I was wrong.


Because to much positive stressors may promote instability, and negative stressors may promote stability (homeostasis).


In my previous post I think I should have wrote..

Both negative and positive stressors that promote stability are eustressful.

Both negative and positive stressors that promote instability are distressful.

What is a "good" stressor and what is a "bad" stressor seems subjective, depending on personal circumstances.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 09:27 PM
Focusing on the terms, in the example quote posted by Greyhound, I have not made any changes to GreyHound1's post quote example. (except for my addtion/comparison in red).

I am only focusing on the the subjective terminology I already discussed about previously in this thread, not commenting specifically the author's opinions, in this post.

Subjective terminology examples.


Diseases Caused by Positive and Negative Distressors Stress.
The number of diseases caused by positive and negative distressors stress is increasing day by day. Read the following article to get to know what some common positive and negative distress stress-induced illnesses and disorders are.



I try to avoid positive and negative distressors stress - it makes me feel like I'm rubber-stamping all my organs "Urgent."
~ Berri Clove

Absolutely! The entire phenomenon of stressors stress, or rather, the way we react to positive and negative distressful stressful situations, puts enormous pressure on every biological organ without discrimination, not to mention the positive and negative distress it causes to the mind! Right from the nervous system and the vital organs to the integumentary system on the outside, positive and negative distress leaves its mark all over those who become willing victims of it - yes, you heard it right, WILLING VICTIMS. You see, the psychological and physical effects that we experience on facing positive and negative distressful, and positive and negative eustressfulstressful situations is nothing but our response to such a situation, which is but an external stimulus. While we may not be able to have complete control over all sorts of external stimuli, how we respond to them is always in our hands. Remember when Peter Parker said "We always have a choice" to Sandman in Spiderman 3? Well, he didn't exaggerate one bit! Now, before you write me off as yet another health preacher, let's move on and take a look at some common diseases caused by positive and negative distressors stress.

What are the Diseases Caused by Positive and Negative Distressors Stress?

With so much talk about positive and negative distressor stress related diseases inundating newspapers, magazines, the television and the Internet, it would come as no surprise that most of us are fairly aware of the long-term bearings of positive and negative stressors stress on the body and the mind. While the negative effects of positive and negative distress stress are borne by almost all organs and physiological processes of the body, the organs and biological systems that get hit the hardest are the cardiovascular system, the nervous system and the endocrine system. All these three systems are very closely related and anything that affects one of these invariably goes on to affect the other two. Here are some common diseases and disorders that affects these three systems as a result of biological burnout owing to inappropriate response to positive and negative distressful stressful stimuli.

Common Cardiovascular Diseases Caused by Positive and Negative Distressors Stress
High Blood Pressure
Myocardial Infarction (Heart Attack)
High Blood Cholesterol
Ventricular Aneurysm
Palpitations
Cardiac Dysrhythmia
Ischemic Heart Disease
Poor Blood Circulation
Common Neuro Psychological Disorders Caused by Positive and Negative Distressors Stress
Anxiety
Panic
Depression
Altered Temperamental States
Cerebral Stroke
Psychoneurosis
Insomnia (and various other sleep disorders)
Headaches (can be neural as well as vascular such as migraine)
Eating Disorders
Drug Addiction and Substance Abuse (especially pertaining to psychoactive drugs, antidepressants and tranquilizers)
Common Endocrine System Disorders Caused by Positive and Negative Distressors Stress
Hormonal Imbalances
Hormonal Headaches
Frequent and Unhealthy Mood Swings
Metabolic Illnesses owing to hormonal imbalances (such as Diabetes)
Thyroid Abnormalities
Sexual Dysfunction (and possible infertility)
Hypoglycemia
Irregular Menstrual Cycles and Ovarian Cysts (in females)
Impotence and Erectile Dysfunction (in males)
Acne and Pimples
Other Stress-induced Diseases
Skin diseases such as eczema, psoriasis, hives, rashes, etc.
Various types of cancers and tumors
Alcoholism
Asthma
Chronic Fatigue
Neuromuscular Tension
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Gastrointestinal Disorders (acidity, indigestion, etc.)
Obesity (owing to binge eating and sluggish metabolism)
Peptic Ulcer
Allergies and similar outbreaks
Viral and Bacterial Infections (colds, flu, etc.)
Respiratory Diseases
Muscular Cramps
Repetitive Stress Syndrome
Post Traumatic Distress Stress Disorder (in extremely severe cases)
Most of the diseases that are brought on by positive and negative distress stress are nothing but dysfunctions of the immune and metabolic systems which lead to disorders and illnesses of various other physiological systems and organs. A lot of infections and pathogens get an opportunity to invade a distressed stressed out body as the immune defenses are low when a person is under a lot of positive and negative distress stress. You see, positive and negative distress stress often leads to unhealthy habits such as skipping meals, eating junk food, staying up late, etc., which wreak havoc on the normal metabolic rhythm. This, in turn, weakens the immune system because the body neither gets the right amount of nutrition nor sufficient rest to be able to repair damaged tissue and replace worn out cells at a healthy pace. All this leaves the doors open for a large number of diseases and infections to nest inside the body and weaken it further.

Lunacie
05-16-14, 09:43 PM
I try to avoid stress - it makes me feel like I'm rubber-stamping all my organs "Urgent."
~ Berri Clove

This is one of the problems with our executive function ... we cannot distinguish between the importance of anything.

We have a very hard time prioritizing ... everything seems "urgent."

mildadhd
05-16-14, 10:15 PM
I try to avoid stress - it makes me feel like I'm rubber-stamping all my organs "Urgent."
~ Berri Clove

This is one of the problems with our executive function ... we cannot distinguish between the importance of anything.

We have a very hard time prioritizing ... everything seems "urgent."

Distressors cause things to be worse, thats for sure.


P

Lunacie
05-16-14, 10:32 PM
Distressors cause things to be worse, thats for sure.


P

Stress causes things to be worse. My point was that ADHD makes it difficult for us to distinguish whether we're dealing with distress or eustress - it's all just stress and it's all making things difficult.

mildadhd
05-16-14, 11:06 PM
Stress causes things to be worse. My point was that ADHD makes it difficult for us to distinguish whether we're dealing with distress or eustress - it's all just stress and it's all making things difficult.

Thanks

A few months ago (Not exactly sure when) you introduced me to an early psychological development program.

I am sorry I can't remember the thread or the name of the program.

I felt you enjoyed going to the meetings, and I really enjoyed learning about the early psychological program.

Do you still have the name of the program and the video link?


P

mildadhd
05-17-14, 03:20 AM
Stress causes things to be worse. My point was that ADHD makes it difficult for us to distinguish whether we're dealing with distress or eustress - it's all just stress and it's all making things difficult.

I have ADD and I find discussing the topics with other people who are interested really helpful and interesting.

I can understand that some people might not be interested in this thread.

It am not interested in every thread topic posted either.

I think which topics people are interested, or not, depends on individual interest.

P

SB_UK
05-17-14, 03:42 AM
What would be an example of a + - distress and + - eustress.

So

positive eustress = eating [moderate - to be defined later] levels of proper food
negative distress = eating [high - to be defined later] levels of junk food

There should be

too little
sufficient
too much

for eustress and distress.

So if eustressful = something essential for existence (ie proper food) ie a necessary limit for consumption - also water, air, temperature regulation

And if distressful = something which harms us even at lowest common level of consumption (cigarettes) ie no safe limit for consumption - also the acquisition of PCP, money, the new 'spice' drug, power, heroin.

Then we've too little proper food <- worse than optimal state
An appropriate level of proper food <- optimal state
Too much proper food <- worse than optimal state

any level of distresssor <- worse than optimal state

So we've:
++ eustressor tends to distressor
+ eustressor
neutral eustressor -> results in us having optimal physiological resilience (sensitivity) to the key parameters of physiology (blood glucose, ions, salt)
- eustressor
-- eustressor tends to distressor
and
distressor.

So - apparently Barliman has just described alcohol as within the eustressor class and not - what I had thought - the distressor class
- note that he cites epidemiological evidence - and so I haven't any problem in mentally switching alcohol (nasty stuff!!) into another box
- whilst noting that if we don't regulate level consumed, that eutressor can morph into distressor.

-*-

Is it possible to make the case that all distressors are eustressors - it's just that the optimal eustressful level is minute - close to zero ... ... maybe ?

This allows us to eliminate distressor and have:

[1] +E tends to D
[2] neutral [optimal] E
[3] -E tends to D

Where - and this is what makes the whole scheme unworkable - the level of any given stressor to determine whether it falls into classes [1], [2] or [3] will be dependent on the individual.

So - we're back left with the idea that we can simplify all of the above - and suggest that ANY specific experience which makes resilience/sensitivity of human physiology to challenge better at restoring physiological parameters as GOOD and anything which doesn't as BAD.

Now - back around to the idea of resistance syndromes which occur within the key arms of physiology - the neuro and endocrine systems; these occur through chronic application of some 'agent' (whether resulting in certain nervous circuit involving certain neurotransmitter firing, or certain hormonal release) - which blunts the body's natural response.

The body loses resilience/sensitivity of human physiology to challenge.

In the case of insulin resistance we look at an impaired responsiveness to glucose challenge.
This is the body's reaction to chronic exposure to levels of glucose in the blood stream which falls under:
[1] +E tends to D
[2] neutral [optimal] E
[3] -E tends to D

Now - in the case of neutral (optimal) E - we actually know what the level should be ie Peripheral gave us this value as 6 mmol/l for blood glucose and we have values for all other standard physiological parameters eg blood pH=7.365.

In the case of the nervous system - we have the same basic thing happening when tolerance occurs to illicit drugs or eg THE ACQUISITION OF MONEY, POWER (which occurs whenever anybody tries to acquire ANY money or ANY power over other people)
- ie tolerance and the desire for EVER more occurring by the exact same mechanism to a physical (eg heroin) and a psychological (eg EXPRESSION OF THE LOVE/DESIRE OF MONEY/POWER/SEX) stressor.

There is no difference between the tolerance which results in the human mind/brain between heroin addiction and anybody who in any way supports the love/desire of money (at any level), power (at any level) and sex (multiple partners).

-*-

So - we've a problem -
How on Earth do we know what levels of experience (roller coaster rides, alcohol intake, exercise, food intake) we're individually meant to take in, in order to remain:
[1] +E tends to D
[2] neutral [optimal] E
[3] -E tends to D

Well - luckily it's not that hard.

Evolution has placed the mind as a more recent emergent property than the body.

All we need to do is correct the mind (eliminate the love/desire of money, power, sex) - and we'll lose tolerance of the basic circuits which're re-used by the standard physiological (ie all the systems which animals pre-mind also possess) system.

-*-

Correct mind - by people receiving an education which teaches people right from wrong -> towards -> acquisition of morality and what then happens is that we DO NOT generate tolerance in neural / endocrine systems which're shared by the standard physiological system (all the reactions encoded by animals pre-mind) - and so we won't be driven into engaging in non:
[2] neutral [optimal] E
in any experiential (roller coaster rides, alcohol intake, exercise, food intake) domains
- and will maintain physiology eliminate the pathophysiological state.

SB_UK
05-17-14, 04:03 AM
So - to what is a stressor ?Not too useful a question - because it's anything that alters us in any way.

What we're more interested in doing is ensuring that we engage in activities which
promote stability and not instability or sensitivity/resilience in the body's capacity at restoring itself to optimal physiological parameters.

We can't do that using the conscious mind - because it is clueless - we need to do this using some intrinsic property (emotion ie wanting another brussel sprout or not wanting another sprout dependent on feeling (ie emotion ie hunger ie natural appetite regulatory mechanisms).

-*-

So - noting that the mind (psychological stress) and the body (physical stress) employ the same circuits - particularly reward - what we need to do is generate an optimal 'physiological' system for the mind
- representing people who're given an education which allows people to tell right from wrong - towards generating morality/wisdom as early into adulthood as possible
- within a global societal context which is logically rationalised with morality/wisdom.

-*-

So - ignore what is a stressor, ignore eustressor / distressor, ignore human physiology, ignore everything

- all that matters is:
an education which allows people to tell right from wrong - towards generating morality/wisdom as early into adulthood as possible
- within a global societal context which is logically rationalised with morality/wisdom.- so that optimal functioning of all neuroendocrine circuits are ensured - allowing the individual to want:
[2] neutral [optimal] E the appropriate level of exposure to stressors/experience (roller coaster rides, alcohol intake, exercise, food intake).

SB_UK
05-17-14, 04:19 AM
Noting that:
[1] +E tends to D
[2] neutral [optimal] E
[3] -E tends to D

- in the case of distressors, I could be convinced that [2] might represent zero level of exposure - which'd help out.

So - if we look at rat park - the rats did not want morphine in the absence of social pain - and so their appetite regulatory processes characterized zero intake of morphine as [2].

So - if [2] represents for eg money zero exposure - then what we generate is the exact profile of a distressor ie all 3 states of eustressor as distressor regardless of the level of exposure we have to money (power, sexual control relationships).

-*-

So - just to re-iterate - it's the love/desire for money, power, sex at the level of mind which corrupt our own emotional circuits which determine our 'appetites' which alter neuroendocrine resistance which fosters an inappropriate level of physical stressors which breaks our system yet further.

-*-

There is only 1 goal that we need to address:
an education [TO ALL PEOPLE] which allows people to tell right from wrong - towards generating morality/wisdom as early into adulthood as possible
- within a global societal context which is logically rationalised with morality/wisdom.Everything else will follow.

Morality = Equality which is not possible in a world of money (must generate inequality), power of man over man ie hierarchical power (= by definition inequality) structures (eg govt, education,workplace) and sex (power relationship eg see graphic representation in 'Requiem for a Dream' in the encounter between Marion and the pimp)
- noting that usually it's not perverted psychopathic pimp and heroin addict - though often it is - and the 'norm' ie man with money exerting power over woman without money for material return - is pretty much the same thing ie crazy psychopath meets victim.

Sad thing is that the crazy psychopath (described above) is considered highly in our society - and the victim is generated by our society.

All a consequence of living in a society which worships the love of money, power, sex (abuse relationships).

The only valid basis to medicine (defined as the alleviation of human suffering/disease) would be in seeing in a global voluntaryism technologically-organized anarchy societal infrastructure where:
an education [TO ALL PEOPLE] which allows people to tell right from wrong - towards generating morality/wisdom as early into adulthood as possible
- within a global societal context which is logically rationalised with morality/wisdom.

SB_UK
05-17-14, 04:40 AM
What's the take home message ?

The degree in medicine MUST be replaced by a relentless thrust towards altering the structure of Western (global) society to generate an optimal phsyiological/psychological engine (over time) - which is capable of self-regulation ie you won't need to be told how much of anything you're supposed to want - your body/mind will regulate its own appetite.

an education [TO ALL PEOPLE] which allows people to tell right from wrong - towards generating morality/wisdom as early into adulthood as possible
- within a global societal context which is logically rationalised with morality/wisdom.

-*-
What is a stressor?Being healthy implies that your body (emotions) must be able to answer this question - will regulate appetite for stressor dependent on its (your) own (health) agenda.

You aren't born into a death wish - you acquire it (physiological/neuroendocrine system blunting) through living life in THIS ROTTEN society - are driven to drugs and drink and then die prematurely after a life of disease.

-*-

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/imgmec/hook.gif

Goal of life - to apply sufficient F to ensure that upon F exposure 'unstretched state' re-attained asap post stressor release.

IE to make as stiff (prevents elastic limit being exceeded and ensures 'unstretched state' quickly re-attained)
- a spring as possible.

If human physiology is seen as a spring.
And 'stressor' as Force applied.
And 'unstretched state' as optimal physiological parameters.

-*-

Similarly - we could simply recharacterize human physiology as the standard buffer (chemistry).
Goal - strong buffer restore pH upon challenge - not weak buffer which either fails or operates too slowly to re-establish optimal reaction conditions.

-*-

What would optimal physiological conditions represent ?
Presumably the most efficient state the individual's body can be in to generate water (aerobic respiration).

We're just like a car which needs the engine to be at a certain speed, fuel to be at a certain level to operate optimally - 'cept the fuel efficiency of a car (when it's optimally operational) is matched by our efficiency at aerobic respiration.

In fact - they're pretty much the same thing.

Efficiency of burning hydrocarbon fuel in the case of car.
Efficiency of burning hydrocarbon fuel (fat) in the case of man.

-*-

What is ADHD ?
Simply the end consequence (distress) of living in:
a society which worships the love of money, power, sex (abuse relationships).-*-

Which is why ... ... ...
http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1648767&postcount=9

SB_UK
05-17-14, 04:58 AM
Beat 30 min deadline for adding to posts (the Hooke's law stuff above ... ...)

Amtram
05-17-14, 09:27 AM
Q.E.D. reductionism.

Food causes obesity.
Driving causes car accidents.
Stress causes disease.

All true statements that essentially say nothing because they leave out all the most important details in favor of generalizing.

mildadhd
05-17-14, 12:06 PM
Q.E.D. reductionism.

Food causes obesity.
Driving causes car accidents.
Stress causes disease.

All true statements that essentially say nothing because they leave out all the most important details in favor of generalizing.

So...why are you generalizing?


P

Amtram
05-17-14, 12:49 PM
To illustrate what is being done in this and many other threads. This might help illustrate my point, from Scilogs - Nuance is critical in science communication both ways (http://www.scilogs.com/in_scientio_veritas/nuance-critical-scicomm-bothways/).

mildadhd
05-17-14, 04:07 PM
To illustrate what is being done in this and many other threads. This might help illustrate my point, from Scilogs - Nuance is critical in science communication both ways (http://www.scilogs.com/in_scientio_veritas/nuance-critical-scicomm-bothways/).


I find the terms eustressor(promotes stability) and distressor(promotes instability) are really helpful, to better understand the topics.

What other terms do you use in your threads/posts, that help better understand, what are stressors ?




P

mildadhd
05-18-14, 12:04 AM
Some vague cause and effects of stress I found.


What are cause and effect?


Stressors(cause), affective stressor-response systems(individual temperament) and stressor-responses(effect?)


(Focusing on primary level of control only, for primary learning purposes)


Two types of stressors:

-Eustressors(+) promotes instability

-Distressors(-) promotes stability


Instability---------------Stability(Homeostasis)---------------Instability



Three major types of affective stressor-response systems:


Emotional Affects


SEEKING System(+)
-FEAR System(-)
-RAGE System(-)
-LUST System(+)
-CARE System(+)
-GRIEF/PANIC System(-)
-PLAY System(+)


Homeostatic Affects

-Circulatory System
-Lymphatic System
-Nervous System
-Endocrine System
-Respiratory System
-Digestive System
-Urinary System

Sensory Affects

-Visual(seeing) System
-Auditory(hearing) System
-Somatosensory(touch, temperature pain) System
-Gustatory(taste) System
-Olfactory(smell) System,
-Vestibular(balance) System



Opinions/additions/subtractions?

P

mildadhd
05-18-14, 12:50 AM
Correction: (missed edit deadline, above post)

Two types of stressors:


-Eustressors(+) promotes stability

-Distressors(-) promotes instability


Instability---------------Stability(Homeostasis)---------------Instability

SB_UK
05-18-14, 02:49 AM
emotion
sensory
homeostatic

? Ideally - we want the following system to be working ?

Emotional reactivity (ie like / dislike) guides sensory expoure (ie more / less) based on homeostatic considerations (stability / instability).

So - taking alcohol which Barliman has written is a eustressor under low dosage.

Like (emotion) guides level of alcohol intake (sensory) based on generating a stronger, more stable physiological (homeostatic) mechanism.

SB_UK
05-18-14, 02:57 AM
What goes wrong ?

Stress from living in a world where psychpaths are worshipped and emulated by all (the desire to make more money, be higher on some hierarchical power ladder, to abuse as many of the opposite sex as possible) drives chronic levels of stress hormone to be produced in all people [Note that 'in why equal societies do better' the rich are sicker in countries of greater inequality than the rich in countries of greater equality], reduced sensitivity and so excess drive towards factors which are essential for life.

We lose pan-regulatory capacity.

Cortisol sensitivity [stress] and dopamine [reactive stress relief] sensitivity is lost from the neuroendocrine system occur first - all other systems then follow - from insulin/leptin to serotonin resistance.

If the body can't self-regulate it's a bit like a car with faulty parts - it will break down.
The individual components need to communicate requirements otherwise - too much fuel in the engine - flooded engine - break down.

SB_UK
05-18-14, 03:20 AM
Once again - maintain physiology eliminate pathophysiology is the conclusion.

The mind is our current emergent property.

Correct mind and all else (the physical body) will work (self-regulate).

The mind is a structure which is intended to support man as a social organism.

It doesn't work unless it is filled appropriately.

To be filled the individual needs only learn the difference between right and wrong in a world which supports what is right and not what is wrong.

Our current world teaches ALL people to do what is wrong in a global societal infrastructure which enforces (ie ensures) that all that people can do (if they wish to survive) is wrong.

The essential problem (stress) which occurs with current (Western now global hierarchical structures of man living) - is that in an environment of information - the mind desires moral/sustainable living (it's really the only option) whilst all people are trapped in a legal/economic environment which enforces immoral/unsustainable living.

material world attachment/desire <---the further--- Proper (towards morality) definition of mind ---the closer---> desire for moral/sustainable living

Material world/attachment wants the world we have currently ie a world of immoral/unsustainable existence.

-*-

--- Solution ---
[1] Ensure that people develop a mind which knows right from wrong.
[2] Allow individuals to do 'right'.
[3] Radical overhaul of the immoral current education (at all levels), workplace into logical consitency with 'doing no harm'.
[4] Permit optimal physiological function since there's no longer any stress reactively driven by the incosistency between mind (tending to morality/unsustainability) and the body (enforced through society enforced immoral/unsustainable existence).
[5] Maintain physiology - Eliminate pathophysiology.

That's all that's required for anybody who's involved in healthcare to understand.

Where it is commonly understood that all that matters is health ie it's the sole concern of all people.

Mental (through building a mind which knows right from wrong) permitting Physical health to be retained.

SB_UK
05-18-14, 03:39 AM
All human problems (of course including the stress reaction which we call ADH disorder) eliminated by developing a mind which knows what is right, a body which does that which is right within a social context of doing what is right. Logical consistency across these 3 domains.

It's easy.

As the mind deviates from that structure - it will take on the form we associate with an animal - of living only for immediate material world reward (attraction to warfare, attraction to division, attraction to hierarchy, love of cheating).

Being human (we're not born properly human) is to escape that state of ignorance, that reward system, that state of incarceration to desire.

[Aspiration to] freedom [from material world attachment] (that's all that life is).And when you're there ?
You're there and are free.