Early Morning Buddhist Inspiration - 5/10/2013
Early Morning Buddhist Inspiration - 5/10/2013 |
- Early Morning Buddhist Inspiration - 5/10/2013
- Dalai Lama packs UM Comcast Center for address on compassion
- Searching For Male Fountain of Youth? Go Exercise
- Dalai Lama says environmental awakening came at 24
- Cultivating self-compassion (Day 29)
- If God doesn't exist, do we still need to believe in "God"?
- 3 Myths About Parkinson's Disease
- Pets May Curb Heart Disease Risk, Doctors Say
| Early Morning Buddhist Inspiration - 5/10/2013 Posted: 10 May 2013 01:00 PM PDT  "It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell." ~The Buddha      Read More @ Source | ||
| Dalai Lama packs UM Comcast Center for address on compassion Posted: 10 May 2013 09:00 AM PDT
"Sit down," the 78-year-old Tibetan spiritual leader said in a firm but friendly voice when he approached the podium and the crowd rose to its feet. "No formality! We are [the] same. … The way we are born, the way we die: no formality." Clad in red robes and his trademark spectacles, the Dalai Lama appeared… Read the original article » Read More @ Source | ||
| Searching For Male Fountain of Youth? Go Exercise Posted: 10 May 2013 08:00 AM PDT
Treatments purporting to offer "male rejuvenation" and combat the effects of aging have become popular in recent years, but such claims are not backed up by science, experts say. Men seeking such treatments often receive testosterone, sometimes in combination with other hormones such as steroids and growth hormones. Advertisers claim the treatments increase strength and sex drive, and make patients feel younger. However, studies examining the effects of these treatments are lacking, and there's little evidence to support their use in men who don't have hormone deficiencies, experts say. "There's really no scientific evidence that they will help a man to function optimally, either in the sexual arena, or that they will have a effect on the general health and wellbeing of a man," said Dr. Eli Lizza, a urologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. Moreover, the treatments also have side effects that should be considered. For instance, testosterone treatments can temporarily decrease sperm count and impair fertility, experts said. Further, studies have suggested a possible link between the receiving the hormone and prostate cancer. If you're looking for a way to lengthen lifespan and increase strength, some say you're better off sticking with the common sense advice to exercise more and eat better. Exercise in the elderly has been shown to improve daily living and decrease muscle and bone loss, according to John Morley, a geriatrics specialist at Saint Louis University School of Medicine, who wrote a review article about the topic. "Overall, exercise, adequate sunlight exposure [for Vitamin D], and adequate protein intake all appear more appropriate 'elixirs of youth' than hormone supplementation," Morley wrote in the May 10 issue of the journal Fertility and Sterility. Low T? Levels of testosterone naturally decrease with age, but exactly what level constitutes "low T" or hypogonadism, is controversial, Lizza said. Testosterone levels vary wildly, and can even differ depending on the time of day they're measured (levels tend to be lower in the evenings.) Doctors typically to treat men for hypogonadism if they have symptoms of low testosterone and their levels are below 300 nanograms per deciliter. In older men with true testosterone deficiencies, testosterone treatment has been shown to increase strength and sex drive, Morley said. Sometimes, symptoms such as decreased energy and low sex drive are due to conditions such as depression. Treating these men with testosterone hormone won't improve symptoms, Lizza said. And even in men with hypogonadism, Viagra is a better treatment than testosterone for help with difficulties maintaining erections, Lizza said. Testosterone treatment is also known to lower sperm count — at one time, it was even considered as a male contraceptive, although it was not proven to be effective for this purpose. Studies suggest sperm count can sometimes be recovered, but not always, especially if men are also taking steroids, Lizza said. Testosterone treatments should be avoided in men desiring future fertility, said Dr. Jared Moss, a urologist at the University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine. Concerningly, a recent survey of urologists found that about 25 percent said they had prescribed testosterone to men with low T who were infertile. "That is completely counterproductive," Moss said. The drug clomiphene (Clomid) is the safest therapy doctors have to increase testosterone levels while preserving fertility, Moss said. Other hormones and supplements Levels of the hormone dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) also decline with age, but there's not enough evidence to say that taking DHEA supplements has any effect on aging. A 2003 study looking at the effect of DHEA supplementation in people ages 60 to 80 found no effect on muscle mass and strength over a year. Because the supplement may increase the risk of hormone-related cancers, such as prostate, breast and ovarian cancer, it is not recommended for regular use without supervision from a doctor, according to the Mayo Clinic. There's also not enough evidence to show that growth hormone treatments are beneficial for older people, Morley said, and there's no proof that they help with sperm count. Because many older people are deficient in vitamin D, it may be prudent for them to take a vitamin D supplement (up to 1000 international units a day), Morley said. Pass it on: There's little evidence to support hormone therapies men who don't have hormone deficiencies, and testosterone treatments can impair fertility. Follow Rachael Rettner @RachaelRettner. Follow MyHealthNewsDaily @MyHealth_MHND, Facebook & Google+. Originally published on LiveScience .  Read More @ Source | ||
| Dalai Lama says environmental awakening came at 24 Posted: 10 May 2013 07:00 AM PDT
The 77-year-old Tibetan Buddhist spiritual leader sold out two events at the University of Portland and was in the city for an interfaith discussion on spirituality and the environment. "I was in Tibet until my age was 24. I think Tibet, some people call it the roof of the world, It was very clean, a small population, everything simple," the Nobel Peace laureate said. "Only after I came to India (did) I first hear, 'This water, you cannot drink.'… | ||
| Cultivating self-compassion (Day 29) Posted: 09 May 2013 10:00 PM PDT
Now, almost exactly twenty years ago I made a promise to myself that I wouldn't walk past a worm without moving it to safety. Why? Well, I just don't like the way I feel when I ignore another's suffering, even if the other is a slimy invertebrate. And the sun was out, the sidewalks were starting to dry out, and it was obvious that many of these worms were going to die. So every few feet I would stoop, scoop up a worm with a dried grass stalk, and move it to a grassy area. (I don't generally use my fingers because I keep thinking how painfully hot and dry I must feel to a worm.) There were so many worms out that as I carried one a few feet to safety I'd pass several more. And so I'd go back and rescue them as well. It was fun at first, although after a while I started to feel a bit antsy. This was all taking a long time: stoop, scoop, move, return; stoop, scoop, move, return. My bit of dried grass kept breaking and I'd have to get a new one. Then it was back stoop, scoop, move, return. I had a lot of work to do, and I really wanted to get to the office. What to do? Well, I could have decided to just bail, but I'd made a promise — never walk past a stranded worm without rescuing it. So what I did was this: I became aware of my restlessness and my anxiety to get to work, and I thought, "OK, you're suffering too, just like they're suffering." And I embraced my suffering with a compassionate awareness, and kept on picking up worms and ferrying them to safety: stoop, scoop, move, return.
I spell this out (my approach to self-compassion, rather than the specifics of worm-rescue) in case it might be useful to you as you're developing compassion. When we consider another's suffering, it induces a sense of discomfort in us. It may be an ache in the heart, or some uncomfortable feeling in the belly. And often we'll react to this by assuming that something's wrong. There's no need to do that. It's OK to feel discomfort. So feel your discomfort. Recognize that this is suffering. Give the suffering your love.  If you like my articles, please check out my books, guided meditation CDs, and MP3s. Don't wallow! Wallowing is when the mind creates more suffering by telling stories about how awful this is, how inadequate we are, how we can't bear these feelings, etc. Let go of all of that thinking, over and over, whenever it arises. Just keep coming back to an awareness of the suffering being, accept your own heart-ache, and embrace both sets of suffering with love and kindness. In my "worm walk" I sensed the arising of wallowing thoughts. I realized that the number of worms I encountered would vary depending on my path to work. I was coming across many dozens of worms, but I was missing many others. The whole town was covered with worms! Maybe I should try to recue all the worms! And realizing that this was impossible, the thought "I should give up" briefly crossed my mind. But these thoughts just skirted the fringes of my consciousness, and I let go of them before they could take root. Focusing on rescuing the worms, and having compassion for my suffering, were enough to keep this kind of unhelpful thinking at bay. I can't save all the worms, or all the anybody. I can't be superhuman. But I can be in the moment, mindfully and compassionately, and do some good. Interestingly, the early Meditation tradition doesn't say much, if anything, about self-compassion. The Buddha did say that we should protect our own minds (against unskillful mental states) and that in doing do we protect others. And we protect the mind both through mindfulness, and through imbuing our awareness in lovingkindness and compassion.
The Buddha also made the point that we shouldn't think in terms of there being a "me" to suffer. All he says is, "there is suffering." So this implies that we should treat "our" suffering (which we shouldn't, ultimately, think of as ours at all) in the same way as we would treat the suffering of others; we respond with kindness and compassion. Sometimes you'll find that you have to spend a long time dealing with your own suffering, and embracing it in a kindly and compassionate awareness. That's OK, and that can just be how things are. But try not to get stuck on this. It's perfectly possible to recognize that you're suffering, and that another person is suffering, and to embrace this joint suffering compassionately. And in fact the recognition that just as you suffer, so do others can help you put your own discomfort into perspective, and perhaps you'll realize it's not such a big deal after all. Read More @ Source | ||
| If God doesn't exist, do we still need to believe in "God"? Posted: 09 May 2013 07:00 PM PDT I love to get free books. One of the benefits of being an active churchless blogger is getting review copies of books in the "spiritual but not religious" genre. I'm about a third of the way through Galen Guengerich's "God Revised: How Religion Must Evolve in a Scientific Age." I like the title, and I''m liking the book -- though this isn't really a review, since I've still got most of the book to read. Today I reached one of Galen Guengerich's core theses in the "What's Divine" chapter (he's the senior minister of All Souls Unitarian Church in Manhattan). A central premise of this book, and perhaps its most controversial and counterintuitive claim, is that God is not supernatural, and yet belief in God is necessary. Ironically, both atheists and traditional religionists agree about the nature of God; they disagree only about whether this God does or does not exist. For my part, I agree with the atheists that God is not supernatural, yet I agree with the advocates of traditional religion that belief in God is necessary. Hmmmm. My first reaction when I read this was, Good luck making that argument. It's tough to make a case for a "God" who/that isn't supernatural. I've looked into pantheism, and it's less appealing (to me) variant, panentheism. Pantheism basically says that the universe is God, while panentheism posits that God interpenetrates the universe while extending beyond it. When Guengerich said he agrees that God is not supernatural, yet belief in God is necessary, I thought "he's a pantheist." This would have been disappointing, because I've never understood why the concept of "God" needs to be added to the concept of "universe" if the two are identical. Sure, its easy to say that God is everything there is. But how is this different from saying the universe/cosmos is everything there is? Likewise, I could say God is love. Which, if God isn't anything supernatural or distinct from the universe, seems to be no different from saying love is love. Thus the problem with pantheism is that it doesn't add anything to our understanding of reality other than calling the universe by another name: God. Good writer and smart thinker that he is, I hoped Guengerich wouldn't take this easy philosophical way out in his attempt to salvage a belief in God while rejecting supernaturalism. Though I've got quite a few chapters left to read, it's looking like he has come up with a fresh way of looking upon a scientifically-defensible notion of God. Because a few pages further on, I came to this: For reasons that will become apparent in the next chapter, I believe this experience of being extensively connected to the universe and utterly dependent on it is an absolutely necessary aspect of a fulfilling human life. It also provides a foundation for the experience I'm referring to when I use the word "God." God is the experience of being connected to all that is -- all that is present, as well as all that is past and all that is possible. When people ask me whether I believe God exists, my answer is yes. I believe God exists in a way similar to the way beauty exists, but not in the way a person or an apple exists. An apple is a physical object that can be weighed and measured. ...God, by contrast, is an experience, akin to our experience of beauty. Beauty itself never appears to us, but we find the idea necessary to account for our delight in the symmetry and form of certain objects and experiences: sunsets, symphonies, and sculptures by Degas. While different in many other respects, beauty and God are both qualities of our experience. OK. This is a different take on pantheism. Rather than focusing on the objective existence of everything there is, the universe/cosmos, Guengerich seems to be emphasizing the subjective experience of everything there is, including its past, present, and future manifestations. When I look up into the night sky while on a dog walk around our neighborhood's lake, and marvel at how mysteriously vast the universe is, along with the mysterious ability of conscious beings like me to marvel at it, seemingly I'm experiencing Guengerich's God. I'm still skeptical about what is gained from calling my experience "God." I'm sure Guengerich will do his best to convince me why this is necessary or desirable in his book's remaining chapters. | ||
| 3 Myths About Parkinson's Disease Posted: 09 May 2013 03:00 PM PDT
One of the highest-achieving athletes of the 20th century is boxing champion Muhammad Ali, but to Maryum Ali, he's just dad. As she has watched her father become one of the most famous faces of Parkinson's disease since his diagnosis nearly 30 years ago, she has learned much about the realities of Parkinson's, said Maryum. who is known to her family as May May. Currently, about 1 million people in the U.S. have Parkinson's, which results from a loss of the brain cells that produce the chemical dopamine. The condition causes tremors, rigid muscles and impaired balance. In the early days of her father's diagnosis, information about the condition was scarce. "Even doctors didn't understand it," she told MyHealthNewsDaily. But still today, myths about Parkinson's persist. "People think that it's a disease of older people," she said. While it's true that the majority of people with Parkinson's develop the condition around the age of 60, it is increasingly being diagnosed in younger people, she said. About 10 percent of people with Parkinson's are diagnosed before age 40, according to the National Parkinson Foundation. Another myth, Ali said, is that there is not much that can be done to help a person with Parkinson's. "There's this, 'it is what it is' mindset out there," she said. People should know that there are effective ways to deal with the symptoms of Parkinson's, she said. Exercise enormously helped her father, she said. In fact, a study published this month in the journal Geriatrics and Gerontology International found that of Parkinson's patients who participated in weekly, one-hour exercise sessions reported improvements in their daily activities compared with a control group who didn't exercise. Brain stimulation treatments also help, Ali said. It's important to find a specialist who is familiar with all available options, she said. "You can do lots of different things; it's not like there's no hope." A third myth about the condition is that it's highly genetic, Ali said. "Lots of people think this, but only 5 percent of people who get it have a genetic tie," she said. Scientists don't know exactly what causes Parkinson's disease. While genetics play a role, most researchers believe that chemicals in the environment increase a person's risk of the condition, according to the National Institutes of Health. Viruses and inflammation in the body have also been linked with the condition, the NIH says. Pass it on: Parkinson's disease can strike younger people, but for all patients, exercise and other treatment may help with symptoms. Follow Karen Rowan @karenjrowan. Follow MyHealthNewsDaily @MyHealth_MHND, Facebook & Google+. Originally published on MyHealthNewsDaily. Read More @ Source | ||
| Pets May Curb Heart Disease Risk, Doctors Say Posted: 09 May 2013 02:00 PM PDT
Owning a pet, especially a dog, probably lowers a person's risk of heart disease, a new statement from the American Heart Association says. "There is a modest amount of data and reason to state that pet ownership may have some causal role in decreasing cardiovascular risk," said Dr. Glenn Levine, professor at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, and chairman of the committee that wrote the statement. Enough studies have looked at the question over the last decade that the time was right for a thorough scientific review of the data, Levine said. The statement explains the evidence surrounding the question of whether pet ownership is linked with heart disease risk factors such as high blood pressure, obesity and physical activity levels. Some studies that have looked for a link between pet ownership and blood pressure have found that people with pets tend to have lower blood pressure, and are less likely to have hypertension, than those who don't own a pet, the statement said. The only randomized controlled trial to look at the question included 30 participants, and found that when people adopted a dog, their blood pressure dropped. Other evidence shows that people who own dogs are more likely than those who don't to reach recommended levels of physical activity, the statement said. It's likely that the benefit is seen because of the walking that some dog owners do. Owners who don't walk their dogs and owners of other pets were unlikely to see a benefit in physical activity levels in studies. Walking a dog may also be linked with a lower risk of obesity, and may help with weight loss efforts in obese people, the statement said. Among people without heart disease, owning a pet does not lengthen life, studies have shown, and among people with heart disease, findings are mixed. Few studies have looked at whether owning a pet is linked with levels of triglycerides (fats) in the blood, but the evidence does show that pet owners have lower levels. The statement doesn't mean people should buy or adopt pets in hopes of improving their heart health, Levine said. "The primary reason to adopt, rescue or purchase a pet should be to give that pet a loving home, and to enjoy the relationship one has with a pet," he said. People should not get a pet without implementing standard changes to lower their risk of heart disease, he said. The American Heart Association recommends avoiding heart disease by eating foods low in saturated fat, trans fat, cholesterol and sodium, being physically active, not smoking and watching your weight. The statement is published online today (May 9) in the journal Circulation. Pass it on: People with pets may have better heart health. Follow Karen Rowan @karenjrowan. Follow MyHealthNewsDaily @MyHealth_MHND, Facebook & Google+. Originally published on MyHealthNewsDaily. Read More @ Source |
Jonathan Pitts, The Baltimore Sun: He pulled on a Terps visor, to the crowd's delight. He rubbed noses with Gov. Martin O'Malley. And the Dalai Lama was met Tuesday with rounds of applause from a crowd of 15,000 at the University of Maryland, College Park's Comcast Center.
The Daily Star, Lebanon: The Dalai Lama kicked off his four-day visit to Portland, Oregon on Thursday by talking about his first understandings of pollution.
The other week I was walking to work after it had rained hard all night. The sidewalks and roads were covered with worms, who like to migrate when the weather is wet (no, it's not because they would drown in their tunnels).
| You are subscribed to email updates from BuddhaRocks ☸ To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
