I was thinking today about how to spread the use of our awesome technologies like the TBI healing process
. Surely, these kind of processes are a complete breakthrough in current science and medicine, and can help so many many people !
However, the institute have contacted many researchers, doctors, mental health institute and organizations before, on issues as suicide prevention, schizophrenic voices, and so on. It looks like very few people yet wants to talk about it or even hear about it.
Subcellular psychobiology (peak states) is a new science and it will be years before it gets the recognition it deserves. Even though technologies are already being developped and bringing successful disruptive innovations
.So, how can we make it more accepted by mainstream science and medicine ?
The same problem occured to James Lovelock and the science proving the existence of Gaïa. Today, there is little scientific argument to contradict the proof that Gaïa, a super-organism maintaining homeostasis on the whole planet, exist. However, as it still contradict the mainstream belief system, or paradigm, it is mostly being ignored by academicians and researchers (not even to mention the general public).
It seems there is a selective unconscious choice being made. Science today is still very reductionist and materialistic. Thus, the obvious is being ignored.
I have been thinking the topic of generationnal traumas and epigenetic damage could bridge the gap.
Scientists discovered that psychological traumas can be passed down the generations through the mechanism of epigenetic damage, and that is real hard science. Thus, it is not to far stretched to think that we can prove our approach works. Our approach is that epigenetic damages can be repaired by healing generationnal and other traumas with psychological-like techniques, especially our WHH.However, I realised today, thinking about TBI healing, that there is still a paradigm problem that will make acceptance unlikely to happen.
Here is how things can be presented : healing generationnal traumas repaires damaged histones (epigenetic damage), thus opening a new metabolic pathway that was previously blocked. The organism now being able to use new proteins, can use a new biological function to fight a pathogen, improve metabolism, detoxination, etc...
In case of TBI, epigenetic healing maximise the brain resistance to the point it can be 100% repaired after TBI. This is unheard of.
However, as much as the explanation above is sufficient for general purpose, a scientific will want to dig deeper and ask which genes are involved, why do they impact brain resilience, and how it was discovered.That "genetic" approach is likely to fail.
How can you ever find which genes are responsible for such a function as repairing the brain ? Even if you can compare people who naturally have that ability (if you can find them, they are rare) with people who suffer from TBI, it is just a statiscal approach and is not a sufficient proof for the theory. This kind of knowledge should be usable to reverse-engineer the research process that made the discovery possible.
The problem is our approach with subcellular psychobiology is very different from classical biology
. We look in the past for pre-cellular development and use the primary cell model to understand wich subcellular structured (that correspond to the disease we want to treat) are impared, and use regression to investigate. The biggest part of it is understanding how some of these structures are pathogen, and thus finding an indirect approach
to eliminate these pathogens by making the organism immune to them in the past
Therefore, a central axiom of our science is that trauma healing is actually really CHANGING THE PAST.
That's where the shit hits the fan.
Changing the past is probably totally unnaceptable for modern science, as it completely violates the current accepted paradigm. Even with new ideas in the field of quantum physics, our understanding of the nature of time isn't likely to be revamped so easily.
The minute you accept it is possible to change the past, though, everything fall into place and it is easy to accept the other elements of the model.
A few days ago, I was talking with a client about doing an experimental process for Alzheimer on his grandfather. He told me he probably would reject the idea because he is not so spiritual. That confused me for a second, because in my view, the institute's approach is really a scientific approach
before being spiritual at all.
Thus, there will be much difficulties to make our science accepted, even though it has amazing practical successes
I don't know how we can bypass this problem. If mainstream scientists are open minded enough to try our approach, they will have huge difficulties to replicate our technology because they won't use our model because of paradigm conflict.
Maybe a smart mind here can work on the epistemologic problem of the idea of changing the past, and the irrationnal problem of paradigm shift.
Or maybe we should just educate the new generation and wait for the older one to die. I don't know.
Meanwhile, there are a lot of people who want and need to be healed, and we can work with them. Hence, the growing need to being able to market and widespread our treatments in the general public.