Possible new technique that profoundly changes the DMT exerience.

[Chan]

You are free to do as you wish.

I think everybody just needs to take a long, deep breath, hold it a while if they like, and feel the litmus paper of the soul turn slowly from sunset red to twilight blue... :thumb_up:

 

[funkyleggs]

Pretty cool topic !

Have any of you heard of Wim HOf ?
Here is a Vice documentary on this man that i HIGHLY recommend, it is very informative and immensely inspiring:

I have practiced this technique a few times and i have experienced some really singular body effects i have never had before. And it's just so easy to do !

 

[1ce]

You just posted two post contradicting each other?

Are you asking me or telling me?

First you said alkalosis isn't possible then you go on to post a wiki link that states it is? Are you going to edit your post?

No, what I said is "claims about methods of 'alkalizing' your blood tend to be total nonsense," which, afaik, is still a correct statement, considering the veritable mountain of "alkaline diets" being advertised online.

Then, man from chan chan made a post indicating that my understanding was incomplete, so I dug further and found the wikipedia article that actually named the phenomenon (something the OP failed to do while making vague overtures about medical safety from unknown experts). As no one had actually named the phenomenon, it seemed worthwhile to provide the link so that others who had a similar understanding as myself could find out more.

As to the question of whether or not I'm going to edit my post, the answer is no (although I must admit, I'm a little baffled as to why you seem concerned with this). My initial post presents my initial reaction to this thread. My second post presents the progression from that initial reaction, having learned something new. I, personally, don't find this finding particularly interesting at this time, so I didn't comment further as I didn't have anything to add.

If you're confused as to why I did not edit my post, it's simple; I'm not looking to present some facade of omniscience or understanding. My first post is an accurate representation of my thoughts/reaction when I made it. My second post is an accurate representation of my thoughts/reaction when I made it.

Were I to edit all my posts whenever my understandings/thoughts/reactions/perspectives/etc change, I would spend much of my time editing prior posts. This seems both silly and disingenuous. I learned something new, and my posts in this thread (far from being contradictory) present the progression of knowledge from one post to the next.

8)

You said those ideas tend to be 'total nonsense', that infers that the OP's post is total nonsense too. You state that such nonsense stems from websites describing diet changes to the blood PH when this thread is directly about respiritory changes to blood ph. If you just could of went on to read the post before yours, it stating that this was true... but you skipped that post because you were impatient and then made a 'boo boo' which you don't want to clear up. This is called 'bad ettiquite'. I am not trying to be confrontational here, just want to bring to light what is good conduct in both forum life and real life too so that we can all have better conversations.

You are free to do as you wish. From my experience of life though, I understand it is good conduct to re-edit your previous mistakes... similar to developing a personality of bad habits. If you don't feel the need to correct where you once made a mistake then that is ok and not considered 'bad' conduct but it is generally a good thing to reform previous mistakes... kind of like, when you spill something... it is generally a good idea to go and clean it up :lol: :thumb_up:

That's not how I interperated snozz's reply, which I found to be genuinely well written. what I understood was snozz did not dismiss the OP's post but merely the 'science' behind the OP's methodology. But I guess sometimes you can't ever win, can you?:?

I on the other hand am a bit different. I do dismiss OP's claims. Here's some food for thought:

http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v48/n1/full/pr2000149a.html

Elevated Intracranial Pressures - OpenAnesthesia

www.openanesthesia.org

REACTIVE OXYGEN SPECIES, CELLULAR REDOX SYSTEMS AND APOPTOSIS

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are products of normal metabolism and xenobiotic exposure, and depending on concentrations, ROS can be beneficial or harmful to cells and tissues. At physiological low levels, ROS function as “redox messengers” ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Also interestingly (I couldn't figure out how to link this) Basic anesthesiology by George W. Williams states on p.287 Hyperventilation would increase the levels of O2- in blood which OP stated would be saturating brain tissue. -leading to oxygen apoptosis.

Claim what you want but until the obstacle of citations has been overcome, my disposition on OP's topic reads as this: "A naturalists guide to inhalant abuse, free neural suicide".

 

[Chan]

I on the other hand am a bit different. I do dismiss OP's claims. Here's some food for thought:

http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v48/n1/full/pr2000149a.html

Elevated Intracranial Pressures - OpenAnesthesia

www.openanesthesia.org

REACTIVE OXYGEN SPECIES, CELLULAR REDOX SYSTEMS AND APOPTOSIS

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are products of normal metabolism and xenobiotic exposure, and depending on concentrations, ROS can be beneficial or harmful to cells and tissues. At physiological low levels, ROS function as “redox messengers” ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Also interestingly (I couldn't figure out how to link this) Basic anesthesiology by George W. Williams states on p.287 Hyperventilation would increase the levels of O2- in blood which OP stated would be saturating brain tissue. -leading to oxygen apoptosis.

Claim what you want but until the obstacle of citations has been overcome, my disposition on OP's topic reads as this: "A naturalists guide to inhalant abuse, free neural suicide".

On the other hand, if you're not a newborn rabbit:

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7379.abstract

 

[pitubo]

Am I the only one who is confused by all of the different breathing techniques mentioned here? I find the OP's description of his technique rather unclear in the first place. Hold your breath 4 to 5 seconds - how is that part of a technique? I do this all the time, between breaths. What is "rapid breathing"?

My impression, though I must admit that I doubt my understanding of what OP means, is that the procedure is meant to introduce a kind of dizzy lightheadedness that causes a mental effect of mild dissociation and derealization. I can see how that could influence the dmt experience, by weakening fortified ego barriers that might otherwise prevent one from surrendering to the dmt effects.

Were I to edit all my posts whenever my understandings/thoughts/reactions/perspectives/etc change, I would spend much of my time editing prior posts. This seems both silly and disingenuous. I learned something new, and my posts in this thread (far from being contradictory) present the progression of knowledge from one post to the next.

I agree very much.

You are free to do as you wish. From my experience of life though, I understand it is good conduct to re-edit your previous mistakes... similar to developing a personality of bad habits. If you don't feel the need to correct where you once made a mistake then that is ok and not considered 'bad' conduct but it is generally a good thing to reform previous mistakes... kind of like, when you spill something... it is generally a good idea to go and clean it up :lol: :thumb_up:

I disagree very much. The analogy with a spill does not hold here at all. If you spill coffee on the carpet, do you cut out the stain, leaving a hole in the carpet?

Editing posts wrecks the thread narrative and removes useful information. If you must correct wrong information, simply add the corrections, with clear labeling of the post-hoc corrective additions. Only in exceptional cases (eg. where dangerous advice is given) should the original text itself be altered, and even then IMHO by adding warnings and formatting, not by traceless removal.

I can see where people feel embarrassed about being wrong, but I find attempting to alter the facts of history much more embarrassing. I admire people who can admit to being wrong.

Also interestingly (I couldn't figure out how to link this) Basic anesthesiology by George W. Williams states on p.287 Hyperventilation would increase the levels of O2- in blood which OP stated would be saturating brain tissue. -leading to oxygen apoptosis.

Claim what you want but until the obstacle of citations has been overcome, my disposition on OP's topic reads as this: "A naturalists guide to inhalant abuse, free neural suicide".

Come on 1ce, isn't that a bit over the top? Molecular dioxygen is not the same as a superoxide anion. Reactive oxygen species do not appear just by breathing.

 

[Jaffster]

A few have also mentioned Wim Hof, here's the cut down Joe Rogan podcast with him:

I followed along and it definitely works, though I didn't make the connection to doing this AND DMT. It would be interesting to say the least, I may give it a try :thumb_up:

 

[1ce]

Am I the only one who is confused by all of the different breathing techniques mentioned here? I find the OP's description of his technique rather unclear in the first place. Hold your breath 4 to 5 seconds - how is that part of a technique? I do this all the time, between breaths. What is "rapid breathing"?

My impression, though I must admit that I doubt my understanding of what OP means, is that the procedure is meant to introduce a kind of dizzy lightheadedness that causes a mental effect of mild dissociation and derealization. I can see how that could influence the dmt experience, by weakening fortified ego barriers that might otherwise prevent one from surrendering to the dmt effects.

Were I to edit all my posts whenever my understandings/thoughts/reactions/perspectives/etc change, I would spend much of my time editing prior posts. This seems both silly and disingenuous. I learned something new, and my posts in this thread (far from being contradictory) present the progression of knowledge from one post to the next.

I agree very much.

You are free to do as you wish. From my experience of life though, I understand it is good conduct to re-edit your previous mistakes... similar to developing a personality of bad habits. If you don't feel the need to correct where you once made a mistake then that is ok and not considered 'bad' conduct but it is generally a good thing to reform previous mistakes... kind of like, when you spill something... it is generally a good idea to go and clean it up :lol: :thumb_up:

I disagree very much. The analogy with a spill does not hold here at all. If you spill coffee on the carpet, do you cut out the stain, leaving a hole in the carpet?

Editing posts wrecks the thread narrative and removes useful information. If you must correct wrong information, simply add the corrections, with clear labeling of the post-hoc corrective additions. Only in exceptional cases (eg. where dangerous advice is given) should the original text itself be altered, and even then IMHO by adding warnings and formatting, not by traceless removal.

I can see where people feel embarrassed about being wrong, but I find attempting to alter the facts of history much more embarrassing. I admire people who can admit to being wrong.

Also interestingly (I couldn't figure out how to link this) Basic anesthesiology by George W. Williams states on p.287 Hyperventilation would increase the levels of O2- in blood which OP stated would be saturating brain tissue. -leading to oxygen apoptosis.

Claim what you want but until the obstacle of citations has been overcome, my disposition on OP's topic reads as this: "A naturalists guide to inhalant abuse, free neural suicide".

Come on 1ce, isn't that a bit over the top? Molecular dioxygen is not the same as a superoxide anion. Reactive oxygen species do not appear just by breathing.

Yeah, certainly. But it took me <5 minutes to find a few citations to make a valid argument, even if a bit extrsme. Therefore OP could do better than 'my imaginary friend told me if was fine'.

 

[pitubo]

Yeah, certainly. But it took me <5 minutes to find a few citations to make a valid argument, even if a bit extrsme. Therefore OP could do better than 'my imaginary friend told me if was fine'.

Personally, I would only cite research articles that I have actually read and that I have found to be relevant and to the point. That usually takes me more than 5 minutes. By the way, did you know that trimming quoted text takes me less than 5 seconds?

 

[a1pha]

OP - I changed the thread title to better fit the Nexus Attitude.
In the future please refrain from sensational click-bait style headings.
Also, breathing exercises are not new.

 

[Nathanial.Dread]

Isn't this basically what Stan Grof was doing with his whole 'holotropic breathwork' practice? Hyperventilate until everything looked sparkly?

Blessings
~ND

 

[1ce]

Yeah, certainly. But it took me <5 minutes to find a few citations to make a valid argument, even if a bit extrsme. Therefore OP could do better than 'my imaginary friend told me if was fine'.

Personally, I would only cite research articles that I have actually read and that I have found to be relevant and to the point. That usually takes me more than 5 minutes. By the way, did you know that trimming quoted text takes me less than 5 seconds?

Yeah but doing it on mobile is rough. I read through a few of them, in alot of the anesthesiology refs I found support the tests done on rabbits as being congruent in humans. The book I reffed is available on google scholar and explains the ROS formations. On a pc I could copy/pasta but not from my phone.

Either way, I was only half serious, nobody is going to suffer massive brain damage by taking a few rapid breaths unless they had a serious head injury on the first place.

 

[pitubo]

I did not read your google books ref, but I think that in people performing breathing exercises voluntarily, any potential for hurt would be self-limiting. That may not be the case with a patient who is undergoing complex surgery and being anesthetized for several hours during the procedure.

 

[1ce]

I did not read your google books ref, but I think that in people performing breathing exercises voluntarily, any potential for hurt would be self-limiting. That may not be the case with a patient who is undergoing complex surgery and being anesthetized for several hours during the procedure.

Yes, but even if there is a neglible chance of damaging even a few brain cells in a weak attempt to get high is enough to dismiss this as click-baitery forum spam. I was quite tired when I made that post --but if my memory serves correctly it takes the brain several hours to return to normal brain function after a fit of hyperventillation. (16-24?)

I'm still waiting for a valid reason as to why we should all stop what we're doing and care about this. But I should know not to hold my breath for it.

 

[Yumi]

When I finally get the chance I will certainly try this, and I am totally guilty of doing the choking game as a ignorant little kid.

 

[downwardsfromzero]

The :lol: I get from 1ce v. pitubo gives a better, longer-lasting buzz than the breath technique.

It's most probably not as applicable to the DMT experience, though (thankfully :? )

I've found the breathing technique to be very simple and it works as described but I've not yet tried it with a DMT admixture. It appears it would just mean taking 5 rapid hyperventilating breaths, followed by one deep breath held in for ~5 sec before inhaling from a loaded vapour chamber.

How will the holding-in of vapour impact the overall respiratory alkalosis effect? Won't freebase DMT cause a localised alkalising effect in the lungs?

 

[Gonzukes]

Very similar to the Wim Hoff method- Others have pointed him out in this threat- he's basically the master of breathing. He's climbed Mount Everest in his shorts, and he says its basically all due to mind set and his breathing exercise, which is very similar to this.

 

[KillaNoodles]

---

 

[Global]

Sorry to see you guys haven't figured out this is pseudoscience yet.
Do try to avoid "naturalnews" and "greathyperventilationtechniques.com"
Really guys...

Sorry you haven't figured this out yet, but "pseudoscience" is a label used to marginalize rational inquiry in the scientific method. Those topics which are taboo in traditional science research are automatically characterized as "pseudoscience," automatically devaluing the studies, which may or may not have been conducted authentically, strictly abiding by the scientific method and producing legitimate evidence. It's like the old Church calling Galileo's work heresy. It's a quaint political tactic.

 

[pitubo]

but "pseudoscience" is a label used to marginalize rational inquiry in the scientific method.

It can be a valid category. Let's not pretend that there isn't a lot of pseudoscience, some even under the banner of "hard science".

But when it is applied without any argument based in factuality and reason, then yes, I agree that it amounts to no more than smear and mud slinging.

 

[n0thing]

My impression, though I must admit that I doubt my understanding of what OP means, is that the procedure is meant to introduce a kind of dizzy lightheadedness that causes a mental effect of mild dissociation and derealization. I can see how that could influence the dmt experience, by weakening fortified ego barriers that might otherwise prevent one from surrendering to the dmt effects.

Finally! You are the first person who has understood this. I really want your help. How can I possibly write a reformation so that people can understand what you just said very clearly?

Strangely, majority of people seemed to think this is the same thing as hyperventilating while completely missing the point about how HOLDING the breath AFTER hyperventilating induces the dissociation feeling.

Can you please write an example of what such a post would look like? I thought my OP was very clear in establishing it succintly but it appears that is not so.