Ciaran O'Loughlin

2.1K posts

Ciaran O'Loughlin banner
Ciaran O'Loughlin

Ciaran O'Loughlin

@Reframe_Reality

Believer in the power of good ideas.

Valencia, Spain Katılım Ocak 2026
56 Takip Edilen101 Takipçiler
Jack
Jack@jack_schroder_·
Melatonin, Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, HBOT, ketogenic diet, infrared light, deuterium-depleted water, and daily forest bathing = Decentralized Chemotherapy without the side effects, without spending ~$10,000/month, and is way more effective.
Anish Moonka@AnishA_Moonka

Trees release invisible chemicals into the air to protect themselves from bugs and disease. Turns out those same chemicals also switch on your body's cancer-fighting cells. They're called natural killer cells. They're a type of white blood cell that patrols your bloodstream looking for cancer cells and virus-infected cells. When they find one, they punch a hole through its outer wall and inject proteins that force the cell to self-destruct from the inside. You're born with them. Unlike most of your immune system, they don't need to be "trained" on a specific threat first. They just attack anything that looks wrong. The 50% number in this tweet comes from Dr. Qing Li at Nippon Medical School in Tokyo, who has been studying the effects of forests on the human body since 2004. His original 2007 study took 12 men on a 3-day, 2-night forest trip, walking two hours a day. Blood tests showed 11 of 12 had roughly 50% more cancer-killing cell activity afterward. A follow-up with 13 female nurses found the same thing. But the part the tweet leaves out: the boost didn't vanish when they went home. It lasted over 7 days in both groups, and in men, it was still detectable in blood work 30 days later. Li's conclusion is that one forest trip per month could keep these cells running at a higher level year-round. The obvious next question is whether it's the forest itself or just the vacation. Li tested this directly. A separate group took a city tourist trip with the same amount of walking. No boost to killer cells. No stress hormone drop. Zero effect. Then he ran an even more controlled test: 12 men stayed in a regular Tokyo hotel room for three nights while a humidifier pumped tree oil (from Japanese cypress) into the air overnight. Their killer cells still went up. Their stress hormones still dropped. That isolates the cause to those tree chemicals, called phytoncides. Pine, cedar, and cypress trees release the most. These chemicals were found in forest air but were nearly absent in city air. A 2021 lab study showed that one of these tree chemicals directly switches on killer cells and slows colon tumor growth in mice. The bigger picture connects these cells directly to cancer risk. An 11-year study published in The Lancet (one of the world's top medical journals) tracked 3,625 Japanese people and found that those with weaker natural killer cells developed cancer at significantly higher rates. A separate study screening for bowel cancer found that people with low killer cell levels were 7 times more likely to be diagnosed. Li's own research across all 47 regions of Japan showed that areas with less forest had higher cancer death rates for lung, breast, uterine, prostate, kidney, and colon cancers, even after accounting for differences in smoking rates and wealth. The caveats: Li's original studies used small groups (12 and 13 people), and the regional data show a pattern but don't directly prove that forests prevent cancer. No large-scale clinical trial has confirmed that yet. But the chain is consistent: trees release chemicals, those chemicals wake up the cells in your blood that kill cancer, the effect lasts weeks, not hours, and people with more active killer cells get cancer less often. Japan now has 65 government-certified Forest Therapy sites across the country, each tested and approved based on the physical effects they have on visitors.

English
7
64
371
17K
Lewis Bollard
Lewis Bollard@Lewis_Bollard·
This is a pig who spent years confined in a gestation crate. She was left behind when factory farms flooded in Iowa and then rescued by some volunteers. The volunteers took her home and dug her a mud pit. She ignored it. They assumed years of confinement had extinguished her natural instincts. Then they noticed her wandering into the woods on their property. They followed her — and found her rooting in a pile of dirt, digging her own mud pit. The pork industry claims pigs adapt to confinement. They don't. Inside every gestation crate is an animal who still yearns to root, wallow, and just be a pig. This is the tragedy of factory farming. We tried to reduce feeling animals to machines. We failed.
Lewis Bollard tweet media
English
81
1.2K
7.9K
217.7K
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
A sad fact of life is that people are often nicer to you once you stop being nice to them.
English
0
0
0
5
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (1.5) Clarification: I believe a diet free from animal proteins CAN BE healthy. I don't think any diet is automatically healthy just because it doesn't contain animal proteins. There's outright junk food with and without animal products in it. Fair enough?
English
1
0
0
10
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
Yes, our social and cultural evolution as a species has had an enormous effect on our biology... Do you think there was not a process of natural selection that took place after we began hunting? After we began farming? As a result of our changing practices. The two things go completely hand in hand and influence one another indefinitely.
English
1
0
0
3
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (4) "Society" may make it challenging to "survive" without a car, a computer, a bank account, etc., but does "social evolution" change us *biologically* to where we NEED to consume certain things we previously didn't need, even by your own admission? You brought it up...
English
1
0
0
14
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
Yes because the social evolution informs the biological evolution. For example adults who could tolerate lactose had a biological advantage once we began farming. This is one of a million examples one could give. You don't seem to want to understand and seem to want this to go on forever.
English
1
0
0
3
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (2) You pay for a 280-extender, but you still didn't reply to my request to clarify what you meant by "we did not socially evolve to NEED cigarettes to survive." What point did I make that you think that refutes? Do we "socially evolve" to "NEED" *anything* "to survive"?
English
2
0
0
11
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez "Evolved" to be more like lions? Absolutely not. Yes, I believe a diet free from animal proteins is healthy -- although you wouldn't have to go that far to avoid meat. I'm not picking any animal to eat EXACTLY like. You keep strawmanning my points because you can't refute them.
English
3
0
0
17
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (3) You imply that humans "socially evolve" into having new PHYSICAL needs to consume certain things just to physically SURVIVE. How does that occur, biochemically/physiologically? Even if you mean "social 'survival'", I'm here in society talking with you, and not eating meat.
English
2
0
0
14
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
@fanoonman @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez I'm saying that eating gazelle is not particularly difficult. You're implying eating meat is unnatural because of the difficulty level. Well not really, because we've managed it for tens of thousands of years! There's nothing complex or unnatural about it at all.
English
0
0
0
7
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (4) You say, "Lions can eat gazelle but can't peel bananas. Monkeys can peel bananas and could probably eat gazelle if they needed/wanted to. They don't." Why don't they? Which of the two are humans closer to, biologically? Why use the one we're not as a dietary role model?
English
1
0
0
10
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
I don't think "rights" are relevant to the conversation, especially when talking about animals like chickens. I think we have to make our own decisions on what is or isn't appropriate or moral, and I don't think there's a simple answer like "meat = bad" or "meat = good". I think that's fast food ethics.
English
0
0
0
9
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
Lions can eat gazelle but can't peel bananas. Monkeys can peel bananas and could probably eat gazelle if they needed/wanted to. They don't. But if you believe a diet of just fruit is healthy for a human then be my guest, tuck in. But there's no way in hell I'm putting my body through that. Secondly, we did not socially evolve to NEED cigarettes to survive. Go and tell an indigenous hunter gatherer tribe to stop eating animal products and live off just fruit..see what they tell you.
English
1
0
0
10
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez Why do you call that distinction "arbitrary"? One is simple enough that almost any human or primate could do it with ease; the other obviously takes manufactured equipment and a lot of work. I'll address 'social/biological evolution' next -- running out of space here.
English
2
0
0
15
Rumi
Rumi@rumilyrics·
Calmness is a superpower. The ability to not overreact or take things personally keeps your mind clear and your heart at peace.
English
88
311
1.7K
31K
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
@yginbar @Lewis_Bollard No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that they wouldn't be alive in the first place if it weren't for farming. Do you see any chickens in the wild?
English
1
0
0
21
Yuval Ginbar
Yuval Ginbar@yginbar·
@Reframe_Reality @Lewis_Bollard That's what matters morally, yes. Of course it's sad when an animal dies, but you can't say that since all animals eventually die anyway you might as well kill them because only outcomes count.
English
1
0
0
20
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
To me it seems like you're drawing a kind of arbitrary difference between the act of peeling a banana and skinning an animal. Btw you don't HAVE to skin or cook them, you can eat raw meat, especially if it's recently killed. You're also looking thousands of years of social and biological evolution to make this point. Yeah we are descended from monkeys that just ate fruit, but that isn't what we are and isn't what we have been for a very long time.
English
1
0
0
8
Lyndon Olson
Lyndon Olson@fanoonman·
@Reframe_Reality @yginbar @Lewis_Bollard @PeggiBosquez (3) BTW, I'm not sure how bananas made your list. If you live where bananas grow, you pull a ripe one off of the tree and pop it open, as even children do with the ones from the store now. Primates usually peel them from the opposite end that we do, FWIW...
English
1
0
0
9
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
I found Blood Meridian extremely inspiring, in terms of how unique and evocative prose can be. He actually makes up his own words at some points, and for all of the poetry of the writing is actually really direct at conveying what he means at times. He cuts through the conventions of language to put an image directly into your head without any beating about the bush or adherence to orthodoxy. All that said, I wouldn't say it's a super enjoyable read. There are fascinating moments. The ending is phenomenal. But he conveys something quite blunt overall with it. I think the idea is good and the execution is exceptionally impressive. But I can fully understand why people wouldn't enjoy it. I'm trying to read it a second time and getting quite bored, even though if someone asked me what the best thing I've ever read is, I would probably say Blood Meridian. A lot of great stuff isn't necessarily meant to be fully enjoyed. It can serve as a reference point. The Wire is one of the best shows ever, but it's probably not as enjoyable as bunging on a good episode of Kitchen Nightmares.
English
0
0
1
34
Erin Perise
Erin Perise@ErinPerise·
I refuse to believe this airbus is up in the air by ways of “aerodynamics” That is witchcraft and I know it
English
9
2
33
3.3K
Ciaran O'Loughlin
Ciaran O'Loughlin@Reframe_Reality·
The language you learn in textbooks is SO different to the one people use in real life 😂 it's crazy. I sound like a robot speaking Spanish, compared to Spanish people sound like they're basically speaking a different language. So many idioms, weird pronunciations and made up vocabulary
English
0
0
1
133
Megha
Megha@megha_lilly·
It’s like, when you learn a language, it’s all in print. And when people actually use a language in real life, it’s in cursive handwriting. Endings, middles and contexts often left out, abbreviated, and totally idiosyncratic to each person. Especially true of Italian. Very endearing even though it makes it much harder to learn. It’s a sign of life in the language.
English
4
3
35
2.3K