very interesting. i am 6 months in remission from cancer.
so its important for me to find the reasons and the beliefs that are causing this vs the other times ive used your sub.
How can i do that?
also, if i use MHS for 3 months, will these beliefs be broken down?
(01-27-2020, 10:10 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020, 07:23 AM)Wiseg9999 Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Shannon, i have been feeling down ever since starting MHS 5.75. I havent felt like this for years.
Then I remembered resistance - or whatever you call it now.
Could it be MHS be causing me emotional turmoil?! If so, why and how?
thanks.
There are some possible reasons I can think of for explaining this.
First possibility is, your subconscious does not want to change its core beliefs. MHS instructs your subconscious to change any belief that is in any way contributing to a physical health issue to a belief that helps the program heal it. Some such beliefs may be very fundamental, and thus very likely to cause a great deal of change in other resulting beliefs if they are changed. Such change may create fear of the unknown, and thus resistance, which - when the program cannot be resisted - may result in feeling down, since the subconscious is feeling hopeless as a result of feing forced to change and face its fears, likely of literal death. For some reason, the subconscious appears to be prone to equating feared imagined outcomes with death.
The second possibility is that the deep detoxing of the MHS program is in the process of flushing out a great deal of toxins from your system, and this is somehow a result. I would imagine that this would go away on its own after a period of 1-4 weeks if it is the case, based on my best understanding of what detox requires and how the program works, factoring in what can be detoxed and how that is done, etc.
The third option I can think of is similar to the first, but differs in that the resistance would be coming not from a fear of death directly, but in being deprived of the issue or illness which it either created or sustains in an effort to avoid something else it fears. So in this case, the fear wouldn't be "of changing my beliefs", but of no longer having a manufactured excuse to hide from something else that is feared, which is being avoided by a subconsciously generated and/or sustained issue which gives you at the conscious level a legitimate excuse to not do or achieve that thing. If the program is too powerful to disrupt, then the subconscious may again become depressed and feel hopeless to stop it from achieving its goals, which forces it to deal with and face its fears.
I think the first and third options are by far the most likely explanations.
(01-30-2020, 03:04 PM)Wiseg9999 Wrote: [ -> ]very interesting. i am 6 months in remission from cancer.
so its important for me to find the reasons and the beliefs that are causing this vs the other times ive used your sub.
How can i do that?
also, if i use MHS for 3 months, will these beliefs be broken down?
Please respond after the text of what you are responding to. Otherwise it breaks the flow of response, and doesn't necessarily make sense.
I don't have enough information to know which of those possible reasons is what is going on. Without that, I don't know how to answer your question.
The longer you use MHS v2, the better your chances of clearing out the emotional issues if they are based on changing old beliefs that the program is trying to change into beliefs that help you become healthy, though.
Awesome you're feeling better.
(02-01-2020, 08:20 AM)Have at ye Wrote: [ -> ]Awesome you're feeling better.
Indeed. I'm still trying to get the predictive models back on track right now. This has been a very expensive flu.
Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
(02-01-2020, 11:40 AM)AbundanceCH Wrote: [ -> ]Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
+1
would love to know this too!
Hey Shannon,
Nothing major to say as i'm not big on reporting now, talking about everything gets me in my head and starts to mess with my results and focus.
Nevertheless i just want to express the gratitude i feel. I've said it before but living all my life with a mind which doesn't work as i want it to and no sense of self esteem has been such an unhappy task. MLS and SE have really given me what i've always needed so badly.
I know you're on a mission and that entails shooting for something much higher than where you are now and in that disappointment will hit at times. Still i want you to know that were you just to give it up now, what you've already produced is enough to turn a lot of lives around.
So thank you, Shannon.
(02-01-2020, 11:40 AM)AbundanceCH Wrote: [ -> ]Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
Right now I am working on proving that the models are stable and accurate. So far 2 of the three tests have been carried out, and have proven accurate. Once I get that done, I am going to finish building ALRA and then work on finishing FRM 4.9. At that point, the gates open up for a lot of different things, including UMS v2. When it will get built, I'm not sure, but it probably won't be too terribly long.
One thing I have been thinking about is that I have been trying to pack a lot into single stages and that seems to be hitting snags, at least partly because around 3 months in, the subconscious gets tired of hearing the same thing. And I can't say as I blame it. So I'm looking at producing big programs (UMS, LTU, etc.) as multi-stage sets again. That means it will take longer to build, but I think that will have better results overall. I think it would need at least 3 stages, possibly 4 or 6. Not sure yet. But that would seem to potentially be a better way forward for making it work, instead of trying to achieve everything all in one stage. Of course there would also be the "+1" stage, where all the other stages are packed into one for you to use after you have stepped up to it.
But it seems to me that we should be getting better results, and I think that is probably the solution.
I'm going to try to get FRM built asap, because that's been a bottleneck for a while now, but it's a very complicated thing and I have to make sure I am using accurate modeling results.
(02-02-2020, 02:27 AM)Darwin Wrote: [ -> ]Hey Shannon,
Nothing major to say as i'm not big on reporting now, talking about everything gets me in my head and starts to mess with my results and focus.
Nevertheless i just want to express the gratitude i feel. I've said it before but living all my life with a mind which doesn't work as i want it to and no sense of self esteem has been such an unhappy task. MLS and SE have really given me what i've always needed so badly.
I know you're on a mission and that entails shooting for something much higher than where you are now and in that disappointment will hit at times. Still i want you to know that were you just to give it up now, what you've already produced is enough to turn a lot of lives around.
So thank you, Shannon.
Thank you. I'm not so much disappointed with what I have accomplished, as I am with the years long series of BS events that have gotten in my way of being productive to my full capacity. I am not giving up, just recovering from the last one to hit me.
(02-02-2020, 09:10 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2020, 11:40 AM)AbundanceCH Wrote: [ -> ]Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
Right now I am working on proving that the models are stable and accurate. So far 2 of the three tests have been carried out, and have proven accurate. Once I get that done, I am going to finish building ALRA and then work on finishing FRM 4.9. At that point, the gates open up for a lot of different things, including UMS v2. When it will get built, I'm not sure, but it probably won't be too terribly long.
One thing I have been thinking about is that I have been trying to pack a lot into single stages and that seems to be hitting snags, at least partly because around 3 months in, the subconscious gets tired of hearing the same thing. And I can't say as I blame it. So I'm looking at producing big programs (UMS, LTU, etc.) as multi-stage sets again. That means it will take longer to build, but I think that will have better results overall. I think it would need at least 3 stages, possibly 4 or 6. Not sure yet. But that would seem to potentially be a better way forward for making it work, instead of trying to achieve everything all in one stage. Of course there would also be the "+1" stage, where all the other stages are packed into one for you to use after you have stepped up to it.
But it seems to me that we should be getting better results, and I think that is probably the solution.
I'm going to try to get FRM built asap, because that's been a bottleneck for a while now, but it's a very complicated thing and I have to make sure I am using accurate modeling results.
Hi Shannon,
This is an interesting realization and intuitively, it feels right to me. All the improvements you have worked on should have the made the programs MORE effective, not less. I have been really curious as to why the only program that worked for me (phenomenally well !!) has been USLM3. I know I executed that program beautifully, so I do not believe that it is as simple as me resisting the others I tried.........USLM4, USLM4.1, and UMS, and I know I am not the only one who has experienced this. But perhaps there is the point of "information overload" with the newer subs and that may trigger them to fail ?
How will it work for those of us who have purchased USLM4 and UMS, with regard to the upgrades ? I know you mentioned that USLM4.2 would be a free upgrade for those of us who purchased USLM4, but what about UMS ? Would they BOTH be rebuilt as multi-stage sets ?
I am currently back on USLM3, and I have NOT asked for any refunds for UMS or USLM4. I really just want the programs to work as intended and I am keeping the faith that you can get them there. Thanks !
(02-02-2020, 09:10 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2020, 11:40 AM)AbundanceCH Wrote: [ -> ]Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
One thing I have been thinking about is that I have been trying to pack a lot into single stages and that seems to be hitting snags, at least partly because around 3 months in, the subconscious gets tired of hearing the same thing. And I can't say as I blame it.
Shannon - this caught my eye. How did you determine that the subconscious gets bored at the 3 month mark? And if it does...how much is progress impeded by that boredom? Would it make sense to switch to a different program every 3 months to increase results?
I've been on UMS since the start of it's introduction but haven't seen much in the way of actual real world effects at all so far. Would switching to the latest DMSI for 3 months and then coming back to UMS perhaps increase effects even though both are geared at different goals? Just trying to think of ways to achieve actual results.
(02-02-2020, 11:36 AM)Rossignol17 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-02-2020, 09:10 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2020, 11:40 AM)AbundanceCH Wrote: [ -> ]Is an update to UMS in the cards anytime soon?
Right now I am working on proving that the models are stable and accurate. So far 2 of the three tests have been carried out, and have proven accurate. Once I get that done, I am going to finish building ALRA and then work on finishing FRM 4.9. At that point, the gates open up for a lot of different things, including UMS v2. When it will get built, I'm not sure, but it probably won't be too terribly long.
One thing I have been thinking about is that I have been trying to pack a lot into single stages and that seems to be hitting snags, at least partly because around 3 months in, the subconscious gets tired of hearing the same thing. And I can't say as I blame it. So I'm looking at producing big programs (UMS, LTU, etc.) as multi-stage sets again. That means it will take longer to build, but I think that will have better results overall. I think it would need at least 3 stages, possibly 4 or 6. Not sure yet. But that would seem to potentially be a better way forward for making it work, instead of trying to achieve everything all in one stage. Of course there would also be the "+1" stage, where all the other stages are packed into one for you to use after you have stepped up to it.
But it seems to me that we should be getting better results, and I think that is probably the solution.
I'm going to try to get FRM built asap, because that's been a bottleneck for a while now, but it's a very complicated thing and I have to make sure I am using accurate modeling results.
Hi Shannon,
This is an interesting realization and intuitively, it feels right to me. All the improvements you have worked on should have the made the programs MORE effective, not less. I have been really curious as to why the only program that worked for me (phenomenally well !!) has been USLM3. I know I executed that program beautifully, so I do not believe that it is as simple as me resisting the others I tried.........USLM4, USLM4.1, and UMS, and I know I am not the only one who has experienced this. But perhaps there is the point of "information overload" with the newer subs and that may trigger them to fail ?
The only difference between USLM 3 and the higher versions is that they are more optimized. The only reason they would not work as well is if they were not being executed as well, and the only reason that could be is... something in the script is triggering fear, and thus resistance. UMS is very clearly triggering resistance, which doesn't surprise me, given what it's trying to do. Especially in just one stage. I was hoping to make it possible to make single stage programs that were massive like that and have them work, but I guess the step up method is going to have to be what we use in those cases. Unless I can make FRM work significantly better in 4.9, but even then stepping up makes sense.
Quote:How will it work for those of us who have purchased USLM4 and UMS, with regard to the upgrades ? I know you mentioned that USLM4.2 would be a free upgrade for those of us who purchased USLM4, but what about UMS ? Would they BOTH be rebuilt as multi-stage sets ?
I don't know how things will be done yet or how we will handle the upgrades, but I'm not interested in making people who paid for 4.x of USLM and didn't have it work well pay more. I don't see USLM being multi stage, either.
Quote:I am currently back on USLM3, and I have NOT asked for any refunds for UMS or USLM4. I really just want the programs to work as intended and I am keeping the faith that you can get them there. Thanks !
I appreciate that. That is the goal. I think what I do for the next version of USLM 4.x will solve the issues that the 4.x series was having. UMS is going to need a considerable amount of work to upgrade.
Can’t the argument that “the subconscious get bored of listening to the script” not just be an instance of resistance? I’ve listened to LTU for more than ten months and still get benefits from it. However I take longer breaks from time to time when I feel it’s needed, for a week or longer. Seems to work well for me.
(02-03-2020, 12:48 PM)Greenduck Wrote: [ -> ]Can’t the argument that “the subconscious get bored of listening to the script” not just be an instance of resistance? I’ve listened to LTU for more than ten months and still get benefits from it. However I take longer breaks from time to time when I feel it’s needed, for a week or longer. Seems to work well for me.
Different personalities respond different ways. Some get bored faster than others; some never get bored. Some crave constant change, and some hate any change at all. In cases where you have someone who has a mind or personality that works in such a high entropy manner, boredom can set in in 3 months and sometimes less, and cause problems. It is a form of resistance, but one motivated by seeking constant difference in stimulation. Not motivated by fear. So we chalk it up to the needs of that particular personality type.