medical intuitive

You are currently browsing articles tagged medical intuitive.

I was recently pub­lished on the excel­lent PawsTalk forum for ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tors, under the sec­tion Interviews With Professional Communicators. Hats off to Lisa, the big Caat at SpiritCaat, for her excel­lent ques­tions. The inter­view is repro­duced below, and if you want to check out her excel­lent board and other ser­vices, give her a click!

How do you describe ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tion to those who are unfa­mil­iar with what it is?

Animals com­mu­ni­cate with each other in many ways, includ­ing telepa­thy. That is their native lan­guage, and how ani­mals of dif­fer­ent species can com­mu­ni­cate with each other. Humans can also use telepa­thy. We are trained to ignore it while quite young, in favor of ver­bal lan­guage. But it is pos­si­ble to regain our aware­ness and stop block­ing it out. I have spent a lot of time doing this, but it can also hap­pen in an instant, for any­one, with­out training.

What tips would you give to stu­dents of ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tion who are just start­ing out?

  • I am answer­ing these remarks in a way that often assumes you are pros and that you are work­ing, get­ting paid, etc. I know this is not nec­es­sar­ily the case, but I want you to feel what it is like to approach ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tion pro­fes­sion­ally. It is good for the ani­mals and for you, to see it this way.

  • Take a Reiki class. This is the best way I know to increase your sen­si­tiv­ity and aware­ness to energy. It will help you to rec­og­nize telepa­thy, and give you a heal­ing skill you can use in your com­mu­ni­ca­tion. Find some­one who will teach the three lev­els sep­a­rately, with time in-​​between lev­els to assim­i­late your heal­ing skills and to prac­tice with humans and ani­mals. Don’t set­tle for some­one who teaches two or three lev­els in one or two week­ends. That is a dis­ser­vice to Reiki, to the ani­mals, and to you.

  • We are not just trans­la­tors. We can do a lot more with our sen­si­tive, car­ing insight than just trans­late. Inter-​​species coun­sel­ing skills are very valu­able, and two of the best places I know to study are with Penelope Smith (www​.ani​maltalk​.net) and Dr. Jeri Ryan (www​.assisian​i​mals​.org/). Also, not all coun­sel­ing skills are gained in cer­ti­fi­ca­tion or train­ing. Spiritual coun­sel­ing is at the cen­ter of many com­mu­ni­ca­tion prac­tices. You will need to explore this in your own life, not just with your teach­ers and mentors.

  • Start or increase your med­i­ta­tion prac­tice. Don’t freak out! This is EASY! You can use Google shop­ping to find a med­i­ta­tion CD which uses “bin­au­ral beat” encod­ing. That means that you will wear head­phones, and the sounds deliv­ered to the two ears will be dis­tinct from each other. Binaural beat med­i­ta­tion auto­mat­i­cally cre­ates theta brain­waves (deep med­i­ta­tion) by the rela­tion between the two dif­fer­ent sounds reach­ing the two hemi­spheres of your brain. Some brand names are HemiSync (which holds the orig­i­nal patent) and HoloSync, and many other ver­sions are avail­able; I espe­cially like the ones with nature sounds. We have been cul­tur­ally trained that med­i­ta­tion is dif­fi­cult to do and that it’s hard to main­tain a sched­ule of it. Neither is true. Binaural beat med­i­ta­tion is a tech­nol­ogy which deliv­ers med­i­ta­tion to us. Once you begin to expe­ri­ence the ben­e­fits, it is not so hard to com­mit to the sched­ule. Meditation is help­ful for fine-​​tuning your aware­ness, and for your well-​​being and abil­ity to deliver com­mu­ni­ca­tion on demand when nec­es­sary. Listen to the CD once a day if pos­si­ble. It is impor­tant not to only lis­ten to it just before you go to sleep. Theta brain­waves are either deep med­i­ta­tion or lighter sleep. If you are too tired, you will sleep instead of med­i­tat­ing. Many peo­ple will fall asleep some­time dur­ing the CD, but if you are awake at least part of the time, you will get the ben­e­fits of the med­i­ta­tion and not just the sleep.

  • Find a men­tor. They may be an ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tor, a vet, a priest, or that old lady you always meet at the store. It’s up to you to attract the right per­son for you. This is some­one who will help you to achieve depth in your work. Whatever your native skills already are, they will add new facets to your awareness.

  • As soon as you can, con­sider charg­ing for your work. It helps clients to take you seri­ously, and they put more into the ses­sion in order to get more out of it. Also things that increase your sense of pro­fes­sion­al­ism are good for you and good for the field. You can start with a lower price, or work by dona­tion if you wish.

  • And sav­ing the best for last, my num­ber one tip is: work with ani­mals whom you don’t already know! This is sur­pris­ing for many peo­ple, who assume they will do best with ani­mals in their own fam­ily. Not true! With our own ani­mal fam­ily we have an inher­ent bias, because we are stake­hold­ers. We want Skippy to eat his din­ner in the kitchen and not drag it onto the rug, or Bella to stop hunt­ing birds in the back yard. That is not the place to start. Those are advanced nego­ti­a­tions, because we are fam­ily. Would an MD start to do surgery on their own fam­ily? No! In my ani­mal fam­ily, when things get seri­ous, I call another com­mu­ni­ca­tor. If you start by try­ing to prac­tice with your own ani­mal fam­ily, you may never find out how good you really are. It is sim­i­lar when work­ing with friends’ ani­mals whom you know pretty well. Especially as a begin­ner, it is much harder to dif­fer­en­ti­ate between your ratio­nal mind and your intu­itive aware­ness when it is some­one you know ahead of time. So give your­self a break and try com­mu­ni­cat­ing with ani­mals you don’t know that well. Where there is an absence of ratio­nal knowl­edge about the sit­u­a­tion, the ‘still small voice’ of your intu­ition can be heard more easily.

Can you share some ver­i­fi­able ques­tions to ask the ani­mals for peo­ple just start­ing out?

I believe pur­su­ing ver­i­fi­able ques­tions, espe­cially at the begin­ning, is the wrong direc­tion to go. We want to build relax­ation, for our­selves, the clients, and espe­cially for the ani­mals. Relaxation cre­ates open­ness to the infor­ma­tion that is already there.

Have you ever asked some­one a direct ques­tion and they answer about some­thing else entirely? The doc­tor might ask you, ‘how is your hand’? And you don’t really care about your hand, you’re really wor­ried about this mole on your face — is it a skin can­cer? So you start talk­ing about the mole. Imagine that most ani­mals may never have had the oppor­tu­nity for a real com­mu­ni­ca­tion. Now that they have your full atten­tion, maybe they don’t want test ques­tions, maybe they want to talk!

I find that ver­i­fi­ca­tion comes much more eas­ily in the course of an unstruc­tured con­ver­sa­tion. For exam­ple, I would never have thought to ask a cat, ‘how many water bowls do you have, and where are they’, but dur­ing the course of the com­mu­ni­ca­tion, he reveals that he has three bowls, and with each of them he has to turn his back to foot traf­fic. He would rather his peo­ple moved the bowls away from the wall, so he could have his back to the wall, and not worry that some­one is going by his tail while he’s drink­ing. The client was amazed at the level of ver­i­fi­able detail, but the quest was not for ver­i­fi­ca­tion, it was for what the cat needed. This cat was hav­ing kid­ney prob­lems, and mak­ing drink­ing eas­ier for him was very important.

Really, I believe that in all com­mu­ni­ca­tion the ani­mal is more impor­tant than our human effort to improve or ver­ify our skill as com­mu­ni­ca­tors. If we just put the ani­mal first, it all goes so much bet­ter, for every­one! If you con­duct a ‘nor­mal’ con­ver­sa­tion (rather than directly pur­su­ing ver­i­fi­ca­tion), much ver­i­fi­able infor­ma­tion will arise, with­out the tense strug­gle to be right, and get a tele­pathic ‘hit’.  Read the rest of this entry »

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This arti­cle pre­vi­ously appeared in the jour­nal Species Link (Winter 2008 issue), the pro­fes­sional jour­nal of ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tors. The col­umn was Voice of the Expert, and I wrote this response to a ques­tion from an ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tor who was con­cerned because a client thought that ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tion could trig­ger seizures.

Dear Fellow Practitioner:

I have spent some time study­ing brain dis­or­ders, both when I ran a neu­ro­feed­back clinic, and work­ing with a doc­tor doing brain maps (Quantitative EEG type). Many of my patients had seizure dis­or­ders, both from known causes (e.g. head injuries) and from unknown causes. The Epilepsy Foundation says that 70% of seizures are from unknown causes. Also, even the most potent anti-​​seizure med­ica­tions are not 100% effec­tive, so the dog hav­ing “ been drugged for x-​​rays ear­lier in the day, so he almost couldn’t have a seizure” is not nec­es­sar­ily true. A typ­i­cal ani­mal anes­thetic for doing x-​​rays is not the drug of choice for pre­vent­ing seizures, and may have only a tiny effect on seizures, if at all. The med­ica­tion the dog received may only have caused a tem­po­rary sleep state, since dur­ing X-​​rays there are no inva­sive pro­ce­dures requir­ing deeper anes­the­sis. It would be good to check with the vet about this and get some informed clarification.

How a seizure looks elec­tri­cally: When you look at the brain map of a seizure, it shows chaotic and extra pow­er­ful (in volt­age) brain wave spikes. When you look at the brain map dur­ing con­ver­sa­tion of sev­eral types, both ver­bal, and non-​​verbal or tele­pathic con­ver­sa­tion, there is a dif­fer­ent pat­tern. The brain waves are finely mod­u­lated, with both rhyth­mic and vari­able aspects, but still orderly, both in ampli­tude and in phys­i­cal loca­tions in the brain. I hope this will help you under­stand how dis­sim­i­lar seizures and com­mu­ni­ca­tion are, in the brain. Also, mul­ti­ple seizures in a short period of time are not uncom­mon, and the first one that day hap­pened before your ses­sion. It is clear to me that the com­mu­ni­ca­tion and the seizure were co-​​incident, that is, hap­pen­ing at the same time, not causal.

How the brain is safe: The skull is a pretty good insu­la­tor. The dif­fer­ence in the volt­age of brain­waves inside the skull vs. what can be mea­sured out­side the skull is pretty big, about a thou­sand times more volts inside than out­side. But the amount of volt­age in sta­tic elec­tric­ity (the kind you get in your hair when you rub it with a bal­loon) is over 1 mil­lion times the volts inside your brain (which uses volt­age in a very del­i­cate and fine-​​tuned way). The sta­tic elec­tric­ity in your hair does not “pen­e­trate your brain”. So it is highly unlikely that any­thing you could do dur­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tion, with your brain, which is 1 mil­lion times less elec­tri­cally pow­er­ful than sta­tic elec­tric­ity, would be able to cause a seizure in the dog.  Read the rest of this entry »

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

  • The first part of the let­ter is about Local Sidereal Time (LST), which I was study­ing because a Palo Alto psy­chic study showed a much higher rate of psy­chic hits at 13:30 LST.
  • The sec­ond part is about how being psy­chic works and and how LST could be used to improve it. Skip to pink sec­tion if you don’t want the astron­omy lesson.

Sent 4.3.08

 To Raphael, who responded to my request for help with Local Sidereal Time con­ver­sion errors (I had noticed that the soft­ware was not cor­rect because it was return­ing the same LST for San Francisco and Seattle). LST was being con­verted because a Palo Alto study showed a much higher % of psy­chic suc­cess (hits) at LST 13:30.

Dear Raphael,

Thank you for respond­ing to my email about the LST con­ver­sion soft­ware hav­ing some pos­si­ble errors. I would like to sum­ma­rize my under­stand­ing of the LST time, so you can share it with the astronomer, (and pos­si­bly the researchers from the orig­i­nal Palo Alto study) and cor­rect me where nec­es­sary. [Some of the most fun stuff is at the bot­tom, so hang in there*] This is what I under­stand, and when requested explained por­tions of it to the 60 peo­ple whom I helped with their conversions:

Planetary time is based on the rota­tion of the earth spin­ning around its axis (the line between the North and South Poles), while it is in orbit around the Sun. So the 24 hour plan­e­tary time is in rela­tion to the spin­ning, which causes night and day as dif­fer­ent por­tions of the planet turn to face the sun every day. And the months of the year are caused by the orbit­ing around the Sun, while that tilt in the axis (a tilt in rela­tion to the flat plane in which the ellipse of the Earth’s orbit of the Sun occurs) causes the equinoxes and sol­stices to be oppo­site above and below the equa­tor. [Last year a friend of mine moved from Mt. Shasta back to Australia in September, get­ting spring and sum­mer, fol­lowed by spring and sum­mer — what a deal!]

LST time is based on the orbit of our Solar System around the cen­ter of our galaxy. So the lon­gi­tude as well as the lat­i­tude has to be fig­ured in, because we are not talk­ing about a sit­u­a­tion where the Earth axis cre­ates hourly bands of iden­ti­cal time from the North Pole to the South Pole, but a sit­u­a­tion where each spot on Earth is cen­tered under the cen­ter of the Milky Way along both a ‘ver­ti­cal’ and a ‘hor­i­zon­tal’ line inter­sect­ing on the sur­face of the Earth, at a cer­tain time of day. [That is why I was sure there was an error in the con­ver­sion soft­ware when it returned the same answer for the LST in Northern California and Seattle.] The one part I did not get was that the time con­ver­sion was for 13:30. My first thought was that it would be a con­ver­sion at 12:00 LST. But maybe it is because of the tilt in the axis, that the cen­ter of the Milky Way is over­head of a given spot at 13:30 LST? Eeek, not sure. Thanks in advance for check­ing this with the astronomer and fill­ing me in. Or was it just that 13:30 LST is the time when the tested psy­chic skills were accen­tu­ated, not nec­es­sar­ily that the cen­ter of the Milky Way was directly overhead?

It might be some­thing anal­o­gous to the dif­fer­ence between the mag­netic North Pole and ‘true North’. It seems to me that it is some­what arbi­trary that the biggest hunk of iron inside the Earth is pretty close to true North - it could have been some­where else, and then it would have taken a lot longer for us to invent a really use­ful com­pass (!). So maybe what­ever it is (in a phys­i­cal or ener­getic sense) which causes psy­chic skills to be sig­nif­i­cantly boosted is not nec­es­sar­ily exactly at the cen­ter of the Milky Way. (‘Inquiring minds want to know’ ;-)

Since I work as a med­ical intu­itive and ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tor, this is more than aca­d­e­mic curios­ity for me.

The really fun part: In terms of physics, in ani­mal com­mu­ni­ca­tion, and med­ical intu­itive and other psy­chic work, I believe that slower brain waves (Theta) some­how make it pos­si­ble to con­nect with the holo­graphic uni­ver­sal energy field which under­lies every­thing. It is expe­ri­en­tially clear to me that the whole uni­verse is con­tained in each part of this holo­graphic field, and that the whole can be accessed from any part, includ­ing from my brain, and/​or my con­scious­ness. The whole includes all time and space, though the res­o­lu­tion of my ‘instru­ment’ is not refined enough to be 100% thor­ough, pre­cise, or cor­rect. (That fits per­fectly with the issue of res­o­lu­tion in any holo­graph — the smaller the piece, in this case me, the lower the resolution.)

I han­dle my impre­ci­sion or incom­plete­ness by look­ing for things that stick out. I can afford to ignore nor­mal func­tion or struc­ture (which would be an over­whelm­ing over­load of detail). I just look for what needs help. So it would really give me an edge, to know what (accu­rately con­verted) LST time would give me more pre­ci­sion. I don’t believe I can achieve an actual higher degree of res­o­lu­tion, since I am still going to be the ‘same-​​sized piece’ of the holo­graphic energy field of the universe.

As I under­stand it now, my pri­mary respon­si­bil­ity is to not fill in any detail I don’t see, don’t make any assump­tions, just report what I get, and don’t jump to ‘log­i­cal’ con­clu­sions. But this is not just an eth­i­cal con­sid­er­a­tion, I believe it is a tech­ni­cal func­tion. At my level of focus (my res­o­lu­tion) pre­sum­ably I am cor­rect where I don’t extrap­o­late. But when I begin to do that (and it is typ­i­cally the log­i­cal left brain that extrap­o­lates, because it has not ‘had a turn’, while the intu­itive right brain has just fin­ished its ‘turn’) then my accu­racy suf­fers. And it is not that the log­i­cal brain is lesser than the intu­itive brain, it just has a dif­fer­ent focus, scale, and res­o­lu­tion, and when you start mix­ing infor­ma­tion from dif­fer­ent orders of mag­ni­tude, it gets messy - and inaccurate.

Thanks for knock­ing some ideas around with me here, and I hope you will for­ward this to the astronomer and/​or Palo Alto psy­chic researchers, so I can get some clar­i­fi­ca­tion too. At least I know the ques­tions I want to ask!

Blessings of the day, Denise Schultz

© Denise Schultz 2008–2009

Donations and con­nec­tions from the many to each other,
in even a tiny way, can cre­ate big shifts.
  
 
So please share Consider This . . .
with any­one else whom you want to con­sider these con­nec­tions and insights.

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Is it real? Yes, it is real. Animals have told me phys­i­cal things that were con­firmed by X-​​rays, ultra­sounds, blood tests, and man­ual pal­pa­tion by vets, chi­ro­prac­tors, acu­puncturists, and oth­ers. Anatomical charts help me name phys­i­cal things the ani­mals show me, so the client can ask the vet about it. Things ani­mals have told me about life events, phys­i­cal objects in their envi­ron­ment, lay­out of house and land­scape, etc., have been con­firmed by clients.

What about proof? The best proof is for me to work directly with you and your ani­mal. It helps to be open-​​minded. Being focused on proof is putting the cart before the horse. If you wanted to know if some­one could drive a car, no amount of talk­ing about it would prove it to you. You would want to see them do it. Listen to what I hear from your ani­mal first, then decide if it is true. Wondering whether I’m for real or not is tak­ing focus off of the ani­mal. If you can lis­ten to what is com­ing from them first, and assess that for authen­tic­ity, it won’t mat­ter so much what I do. I am not the point here, this is about the con­nec­tion between you and your animal.

Read the rest of this entry »

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , ,

This site is protected by WP-CopyRightPro