Sex is listed in Napoleon Hill’s "Think and Grow Rich" as one of the seven major positive emotions. Presumably it is not sex itself that is being classified an emotion but the emotions of calm, satisfaction and clarity along with the increase in energy and the inspiration that might result from engaging in sexual intercourse. The operative term is "might", as sexual release is not always accompanied by positive emotions. However, it is suggested that having frequent shame-free, guilt-free, spirit-cleansing sex can infuse brighter colors into a gray financial picture.

Of course it is not being suggested that sex is some kind of miracle pill you pop and suddenly a million dollars appear in your bank account. What is being suggested is that frequent sex can improve your outlook, remove some of the mental and emotional burdens that might be responsible for your inability to focus on the goals you’ve set for yourself, increase your energy level, help combat the chemical imbalances that drain your spirit and suck you into a crippling void of depression, calm you so that you’re not riddled with stress and anxiety; and in so doing provide you with the inspiration, the unobscured vision, the desire, the fuel you need to propel you to the apex of your particular Mount Everest.

This is not a red light to go out and become sexually promiscuous or irresponsible. It is not a suggestion that you should alter your lifestyle in any profound way to make sex so important as to become a distraction in your life. It is not a suggestion that sexual pleasure should become a daily pursuit or that you should in any way center your life around sex or use sex abusively. On the contrary, you are using the power of sex to balance your life and in order for that to occur your relationship with sex must necessarily be disciplined and controlled.

Ideally sex with another person is better for your mind, assuming you are having sex with a partner with whom you are physically, mentally and emotionally at ease, and with whom you can count on the experience being mutually satisfying. The psychological benefits of sex with a partner under positive conditions can be greater than the benefits of self masturbation; however lack of a partner is no reason not to use the positive power of sex to your advantage. Sexual release does not necessarily require that there are two people involved, and keeping in mind that you are having sex for therapeutic reasons, having sex with a partner could conceivably be counterproductive if the partner is not someone with whom you are physically, mentally and emotionally at ease or if the partner is someone who might inspire feelings of frustration during intercourse and regret and dissatisfaction afterward.

If you are uncomfortable with the subject of sex and masturbation then very likely the idea that you should make a point of having sex frequently whether with a partner or by yourself so that you can calm your mind and spirit and be better able to function in your daily life embarrasses and appalls you. Most of us are raised to regard sex as something you do only in your marriage bed and in moderation. Not everyone is able to talk about sex in a casual manner much less to contemplate having sex for reasons that have nothing to do with love and marriage. Masturbation is still something people are ashamed to do even when they alone know that they do it. There is plenty of shame and guilt associated with sexual activity that is not sanctioned by law whether moral or written. In order for you to benefit from the therapeutic use of sex you cannot be at conflict with your sexuality or be prone to feelings of guilt and shame after sexual indulgences. The objective is to reap the calming and uplifting benefits of sexual release, so if you are going to be tortured with shame for bringing yourself to sexual climax or for having sexual intercourse without the motivation of love you might not want to put to the test the theory that frequent sex might help you in your quest to achieve success in business.

Some will no doubt call it insanity, but if you are one of us, then you can probably identify with those moments of having no idea what the point is of anything you’re doing. And truth be told, you’re sometimes in such a state of cluelessness as to who you even are, that the idea that you could possibly know what your purpose is, what your goals are, where you’re trying to go and what you’re trying to do, well, it’s laughable; but you don’t have the energy to laugh and you seriously don’t find it funny at all. Particularly with only 11 days left until you have to come up with money to pay the bills and your tally of the funds in your accounts suggests it’s time to hit the panic button.

I am not here to preach to anyone about facing reality and being practical and doing what you have to do even if it means giving up on the business you’re trying to run, what ever that business may be, and finding a more secure and steady means of generating income, like a 9-5 job. I cannot tolerate people preaching to me about how irresponsible it is of me to live my life on the edge. The last time I checked, it was my life to live on the edge if I chose to live it that way. And by the same token, your choices are your own. Your life is your own and the decisions about how to live it are your own to make. Whether or not it’s time to give up on your entrepreneurial efforts or change from pursuing one thing to pursuing another is entirely your decision to make. You know your reasons for doing what you do. You know the impact of your choices on your very livilihood. You know better than anyone what is in your best interest.

That being said, let’s assume you go through moments when everything seems to be pointless. You’re running your own business. Maybe you have an office in the city, or your office is the corner of your living room. You wake up one morning and you just don’t feel like bothering. What’s the point? You have no clients. You’re not making any money. No one can tell the difference between you and someone who is unemployed. You say you’re self-employed, you’re running your own business but you have nothing to show for it. It can be pretty depressing waking up every day to the same reality that you really have nothing to do that you can expect to get paid for. Not that you have nothing to do. There’s always plenty to do, but doing it doesn’t guarantee you money, so you figure why bother?

I’d be lying if I said I don’t go through these periods. I go through them frequently. I have run my business now since 1998. I’ve had panic moments when bill collectors were threatening to sue me, when I was receiving disconnection notices for everything every month. The people in my life preached ad infinitum. You need a job. You’re not getting anywhere. You’re not making any money. You’re not self-employed, you’re unemployed.

But at those moments when I didn’t know the point of any of it, I still kept at it, even while not knowing what “it” was that I was keeping at. I kept waking up and going to the living room corner office, turning on the PC, loading up the sites and working. I can’t promise if you keep at it even when you don’t know what you’re keeping at you’ll see results and everything will work out the way you want it to; but it is guaranteed that if you don’t keep at it, if you quit trying, you won’t accomplish whatever it is you are trying to achieve. Just keep at it. Go into the office when you don’t feel like bothering. That in itself is an achievement.

Depression Can Be a More Serious Matter for Men Than Women, Reports the Harvard Mental Health Letter

10/31/2006 10:37:00 AM

——————————————————————————–

To: National Desk, Health and Medical Reporter

Contact: Christine Junge of Harvard Health Publications, 617-432-4717, or Christine_Junge@hms.harvard.edu

BOSTON, Oct. 28 /U.S. Newswire/ — Depression is sometimes called the common cold of mental health, but it’s unlike the common cold in at least two important respects: It doesn’t go away in a week without treatment and it doesn’t affect men and women equally or in the same ways. Though depression seems to affect more women than men, it presents special problems for men, reports the November issue of the Harvard Mental Health Letter.

In the United States, about half as many men as women are diagnosed as being seriously depressed at some time in their lives. But this relatively low rate could be an illusion. Men often don’t like to admit that they are depressed, so they are more likely to withdraw into silent misery or hide depression under anger, irritability, alcoholism or drug abuse.

Depression can be an even more serious matter for men than for women. To begin with, it is a key risk factor for suicide and men commit suicide four times more often than women do. Another mortal concern for men with depression is cardiovascular disease. Depression affects blood pressure, blood clotting and the immune system. It’s a well-known risk factor for heart disease, heart attacks and stroke. Men are especially vulnerable because they develop these diseases at a higher rate and at an earlier age than women.

“The most important thing others can do for a man who shows signs of depression is to help him contact a physician or mental health professional,” says Michael Miller, editor in chief of the Harvard Mental Health Letter. “If necessary, accompany him to treatment and encourage him to continue until his symptoms improve.”

***Ephosting.com does not own the copyright to this report. This is a reprint of a press release. The source of this document: http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=75364

Press Release
August 7, 2006

Contact: Susan Cahill
NIMH Press Office

301-443-4536
NIMHpress@nih.gov

Experimental Medication Kicks Depression in Hours Instead of Weeks

People with treatment-resistant depression experienced symptom relief in as little as two hours with a single intravenous dose of ketamine, a medication usually used in higher doses as an anesthetic in humans and animals, in a preliminary study. Current antidepressants routinely take eight weeks or more to exert their effect in treatment-resistant patients and four to six weeks in more responsive patients — a major drawback of these medications. Some participants in this study, who previously had tried an average of six medications without relief, continued to show benefits over the next seven days after just a single dose of the experimental treatment, according to researchers conducting the study at the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Mental Health.

This is among the first studies of humans to examine the effects of ketamine on depression, a debilitating illness that affects 14.8 million people in any given year. Used in very low doses, the medication is important for research, but is unlikely to become a widely used clinical treatment for depression because of potential side effects, including hallucinations and euphoria, at higher doses. However, scientists say this research could point the way toward development of a new class of faster- and -longer-acting medications. None of the patients in this study, all of whom received a low dose, had serious side effects. Study results were published in the August issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry.

“The public health implications of being able to treat major depression this quickly would be enormous,” said NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni, M.D. “These new findings demonstrate the importance of developing new classes of antidepressants that are not simply variations of existing medications.”

For this study 18 treatment-resistant, depressed patients were randomly assigned to receive either a single intravenous dose of ketamine or a placebo (inactive compound). Depression improved within one day in 71 percent of all those who received ketamine, and 29 percent of these patients became nearly symptom-free within one day. Thirty-five percent of patients who received ketamine still showed benefits seven days later. Participants receiving a placebo infusion showed no improvement. One week later, participants were given the opposite treatment, unless the beneficial effects of the first treatment were still evident. This “crossover” study design strengthens the validity of the results.

“To my knowledge, this is the first report of any medication or other treatment that results in such a pronounced, rapid, prolonged response with a single dose. These were very treatment-resistant patients,” said NIMH Director Thomas R. Insel, M.D.

Ketamine blocks a brain protein called the N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor. Previous studies have shown that agents that block the NMDA receptor reduce depression-like behaviors in animals.

NMDA receptors are critical for receiving the signals of glutamate, a brain chemical that enhances the electrical flow among brain cells that is required for normal function. Studies indicate that dysregulation in glutamate could be among the culprits in depression. Using ketamine to block glutamate’s actions on the NMDA receptor appears to improve function of another brain receptor — the AMPA receptor — that also helps regulate brain cells’ electrical flow.

Scientists think the reason current antidepressant medications take weeks to work is that they act on targets close to the beginning of a series of biochemical reactions that regulate mood. The medications’ effects then have to trickle down through the rest of the reactions, which takes time. Scientists theorize that ketamine skips much of this route because its target, the NMDA receptor, is closer to the end of the series of reactions in question.

“This may be a key to developing medications that eliminate the weeks or months patients have to wait for antidepressant treatments to kick in,” said lead researcher Carlos A. Zarate Jr., of the NIMH Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program.

The researchers who conducted the study now are zeroing in on other areas of the glutamate system. Specifying which components of the system are affected by compounds such as ketamine may help scientists understand how and why depression occurs, reveal biological markers that may one day aid in diagnosis, and point the way to more precise targets for new medications.

Dr. Zarate was joined in this research by Husseini K. Manji, chief of the NIMH Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program, and colleagues Jaskaran B. Singh, Paul J. Carlson, Nancy E. Brutsche, Rezvan Ameli, David A. Luckenbaugh, and Dennis S. Charney.

******Ephosting.com does not own the copyright to this report. This is a reprint of a press release. The source of this document: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/press/ketamine.cfm

I came across this article today and found it interesting; but after reading it, although I can concede the validity of the points made, I have had no change of heart where my own ambition is concerned. I want to be at peace with myself, yes, but I cannot be at peace with myself if being at peace with myself means accepting that I will struggle financially through the rest of my life. I don’t need to make it onto the Forbes list of richest people in the world; but I do want to have control over my life to the extent that I live where and how I choose to live rather than where and how the circumstance of my life dictate that I live.

Published June 6, 2000 in the San Francisco Chronicle
Desire to Be Rich and Famous Called a Sure Path to Discontent
by Alfie Kohn

New York - The adage that money cannot buy happiness may be familiar, but is easily forgotten in a consumer society. A much more persistent and seductive message is beamed from every television screen: Contentment is available for the price of this car, that computer, a little more getting and spending.

Over the last few years, however, psychological researchers have been amassing an impressive body of data suggesting that satisfaction simply is not for sale. Not only does having more things prove to be unfulfilling, but also people for whom affluence is a priority in life tend to experience an unusual degree of anxiety and depression as well as a lower overall level of well-being. Likewise, those who would like nothing more than to be famous or attractive do not fare as well, psychologically speaking, as those who primarily want to develop close relationships, become more self-aware or contribute to the community.

Earlier research had demonstrated that neither income nor attractiveness is strongly correlated with a sense of well-being. But Dr. Richard Ryan, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester, and Dr. Tim Kasser, a former student who is now an assistant professor of psychology at Knox College in Illinois, have discovered that the news is even worse.

In three sets of studies published in leading psychology journals since 1993, with a new article this year in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin and still more papers on the way, the researchers sketch an increasingly bleak portrait of people who value “extrinsic goals” like money, fame and beauty.

Such people are not only more depressed than others, but also report more behavioral problems and physical discomfort, as well as scoring lower on measures of vitality and self-actualization. While not every study has investigated the full list of effects, the pattern that emerges from the research project as a whole is remarkably consistent.

Ryan and Kasser said their studies provided a look at the “dark side of the American dream,” noting that the culture in some ways seemed to be built on precisely what turned out to be detrimental to mental health. Americans are encouraged to try to strike it rich, but, “the more we seek satisfactions in material goods, the less we find them there,” Ryan said. “The satisfaction has a short half-life; it’s very fleeting.”

Moreover, the detrimental effect of extrinsic goals seems to hold regardless of age or even level of income: A preoccupation with money bodes ill regardless of how much money one already has. The effects also appear not to be limited to any one culture. Kasser and his associates have now collected data from subjects in 13 countries, including Germany, Russia and India. The fact that pursuing wealth is psychologically unhelpful and often destructive, he reports, “comes through very strongly in every culture I’ve looked at.”

Affluence, per se, does not necessarily result in an unsatisfying life. Problems are primarily associated with “living a life where that’s your focus,” Ryan said. Nevertheless, the negative psychological picture does seem to be associated with the extent to which people believe that they are already on the way to attaining extrinsic goals.

For example, the paper to be published this year surveyed about 300 youths, some in the United States and some in Russia. In both countries, lower levels of mental health were found not only in people who wanted to make a lot of money but also in those who thought they were likely to succeed at it.

Another study by the same researchers, not yet accepted for publication, found that college students who were already “relatively high in the attainment of appearance, financial success and popularity” were nevertheless “lower in well-being and self-esteem.” Those who aspired to affluence also had more transient relationships, watched more television and were more likely to use cigarettes, alcohol and other drugs than were those who placed less emphasis on extrinsic goals.

Apart from its obvious implications for a culture that thrives on material gain, this whole line of research raises questions about the proclivity of some psychologists to analyze the dynamics of what is often called goal-directed behavior while, in effect, ignoring the nature of the goal. Likewise, it challenges homespun advice to “follow one’s dream,” whatever it may be.

These data strongly suggest that not all goals or dreams are created equal. According to the researchers, pursuing goals that reflect genuine human needs, like wanting to feel connected to others, turns out to be more psychologically beneficial than spending one’s life trying to impress others or to accumulate trendy clothes, fancy gizmos and the money to keep buying them.

The latter quest may amount to using compensation to try to compensate for something more meaningful. The empirical support for this piece of the puzzle comes from a particularly provocative study that Kasser and Ryan conducted with Dr. Melvin Zax at the University of Rochester and Dr. Arnold Sameroff at the University of Michigan. These researchers discovered that 18-year- olds for whom financial success was especially important turned out to be disproportionately likely to have mothers who were not very nurturing. When parents are “cold and controlling,” the researchers wrote, “their children apparently focus on attaining security and a sense of worth through external sources.”

This seems consistent with anecdotal accounts of very wealthy men who grew up in troubled homes. Such stories are sometimes cited as evidence that they made the best of a bad thing, turning out well despite or because of their unhappy childhoods. The problem with this interpretation, according to the research, is that they may not have turned out so well after all. They just turned out wealthy.