Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Mark Goulston, M.D.: Election 2010: Will You Be a Good Sport on Wednesday?

Will you go gently and cooperatively into Wednesday after the elections, or will you rage against the winners you didn't vote for?

If immature love is loving people for what they do right and mature love is loving them in spite of what they do wrong, will you be able to give your full support to whoever is elected and help them succeed in their position even if you didn't vote for them?

If you are able to do that, you are not only mature, you have "object constancy." Object constancy is the ability to maintain a positive connection to a person, a goal and in the most important category, hope, in the face of disappointment, hurt, frustration and upset.

It is sometimes a matter of temperament, because there are those lucky individuals who by nature see the good in the bad and the half filled cup. Often, however it is a matter of maturity, in that the more immature you are (as with many kids and people who refuse to grow up that you and I know all too well), the more likely you are to respond to disappointment or even a simple "No" with "I hate you!" "You're not my friend!" "Let's just get a divorce!" "That's okay, because I just might as well kill myself!"

I am not advocating that one should tolerate physical, sexual or mental abuse without fighting back or cutting your losses. In that regard I try to follow the wise words from one of my late mentors, Walter Dunn: "Confront evil at the earliest opportunity, but for everyone else who is just flawed, cut them some slack."

?

?

?

Follow Mark Goulston, M.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/markgoulston

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Dr. Irene S. Levine: Disappearing Acts: Should you think the best or assume the worst?

QUESTION

Dear Irene,

It is hard to know if lengthy silences and withdrawals by friends are because they are trying to dump you or because they are busy and a little neglectful. I especially grapple with this at birthdays and at Christmas time, often continuing to send cards or emails because I assume the best---that my friends are just busy.

But when I am always the initiator, does this mean I am refusing to accept that they don't really want to continue the friendship? Is it better to assume the best and send occasional missives? How does one know?

Signed, Becca


ANSWER

Dear Becca,

What a great question! You really get to the crux of the ambiguity of many friendships, which is something that everyone grapples with from time to time. Just as the beginning and ending of friendships are often fuzzy, it's sometimes hard to gauge what is going on with a friend mid-stream, particularly if you haven't spoken to her for a while.

People's lives change over time and sometimes the threads that connect them becomes frayed and weak. Thus, many relationships we thought would last forever turn out to be transient----and friends, even very close ones, slip in and out of our lives for a variety of reasons. Other friendships are continuous but change in intensity and frequency of contact.

As you suggest, lack of communication may mean any number of things: that the person is engaged with or overwhelmed with other people and/or responsibilities (e.g. work, family, etc); that the person needs more alone time for herself; or that the person is either purposely or unconsciously withdrawing from you.

Being a good friend entails being sensitive to the needs of another individual and to the natural vicissitudes of friendship. Unless you have a concrete reason to think otherwise, you should always assume that lack of communication has more to do with the other person than it does with you. Sending periodic emails, short notes or cards to acknowledge her birthday, or holiday greeting cards are thoughtful and non-obtrusive ways to tell the other person you're thinking of her.

But if there is no pick-up on the other end---for example, your friend never initiates or reciprocates after you reached out three or so times---it makes sense to check in more directly to find out what's going on. You can either call her, offer to get together, or send her an email asking if everything is okay in her life and between the two of you.

In most cases, your friend's response will allay your concerns. If she doesn't respond or answers in some vague way, allow some time to pass and try again. If there is still no positive response after that, it's safe to assume that your friend is withdrawing or at least needs a break and you need to accept that.

I hope this is helpful.

Best,
Irene


Have a question about female friendships? Send it to The Friendship Doctor.

Irene S. Levine, PhD is a freelance journalist and author. She holds an appointment as a professor of psychiatry at the New York University School of Medicine. Her recent book about female friendships, Best Friends Forever: Surviving a Breakup with Your Best Friend, was published by Overlook Press. She also blogs about female friendships at The Friendship Blog and at PsychologyToday.com.

?

?

?

Follow Dr. Irene S. Levine on Twitter: www.twitter.com/IreneLevine

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Mike Robbins: World Series 2010: What Baseball Can Teach Us About Life

With all the excitement of the playoffs and the World Series (which, thanks to the success of the San Francisco Giants, we got to experience directly here in the Bay Area), I've been thinking about, watching, and appreciating the great game baseball a lot these past few weeks. As someone who spent 18 years of my life (from the age of seven until the age of 25) playing organized baseball and who has been a huge fan all my life, the game has taught me a great deal.

Whether you've played (or still play) baseball yourself, watch it as a fan, or even if you don't particularly like it, understand it, care about it, or think it's boring (which I know some people do), the game of baseball can teach us so many important things about life.

The fact that there are seemingly endless metaphors and universal life lessons that can be gleaned from baseball is one of the many things that make the game so interesting, exciting, and magical in my opinion.

Here are some key lessons from baseball that I've been reminded of these past few weeks as I've been following the Giants with passion and enjoying the excitement of the post-season:

1) Appreciate the moment. It's so easy in life to take things for granted, focus too much on the outcome, and worry about our own agenda or performance -- all things I did for much of my own baseball career. Doing this, as we've all learned the hard way, causes us to miss the magic of the moment. As I've continued to remind the folks within the San Francisco Giants organization, whom I've had the honor of working with as a client this year, the most important thing to do in the midst of the excitement, intensity, and pressure of competition -- whether it's in baseball or in life -- is to enjoy and be grateful for the experience right now. As baseball teaches us, if we hold our breath and wait for it "all to work out," it often doesn't, and we lose opportunity to appreciate what's happening while it's happening, which is the only way we can authentically enjoy anything in life.

2) Take it one step at a time. As most baseball coaches preach to their players, "Take things one pitch at a time, one at-bat at a time, one inning at a time, and one game at a time." While these may be some of the oldest baseball clichés in the book, they're cliches for a reason: they're true, and not just for baseball. The better you are at letting go of what just happened, not worrying about what's coming up, and staying in each moment of your experience as it happens, the more likely you are to enjoy yourself and perform at your best. You never know how things are going to unfold, and you don't want to get too far ahead of yourself. According to all of the "experts," the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Phillies were supposed to be playing in the World Series, not the Giants and the Texas Rangers.

3) Focus on what you can control. In baseball, work, and life, there are so many things we can't control (i.e., what other people do, external factors, and ultimately the results), but we always have control over our attitude and our effort. Remembering what you can and can't control, and putting your attention on your attitude and effort are key elements in staying focused and positive, and in reducing stress and negativity. In baseball, if you waste your time getting upset about the calls by the umpire, the play of the other guys on your team, the decisions your manager makes, the weather conditions, what the fans and media have to say, and more, you'll make yourself crazy and render yourself ineffective in the game. The same is true in life; we spend and waste so much energy on stuff we have no control over. When we shift our focus to what we can control (our attitude and effort), we're empowered.

4) Failure is part of the game. There is so much failure in baseball, even when you're a really good player or team. Cody Ross, an outfielder for the Giants, won the Most Valuable Player award of the National League Championship Series against the Phillies the other week. He had a great series and hit .350, which is a fantastic batting average. However, this means he got out (i.e., failed) 65 percent of the time. Even when you're considered the "best," which he was for that series, you still have to deal with a lot of failure in baseball.

The two teams in the World Series this year, the Giants and the Rangers, each lost 70 and 72 games, respectively, during the regular season. That's a lot of failure -- and, they're really good! This is also true in life. The question isn't whether or not we'll fail; it's how we'll deal with it when it happens that's most important. Remembering that failure is an essential part of the game of life can help us let go of unnecessary fear, worry, and self judgment.

5) Swing hard, just in case you hit it. Our fear of failure and embarrassment often holds us back from really going for it. There were many times in my baseball career that I played tentatively, so as not to fail or lose. However, the best way to approach the game, as well as life itself, is with passion. Juan Uribe, the Giants' third baseman, hit the game-winning home run in Game Six of last week's National League Championship Series (sending the Giants to the World Series). He's a guy who swings about as hard as anyone in baseball. Sometimes he misses and can look bad at the plate. However, when he hits it, as he did last weekend, he has the ability to drive the ball out of the ballpark and win the game in heroic fashion. Swinging hard in life, just in case we hit it, is a great way to approach many of the important things we do.

Imagine what your life and career would look like it you weren't afraid to fail or embarrass yourself.

6) Don't be a front-runner. During the post-season, there are lots of "front-runners" (e.g., fans, media, and others jumping on the "bandwagon" when a team starts winning games and doing well). We live in a culture that loves winners and makes fun of losers. While this makes sense in baseball and sports, it can be quite damaging in business, relationships, and life. Sadly, we're often "front-runners" with ourselves, thinking that we're only as good as our performance or liking ourselves better based on external factors (e.g., money, accomplishments, weight, status, etc.).

The most successful baseball players I've ever seen or known and the most fulfilled people I've ever been around don't get too caught up in their own "hype" when they're doing well and don't get too stuck in their own "black hole" when they're in a slump. Keeping it real with yourself and others and not being a front-runner is critically important to creating authentic success and fulfillment in life.

7) It ain't over till it's over. As the great and somewhat quirky hall-of-fame catcher from the New York Yankees Yogi Berra famously said, "It's ain't over till it's over." This is, of course, true in baseball and in life. So often individuals and teams get counted out, which was true for both of the teams playing in this year's World Series, as well as many of the individual players on both squads, especially the Giants. However, baseball is a game of many second chances and opportunities for redemption -- just ask Josh Hamilton of the Texas Rangers. His story of recovery from addiction is inspiring and a great example of perseverance.

We are confronted on a daily basis in life with opportunities to give up, give in, and quit. Remembering that "it ain't over till it's over" is important for us in those low moments when we feel like throwing in the towel. Don't give up; you never know what's going to happen, as we're continually reminded about through the great game of baseball and the great experience of life.

Whether you love baseball like I do, get into it from time to time (especially at this time of year), or think it's a ridiculous and boring game, I hope you were able to watch the World Series and not only appreciate it for the exciting sporting event that it is, but also look more deeply into the beautiful way it can teach us so much about ourselves and how to live life to its fullest.

Mike Robbins is a sought-after motivational keynote speaker, coach, and the bestselling author of "Focus on the Good Stuff" (Wiley) and "Be Yourself, Everyone Else Is Already Taken" (Wiley). More info can be found at www.Mike-Robbins.com.

?

?

?

Follow Mike Robbins on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mikedrobbins

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Larry Womack: No, Really: If You Don't Vote This Time, It Is Your Fault

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is up by three points among all voters, but down by two points among likely voters. Michael Bennett looks to be narrowly leading among his constituents but decisively losing among those who plan to actually cast ballots. Polls find Democratic upstart Joe Sestak either up by four or down by seven, depending on how many voters show up. Poll after poll finds the same: Americans prefer to have Democrats in charge right now... they just don't plan to vote for them today.

With nearly a quarter of the House of Representatives in play, this gulf between registered voters and likely voters has never been so significant. A three or four point swing or pollster miscalculation in either direction moves projected results from continued (though slim) Democratic control of the House to an 80-seat Republican victory that it could very well take decades for Democrats to overcome.

Luckily for optimists on both sides, there is one group that trumps both registered and likely voters: Actual voters. Actual early voting numbers have been mixed and occasionally surprising. If I were a Democrat this morning (and it turns out I am,) I would do everything in my power to make sure that every legal, registered voter I knew became an actual voter today.

I absolutely understand why independent or culturally-conservative Obama 2008 voters might want to sit this election out or vote for Republican candidates. The economy is still in shambles and the rather timid Obama administration has done little to address the immediate needs of the nation. I also firmly believe that is the height of foolishness for them to do so.

At first blush it seems hard to believe, but they have even more to lose under Republican control than Democrats. At least partisan Democrats will end up looking pretty good after two years of 90's-style government shutdowns and Republican grandstanding. All middle-of-the-road voters will get out of it is two more years of nothing. The new Republican majority will not suddenly come up with all those ideas they haven't put forward during the past two years. Nor will they suddenly become interested in bipartisanship. No, if recent history is any indication, they will simply make sure that the government comes to a halt while they ham their way to nothing, hoping to oust Obama in 2012 with some mysterious, electable candidate who will never materialize. (All the while, of course, they will be boosting Obama's popularity among independents.) But "undecided" voters are rare in midterm elections, which very often hinge on turnout.

What I have a most difficult time wrapping my head around is the purportedly sizable group of disaffected liberal Democrats who just don't feel like they've been given enough by the Obama administration to make another two years of government worth half an hour at their polling place.

I know, I know. There's a rather popular notion among some liberals that not voting is the new voting and that removing oneself from the political process somehow makes one morally superior. They dislike President Obama because he's too soft and doesn't get enough of what he wants. They loathe Speaker Pelosi because she's too hard and gets everything she wants. They'd rather write angry comments on blog posts than go out and vote. They want everything their way, gift-wrapped with a nice bow and the word "bipartisan" worked into the card, if at all possible.

Sadly, Santa Claus is not now nor has he ever been on the ballot.

Also unfortunate for Democrats is that this mindset is uniquely liberal. Republicans never come close to getting any of their biggest goals met, and still they vote. After decades of Republican control of Congress and the presidency, abortion is still legal, Social Security still exists, we still have a minimum wage and Big Bird is still brainwashing their children on the teevee box. All we ever seem to get out of Republican presidencies are floundering economies, ballooning national debt and wildly ironic lectures about how they are the party of economics and fiscal responsibility.

Could a sizable number of Democrats really have expected so much more from this government that they genuinely believe it is now better to just hand it back over to the Republicans? If you were convinced (to paraphrase Hillary Clinton) that Barack Obama's arms would spread and the heavens would open, your expectations were simply never rooted in reality. The Blue Dog Democrats serve at the leisure of constituents who reach for pitchforks every time they hear the name Obama. The President, though bizarrely embraced as some sort of lefty messiah in 2008, never at any point showed himself to be more than a corporate centrist with all the political cowardice and none of the insider know-how of more seasoned nominees past. I would humbly suggest that a center-left, sometimes amateurish government was all that anyone could have reasonably expected. If you were surprised that there was poison in the Kool-Aid, you probably shouldn't have joined the cult.

If you're a liberal who isn't voting because you feel like not enough has been done to advance the causes you care most about, I probably actually agree with you on those points. I agree that it is vitally important to continue work toward truly universal health care in America, that ends to DOMA and DADT and the passage of ENDA are long-overdue moral imperatives and that energy reform is desperately needed for the future of this country. But that doesn't mean that it is anything short of idiotic to help Republicans capture Congress just to teach Democrats a lesson. Are we really to believe that losing to more conservative politicians is going to make Democrats more liberal?

I also don't think I need to remind you that allowing Democrats to lose control of the House of Representatives is the easiest way to make sure nothing we care about gets done for years--maybe even decades, if some forecast models are right.

The Democratic agenda and quite probably the federal government will shut down as soon as Nancy Pelosi hands over the gavel (I write to Republican applause). When Harry "Couldn't get the votes" Reid and Barack "I'll just let Congress do its thing and check in when it's done" Obama wanted to scale back or scrap Health Care Reform, it was Pelosi who managed the Herculean feat of getting the Senate version of the Health Care bill through the House word-for-word. While the Senate struggled for years to make the most modest advances, Pelosi passed every piece of her 100-hour plan with 13 hours to spare. Love her or hate her, at every step of the way it has been Pelosi, not Obama and certainly not Reid, who has driven Democratic accomplishment over the last two years.

"What accomplishments!" I hear some of those sit-at-home Democrats sneer. Well, if a health insurance overhaul half a century in the making, unprecedented consumer credit protections, historically low tax levels, a draw down of US forces in Iraq and Wall Street reform aren't a good enough start for you, what exactly would it take to get you to vote? A pony? A public flogging of Karl Rove?

Take two minutes to seriously consider what would have been accomplished by this country during the last two years if Republicans had been in control. Really think it through. If Republicans had had their way, four million more low-income children would be without health insurance and the ones lucky enough to afford it could still be refused care for pre-existing conditions. If Republicans had their way, millions (if not billions) of future Americans would suffer economic ruin and/or go without health care entirely if they happened to commit the criminal offense of becoming ill. If Republicans had had their way, the toughest financial reforms since the Great Depression would never have been enacted. If Republicans had had their way, we may well have found ourselves in a depression so great we'd have to give "the economic downturn of 1929" a new name.

In 2010, we simply cannot afford the delusion that we are somehow teaching the Democrats a lesson by not voting. Moreover: elections are for deciding who runs the government, not who needs a little spanking.

So, please, Democrats: Vote. In fact, don't just vote and call it a night. Voting isn't quite enough this time. Call up a few friends who might be sitting this one out and make sure they made it to the polls. Drive people to the polls if you can. Volunteer, if you are able, at your local campaign HQ--I'm sure they'll be glad to put you to work. Call up some other friends who you know will be voting and make sure they're doing the same. Strongly urge your moderate and independent friends who are occasional voters to come out as well. They probably won't be voting for sideshow attractions like Sharron Angle.

Ask your more hesitant friends (more politely than I phrase it here): Would you rather go to the polls and keep Republicans out of power, or sit at home and feel smug?

If Democratic voters can be bothered to show up, they could very well keep control of the House. If they don't, they're unlikely to see it back within their grasp for a very, very long time.

?

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Make Big Money With Affiliate Program

Have you ever joined an affiliate program with a great product/service but still can’t make big money (if any)? Then where in the world all these affiliates with a big pay check came from? Can you still make money as an affiliate? The answer is YES.

Money can be made from affiliate program as many people still do everyday. Two major problems people fail to make big money from affiliate program:
??? ?They only get a small percent of commission.
??? ?Too many people joined the same affiliate program. Sometimes well over 100,000 affiliates for a single affiliate program.

Making money from affiliate program is not simple as put up a link in your website and expect lots of people to click on it. Even though, some people do make money this way but most of them are not big money. In order to make big money you need a strategy.

Your own opt in email list is probably the best way to make big money from an affiliate program. Building a list will take time but the reward at the end is well worth it. There is higher chance person in your own list will buy a similar product/service or it is complement with the one that you offer. The best of both worlds if you could capture the potential customer’s email before send them off to the affiliate’s website because you are now own that list and you can promote other products/services in the future. Don’t go crazy by offering anything and think people will buy it. Also, never make people in your opt in list feel you are just an advertiser. Give them some valuable information before recommend a product/service. Never recommend a product/service that you do not like it yourself.

The second way to make big money with affiliate is to find a super-affiliate. What is a super-affiliate? Super-affiliate is affiliate with his/her own opt in email list. If you asked a super-affiliate to join an affiliate program and if he/she does then that means he/she is under you whenever someone from his/her list purchases the product/service you will get a commission from it. It’s a win-win situation. Only a few super-affiliates you already build yourself an army of affiliates. An advantage of the second method is time saving. It’s won’t take as much time as build a list but it is a challenge to convince a super-affiliate to join the affiliate program that you are promoting.

There you have the two best ways to make big money with affiliate program. Making money as affiliate is not easy but at the same time is not impossible either.

Related Articles

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Content Is King? Broadcasters Keep Upper Hand In TV Disputes

LOS ANGELES — A recent spate of TV blackouts and the lack of government intervention suggests that broadcasters have the upper hand over TV signal providers when it comes to negotiating fees, at least until Congress decides to act.

New York-area cable TV operator Cablevision Systems Corp. tested the limits of government intervention in October, calling early and often for the Federal Communications Commission to step in and force News Corp.'s Fox to keep providing its broadcast signal while it pressed for arbitration in a fee dispute.

Fox declined and the FCC did little more than suggest mediation if both parties were willing to participate. When the two sides couldn't reach a deal, Fox blacked out its signals to 3 million Cablevision subscribers for 15 days, through two games of baseball's World Series. On Saturday, Cablevision finally accepted terms it said were "unfair" for the sake of its customers.

Ultimately, the FCC said that its hands were tied.

"Under the present system, the FCC has very few tools with which to protect consumers' interests," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in a letter to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in a letter Kerry's office released Friday. "Current law does not give the agency the tools necessary to prevent service disruptions."

Some analysts said Cablevision's move was mainly intended to draw the government out. Its battle had the support of other cable and satellite TV signal operators through such groups as the American Television Alliance, which counts Dish Network Corp. and DirecTV Inc. among its members.

Fox said in a statement Sunday that "this entire dispute was solely about Cablevision's misguided efforts to effect regulatory change to their benefit." Cablevision did not respond to a request for comment.

But the distributors are also competing with one another, rather than presenting a united front.

Dish Network announced Friday that it had settled its dispute with Fox, two days before Fox broadcast signals could have been blacked out to some of its 14.3 million subscribers. That would have made its service more attractive to Cablevision customers still stuck without Fox, and hurt Cablevision's position as the lone holdout.

It gave in just one day later.

Battles between TV signal providers and broadcasters have been raging for years and the latest dispute wasn't the longest.

In 2005, about 75,000 Cable One Inc. subscribers in Missouri, Louisiana and Texas went without signals from local NBC and ABC affiliate stations owned by Nexstar Broadcasting Group Inc. for almost the entire year.

In March, Cablevision also attempted a high-profile negotiating strategy and its customers lost their ABC station in New York in the hours leading up to the Oscars. Viewers missed the first 15 minutes of the awards show before Cablevision and The Walt Disney Co. reached a tentative deal.

The law at the center of the debates is the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992.

It allows broadcasters like Fox, ABC, CBS and NBC to choose between forcing a TV signal distributor like Cablevision to carry its local TV station, thus boosting its audience, or bargaining for the best rate it can for so-called "retransmission consent."

Because broadcasters bought the rights to such high-demand programming like football, baseball and the Oscars, they have chosen to bargain and have recently been pressing for higher fees.

The law heavily favors broadcasters in such negotiations because they have the ability to black out signals and subscribers are hard to win back if they switch TV signal providers.

David Bank, an analyst with RBC Capital Markets, said it was in the best interests of the FCC to keep the balance tipped in broadcasters' favor. The FCC regulates the airwaves and it has authority over what broadcasters can send out over them. There are rules over obscenity and local content that don't apply to pay cable channels, which escape the FCC's grasp.

"That's what the FCC really cares about: minority voices on air, localism, childhood early education initiatives, obscenity," Bank said. If the balance of power were shifted to distributors, media giants could pull back from the broadcast model and move to an all-cable channel lineup. TV stations might disappear and the FCC would "lose the ability to regulate all that," Bank said.

The American Cable Association, a grouping of smaller cable operators representing 7.6 million subscribers, argued Sunday that the fight to change an 18-year-old law wasn't over and it said it remains within the FCC's powers to adopt regulations to prevent signal blackouts now. "Despite these deals being done, retransmission consent needs to change," its president Matthew Polka, said Sunday.

Both Genachowski and Sen. Kerry called for reforms of the current system. Genachowski, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said in his letter that "the current system relegates television viewers to pawns between companies battling over retransmission fees." Sen. Kerry called the existing regime "broken."

"Media interests have every right to play hardball," Sen. Kerry said in a statement Sunday. "But I believe it's incumbent upon those of us in public policy to see if there's a way to help protect consumers and avoid the now regularly scheduled, frequent games of high-stakes chicken that leave consumers in the crossfire."

Get HuffPost Media On Twitter, Facebook, and Google?Buzz!

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Should You Use Organic Skin Care Products?

There has been an increase in the use of organic skin care products over the years. You might be aware of the benefits of eating organic foods and you might be asking yourself why you need to use organic skin and body care products as well. Well, you should know that what makes our body healthy is not only what you put inside it but on it as well.

The epidermis is the largest organ of the body. It can easily absorb anything that is applied to it like in the case of lotions, creams, and other skin care products. The problem with a lot of skin care products is that they are made using chemicals and other ingredients that can cause health problems.

Parabens, dioxanes, mineral oil, alcohol, and fragrances are all commonly used in skin care products. What consumers aren’t aware of is that these ingredients can cause serious health problems like cancer. These ingredients can be toxic to the body and when you apply them repeatedly to your skin, this is where the problem begins.

Organic skincare products are obviously better than other skin care products because they contain no artificial preservatives or ingredients. Natural ingredients are mild to the skin and do not cause skin reactions like rashes or skin irritation. These are a lot safer and you don’t have to worry about getting cancer and other diseases. In terms of effectiveness, organic skin care products are also very powerful.

A lot of natural ingredients contain antioxidants that help fight free radical damage, antibacterial properties to help fight acne and skin infection, and some ingredients can even restore the firmness and elasticity of the skin by increasing production of collagen and elastin in the body.

Some of the best ingredients you can find in organic skin products are avocado oil, shea butter, maracuja extract, manuka honey, cynergy TK, and jojoba oil. There are a whole lot of other natural ingredients which target specific skin problems and these are very safe and effective.

When you want a healthy body and healthy skin, remember that it is not only what you put inside that matters. What you apply on your skin matters as well. Make sure that you eat fresh and healthy foods, drink plenty of water, exercise regularly, avoid smoking and drinking alcohol, and pay attention to what you apply on your skin. If you want the best for your skin, then make sure that you use only organic, natural skin care products.

To learn more information on organic skin care or to take a look at the products I strongly recommend, visit my site today.

Tasha D. Crowell has a passion is to write about skin and body care.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here