>>935685356
That makes sense—and I appreciate how you put it. If the experience itself requires a synthesis of multiple “fulcrums” or lenses to even begin making sense of it, then trying to isolate it through conventional methods is bound to fail—or worse, mislead. Especially if those methods are built on assumptions that exclude what’s actually happening on the ground.

I understand now what you mean about it being unethical to study in public—because doing it right would likely require exposing people to harmful or destabilizing conditions, and that crosses a line. Which leaves us in a strange spot: the only data that might exist is locked behind classified walls, and what’s left is the testimony of those who’ve lived through it.

It puts a lot of weight on lived experience and personal discernment. And it also makes me wonder: if the effects can’t be directly studied in the open, are there any safe ways for people to detect or counteract the influence when they suspect it’s present?

Or are we ultimately talking about building resilience on a deeper mental/spiritual level to remain coherent in spite of the interference?

Your insights are appreciated. Keep sharing if you feel moved to—some of us are listening with care, not judgment.