|
|
|
 |
|

By K. C. Blair, Founder, Director
GoodSamIAm.org |
Soup Research. Back when most mothers were stay-at-home moms, there
were soup company executives who believed soup was good food. They thought
they could prove it by conducting a study of consumers to determine that
more soup servings and healthier ingredients were associated with enhanced
health.
If the marketing researchers found the association to exist, the company
marketers could and would use a claim that soup is good food in a new
advertising campaign. That hopefully would get more consumers to increase
all soup usage to enhance their families’ health, increasing the executives’
company sales the most. The sources for the consumer research were 1)
consumer diary panelists’ soup purchase and usage data and 2) family member
doctor visits and illnesses of cooperating panelists, as reported in health
records filed in their doctors’ offices. The consumer researchers gathered,
analyzed and reported the data.
Soup Research Findings. The key finding pleased everyone: The
more soup servings there were in the households, the healthier were their
families. But the secondary finding pleased no one: The panel
families who ate soups predominantly with healthier ingredients, like
homemade and vegetable, were not healthier than those eating primarily the
less healthy ingredients of commercial and chicken noodle. That meant if you
wanted to conclude soup is good food, you would have to do it without the
association with healthy ingredients. Since healthy or less healthy
ingredients seemed not to make a difference, the researchers wondered how
soup is good food. In trying to find a physical link between soup servings
and health, without the more-healthy-ingredients theory, the company
researchers speculated that the hot cooking and warm servings of soup must
have supported better digestion. No research was conducted to determine if
that hypothesis were true. The puzzle continued.
Soup Advertising Test Market. Finding a relationship between soup
servings and health, regardless of causality or direction, was enough for
the company to make the advertising claim that soup was good food. The
finding led to a test market in which advertising was used to tell consumers
soup is good food, the more the better. In the advertising test market,
versus the no-advertising control market, more consumers bought more soup
overall and the executives’ company soup gained the most during the
heavy-spending campaign. The in-market advertising experiment was considered
a success.
The Great Soup Illusion. From the soup-serving puzzle I had an
epiphany, which I call The Great Soup Illusion. Soup traditionally
delivers two variables: 1) servings of physical ingredients and 2) servings
of mom’s tender loving care. The “Illusion” is that when the physical
ingredients and subjective compassion are served together, the physical
ingredients may not create healing or health but being visible get all of
the credit, while the subjective compassion likely creates all healing and
health but being invisible gets no credit. I call it “Great” because it has
helped me identify and understand similar illusions, like The Modern
Medicine Illusion in which the invisible power of the placebo does the
healing, while credit goes to orthodox medicine, which may have done nothing
positive.
The Physical-Visible Ingredients. The soup company researchers found
out that serving healthy ingredients does not necessarily contribute to
health. What they did not know was, when people have a nutrition
sufficiency, giving them more nutrition does not add to their health. In
contrast, another research study showed vitamins and minerals were given on
a daily basis to malnourished Africans, who were susceptible to disease.
Their health and immunity responded quickly and noticeably after only a few
days because they had had an insufficiency of those vitamins and minerals.
Adding mega vitamins and minerals to a healthy group of Americans, affects
health little or not at all, making a change in health impossible to
measure. Soup ingredients are healthy when they enhance health, which means
there first has to be a deficiency of those ingredients.
The Subjective-Invisible Compassion. Soup is good food because it
always helps mom serve more attention and care to her loved ones. The
historically famous, “Mom’s chicken soup,” is a symbol of moms’ compassion
served to their sick and vulnerable children. The belief that it worked was
important. Compassion seems to have unlimited possibilities and our beliefs
seem to be the only limitation. When soup was first commercially
manufactured and packaged it mattered not whether it had the healthiest of
ingredients. It was mom’s compassion, conveniently packaged in can or
envelope, ready for her to serve us at lunch or waiting on the counter for
us, when we got home from school. It protected us from everything, even the
preservatives.
Progressive Learning. My first serious healing research began with my
breakthrough understanding of the placebo in medicine. The placebo is
usually thought of as a fake medicine or procedure offered to people in
clinical trials. But the placebo effect of healing is delegated from within
us to the symbols of every medicine, procedure and physician. More research
has been done on the placebo than there are medicines and procedures in the
marketplace. The placebo has been proven to consistently help more people
than any drug. For example, if a drug is said to help 60% of the people in a
clinical trial, 40% (40 of 60 points) will likely be due to the average
effect of the placebo and the remaining 20% may be due to the drug, unless
the more active ingredient of the drug is considered part of the larger
placebo effect, along with the placebos’ less active ingredients. Translated
from Latin, placebo means, “I shall please.”
Our research has found that the placebo is really compassion, mislabeled and
misunderstood by medicine men down through the ages. Compassion, we define
as new and incremental love, is created from within, where love seems to
accumulate, where health is, where deviations from health start and where
healing occurs. “From within” is called the subjective. Doctors, drugs and
surgery come from outside us, called the objective, where our health,
healing and disease do not take place. The more research I do, the more I
find we live in a subjective universe.
From experiments, we have learned about the relationship of compassion and
love’s correlates, like health. The more compassion we create within and
between us, the more we enhance love’s correlates, the healthier we are; the
less compassion we create, the less we enhance the correlates, the less
healthy we are. So far, I have not found there is a compassion sufficiency.
It seems we always have a compassion deficiency and adding compassion always
enhances love and its correlates. We have found compassion works two ways:
locally through the senses, like when we visit a sick friend; and nonlocally,
not through the senses, when we send a sick friend our compassionate intent,
like prayer, from a distance.
Our research indicates compassion is the common denominator of all healing.
It does not matter which medicine you are exposed to, whether it is
conventional medicine, complimentary, supplementary, alternative, or
integrative medicine, the common denominator of what works and how it works
seems to be compassion-related. The success of all of these alternatives at
the time of our exposure to them is a function of how well they use
compassion. There is an exception: in an emergency a good body mechanic
needs no bedside manners.
When you are too busy, you do not create or experience enough compassion.
When you take a moment to make yourself some tea, hot chocolate or soup you
are showing yourself attention and care. Compassion deficiency results in
symptoms, seemingly placed at random in the body. The signal from symptoms
is that you need more compassion, overall. We ignore the signals for
compassion replenishment at our peril. Our subjective thoughts create our
reality for better or worse. More compassion is “for better,” less
compassion is for “worse.”
Conclusion. Creating compassion enhances love’s correlates, like
healing, health, happiness, longevity, creativity, productivity and
everything else good we want. And if you focus on any one correlate, you
will enhance the others. This is synchronicity and why people say we should
think positive thoughts. Positive synchronicity helps exclude the negative
information of fear and its correlates of pain, sickness and disease –
medicine, invasive procedures and doctors.
Serving and consuming soup is positive. It is good food but not necessarily
for the reason most people believe. And that reason, you know by now, is
pretty important.
So far, our research has found the power of compassion has unlimited
potential in helping us create better realities. In practice, it seems to be
limited only by our beliefs of what is possible. Maybe it is time to start
changing some beliefs.
Compassion? That is the short answer to the question: Why is soup good food?
|
As we help you or your loved ones please consider commensurate
.
|
|