Uncorrected Scribe v2 machine transcript. Neutral speaker labels are specific to this recording. Review flags: 0.
TXT · SRT · VTT · Untouched JSON · Review flags
Source: reality/010-bonus-food-and-frequency.mp3
SHA-256: 9026fe3f9a193d986d0ee92e7c61ffd140b71ea0e0d2c97afcaa1d49d7d8c60c
00:00:00.560 Speaker 1 Hello. This is Stephen Schrembeck, and I am recording the last bonus episode here.
00:00:06.280 Speaker 1 This one's titled Food and Frequency. This is a lecture-like experience that I got
00:00:10.720 Speaker 1 on the morning of May 3rd, 2026. And this came amidst a long series of
00:00:16.680 Speaker 1 serious and profound experiences. So this was a very welcome [chuckles] and very
00:00:21.840 Speaker 1 surprising, uh, experience. I haven't had very many lecture experiences, but this
00:00:26.520 Speaker 1 one was extremely high-quality telepathy, meaning it was obvious that I was talking
00:00:32.460 Speaker 1 to somebody else, and what they were saying was very clear. It starts as a dream,
00:00:37.000 Speaker 1 and I thought that the information in here was something I'd never heard before.
00:00:40.340 Speaker 1 It's very practical in nature, and it's kind of fun. So enjoy. Now, I'm gonna be
00:00:45.300 Speaker 1 reading from a journal for some of this, and I'll interject my own thoughts. My own
00:00:49.120 Speaker 1 handwriting's pretty hard to read, so if I'm stumbling through it, well, that's why.
00:00:54.060 Speaker 1 All right, here we go.
00:00:56.260 Speaker 1 I was a bodiless observer in a dream about a cooking show. Chefs had prepared one
00:01:01.420 Speaker 1 dish after another for a panel of judges. As it would turn out, the chefs, judges,
00:01:06.660 Speaker 1 and I were all actually students of a sort on this set, as it was a
00:01:12.400 Speaker 1 classroom in disguise. A man presents a dish with some fish and leafy
00:01:18.300 Speaker 1 vegetables. One taster expresses satisfaction with the contrast between the fish and
00:01:23.360 Speaker 1 the vegetables. And then a Michael Pollan-like figure interjects. He has-- He's
00:01:29.360 Speaker 1 bald with liver spots, and he starts to explain why the contrast is satisfying.
00:01:35.340 Speaker 1 "Look at how different the environments of the ingredients are." Meaning the fish
00:01:39.700 Speaker 1 and the leafy greens came from very different environments. That's why it's, the
00:01:43.800 Speaker 1 contrast is satisfying. Another taster, this is the judge on the panel, says
00:01:49.180 Speaker 1 something about the greens. And then, again, this figure interjects and says, "Your
00:01:53.820 Speaker 1 brain is desensitizing to the greens." Meaning, to explain why they didn't like it.
00:01:59.140 Speaker 1 So I'm in a dream, right? This is, this is just happening. It's in a dream.
00:02:04.580 Speaker 1 Another, uh, judge comments about something else on the plate. They make a comment
00:02:09.259 Speaker 1 about gluten. And then, again, the Michael Pollan-like figure [chuckles] interjects.
00:02:13.400 Speaker 1 He's like the host, you know. He's, like, talking to the audience. He's talking to
00:02:15.680 Speaker 1 the whole room, right? Every time somebody will present a dish, they're, like,
00:02:18.580 Speaker 1 tasting something, the judge says something, and then this guy starts to come in
00:02:21.600 Speaker 1 with, like, "Oh, I'm gonna layer some commentary over the top to explain some
00:02:25.380 Speaker 1 things." So they say, "You need to see beyond gluten-free. It is not that simple."
00:02:30.900 Speaker 1 And with a flourish, the dream takes a turn and seems to become much more
00:02:34.360 Speaker 1 instructive. Uh, so they basically look right at the camera, and
00:02:38.980 Speaker 1 [laughs] uh, they're, now they're talking. So while this--
00:02:44.920 Speaker 1 Here's the exact quote.
00:02:47.480 Speaker 1 And I am seeing, like, intuitive, like, conceptual, visual, like, literally, like,
00:02:53.260 Speaker 1 watching some grains grow from a seed in the field, and they're being, like,
00:02:57.660 Speaker 1 harvested or, like, milled or whatever. They're going through a distribution
00:03:01.120 Speaker 1 facility, prepared in a kitchen. I see this whole, like, life cycle while this guy
00:03:04.720 Speaker 1 is talking this next quote. Right. So it comes with a, a slideshow, [laughs] a very
00:03:10.060 Speaker 1 fancy one. Here's the quote. "The food is trying to give you its entire experience
00:03:17.160 Speaker 1 at every step of its own experience." So that's what he says while, while
00:03:23.120 Speaker 1 I'm watching this grain grow. I'm like, "Okay." Uh, sorry. Here's the quote. Back to
00:03:28.160 Speaker 1 the journal. Now I'm both curious and waking up. I'm becoming lucid. This person,
00:03:33.600 Speaker 1 uh, so I-- they introduce themself as Nom, and I quote, "Because it is thematically
00:03:39.100 Speaker 1 appropriate, and they require a name." I love it so much. The names are clearly made
00:03:44.480 Speaker 1 up, but I thought it was a beautiful choice for a name. And they offer to dispense
00:03:49.380 Speaker 1 with the illusion of a dream and speak to me directly. I agree. Right. So the whole
00:03:53.580 Speaker 1 dream fades now. I'm lucid, and I'm entering, like, a liminal state. Like, I'm
00:03:58.080 Speaker 1 starting to wake up. I'm not really dreaming anymore. We're just talking.
00:04:04.060 Speaker 1 And I have questions, you see. Uh, I am amused and amazed to be given a lesson on
00:04:08.020 Speaker 1 food, health, and frequency. Uh, so it's part metaphysics and, uh, part cooking
00:04:13.360 Speaker 1 lesson. Uh, so it's very practical. Um, so that's cool. All right, so I o-
00:04:19.459 Speaker 1 I ask this question right off the bat. I'm like, "Oh, hold on a second. I can tell
00:04:22.200 Speaker 1 that this is a lesson. [laughs] I got some questions for you because you just said
00:04:26.320 Speaker 1 some crazy stuff to me. So, uh, let me, let me get this straight." "So the quality
00:04:31.960 Speaker 1 of its experience determines its health value?" I'm skeptical. Here's the response.
00:04:37.400 Speaker 1 "That affects the frequency, which determines its health value or detriment."
00:04:43.560 Speaker 1 All right. So he goes on to explain that a batch of Oreos could be made with love,
00:04:48.320 Speaker 1 and that you can tell the difference when something is made with love, and that
00:04:53.400 Speaker 1 there are three different ways to determine, like, the frequency of a food as it
00:04:58.560 Speaker 1 relates to its health value for you. And you can do it before, during, or after
00:05:02.520 Speaker 1 eating something. So you can sense, uh, whether something is good for
00:05:08.420 Speaker 1 you before, during, or after eating it. So the easiest time is after you eating it,
00:05:13.540 Speaker 1 after you've eaten it. It's literally just how it makes you feel. That should be
00:05:16.340 Speaker 1 pretty obvious, right? I think everyone knows this one, like, "Ugh, I don't feel
00:05:19.740 Speaker 1 good after eating that." That's the easiest. So these are each skills, and there is
00:05:23.760 Speaker 1 a level of awareness involved, and there's some practice. Uh, but you can train
00:05:27.700 Speaker 1 yourself, and then during eating it, you can notice, "Ooh." That one's a little
00:05:31.600 Speaker 1 easier. And then the hardest, generally, is knowing whether food is healthy before
00:05:36.040 Speaker 1 you've eaten it. You can just sense it.
00:05:39.940 Speaker 1 Okay. Um, so they go on to say that every ingredient in the dish involved, the
00:05:45.240 Speaker 1 equipment, everything connected to each part matters separately. Everything
00:05:50.960 Speaker 1 is connected. So literally everything involved in the preparation of this dish
00:05:54.960 Speaker 1 affects its final frequency. Whether it was made on a stove that was well-loved or
00:05:59.240 Speaker 1 made on a stove that's a piece of crap that somebody yelled at it every day because
00:06:03.220 Speaker 1 it never worked correctly. That makes a difference. It's literally all involved in
00:06:06.860 Speaker 1 it. All right. So this guy's blowing my mind at this point. I'm in a lesson, but I
00:06:10.720 Speaker 1 don't even care. Like, I'm less wowed at this point than [chuckles] receiving a
00:06:14.800 Speaker 1 telepathic lesson from a stranger. I'm mostly interested in, like, I've never heard
00:06:18.720 Speaker 1 this stuff before. What are you talking about? Like, what makes food healthy or not?
00:06:22.260 Speaker 1 Let's talk.
00:06:24.380 Speaker 1 Okay. So naturally, I'm gonna poke some holes in this.
00:06:28.556 Speaker 1 All right, so here's my next question, question number two. But I could lovingly
00:06:32.476 Speaker 1 make a batch of arsenic and feed it to someone, and it would still kill them. So I
00:06:36.616 Speaker 1 wanna know, like, okay, so you're saying that if you l- if the arsenic has a great
00:06:41.376 Speaker 1 experience while it's being made, and I give it to somebody, it's still gonna kill
00:06:45.316 Speaker 1 them. It's still obviously not good for them. Here's the answer. Frequency is
00:06:50.296 Speaker 1 contextual. This is the context of eating.
00:06:55.736 Speaker 1 Meaning, in some other context, like cleaning, it could, could be considered very
00:06:59.336 Speaker 1 high frequency.
00:07:02.416 Speaker 1 All right, so we have, like, a little, like, conceptual back and forth without
00:07:05.416 Speaker 1 words. Um, so that's the answer. I thought it was interesting, and I'm sort of
00:07:10.856 Speaker 1 poking more holes in this. It's... I'm translating to words here. So there's the
00:07:16.216 Speaker 1 context of having a body, and food that interferes with the bodily's, the body--
00:07:20.816 Speaker 1 with bodily functions is not high frequency in that context. And then he also points
00:07:25.776 Speaker 1 out that, as an example, uh, with Wim Hof, there are no fundamental limits, however,
00:07:32.396 Speaker 1 but there are practical ones. So specifically, Wim Hof, like, has injected pathogens
00:07:37.736 Speaker 1 into him to suppress the immune reaction and prevent them from, like, damaging him
00:07:41.856 Speaker 1 or hurting him. And he points at Wim Hof as an example of, you know, even poisons
00:07:46.216 Speaker 1 can be neutralized if you're skilled enough. But generally speaking, practically
00:07:51.196 Speaker 1 speaking, if you're eating poison, it's gonna hurt you. It doesn't matter how much
00:07:54.356 Speaker 1 you love the process [chuckles] or how much, how lovingly it was made. So you can
00:07:58.176 Speaker 1 think of this as a modifier, right? If you're taking something that's just
00:08:02.676 Speaker 1 physically, biologically awful for you, you're gonna have a real hard time moving
00:08:06.956 Speaker 1 the needle with love. Doesn't mean it can't be done. There are no fundamental
00:08:10.276 Speaker 1 limits. But there are practical ones. I thought that was a fascinating answer. So
00:08:15.536 Speaker 1 then I asked my next question. Is frequency not universal then? And I get
00:08:21.396 Speaker 1 yes and no simultaneously, at the same exact time. Like, the words, like they,
00:08:27.316 Speaker 1 like you say them over the top of each other, yes, no, at the same time. I've gotten
00:08:31.836 Speaker 1 this before in telepathy, and it's hilarious. Like, I always love this answer. It's
00:08:35.936 Speaker 1 like a, a yes, but, dot, dot, dot. [chuckles] All right. So I wanted to know, you--
00:08:42.616 Speaker 1 basically, this idea of something having a frequency is always out there. You know,
00:08:47.256 Speaker 1 people treat it as a good/bad spectrum. This is not exactly correct, but if you were
00:08:51.696 Speaker 1 to oversimplify it, that would be one way of looking for it. So I wanna know about
00:08:55.356 Speaker 1 this term. I'm asking is it... Okay, so is something, can something be universally
00:08:59.636 Speaker 1 high or low frequency? And they answer yes, no at the same time. And they say, this
00:09:04.976 Speaker 1 is a quote, "It is always contextual." And then they, they point to a story where I
00:09:10.976 Speaker 1 hit my sister before. Okay. Here's the quote. "You hit your sister, yet you love
00:09:17.036 Speaker 1 your sister." [chuckles] And I respond with, "Gee, thanks for this very personal
00:09:20.716 Speaker 1 example." And they just smile at me. [chuckles] And here's the next. But are you
00:09:26.596 Speaker 1 high frequency? And I answer, after a little hesitation, "Yes." And then they nod
00:09:32.016 Speaker 1 yes. [chuckles] And then I say, "No," and then yes. But yes overall?
00:09:39.776 Speaker 1 And then I ask, "So is frequency like benevolence?" Here's the exact quote.
00:09:46.856 Speaker 1 "In the simplest terms, yes. But it is not only that. Relevant to the
00:09:52.356 Speaker 1 context," and it's said with a very knowing smile, "of this conversation, that is
00:09:58.356 Speaker 1 true." But they're not willing to, to give a universal absolute answer. But they
00:10:03.476 Speaker 1 just say that, yes, relevant to the context of this food and frequency conversation,
00:10:08.036 Speaker 1 yes, you can consider frequency like a scale of benevolence, but it is not that
00:10:12.576 Speaker 1 simple. And then they go on to say, "It's whether it is good within
00:10:18.596 Speaker 1 that context." That is what frequency is. Within a specific context, is it good?
00:10:24.776 Speaker 1 That is high frequency. That's it. There you go. There's a definition for the term.
00:10:29.656 Speaker 1 I like that one 'cause I'd never heard that one before. It fits.
00:10:35.316 Speaker 1 And then I'm given an intuitive, completely intuitive understanding that a universal
00:10:40.456 Speaker 1 frequency is simply the frequency at every context. So this is, like, from every
00:10:45.216 Speaker 1 perspective. And you could use that as a measure, as one way to measure,
00:10:51.496 Speaker 1 uh, the net good
00:10:54.256 Speaker 1 of one... Oh, my gosh, cat. [chuckles] Sorry, cat in my lap.
00:11:01.016 Speaker 1 You could use that as a measure of one way of determining the net good to the
00:11:06.656 Speaker 1 entire system. So when we say high frequency, we generally mean the overall
00:11:10.896 Speaker 1 universal set of contexts. This is a shorthand. So if you don't supply a context,
00:11:15.576 Speaker 1 it's understood that you mean, is this good for everybody and everything? Then you
00:11:20.256 Speaker 1 could say that would be the universal measure of frequency. I thought that this was
00:11:24.496 Speaker 1 really cool. That makes kinda sense. That makes sense to me. But that's one way of
00:11:29.236 Speaker 1 doing it, right? The net good. But of course, you could be plus 100 to somebody and
00:11:34.016 Speaker 1 minus 50 to another, and the person who got minus 50 might not see it as a net good,
00:11:38.836 Speaker 1 even though it was.
00:11:44.496 Speaker 1 Okay. Then there was a discussion about whether one could make food healthy. You
00:11:49.436 Speaker 1 know, wasn't unhealthy, or wasn't healthy, and then you made it healthy. Or it was
00:11:53.676 Speaker 1 less healthy, and you made it more healthy. Nam told me to look up for my answer. I,
00:11:59.176 Speaker 1 so I was a little confused by that. And then I took this to mean, like, blessing the
00:12:03.436 Speaker 1 food to directly affect its frequency. Yes, was the answer. Again, there are limits.
00:12:09.356 Speaker 1 It helps. Uh, and then [chuckles] I was given, like, the intuitive hint, important,
00:12:14.776 Speaker 1 do not harm others by misleading them into believing, basically, that you can turn
00:12:18.976 Speaker 1 something bad for you into something good for you. Practically speaking, that's not
00:12:23.316 Speaker 1 so easy to do. It's a, don't think that you can just eat complete trash and, because
00:12:27.656 Speaker 1 you, you said, "Oh, this is healthy for me now," it is. It's not that simple. You
00:12:31.516 Speaker 1 could get to that level. All right, so then I say to- Praying over your food,
00:12:35.880 Speaker 1 therefore, is not completely useless. And their response, direct quote, "Not at
00:12:40.460 Speaker 1 all," and a smile. [laughs] Then I ask another question. Said, "Does feeling
00:12:46.380 Speaker 1 guilty change the food's health value?"
00:12:50.120 Speaker 1 Quote, "In a sense, but by a different mechanism." And I got the sense that this was
00:12:54.880 Speaker 1 a different lesson, but it was related to this. And I quote, "Suffice to say, you
00:13:00.300 Speaker 1 are affecting, affecting yourself more than the food in this case. So you're
00:13:05.320 Speaker 1 directly affecting your own body and its ability to digest fully this food, possibly
00:13:10.920 Speaker 1 among other changes."
00:13:14.180 Speaker 1 So at this point, I pause. Um, so I'd been going through this whole notes and
00:13:21.020 Speaker 1 making sure I understood the things that I'd said, and I got the quote, "You
00:13:24.640 Speaker 1 understand," followed by a sort of confident feeling, a simple assertion. So it
00:13:29.480 Speaker 1 stopped sort of fussing over getting the exact words right. You get it. [laughs]
00:13:33.960 Speaker 1 Time to move on. You get it. You get the idea. Let's go. And I said, "Thank you for
00:13:37.860 Speaker 1 the lesson," and that I would pass it on. So here I am, keeping a promise.
00:13:44.720 Speaker 1 Uh, and then they said, "I know." And then there's a knowing and warm smile.
00:13:50.180 Speaker 1 "Thanks for your work." And I said, "Same. Bye."
00:13:54.760 Speaker 1 [laughs] And there's one more interaction. I wrote down,
00:13:59.900 Speaker 1 [laughs] "This conversation requires cookies," and then I ate two of them.
00:14:06.100 Speaker 1 And Nom replies, "They were gluten-free. How do you feel?" And I wrote, I wrote down
00:14:11.740 Speaker 1 the word, "Eh." [laughs] And there is a knowing smile, followed by the
00:14:17.260 Speaker 1 indication to, "Well, maybe you should pay attention to that." And this was clearly
00:14:22.800 Speaker 1 a joke. I didn't even realize they were still paying attention, I'm sure.
00:14:26.460 Speaker 1 [laughs] "Yeah, you ate those cookies. How do you feel? Oh, they're gluten-free.
00:14:32.100 Speaker 1 Hmm, and you don't feel good. That's interesting. Guess there's more to it." Um, and
00:14:36.660 Speaker 1 that was it. That was the end of the entire interaction. And I thought that was so
00:14:41.380 Speaker 1 fun. Those are some pretty weird ideas. I'd never heard those before. I definitely
00:14:46.540 Speaker 1 never thought about a food being healthy as to based on how its experience was. What
00:14:52.220 Speaker 1 was the quality of its own experience, and that it's giving you that quality
00:14:56.220 Speaker 1 directly. It's imparting that on you. Uh, so if it was grown with love and, uh,
00:15:01.460 Speaker 1 tender care and, like, it was well cared for. I mean, a lot of these things directly
00:15:06.160 Speaker 1 correlate with more obvious facts, like if a factory farmed animal was very sick and
00:15:12.220 Speaker 1 tortured and stressed out, chances are that food is not very healthy for you. Same
00:15:17.400 Speaker 1 with, you know, a whole bunch of, like, uh, food that has been processed or sat
00:15:22.400 Speaker 1 around stale. And I never considered that a lot of the reason it might be unhealthy
00:15:26.200 Speaker 1 is not because it was old or because of pesticides or because of runoff or whatever
00:15:31.320 Speaker 1 was happening, pollution,
00:15:33.860 Speaker 1 uh, or because of contaminants, but because its own experience was bad and all the
00:15:39.180 Speaker 1 things it was connected to had a bad experience. And if you follow that thread, it
00:15:42.740 Speaker 1 is interesting. It's still saying the same thing. It includes a model of, well,
00:15:48.040 Speaker 1 [laughs] you know, it was infected with this fungi, and so that's not good for you.
00:15:53.940 Speaker 1 Well, that could still be true, but it was also not good for you because this grain
00:15:59.440 Speaker 1 didn't have a great experience because it was infected with fungi. I thought that
00:16:03.280 Speaker 1 that was very fascinating, and it opens up the avenues of being able to affect the
00:16:07.940 Speaker 1 quality of your food and thus your health value in other ways. I think everyone can
00:16:12.640 Speaker 1 attest that for some reason, the same meal made at a restaurant is often less
00:16:18.000 Speaker 1 satisfying and it feels less healthy than a home-cooked meal. You can make pretty
00:16:22.840 Speaker 1 crappy food that is made at love with, you know, at home, with love at home, uh, and
00:16:28.380 Speaker 1 then served, you know, with care. And for some reason, that does seem to make a big
00:16:33.020 Speaker 1 difference, and I think that this model helps to explain why that might be. I
00:16:36.880 Speaker 1 thought they were very cool ideas, and I'd never heard frequency described in this,
00:16:41.620 Speaker 1 uh, [laughs] in this way before, and that it's all contextual. And I thought that
00:16:47.400 Speaker 1 was fascinating too. So I hope that you found this interesting. Thank you all very
00:16:52.840 Speaker 1 much for listening. This is the very last surprise episode.
00:16:58.540 Speaker 1 See you around.