Top five essential oils for stress relief

Top five essential oils for stress relief and how to properly use them

(NaturalNews) When used properly, the power of essential oils lies in their ability to deliver the beneficial healing properties of certain plants in a direct and highly concentrated form. Recognized long ago for their therapeutic properties, ancient Egyptians made essential oils by first soaking the flowers, leaves, twigs or bark in oil and then using linen as a filter to isolate the oil.



The healing applications of essential oils are many, from antibacterial defense to pain relief and emotional therapy, depending on the type of oil. From a scientific perspective, oils are effective because 50 million smell receptors inside the nasal cavity connect to the brain's Limbic System - an area responsible for emotions, memory and sexual arousal. From a human perspective, they simply smell nice and make us feel better.

Whether improving mood or overall health, a winning strategy begins with stress reduction. And for the physical body that interprets stress as pain, these five essential oils know just where it hurts:

Lavender

Easily the most popular of all essential oils, lavender is known as the "universal oil." With its calming, earthy, lightly sweet and freshly floral scent, it is widely beloved for its relaxing and balancing effects on both the physical and emotional bodies. It may also be used as a pain reliever for muscles and joints, or as an antiseptic on minor cuts, burns, bug bites and stings.

Frankincense

With its comforting warm, exotic aroma, Frankincense's most common use is stress relief; however, it may also be applied topically to the skin to rejuvenate cells and repair scar tissue, or used to calm certain respiratory conditions such as asthma, coughing and bronchitis.

Rose

Another highly versatile essential oil, this one may be even more costly than most, due to its labor-intensive extraction process, which requires 60,000 roses for every one ounce of rose oil. In addition to providing relief from both stress and depression, the many uses of rose oil include the treatment of eczema and menopausal symptoms.

Chamomile

Though both the Roman and German types of chamomile essential oils are well suited for calming the nerves and supporting digestive health, there are some important differences between the two. Where the Roman variety is superior in addressing mental anxiety, paranoia and hostility, the German variety excels more in the treatment of irritated skin.

Vanilla

If the pure scent of warm vanilla makes you feel right at home, some aromatherapists say it is because vanilla is the closest in fragrance and flavor to mothers' milk. With the ability to both soothe in tranquil relaxation and stimulate mental clarity, this rich aroma can vary in its therapeutic effects. Vanilla essential oil has also proven effective in relieving upset stomachs and reducing cravings for sweets.

Use essential oils appropriately and with caution

The most appropriate applications of essential oils will vary, depending on which of the additional therapeutic benefits you're looking to harness. Because they are extremely potent in their pure form, essential oils should always be blended with a carrier oil, like almond or jojoba oil, before use. They may then be applied directly onto the skin, as with a massage, or onto a warm compress, handkerchief or pillow. A few drops may also be burned in a diffuser or added to bath salts for a skin-softening, muscle-relaxing bath experience. Some find that applying a small amount to the soles of the feet or to the back of the neck is also quite effective.

As always, be sure to do your own homework on the type of oil you're using, as some may react negatively with sun exposure, certain medications, medical conditions or pregnancy. Remember that 100 percent pure, organic essential oils are made from plant materials and are therefore quite different from cheaper, artificial fragrance oils. Though they may have a pleasant aroma, fragrance oils often contain synthetic chemicals, and rather than helping to heal you, breathing in those synthetic chemicals may actually harm you. And that wouldn't be very aromatherapeutic, now would it?

Sources for this article include:

http://spryliving.com/articles/essential-oils-how-to-use/

http://www.mindbodygreen.com

http://www.floracopeia.com

http://oxford-consultants.tripod.com/OilsInformation.htm

http://www.quinessence.com/methods_of_use.htm

http://www.naturalnews.com/032379_essential_oils_sources.html

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040462_essential_oils_stress_relief_Frankincense.html#ixzz2UBPWoJ91

Science vs. Humanity

Science will destroy humanity, says team of scientists

(NaturalNews) One of the primary goals of science is to advance knowledge and understanding to improve the human condition, but all too often this noble field of study has devolved into a profit-seeking quest for power, at the expense of mankind.



Indeed, the science of technology is perhaps the worst culprit, a team of mathematicians, philosophers and scientists at Oxford University's Future of Humanity Institute is warning.

The team, in a forthcoming paper titled, Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority, says humankind's over-reliance on technology could lead to its demise, and that human beings are facing a risk to our own existence.

What's more, the team says humankind's demise is not far off; it could come as soon as the next century.

'Threats we have no track record of surviving...

"There is a great race on between humanity's technological powers and our wisdom to use those powers well," institute director Nick Bostrom told MSN. "I'm worried that the former will pull too far ahead."

Since our existence on this planet there have been those who have predicted the end of world as we know it, the latest "fad" in this realm being the hoopla surrounding the now-disproven 2012 Mayan prophesies. Still, folks can't seem to let go of the notion that, at some point in our future, life on Earth will cease to exist.

From Bostrom's paper:

Humanity has survived what we might call natural existential risks for hundreds of thousands of years; thus it is prima facie unlikely that any of them will do us in within the next hundred. This conclusion is buttressed when we analyze specific risks from nature, such as asteroid impacts, supervolcanic eruptions, earthquakes, gamma-ray bursts, and so forth: Empirical impact distributions and scientific models suggest that the likelihood of extinction because of these kinds of risk is extremely small on a time scale of a century or so.

In contrast, our species is introducing entirely new kinds of existential risk - threats we have no track record of surviving. Our longevity as a species therefore offers no strong prior grounds for confident optimism. Consideration of specific existential - risk scenarios bears out the suspicion that the great bulk of existential risk in the foreseeable future consists of anthropogenic existential risks - that is, those arising from human activity.

Continuing, Bostrom predicts that future technological breakthroughs "may radically expand our ability to manipulate the external world or our own biology."

"As our powers expand, so will the scale of their potential consequences - intended and unintended, positive and negative."

Bostrom goes onto say that well-known threats like an asteroid strike on the planet, supervolcanic eruptions and earthquakes likely won't threaten humanity in the near future. Even a nuclear explosion won't completely wipe out life; in that event, he says, enough people would survive to rebuild.

Rather, it is the unknowns that will wind up as a bane on the existence of humankind.

Science has an obligation to serve mankind

Not all of the news is bad, Bostrom says.

"The Earth will remain habitable for at least another billion years. Civilization began only a few thousand years ago. If we do not destroy mankind, these few thousand years may be only a tiny fraction of the whole of civilized human history," he writes.

Mike Adams, The Health Ranger, notes in an Infographic posted here at NaturalNews that the onus for protecting humanity falls on those who are creating the technology.

"If an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, the burden of proof that it is NOT harmful falls on those taking the action," the graphic says.

Check out the rest of the graphic here.

Sources for this article include:

http://news.yahoo.com

http://news.msn.com

http://www.latimes.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040280_end_of_humanity_science_extinction.html#ixzz2THQBDGmx