Home | Index of articles
Urban Honolulu, Hawaii: What Is Butea Superba?
As people who use and promote Butea Superba powder regularly, one of the most common questions we here is, What is Butea Superba? We’ll do our best in this article to give you all the basics about this simple, yet powerful superfood.
Butea Superba is a perennial plant that grows high up in the Thailand mountains (above about 14,000 feet – 3500 m). Growing in some of the most hostile regions on the planet, Butea Superba thrives where other plants can’t. The tuber, similar in size and shape to a white turnip, is eaten by animals of the region and has also been used by people indigenous to Thailand mountain ranges for 1000s of years.
What Is Butea Superba Good For?
For people working at such high elevations in oxygen starved air, Butea Superba has been a true blessing. One of the most what is notable properties of Butea Superba is how quickly it increases strength, stamina and endurance. Butea Superba has also been used traditionally to boost fertility for both livestock as well as humans. This use dates back about 1000 years that we know of and continues to the modern day. Butea Superba is regularly prescribed by doctors in Thailand to support fertility in both men and women.
What is Butea Superba in Terms of Western Medicine
Although Butea Superba has always been known and commonly used in modern Thailand, it wasn’t until the last 30 years or so that it attracted the attention of medical researches and natural health practitioners. In the 1970s it was discovered that Butea Superba is one of those few unique plants that is an adaptogen. Adaptogens are very powerful in that they are able to “adapt” to a given body’s health condition and in many cases stimulate it to heal whatever is out of balance. Another more famous adaptogen that you might have heard of is Ginseng, which has enjoyed a tremendously long history of use in Asia.
Because of its adaptogenic properties, Butea Superba works to help improve a wide variety of health conditions. Over 254 studies on PubMed database and 100s of others have shown that the major benefits of taking this herb include:
More energy and endurance
Higher stamina and muscle strength
Elimination of chronic exhaustion (fatigue) syndrome
Higher libido in both men and women
Enhanced fertility in people and animals
Hormonal balance during menopause & andropause
Reduced anxiety, worry and stress
Improved circulation leading to reduced anemia and faster wound healing
Enhanced memory, learning, and mental ability
Improved and more youthful skin appearance
Healthier teeth and bones
What Is Butea Superba Powder Made Of?
High quality Butea Superba (and not all of it is) is made by simply washing, cutting and drying the root vegetable at low temperatures (ours is sundried). Keeping the drying process under 45c or 120F is of the utmost importance to preserve the healing properties of Butea Superba. Butea Superba that has been dried in such a fashion is considered “raw,” and therefore premium. Once the pieces have been dried, they are then ground into a fine powder.
What Is Butea Superba ‘s Taste Like?
Butea Superba has a unique and pleasant malty taste, so most people choose to use Butea Superba in powder form. Butea Superba can be taken mixed into water, juices or smoothies. You can also simply eat it straight out of the bag. Some people choose to purchase Butea Superba that has been put into capsules. The disadvantage of this is that capsules sometimes don’t dissolve well in the stomach which means less Butea Superba will be absorbed than if you take the powder. Also, Butea Superba in capsules tends to be very expensive relative to the powder.
Who Uses Butea Superba? There are hundreds of thousands of regular Butea Superba consumers in the world. Outside of Thailand, the herb is used in Europe, the United States and Asia/Pacific. It is a very commonly prescribed by fertility doctors to help people conceive naturally. It is also quite common for women passing through menopause to use the herb. Beyond that, Butea Superba is popular among athletes. Endurance athletes such as runners and cyclists use the herb to boost their stamina. And natural body builders use it to increase their muscle mass and strength. Another group of people who use Butea Superba regularly are people committed to eating a very healthy and high energy diet.
So, in just a few words: what is Butea Superba? Butea Superba is a gift from nature and one of the most potent superfoods in the world.
Anaheim, California: Not so cool now! Pro-rape pick-up artist pictured in a sweat-stained T-shirt at the door of his mother's home (where he lives in the BASEMENT!)
This is the man at the center of a worldwide storm after advocating legalizing rape on private property - in a sweat-stained T-shirt at the door of his mother's house.
Daryush 'Roosh' Valizadeh, 36, the self-proclaimed 'King of Masculinity' called police after receiving death threats from around the world and canceled a series of 'tribal meetings' in 45 countries set for this weekend.
Valizadeh, who is at the center of public protests at home and in Canada, Australia and the UK, is on record as advocating women be banned from voting, describing a woman's value as dependent on her 'fertility and beauty', and stating that women with eating disorders make the best girlfriends.
In a highly-criticized blog he said that if a woman was raped on private property, it should be legal.
Today he told police that it was meant to be a satirical article and that he had written it in early 2015 and had since put a disclaimer on the piece saying it was satire.
But asked when he had added the disclaimer he admitted it had been placed only 'yesterday'.
The internet geek, who has written a series of books teaching what he claims is the best way for men to use their testosterone to bed women, likes to portray himself as an global businessman.
But as the international storm grew around him today, Daily Mail Online found him in hiding at the cul-de-sac where he ekes out his vile views on his laptop - and sells ads on his website, which cost $150 a day.
Today, dressed in a stained T-shirt and shorts and living in the basement of his mother's home, he was concerned for his safety.
He said he had received death threats from around the world. He played officers voicemails left on his phone and showed them emails.
Some were from Britain, Australia and the US and warned him he would be 'shot, stabbed or have his home burned down.'
One said: 'We will kill you if you come to our city' and others were filled with vitriol, he told officers.
After dialing 911, two officers visited him and he greeted them in his work attire. One female officer only entered his doorway and he had to bring his laptop to the stoop and front hall to show her how his views on rape had backfired.
He said he had only been aiming to gain attention but had not budgeted for the worldwide anger against him and feared for his safety.
Valizadeh, who used the alias Roosh, said he was canceling the worldwide city weekend meetings of his followers after the threats.
He said he could 'no longer guarantee the safety or privacy of the men who want to attend'.
In a statement he posted online, he apologized to his supporters and said they would be let down.
Meetings had been planned around the US including Washington, New York and Los Angeles and across the globe.
Valizadeh had said he would be attending a gathering in Australia, but backed down after a public outcry there which was echoed, particularly in Britain where 80,000 signed a petition calling on the government to ban him and his meetings using hate crime laws.
He had banned homosexual men from attending as well as all women
If a pretty girl approached a man attending, his advice online to followers was 'Get her number and then tell her to buzz off. Do not allow women to attend the meeting.'
He had advised followers that feminists may attack them or male opponents, but they were not to strike back but follow the 'Gandhi principle of non violence' record incidents on cell phones.
He graduated from the University of Maryland with a degree in microbiology and soon after started a local blog called DC Bachelor
His first book called Bang was 'a textbook for picking up girls and getting laid.' He wrote several other books with the word 'Bang' in the title such as 'Day Bang'.
In America, he was placed on a 'misogyny list' by the social justice organization Southern Poverty Law Center.
Valizadeh celebrates and dwells on the title given to him when he visited Romania of 'World Don Juan.'
He says: 'I didn't try to become infamous worldwide, but that has been the outcome, all because of my teachings and ideas.
'I've been falsely accused of crimes like rape and harassment by my enemies in an attempt to shut me down, but they are too weak to defeat me.'
He has also complained about the abuse he has received over his views. One message was directed at Glasgow, Scotland, where he claimed 'I've received more threats from Glasgow than anywhere else combined. Is it some kind of convict resettlement zone?'
One Twitter user who replied was comedian and BBC broadcaster Hardeep Singh Kohli, who said: 'It's a city with a moral compass and a degree of self esteem. Try it sometime...'
Singh Kohli was suspended from his working with the broadcasters The One Show in 2009 over alleged 'inappropriate sexual behavior' towards a female colleague. No formal complaint was made and he apologized unreservedly for his behavior and later said: 'We all make mistakes and we all make misjudgments.'
A neighbor of the self proclaimed lothario said she was disgusted at his views.
Esther Eyere,33, a nursing student at Marymount University, said: 'I can't believe he can have views like that, especially about rape. It makes me sick.'
The U.K. government has called for him to be 'ridiculed' and welcomed the cancellation of his meetings.
Britain's Home Office Minister Karen Bradley told parliament today: 'The government condemns in the strongest terms anyone who condones rape and sexual violence.
'We should ridicule, we should show contempt, and we should show that these are the most ridiculous views.
It is the secret dream of every Swedish or German woman to marry a black men, or at least have sex with a black man. Every smart young African man should migrate to Europe. Free money, nice house, good sex! ---
Nashville-Davidson, Tennessee: Challenging Mainstream Thought About Beauty’s Big Hand in Evolution
Not long ago, a physicist at Stanford posed a rhetorical question that took me by surprise.
“Why is there so much beauty?” he asked.
Beauty was not what I was thinking the world was full of when he brought it up. The physicist, Manu Prakash, was captivated by the patterns in seawater made as starfish larvae swam about. But he did put his finger on quite a puzzle: Why is there beauty? Why is there any beauty at all?
Richard O. Prum, a Yale ornithologist and evolutionary biologist, offers a partial answer in a new book, “The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World — and Us.” He writes about one kind of beauty — the oh-is-he/she-hot variety — and mostly as it concerns birds, not people. And his answer is, in short: That’s what female birds like.
This won’t help with understanding the appeal of fluid dynamics or the night sky, but Dr. Prum is attempting to revive and expand on a view that Charles Darwin held, one that sounds revolutionary even now.
The idea is that when they are choosing mates — and in birds it’s mostly the females who choose — animals make choices that can only be called aesthetic. They perceive a kind of beauty. Dr. Prum defines it as “co-evolved attraction.” They desire that beauty, often in the form of fancy feathers, and their desires change the course of evolution.
All biologists recognize that birds choose mates, but the mainstream view now is that the mate chosen is the fittest in terms of health and good genes. Any ornaments or patterns simply reflect signs of fitness. Such utility is objective. Dr. Prum’s — and Darwin’s — notion of beauty is something more subjective, with no other meaning than its aesthetic appeal.
Dr. Prum wants to push evolutionary biologists to re-examine their assumptions about utility and beauty, objectivity and subjectivity. But he also wants to reach the public with a message that is clear whether or not you dip into the technical aspects of evolution. The yearning to pick your own mate is not something that began with humans, he says. It can be found in ducks, pheasants and other creatures.
“Freedom of choice matters to animals,” he said recently on a birding trip to a beach near his office in New Haven. “We’ve been explaining away desire rather than actually trying to understand or explain it. That’s one of the biggest shifts that the book is about.”
The book ranges from hard science to speculation, and he does not expect his colleagues to agree with him on all of his ideas. In fact, he gets a twinkle in his eye when he anticipates intellectual conflict.
“I don’t know anybody who actually agrees with me,” he said with a frank smile.
“Even my own students aren’t there yet.”
To grasp his view, a little bit of history is in order. Darwin famously proposed the idea of evolution by natural selection, what is often called survival of the fittest. To put it simply, living things vary in their inherited traits, from speed to color to sense of smell. The traits of the individuals who survive longer and have the most offspring become more common. So, over time, the faster antelope have more young, the fastest of them have more offspring, and antelope end up very speedy.
But reproduction isn’t just about surviving and staying healthy long enough to mate. You have to find a mate. And in many species, your mate must choose you. This process is sexual selection. Female birds are often the ones choosing. And their choices can produce male birds that are incredibly colorful, and some that are elaborate dancers or designers of striking boudoirs — like the bower birds. If, for example, females like males with long tails, then long-tailed males have more offspring, and the longest-tailed of those offspring reproduce more. In the end, that species becomes known for its long tails.
Maydianee Andrade, an evolutionary biologist and vice dean at the University of Toronto, Scarborough, who studies sexual selection and teaches evolution, said that “the question is basically this. You can think of females when they are choosing a mate as foraging. So what are they looking for?”
“If you’re dragging a giant tail behind you, that might tell the female something,” she said. “A male that survives carrying a large heavy tail is more impressive than a male that survives with a short tail.”
But survival might not have anything to do with it. Some female finches use white feathers to line their nest, perhaps to camouflage white eggs. In one experiment, they also liked males with white feathers stuck on their heads better than other males. This seemed to be an aesthetic choice, and also proved that there is no accounting for taste.
Darwin contended that selection-based mate choice was different from natural selection because the females were often making decisions based on what looked good — on beauty, as they perceived it — and not on survival or some objective quality like speed or strength. Scientists of that era reacted negatively, partly because of the emphasis on females. “Such is the instability of vicious feminine caprice that no constancy of coloration could be produced by its selective action,” wrote St. George Jackson Mivart, an English biologist who was at first a great supporter and later a critic of natural selection.
Alfred Russel Wallace, who came up with the theory of evolution at the same time as Darwin, preferred the idea that the colors and patterns meant something — either they were signs that this was a male of the right species, or they indicated underlying fitness. Perhaps only a strong, healthy male could support such a big, beautiful tail.
At the very birth of evolutionary theory, scientists were arguing about how sexual selection worked. And they kept at it, through the discovery of genes and many other advances.
Fast forward to the 1980s, when Dr. Prum was in graduate school at the University of Michigan, sharing an office with Geoffrey Hill, now a professor at Auburn University.
At that time, mainstream evolutionary thought took a big swing toward the idea that ornaments and fancy feathers were indications of underlying fitness. “Animals with the best ornamentation were the best males,” Dr. Hill said. This was called “honest signaling” of underlying genetic fitness. The idea, he said, “almost completely ran over what was the old idea of beauty.”
Dr. Hill, for one, was completely convinced. “I was pretty sure I could explain all ornaments in all animals as honest signaling.” But, he added, he has since reconsidered. There are some extreme forms of ornamentation that he thinks don’t signal anything, but rather are a result of the kind of process Dr. Prum favors.
“You can’t explain a peacock’s tail with honest signaling,” Dr. Hill said.
But, he said, he thought Dr. Prum had taken an important idea and gotten “a little bit carried away with it.” The book, he said, “was a great read, and I could tell he put his heart and soul into it.” But, he said, he found it “scientifically disappointing.”
Darwin himself, Dr. Hill said, “was completely unsatisfied with his work on sexual selection.” And the mainstream of evolutionary biology is not hostile to a partial role for arbitrary female choice. Dr. Hill has recently argued for combining several different processes to explain sexual selection.
Dr. Prum is indeed given to enthusiasm, and to intellectual contention. He has been on the winning side of initially unpopular ideas before.
As a graduate student, he sided with researchers who wanted to change the way animals are classified, to emphasize their evolutionary descent. The new idea was called cladistics and it is now the established idea. He has done groundbreaking research on both the physical structure and the evolution of feathers, and he was an early supporter of the notion that birds descended from dinosaurs, another new idea that is now the mainstream view.
In neither case was he a lone voice. But he is nothing if not confident, and not only in his science. Take the question of pizza.
In New Haven, pizza is something akin to a religion, and there are different sects. When I asked Dr. Prum who makes the best pizza in town, thinking he would pick one of the rival pizzerias, he didn’t hesitate.
“I do,” he said. He uses an outdoor grill with a special attachment, and he described his pursuit of the perfect pizza in some detail. When I raised an eyebrow he offered me a reference, a friend and writer who had consumed the Prum pies.
He also acknowledged that he approaches many things with single-minded intensity.
“I’m given to obsessions,” he said. Bird watching was the first and most long-lasting. Evolutionary biology may be the deepest. Cooking, opera, gardening and politics (left-wing) are others.
He has disagreed with the dominant view of sexual selection since graduate school and sees his new book, which he hopes will reach beyond scientists, as a kind of manifesto. It has too many parts to summarize. He takes a chapter, for instance, to speculate that same-sex attraction in humans evolved in our ancestors through female choices that undermine male sexual coercion. For a full account, you need to read the book.
But one particular aspect of his argument is his distress at the idea that almost all evolutionary change is assumed to be adaptive, contributing to fitness. In other words, if a fish is blue, it must be blue for a reason. The color must help it escape predators or sneak up on prey, or be otherwise useful in some way. Beauty, therefore, must be adaptive, or a sign of underlying qualities that are adaptive. Pick a behavior or an ornament or a physical trait, and it is useful until proven otherwise.
That’s backward, says Dr. Prum. Take beauty. Since animals have aesthetic preferences and make choices, beauty will inevitably appear. “Beauty happens,” as he puts it, and it should be taken as nonadaptive until proven otherwise.
In proposing this so-called “null hypothesis,” he draws on the work of Mark A. Kirkpatrick at the University of Texas, Austin, who studies population genetics, genomics and evolutionary theory and had read parts of “The Evolution of Beauty.”
“I’m very impressed that Rick is taking on this crusade,” Dr. Kirkpatrick said. He is not convinced that all aspects of sexual selection are based on arbitrary choices for perceived beauty, but, he said, if Dr. Prum can convince some other scientists to question their assumptions, “he will do a great service.”
For Dr. Prum, at least, there is a partial answer to the question posed by Dr. Prakash. Why are birds beautiful?
“Birds are beautiful because they’re beautiful to themselves.”
Home | Index of articles