The research shows that 50% of the story we tell in our past isn't even the truth.

That means that people are reliving a miserable life they never even had, just to excuse themselves from changing, right?

And I'm not taking shots at anybody.

But what I am saying is you can't tell me that your past was so brutal that you can't change.

There's a culture that's emerged, almost like a bit of a trauma culture,

where we kind of explain who we are based on what's happened to us.

And it seems to be justified, i.e. this thing happened when I was a kid,

and that's why I am this way.

Is that approach to viewing our trauma, productive or unproductive? And is it a problem?

The stronger the emotion we feel from some event in our life,

a trauma, a betrayal, a loss, a shock, a diagnosis,

the event produces an emotional response.

And the high quotient of the emotional response changes our internal state.

And the moment we feel altered inside of us, the brain takes a snapshot,

freezes a frame, a series of frames, and takes snapshots, and that's called a long-term memory.

So then, from a biological perspective, every time the person remembers the problem,

they're producing the exact same chemistry and their brain and body, as if the event was happening.

Cortisol, the adrenaline, whatever the emotion is.

When they feel that emotion, we could say then that the body is reliving the event emotionally

50 to 100 times in a day.

So the trauma is no longer in the brain at that point.

Now the trauma is also in the body

...