The Fuel Required by Giant and a Human Being

 

This article is dedicated to  Captain Lim Khoy Hing, a retired Senior Pilot with MAS flying the AirAsia Airbus A320, AirAsia X A330/A340 and the Boeing 777 with Malaysia Airline. 

Captain Lim is an old friend of mine of many years, and I told  him  actually  I 

wanted to be a either a pilot, an astronomer, a physicist or a mathematician, but not  a doctor or a biological and a medical research  scientist.  

Here I am writing my thoughts not as a pilot for which I am not, but as a nutritionist since both  an aircraft and the human body require fuel to function   

“Fueling Giants and Fueling Humans: A Tale of Power, Energy, and the Flight of a Boeing 737” like the Tales of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. 

An Essay on Jet Engines, Human Metabolism, and the Shared Language of Energy

Since the dawn of aviation, few machines have left a deeper imprint on global travel than the Boeing 737. First introduced in the late 1960s, this narrow-body, twin-engine jet soon became the best-selling commercial aircraft in history. Today, it remains the workhorse of airlines across continents, taking millions of travelers to their destinations every day.

But behind its familiar silhouette lies a story of power, physics, and energy, one that intriguingly mirrors the way the human body itself uses fuel.

The Boeing 737: A Compact Giant of the Skies

Modern variants such as the Boeing 737-800 and 737 MAX 8 operate at a Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) of:

≈ 79,000 kg for the 737-800

≈ 82,600 kg for the 737 MAX 8

Each engine of a 737-800,  typically a CFM56-7B,  can produce up to 27,300 pounds of thrust, though everyday takeoffs often use lower thrust settings to prolong engine life. The MAX 8 engines push even further, delivering a combined thrust approaching 249 kN (≈ 56,000 lbf).

In terms of raw power, the two engines together develop the equivalent of 15–20 megawatts (MW) during takeoff — roughly 20,000 to 27,000 horsepower. This is the muscle needed to lift an 80-tonne machine into the sky.

Jet Fuel: The “Food” That Powers an Aircraft

Just as the human body thrives on carbohydrates, fats, and proteins, jet engines depend on their own form of food: kerosene-based aviation fuel.

Jet A vs Jet A-1

Jet A - used primarily in the United States

Jet A-1 - used globally due to its lower freezing point (–47°C vs –40°C)

For most Boeing 737s, Jet A-1 is the predominant fuel

Energy Content of Aviation Fuel

Aviation kerosene contains approximately:

43.1 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg)

≈ 12 kWh per kg

This extremely high energy density is what allows a relatively small mass of fuel to produce enormous power.

To illustrate:

580 kg of jet fuel = ~25 gigajoules of energy
(580 kg × 43.1 MJ/kg = 24.998 GJ)

That is the same amount of energy a typical Malaysian home might consume in eight months.

How Much Energy Does Takeoff Really Require?

The power of a jet engine is usually described by thrust, but converting thrust to energy reveals the scale of what happens during takeoff.

During the takeoff and initial climb to 10,000 feet (3,048 metres),  a process lasting several minutes, a Boeing 737-800 typically uses about:

≈ 580 kg of fuel ≈ 6,960 kWh (≈ 25 GJ) of energy

This includes the takeoff roll (usually less than 1 minute), the climb to 10,000 ft (often 11–20 minutes)

Importantly, only a small fraction of the 580 kg is consumed on the runway itself. Most of it is burned during the sustained high-power climb.

In broader flight operations, industry sources estimate:

≈ 2,300 kg of fuel (about 700 gallons) is used from takeoff to the first 3,000 ft of altitude across an average flight profile.

At full takeoff thrust, each engine may burn 2,200–2,700 kg of fuel per hour.

Environmental factors such as temperature, runway length, headwinds, and aircraft weight also significantly influence fuel burn.

Energy and Humans: A Comparison We Rarely Make

As a nutritionist, let me extend the analogy between aircraft fuel and human food energy; indeed, they share the same fundamental unit: the joule.

The daily energy requirement of an average adult human is remarkably small when placed beside the energy appetite of a jet engine.

Daily Human Energy Needs

Humans typically require:

0.150–0.250 MJ per kilogram of body weight per day. For example:

A 70-kg moderately active man requires
≈ 11.7 MJ/day (0.167 MJ/kg/day)

A 55-kg moderately active woman requires
≈ 10.1 MJ/day (0.183 MJ/kg/day)

These numbers depend on:

Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR), namely, the energy needed at complete rest.

Physical Activity Level (PAL) from 1.4 (sedentary) to >2.4 (very active)

In contrast, a Boeing 737 consumes 25,000 MJ just to climb to 10,000 feet — the equivalent of the entire daily caloric needs of 2,137 adult men in a single ascent.

The Shared Language of Life and Machines

Despite their differences, the human body and a jet airliner obey the same universal physics:

Both convert chemical potential energy into motion. Both operate within limits of efficiency. Both require specialized fuel. And both must balance power output with structural and thermal constraints.

What differs is scale. A human body may burn the caloric energy of a banana to climb a flight of stairs; a Boeing 737 burns nearly half a tonne of kerosene to climb into the sky.

Yet the underlying principle remains beautifully the same:
Energy becomes lift, motion, and life.

Conclusion:

Understanding the fuel needs of 

a Boeing 737 opens a window into the 

astonishing power of modern 

engineering. And comparing this with 

human metabolic needs reveals a poetic 

symmetry  from the beating heart to

the  roaring turbofan, the laws of

energy  bind us all.

The Law of Parity in Physics

The Law of Symmetry in Physics

 

by: lim ju boo (lin ru wu)  

Recently, the world lost one of the most important scientific personality - James Dewey Watson (April 6, 1928 – November 6, 2025) an American molecular biologist, geneticist, and zoologist who died at the age of 97. 

In 1962, Watson, Crick, and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids -deoxyribonucleic (DNA) and its significance for information transfer in living material. 

I have written quite a lot of articles here on molecular biology, DNA and also its applications in medicine, forensic science, agriculture among others, and I shall not repeat them here.  

In this year (2025) alone, we also lost another Nobel Prize winners - Yang Chen-Ning who won the Nobel Prize in physics in 1957, 

I shall today write an article on physics instead concerning Yang Chen-Ning. 

I received this piece of news on the demise of China's first Nobel laureate, Yang Chen-Ning

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202510/18/WS68f3170ea310f735438b5bf2.html

I heard about this first Chinese scientist who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1957 from my classmate when I was only in Form 4 in school, and naturally, I could not understand  what this theory of parity was all about till I studied physics and mathematics in a university years  later.

Friends and former colleagues of mine who are medical doctors have not much clue in physics or chemistry are also now asking me what is this theory of parity all about?

The theory of parity non-conservation is the principle that some subatomic particle interactions, specifically the weak nuclear force, are not mirrored in a mirror image. "Parity" is the physics concept of mirror symmetry, and before the work of Yang and Lee, it was believed that all physical laws were symmetric, meaning a process and its mirror reflection should behave identically. Yang and Lee proved this wasn't true for the weak interaction, a discovery that revolutionized physics by showing that a fundamental symmetry of nature was not universal. 

Parity symmetry: Think of a mirror. In a mirror, left and right are swapped, but up and down are not. Parity conservation was the idea that the laws of physics should hold true even if you viewed them in a mirror. For example, if you dropped a ball, its mirror image would also drop. This was thought to be a fundamental law for all forces.

Weak interaction: This is one of the four fundamental forces of nature, responsible for things like radioactive decay.

Yang and Lee's discovery: They theorized and later proved that the weak interaction is "chiral," meaning it is not mirror symmetric. This is like a left-handed glove not fitting a right hand. The weak force can distinguish between "left-handed" and "right-handed" particles, breaking the principle of parity conservation.

Impact: This discovery was a major breakthrough, upending a long-held assumption in physics. It demonstrated that the laws of nature are not universally symmetrical and led to a deeper understanding of elementary particles and the fundamental forces. 

Let me now explain this in another simpler way:  Understanding Parity - Using A Simple Idea and Life Illustrations.

 

Let me now explain them under this title:

When the Mirror Lied: Yang Chen-Ning and the Hidden Asymmetry of Nature

A Tribute to a Giant of Physics

On 18 October 2025, the world lost one of its greatest scientific minds - Professor Yang Chen-Ning (Yang Zhenning) who passed away peacefully in Beijing at the age of 103.

Born in 1922 in Anhui Province, China, Yang grew up during a turbulent era of war and political change but rose through hardship to become one of the most brilliant theoretical physicists of the 20th century.

After graduating from the National Southwest Associated University during wartime China, Yang later pursued his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago under the legendary physicist Enrico Fermi. In 1957, at the age of just 35, he and his colleague Tsung-Dao Lee became the first Chinese-born scientists to receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for their groundbreaking theory that parity is not conserved in weak nuclear interactions. This discovery fundamentally changed modern physics and reshaped our understanding of the universe.

What exactly did Yang discover that was so profound? To understand this, we must take a journey, not through complex mathematics or quantum jargon, but through simple observation, biology, and ordinary life which my gentle readers here can understand

Parity is nothing more than mirror symmetry. It asks a simple question:

Would the laws of nature still work if everything were flipped in a mirror - left becomes right and right becomes left?

For example, if a person kicks a football with their right leg, in the mirror it looks like they are kicking with their left, but the action still makes sense. So we’d say: football respects parity.

For over a century, physicists believed that all natural laws behaved this way, that nature does not care about left and right.

Yang and Lee challenged this belief, and they were right.

Biology Already Told Us: Nature Is Not Perfectly Symmetric

Even before physics discovered this, biology already knew that nature breaks mirror symmetry.

1. Our Bodies Are Not Mirror - Symmetric

If you look inside your body, your heart is slightly to the left, your liver mostly on the right, and even the two halves of your brain have different functions. If humans were perfectly symmetric, flipping us into a mirror would still make perfect biological sense, but it doesn’t.

2. Life Prefers One Hand

Chemically speaking, molecules can be left-handed or right-handed (a property called chirality). But all amino acids in living organisms are left-handed. The right-handed versions simply do not function in the body.

3. DNA Twists Only One Way

The DNA double helix twists in a right-handed spiral, never the mirror version in normal biology. Life has chosen a direction.

So symmetry is not universal. Nature often chooses one side over the other.

Yang and Lee’s Revolutionary Question

In the 1950s, there was a puzzle in nuclear physics called the tau-theta problem. Two particles that looked identical behaved differently, something strange was going on. Yang and Lee proposed a bold idea:

What if the weak nuclear force does not obey mirror symmetry (parity)?

This was unthinkable. It challenged decades of unquestioned belief in physics. Many dismissed the idea, but Yang and Lee persisted. They worked with experimental physicist Chien-Shiung Wu, and in 1957 she performed a brilliant experiment using cobalt-60, a radioactive isotope.

The results shocked the world:

The electrons emitted during radioactive decay did not go out evenly in all directions.
They preferred a specific direction.
 In the mirror version, this behavior would be impossible.

For the first time in history, science had proof:

Nature breaks mirror symmetry. Parity is violated in the weak nuclear force.

Simple Everyday Life Analogies to Understand 

Everyday / Biological Analogy	Meaning
Right-handed scissors don’t work well in the left hand	Nature doesn’t always treat left and right the same
Screws only turn in one direction	Some processes prefer a direction
Only left-handed amino acids work in life	Nature has a built-in preference
DNA twists in one direction	Symmetry is not absolute

The weak nuclear force is like this, it has handedness. It only interacts with left-handed particles, ignoring right-handed ones completely.

Why This Was So Important

Yang and Lee didn’t just answer a question in nuclear physics, they opened a door into a deeper truth about the universe:

1. Nature is not perfectly symmetric

2. The universe has structure and preferences

3. There are hidden rules still waiting to be discovered

Their discovery reshaped physics and helped build the Standard Model, our modern theory of fundamental particles.

Summary:  The Legacy of Yang Chen-Ning

Yang Chen-Ning taught the world a profound lesson—not only in physics but in thinking itself:

Never assume. Question even the most “obvious” truths.

His life’s work reminds us that science advances not by accepting tradition, but by challenging it boldly yet intelligently. Today, as we remember this towering figure of human thought, we honor not just a Nobel laureate, but a mind of courage, clarity, and curiosity who dared to ask a question the world had ignored.

And with that single question, he changed science forever.

Summary: 

The law of parity in physics, or conservation of parity, states that a physical system and its mirror image should behave identically, meaning nature is indifferent to left and right.  This law was long thought to apply to all fundamental interactions, but experiments in 1956 revealed that parity is violated in weak interactions (such as beta decay), though it remains conserved in strong interactions, electromagnetism, and gravity. 

 

A Commercial Boeing Jet Plane in a Paddy Field

 

“The Jet in the Green Sea: A Journey Through Fields, Forces, and Forgotten Questions”

By Lim Ju Boo

Yesterday (Saturday, 15 November, 2025)  I set out with only two modest intentions: to enjoy seafood lunch in Tanjong Karang in Selangor, Malaysia,  and to catch a sunset over the Straits of Malacca. But nature, as usual, had its own schedule. The sun was still playing high above the horizon at 3:30 pm. That was far too early for any respectable sunset. So I decided to take a detour through Sekinjang, the land of vast paddy fields that spread out like a shimmering green ocean.

It was there, in the middle of this serene agricultural expanse, that I saw something completely out of place:

a Boeing airplane - gleaming, silent, and enormous - resting in the middle of a paddy field.

It looked like a beached whale on a paddy sea.

A handful of curious visitors were already gathered near the fence around it. As I approached, I heard the usual Malaysian village committee of theories:

“It’s a café now!”

“No, no, it’s a hotel, they rent out the cockpit!”

“I heard it’s a restaurant. They’re serving nasi lemak on board!”

“Tourist attraction lah. Just take pictures only.”

The airplane did not speak, but the people certainly did.

Yet, the moment I saw it, a different set of questions flooded my mind, questions not about cafés or menus, but about engineering, physics, and the simple stubbornness of soil.

The First Puzzle: How Does a Boeing Stand in a Paddy Field?

When I reached home that night, I WhatsApp to a group of friends what I saw in Sikinjang

An structural engineer friend  commented this is not possible - the soil is too soft to support a plane.  I too thought a paddy field is a sponge, not a foundation.

The engineer and myself were right, the soil is soft, wet, and incapable of bearing heavy loads unless extensively reinforced. So how could an aircraft, weighing as much as a small building, stand there without sinking? The engineer must have thought I was faking stories, and the pictures I took were all faked. He did not wish to comment a single word further.

A retired senior pilot whom I know told me to his understanding, it was an old Boeing, dismantled, transported by trailers on land and re-assembled there into a “Premium Outlet Cafe”.  I then asked him for the weight of the Boeing since he was a former pilot. He did not reply me nor said a word further.

 I have no choice but to solve this engineering mystery myself. I am not a structural engineer, so I  turned back to physics the language that never lies, since physics and mathematics are some of the scientific and medical disciplines I have training in my undergraduate and postgraduate to allow me confidence to question, answer and write on my own without help from experts.   

I assumed the aircraft was a Boeing 737-800, one of the most common commercial planes. Its empty mass is about:

M = 41,450 kg

The force exerted by gravity is:

F = mg = 41,450 × 9.81 ≈ 406,625 newtons  

That is the total weight pressing down on the earth.

Since the main landing gear carries most of this load, and since a 737 has four main wheels, each wheel supports roughly:

406,6254 / 4 ≈101,656 N

or about 10,360 kg of force on each wheel.

But tires do not rest on the ground as full circles. They touch the earth through a relatively small footprint, and for aircraft tires, this is determined by tire pressure.

A Boeing tire is inflated to about 200 psi, which converts to:

200 psi ≈ 1.379 MPa = 1,379,000 Pa

The footprint area can therefore be estimated as:

A = wheel load / tire pressure = 101,656 / 1,379,000

 

≈ 0.0737  meters^2   

This is about the size of a large dinner plate, and yet it carries more than ten tonnes of force.

Now compare this with typical soft, waterlogged paddy soil, which can only withstand:

20–50 kPa for very soft clay

100–200 kPa for compacted fill

Aircraft tire pressure is around 1,379 kPa.

That is more than ten times what the soft paddy soil can naturally support.
If left as it is, the Boeing would sink into the ground,  nose first, tail high, like a badly landed duck.

The Second Puzzle: Water, Electricity, Sewage - In a Paddy?

Even if the soil problem were solved, another riddle appears:

Where does the plane get piped water in the middle of a field?
Where does the sewage go?
Where does it get 24-hour electricity?

For any café or hotel to operate:

Water supply must be connected through buried pipes from the nearest town, or stored in tanks.

Electricity must come from trenched cables, solar arrays, or generators.

Sewage must go to a septic tank or a packaged treatment system.

This means someone had already dug trenches, installed infrastructure, possibly even driven concrete piles to support the plane.

The Boeing was not merely brought there.  It was engineered to be there.

The Final Puzzle: Why Put a Plane in a Paddy?

Curiosity, creativity - and business.

All around Southeast Asia, old passenger jets have found second lives as:

1. cafés

2. themed restaurants

3. wedding venues

4. boutique hotels

5. aviation learning centres

6. tourist attractions

Bringing a plane to a paddy field may seem eccentric, but it is surprisingly profitable. People are drawn to the unusual -  and nothing is more unusual than a giant machine resting where rice once grew.

Reflections in the Setting Sun

By the time I returned to Tanjong Karang, the sun had finally begun its descent. The sky blushed orange as if embarrassed by its earlier tardiness. As I watched it dip below the Straits of Malacca, I realized:

What began as a simple afternoon trip to Tanjong Karang for seafood lunch and a sunset view had transformed into an unexpected lesson, not just in physics or engineering for me to ponder over, but in human creativity and curiosity.

A plane in a paddy field.
A contradiction that stands on concrete.
A puzzle solved by science.
A story carried home by the heart.

And perhaps that is why such sights exist:
to remind us that even the ordinary world is full of extraordinary surprises.

 

(This story of mine is dedicated to all engineers and pilots) 

More articles to come

 Good morning to you too Keele and for your comment

More interesting thoughts come in the days to come. Give me space and time to think before I can write. I cannot release too many things

Where Science and Medicine End, The Eternal Breath of Life Begins

 This article and comment  by me is dedicated to Professor Dr Vythilingam 

There is a WhatsApp circular from Professor Dr Vythilingam s/o Palaniandy Pilla, a close friend of mine who share his WhatsApp message with me about a specialist doctor in the UK who died after being given an overdose of amphotericin

It was written "BMJ" there. This means he must have got the report from the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

Here is the report I received:  

 

Doctor dies after hospital he worked at gave him wrong medicine

 

By Clare Dyer

 

A senior histopathologist died of an overdose after being given the wrong medicine by staff at the NHS trust where he worked.

 

Ray McMahon, a professor of gastrointestinal pathology at the University of Manchester and consultant histopathologist with Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust,1 had a cardiac arrest after being given the drug, which was three times too strong.

 

McMahon, who was also president elect of the International Academy of Pathology, died in February aged 68, four days after being admitted to Wythenshawe Hospital with a low grade fever, reduced appetite, and cough.

 

An inquest into his death at the Manchester coroner’s court heard that McMahon had been transferred to intensive care and that an infectious disease consultant had recommended that he be given liposomal amphotericin, a drug used to treat fungal respiratory infections, if his condition did not improve. The drug is normally stored at room temperature on a shelf in the pharmacy but, in error, a preparation of liposomal amphotericin that needed to be stored in the fridge was prescribed instead. As a result of this error a trainee pharmacist looked in the fridge and wrongly identified non-lipid amphotericin as the correct medicine.

 

Liposomal amphotericin requires a considerably larger dose than the non-lipid drug. As a result, McMahon was given a significant overdose of the non-lipid drug for nearly an hour. His condition deteriorated, and he had a cardiac arrest. Resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful, and he died.

 

Katherine Ajdukiewicz of Manchester University NHS 

Foundation Trust told the court that a “cascade of errors” had led to McMahon’s death.

 

Multiple failings

 

The acting senior coroner, Zak Golombek, concluded that McMahon had died after an overdose of the incorrect medicine and that neglect had contributed to his death.

 

McMahon’s wife, Claire McMahon, a retired GP, said,

“I and my family would like to express our extreme disappointment, distress, and sadness at what happened to Ray, especially within the trust that he’d worked in for many years. “Ray devoted his whole life to the NHS, but as a patient he was failed by Wythenshawe Hospital. We are grateful for the thorough investigation undertaken by the hospital, but to know that both system and individual failures caused his death is devastating.

Our disappointment extends to Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust as an organisation.”

 

Rachael Heyes, a specialist medical negligence solicitor at the law firm JMW, representing the McMahon family, said, “What happened to Ray was a complete tragedy. There were multiple failings in his care, including the initial prescribing and the dispensing of the antifungal medication.

 

“I hope that the trust can learn from what happened and ensure that the processes now in place are effective and no other patients are exposed to potentially serious harm in the future.”

 

Sohail Munshi, joint chief medical officer at the trust, said that McMahon had been a valued member of staff for many years who had made significant contributions to the health service. He added, “We are committed to providing the best care possible for our patients, and we will be reviewing the coroner’s conclusion carefully, to ensure that any further learning for the trust is addressed and applied to our constant work to improve our patients’ safety, quality of care, and experience.”

 

the BMJ

 

Here is my comment.

 

Let us accept this as gospel truth.

 

Whether or not Dr Ray McMahon was given an under dose, the correct dose or a lethal overdose of amphotericin, he still like all of us must die one day together with all the doctors who treated him. Once dead it makes no difference whether we die young or old whatever the cause

 

Medicine does not prevent us from death for sure. Untold number of doctors all too have already died in the past. New ones will arise and they too must die together with their patients later. There is no cure for death, with or without medicine. This will also happen to non doctors too.

 

In Ecclesiastes 12:7 of the bible it clearly tells us we shall all  return as dust  to the ground from where we came (with or without medicine) 

 

It states, "and the spirit returns to God who gave it". This verse is often paired with the phrase that "the dust returns to the earth as it was" to describe the separation of the body and spirit at death (irrespective of whatever medicine the doctor gave - whether the correct or overdose)

 

 Just remember this verse :

 

"Thou does art unto dust thou returnth"  from Genesis 3:19

 

This means "by the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return". 

 

This verse explains that work will be a source of struggle and frustration - whether we are a doctor, a scientist, engineer, teacher, technician, a nurse, a businessman, a politician,  a prime minister or even a king

 

All will have to go into dust and ash, and that the physical body of a person is mortal and will return to the earth after death.

 

This is spiritual food and spiritual medicine for our eternal soul. They are not chemical medicines prescribed by doctors for our physical body.

 

I have already explained to everyone humanity fleeting moments since creation 

 

How else do you want me to explain 

 

https://scientificlogic.blogspot.com/2025/11/humanitys-fleeting-moment-in-age-of.html?m=1

Let me rewrite the above in a more somber reflection on the brevity of life with more spacing 'to breathe' 

The passing of Prof. Ray McMahon reminds us of a truth that medicine, science, and technology, despite all their triumphs, can never escape. Even when every dose is correct and every decision is precise, life remains a fragile flicker in the vast silence of time. Whether through error or accuracy, through illness or age, each of us walks a path that eventually leads to the same destination.

Death does not bow to knowledge, nor does it respect status. It comes to the healer as it comes to the afflicted, to the scholar as to the child. Our machines may grow more powerful, our medicines more precise, our laboratories more advanced, but none of these can alter the truth that the human body is temporary, a vessel sustained for a moment in eternity.

Scripture speaks simply and profoundly:
“The dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7)

“For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” (Genesis 3:19)

These words are not merely ancient poetry; they are a mirror held before the human soul. They remind us that we spend so much of our lives strengthening the body, while the spirit, the one part of us that does not perish, is left unattended.

We chase cures, extend years, correct errors, and refine our technologies. Yet no discovery, however brilliant, can grant immortality. At best, medicine touches the body; it cannot reach into the chambers of the heart where humility, compassion, and eternal meaning dwell.

Perhaps our greatest illusion is the belief that life will respect us for our achievements, the university degrees after our names, the titles before our names,  our wealth, our power and status in society. But illness strips these away, and death dissolves them to silence. What remains is not the pride of our accomplishments, but the condition of our soul.

Therefore, the truest healing is spiritual.
The deepest medicine is humility.
The only enduring life is the one that begins when this mortal one ends.

In recognizing the brevity of life, we do not despair. Instead, we learn to walk gently, to speak kindly, to forgive quickly, and to hold lightly the things we cannot keep. For while the body returns to dust, the spirit journeys onward - to the God who breathed life into it.

Jb lim