Low Toxin Videos Dr. Garrett Smith Offers An Olive Branch to The Ray Peat Community

[charlie]

Starting at 2:47 Dr. Garrett Smith offers an olive branch to the Ray Peat community and is going to refrain from the name calling and such.

View: https://www.youtube.com/live/5ASd_J85iQ0?si=zcYAl2kxcKSFIC2i&t=167

 

[lamassu]

Who is that?

 

[Apple]

Starting at 2:47 Dr. Garrett Smith offers an olive branch to the Ray Peat community and is going to refrain from the name calling and such.

View: https://www.youtube.com/live/5ASd_J85iQ0?si=zcYAl2kxcKSFIC2i&t=167

... he called peatarians - petards.
But good talk, anyway

 

[DKayJoe]

Video is now deleted? How long was it up for?

 

[charlie]

Video is now deleted? How long was it up for?

I clicked on the video link and it worked for me:

https://www.youtube.com/live/5ASd_J85iQ0?si=zcYAl2kxcKSFIC2i&t=167

 

[DKayJoe]

I clicked on the video link and it worked for me:

https://www.youtube.com/live/5ASd_J85iQ0?si=zcYAl2kxcKSFIC2i&t=167

My bad, I misread, it just needs to be watched on youtube.

 

[J.R.K]

Starting at 2:47 Dr. Garrett Smith offers an olive branch to the Ray Peat community and is going to refrain from the name calling and such.

View: https://www.youtube.com/live/5ASd_J85iQ0?si=zcYAl2kxcKSFIC2i&t=167

This was the first video of Dr Smith’s that I viewed, in researching his viewpoints. His position on dialogue aligns with my own as these are new concepts to many of us and research needs to be done first and dialogues with others who are familiar with the work should occur.
I understand the urge for defensiveness and emotional flare ups, but in the end a review of both the differences and the similarities need to happen from a place of logic and stoic positions.
Otherwise we will only end up building animosity and hostilities devolving the forum into a polarized place. In the end scientific discovery and better understanding will come irregardless of emotional reactions to new theories and concepts. I think Dr Peat would be the first to acknowledge the need for open dialogue on new ideas and topics.
I appreciate the extension of the olive branch from Dr Smith, as to the epicentre of the tensions between the two sides, a blame game is neither relevant or constructive, all we can give is patience and understanding for those asking questions, looking for the similarities and the differences in the two bodies of work being shown. Either way science is fluidic and our knowledge is evolving, growth can never happen when the current knowledge is based upon the notion of absolutes.

 

[ddjd]

is it fair to ask.....if garrett smith has done a full 180 change of opinion about flush niacin (see clips below), maybe he will change his opinion on vitamin A completely in 6 months as well



View: https://x.com/source_222/status/1779810638564298918

 

[mosaic01]

is it fair to ask.....if garrett smith has done a full 180 change of opinion about flush niacin (see clips below), maybe he will change his opinion on vitamin A completely in 6 months as well

He was actually correct, the flush itself does not mean someone is detoxing. It is a prostaglandin reaction. It does help with repair I think, and probably also with detox due to the vasodilation. The effect of niacin on liver phase 2 and NAD is what helps with detox primarily.

But to answer your question, what would be the problem if he changes an opinion on anything? I don't make myself dependent on what somebody else thinks.

 

[ddjd]

He was actually correct, the flush itself does not mean someone is detoxing. It is a prostaglandin reaction. It does help with repair I think, and probably also with detox due to the vasodilation. The effect of niacin on liver phase 2 and NAD is what helps with detox primarily.

But to answer your question, what would be the problem if he changes an opinion on anything? I don't make myself dependent on what somebody else thinks.

Where did I say it's a problem? I'm saying let's consider how much weight his opinion holds when he flip flops so easily from EXTREMELY ANTI flush niacin to the point of mocking everyone that does it and telling them how idiotic they are, to parading his niacin flush cup in every live stream for the last six months.

My point is, it could easily happen again with his view on vitamin A

 

[mosaic01]

Where did I say it's a problem? I'm saying let's consider how much weight his opinion holds when he flip flops so easily from EXTREMELY ANTI flush niacin to the point of mocking everyone that does it, to parading his niacin flush cup in every live stream for the last six months.

Ah ok. I am not watching/following him, so I'm not in the loop on this. His opinions may be a bit unstable. I put weight on research/facts, not individual people.

From the outside, it seems the way he works is by applying ideas, and if he sees something is giving results, he looks further into this.

What I can see as a possibility is that at one point he stops seeing vitamin A as "the culprit for everything", and starts being more relaxed towards intakes below a certain threshold.

 

[Hidden49]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckzs7Q9c_8k&ab_channel=ElwinRobinson

 

[TripleOG]

is it fair to ask.....if garrett smith has done a full 180 change of opinion about flush niacin (see clips below), maybe he will change his opinion on vitamin A completely in 6 months as well



View: https://x.com/source_222/status/1779810638564298918

Other than niacin, what else has he done a 180 on to raise concern that this is a pattern?

From what I can tell, he wasn't aware "niacin" was a blanket research term for multiple forms with worse toxicity profiles and didn't make the NAD/phase 2 detox connection. Everything changed when Kelsey Kenney came along.