IP6 For Iron Chelation

[tara]

That would explain why my nightmares and epileptic-like awakenings have returned since adding baking soda, organic milk and 1g magnesium

I'm fed up of this s***

Did you read the threads about milk-alkali syndrome? Too much baking soda + calcium has set a couple of posters back.

 

[narouz]

It's more of a Peat misunderstanders kind of situation usually. pumps.

Seriously, that would be a good one!

 

[Stuart]

@ 4Peats_
The only reason I even started the 'fiber in breast milk' thread at all was he just seems a bit in the dark about the importance of the human microbiome to human health generally, and the role of fermentable fiber in colonic microbial health specifically.
He does make comments like 'babies seem to do O.K without fiber' after all.
Does that sound like someone who's well informed about how vigorously breast milk promotes a robust microbiome to you?
Look, it's never too late for Dr. Peat to get more up to date. Trying to preserve the existing Peat corpus with any inherent flaws just seems counterproductive to the legacy Dr. Peat hopes to leave don't you think?
I can see that you are trying to characterize me as a Peat 'detractor' though, Aren't humans an interesting species?
If anything I appreciate that he's made an immense contribution to the understanding of our physiology. It's just that with his clear misunderstanding that breast milk even promotes the microbiome from a baby's very first feed, his enduring message becomes clouded by incompetence I'm afraid.
Pboy characterized this abiding anti intellectualism in a recent comment on Jennifer's log when he referred to 'that bacterial thread' as a 'charade'.
4Peat, there's a level of ignorance below which you just don't want this forum to sink I would have thought.
And if Dr. Peat demonstrates the same failings, for instance not being aware that breast milk delivers a constant supply of both bacteria and the prebiotics they thrive on it should ring some alarm bells after all.
But I would like to commend the entire editorial team for at least having this conversation. As you say, you've done amazingly well.

 

[sugar daddy]

Maybe you should all just take a breath here

IMHO this forum is very important because it helps sick people gets to grips with a way that they can get better

I can only talk from my own situation but Peats work interpreted through this site is the only thing that's really worked after years of not functioning normally

It's fine if you don't agree with Peat about this or that and it's very important to not be dogmatic BUT when someone is sick it's very hard to get anything together and this constant adversarial bickering can be enough to put people of giving peats advice a go

Thanks to Charlie and mods like 4peat people can easily access Peats knowledge and actually make a difference to there lives

 

[Stuart]

Maybe you should all just take a breath here

IMHO this forum is very important because it helps sick people gets to grips with a way that they can get better

I can only talk from my own situation but Peats work interpreted through this site is the only thing that's really worked after years of not functioning normally

It's fine if you don't agree with Peat about this or that and it's very important to not be dogmatic BUT when someone is sick it's very hard to get anything together and this constant adversarial bickering can be enough to put people of giving peats advice a go

Thanks to Charlie and mods like 4peat people can easily access Peats knowledge and actually make a difference to there lives

I agree with you. But it does seem that pointing out obvious flaws in Dr.Peat's reasoning like 'babies seem to do O.K. without fiber' actually reinforces his more sensible material don't you think? There's plenty of great ideas. How are those worthwhile elements of the Peatarian message served by tiptoeing around the nonsense?
Remember, this forum shouldn't even attempt to push the idea that Dr. Peat is infallible should it? Surely people are intelligent enough to be able to differentiate between the appropriate corrections and the malicious defaming. I don't even properly understand most of his cellular biology stuff. Besides, the beneficial effects of dietarily applying those concepts are pretty obvious anyway.
But I do know enough about the human microbiome generally and breast milk specifically to be well aware that Dr. Peat is simply wrong. And it's certainly not just my opinion either. There is exactly ZERO disagreement throughout the scientific and medical community that human breast milk provides both commensal bacteria and the fermentable fiber they need to thrive. Dr. Peat should be aware of this. Pointing this out is not a general criticism of Peatarian concepts. It's just a candid opportunity for the Peat message to be enhanced, not for a censorial cloak to be drawn over the disinformation.

 

[gbolduev]

I have no idea why this thread has turned personal. To me Peat talks about one body chemistry and he describes that body chemistry very well, and his recommendations for that body chemistry are really good. When I see this body chemistry on tests I always just say go on Ray Peats diet for me to save time and explanations. But this does not cover all cases not even close. This can be seen by the fact that big percentage of people are trying Peats ideas and failing and getting worse on this forum.

When I put people with a contradicting body chemistry on Ray Peats diet. It is quite obvious what happens.They fail.

Haidut even admits now that not high cortisol but also low cortisol could be a problem))) I personally had low PTH and low estrogen and low calcium in blood and low TSH and was almost dead.) It is all about balance. there are tons of different imbalances.

And I think threads and discussions actually help people to try different approaches.
Of course if moderators dont want it here, then I would not post here anymore.
But to me if someone creates a thread about iron, then we can discuss that issue from different angles.Also mentioning Peat in this discussion could be from favorable and negative sides. Why not? Arguing is the way to progress in my book. Forum was not created for praising Peat , was it? If yes, then I dont think I should post here.

Why cant it be a free discussion and free thoughts here especially amongst some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs?

Plus in no way , I am trying to be a guru or anything. I am for discussing things with interesting people , for trying things out and proving each other wrong, including Peat. Since no one knows the truth 100% , not even 50%

Also it is not about me misunderstanding Peat. It is about 80% people on this forum misunderstanding his ideas, because of the way he wrote them in his articles. If he wrote his ideas differently , actually how it was supposed to be, then he would not be any different than any biochemistry book. But he wrote those articles with bold statements of incorporating everyone into one body chemistry and then for some reason he says CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT. This looks like a marketing thing may be))) Shock everyone first and then slip into context scenario since obviously at least 50% of people wont have high PTH , nor high cortisol or high calcium in blood.

Anyway moderators, let me know if I can post here. I dont want to be a pain in the B , I have other things to do.

 

[tara]

@ Stuart:
I am in favour of discussion, and I think there is a place for questioning areas where there may be apparent inconsistencies between some of Peat's viewpoints and other viewpoints. This can lead to greater understanding of what we can each individually take from Peat's work, and help us develop more accurate and useful models of reality.
I don't assume that Peat is right about everything (and I am pretty sure he has no illusions of omniscience himself). I see him as encouraging everyone to keep learning, to question dogma that is not serving people, and to keep thinking for ourselves, and I see him doing the same himself. [edit to add:] I do consider Peat to be widely read, intelligent, with habits of logic, good will, and intellectual and ethical integrity, and to present a developing model of reality that has clearly been helpful to many people (though not necessarily everyone).

This forum is for members interested in learning about and discussing Dr. Ray Peat's ideas, as presented in his writing and interviews, and in helping each other to think about how we can apply these ideas in our own lives.

I do not consider it in keeping with the purpose of the forum, or with respect for Peat or for other posters who are trying to learn about Peat's work and how it can be helpful to us in resolving our health issues, to repetitiously assert that Peat is 'obviously' misinformed and/or outright wrong. This is especially the case in areas where you have not shown an understanding of what he has actually said, and especially when you persist in repeating the same generalisations over and over again, and when you seem to keep pointing to the same conclusions that do not follow logically from all the evidence that you keep referring to.
Once it gets to repetition of your fixed viewpoint, and insulting people who disagree with it, it is no longer a useful discussion, and there is no more illumination to be gained from it.

I would like you to desist from repetitive assertions that Peat is wrong. If you wish to continue discussing this area or others, then how about making a serious effort to read and understand what he has been saying, and what value it may have in at least some contexts (even if not in yours) - with a mind open enough to consider information that seems to conflict with your current view.

 

[narouz]

But this does not cover all cases not even close. This can be seen by the fact that big percentage of people are trying Peats ideas and failing and getting worse on this forum.
When I put people with a contradicting body chemistry on Ray Peats diet. It is quite obvious what happens.They fail....
And I think threads and discussions actually help people to try different approaches...

Peat says to question everything.
And yet, on a forum devoted to him,
how easy it is to lose sight of Peat's basic recommendation:
be skeptical.

I have been a member here for about 3 years.
I've read a hell of a lot of Peat and listened to many hours of interviews.
I have eaten and am currently eating a quite Peatish diet.
I sit under a 300W incandescent bulb 10 hours a day at work.
All this is just to say...I am really into Peat.

To be honest,
over those 3 years of Peating,
I have not improved my health.
Actually--again, being honest--it has declined.

And yet, I am still really into Peat!
There are so many things that happen to us in life,
so many variable, stresses...
I am not at all convinced that eating/living like Peat
caused
my health declines.
Actually, I tend to think correlation, not causation.

And yet...I don't go to Peat like I'd go to church.
I don't have faith in Peat in the same way that many have faith in God.

Peat is all about experiencing and thinking and self-observation and questioning.
In my situation,
am I really a Bad Peater because I think--
rationally and experientially,
given my progress doing Peat stuff--
I should not close off other ideas, other approaches to health?
Am I a failure because I have not tried hard enough at Peating?
And perhaps more to the specific point at hand,
should I be ostracized/censored by the forum
for my lack of success?
(don't worry guys: I could take it:>))

I will leave you guys to draw your own conclusions,
but in my opinion,
I don't blame myself in those ways.

It is a very simple thing to observe if one has eyes to see and ears to hear,
but...
we aren't always very scientific here on the forum.
We eagerly push to the front of the line
and into the spotlight
the posters who have success with Peat's diet and ideas.
I can understand that!
It is good to be inspired by others' successes.

But do we really try to keep track,
in any scientific way,
of those who struggle?
Or do we just kinduv...look away...accentuate the positive...?

Questioning is not as comfortable as Believing.

 

[Stuart]

@ Tara
With respect, I think you are missing the point. I've only ever suggested that Dr. Peat is wrong about one thing. He is on record as saying that 'babies seem to do O.K. without fiber' . But this is completely and verifiably inncorrect. Dress it up however you like, it's just plain ignorance.
And it's distracting from the very worthwhile material in his ideas. That's all. Isn't that fair enough?
People discovering Peat are not going to be too impressed by that degree of incompetence are they?
Gboldhuev has pointed out other pitfalls in Dr. Peat's views which I can't really comment on, because I simply am not well informed enough. He seems sincere though, and good luck to him.
But breast milk does contain a lot of fermentable fiber (and bacteria of course). It's not even open to conjecture. Pernaps if Dr. Peat was aware of this, it would inform his views about fermentable fiber in the diet of adults?
What do you think?

 

[charlie]

@ Stuart:
I am in favour of discussion, and I think there is a place for questioning areas where there may be apparent inconsistencies between some of Peat's viewpoints and other viewpoints. This can lead to greater understanding of what we can each individually take from Peat's work, and help us develop more accurate and useful models of reality.
I don't assume that Peat is right about everything (and I am pretty sure he has no illusions of omniscience himself). I see him as encouraging everyone to keep learning, to question dogma that is not serving people, and to keep thinking for ourselves, and I see him doing the same himself. [edit to add:] I do consider Peat to be widely read, intelligent, with habits of logic, good will, and intellectual and ethical integrity, and to present a developing model of reality that has clearly been helpful to many people (though not necessarily everyone).

This forum is for members interested in learning about and discussing Dr. Ray Peat's ideas, as presented in his writing and interviews, and in helping each other to think about how we can apply these ideas in our own lives.

I do not consider it in keeping with the purpose of the forum, or with respect for Peat or for other posters who are trying to learn about Peat's work and how it can be helpful to us in resolving our health issues, to repetitiously assert that Peat is 'obviously' misinformed and/or outright wrong. This is especially the case in areas where you have not shown an understanding of what he has actually said, and especially when you persist in repeating the same generalisations over and over again, and when you seem to keep pointing to the same conclusions that do not follow logically from all the evidence that you keep referring to.
Once it gets to repetition of your fixed viewpoint, and insulting people who disagree with it, it is no longer a useful discussion, and there is no more illumination to be gained from it.

I would like you to desist from repetitive assertions that Peat is wrong. If you wish to continue discussing this area or others, then how about making a serious effort to read and understand what he has been saying, and what value it may have in at least some contexts (even if not in yours) - with a mind open enough to consider information that seems to conflict with your current view.

:1

 

[4peatssake]

Why cant it be a free discussion and free thoughts here especially amongst some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs?

Simply because it's the Ray Peat Forum not the "free discussion and free thoughts forum especially for some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs," whatever they are.

This is the essential problem that those of you in direct disagreement with Dr. Peat are bumping up against.

It's not a personal issue. It's a structural one.
Go create that forum if you wish. Or resurrect Peatarian, they tried that type of thing and it imploded from all the bickering.

But as sugar daddy has said upthread, we endeavor here to have Peat's views clearly articulated and discussed. And the forum has every right to structure itself as it chooses.

I suggest that both you and stuart engage directly with Ray Peat rather than defame him here. He is not here to defend himself and posting things like, "I don't know how he sleeps at night" when you yourself admit to being a stockbroker, not a doctor but readily give out your advice is questionable to me.

You have not been warned nor requested to not post. I suggest perhaps you read the rules and try to follow them.

That is all that has been asked of anyone.

 

[charlie]

What do you think?

I think you are done here, you have stated your case 5 bazillion times and you got nothing else. You have defamed Ray Peat's name over and over. You are gone, see ya.

 

[4peatssake]

But this does not cover all cases not even close. This can be seen by the fact that big percentage of people are trying Peats ideas and failing and getting worse on this forum.
When I put people with a contradicting body chemistry on Ray Peats diet. It is quite obvious what happens.They fail....
And I think threads and discussions actually help people to try different approaches...

Peat says to question everything.
And yet, on a forum devoted to him,
how easy it is to lose sight of Peat's basic recommendation:
be skeptical.

I have been a member here for about 3 years.
I've read a hell of a lot of Peat and listened to many hours of interviews.
I have eaten and am currently eating a quite Peatish diet.
I sit under a 300W incandescent bulb 10 hours a day at work.
All this is just to say...I am really into Peat.

To be honest,
over those 3 years of Peating,
I have not improved my health.
Actually--again, being honest--it has declined.

And yet, I am still really into Peat!
There are so many things that happen to us in life,
so many variable, stresses...
I am not at all convinced that eating/living like Peat
caused
my health declines.
Actually, I tend to think correlation, not causation.

And yet...I don't go to Peat like I'd go to church.
I don't have faith in Peat in the same way that many have faith in God.

Peat is all about experiencing and thinking and self-observation and questioning.
In my situation,
am I really a Bad Peater because I think--
rationally and experientially,
given my progress doing Peat stuff--
I should not close off other ideas, other approaches to health?
Am I a failure because I have not tried hard enough at Peating?
And perhaps more to the specific point at hand,
should I be ostracized/censored by the forum
for my lack of success?
(don't worry guys: I could take it:>))

I will leave you guys to draw your own conclusions,
but in my opinion,
I don't blame myself in those ways.

It is a very simple thing to observe if one has eyes to see and ears to hear,
but...
we aren't always very scientific here on the forum.
We eagerly push to the front of the line
and into the spotlight
the posters who have success with Peat's diet and ideas.
I can understand that!
It is good to be inspired by others' successes.

But do we really try to keep track,
in any scientific way,
of those who struggle?
Or do we just kinduv...look away...accentuate the positive...?

Questioning is not as comfortable as Believing.

If things aren't working for you narouz, then why do you keep doing 'em?
Peat is not one size fits all much as some people like to synthesize his body of work down to milk and OJ.
It's personal responsibility at its ultimate and if something doesn't work for you, don't do it.

Surely you don't blame Ray Peat for your health problems. :?

And who has ever suggested that people are bad peaters if they don't find success or choose to incorporate other health practices?

This isn't a cheerleading squad. It's a forum to discuss the work of Dr. Peat.
If it's not an appealing thing for people, no problem, find somewhere that does appeal to you.

 

[narouz]

It's that caring side we treasure about you.
Now I'm getting verklempt...

 

[4peatssake]

I'm not caring because I question why you would continue to do things that are causing you harm?
Or further suggest that people take responsibility for their own health, for their entire lives for that matter.
That is what I believe. I don't hold people hands while they cry and lament about their problems. That doesn't help them. It keeps them stuck and drags me down into the problems.

Rather I choose to help people raise themselves up so they are able to solve their problems. I'd much rather find solutions to problems than talk about them over and over.

Your suggestion that we try and follow the progress of anonymous people on an internet forum is a bit cumbersome for a group of volunteers is it not?

 

[gbolduev]

Why cant it be a free discussion and free thoughts here especially amongst some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs?

Simply because it's the Ray Peat Forum not the "free discussion and free thoughts forum especially for some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs," whatever they are.

This is the essential problem that those of you in direct disagreement with Dr. Peat are bumping up against.

It's not a personal issue. It's a structural one.
Go create that forum if you wish. Or resurrect Peatarian, they tried that type of thing and it imploded from all the bickering.

But as sugar daddy has said upthread, we endeavor here to have Peat's views clearly articulated and discussed. And the forum has every right to structure itself as it chooses.

I suggest that both you and stuart engage directly with Ray Peat rather than defame him here. He is not here to defend himself and posting things like, "I don't know how he sleeps at night" when you yourself admit to being a stockbroker, not a doctor but readily give out your advice is questionable to me.

You have not been warned nor requested to not post. I suggest perhaps you read the rules and try to follow them.

That is all that has been asked of anyone.

First of all I am a stock trader not a broker.I do algorithmic trading thus have been developing systems in different fields for a long long time..Secondly I did not think Peat was an MD. . He has a PHD I thought, actually same as me.

I think I articulate Peat's ideas very clearly, but I also articulate mine.And I think I wont post here anymore. Makes no sense at all .Now I understand the reason of creating this forum and I don't think it is right for me to post here. If this were a forum to discuss Ray Peat , then discussions would be in favor and against his ideas. But here you promote a zombie land discussions and Peat praising and it would be silly to be a part of. It is like being a part of big huge infomercial then. I am out, sorry for disturbing your place 4Peat.

Good luck to you all.

 

[jyb]

I think I articulate Peat's ideas very clearly, but I also articulate mine.And I think I wont post here anymore. Makes no sense at all .Now I understand the reason of creating this forum and I don't think it is right for me to post here.

I think your contributions are interesting. If you post elsewhere, I would like to keep updated and learn more about your viewpoint.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Why cant it be a free discussion and free thoughts here especially amongst some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs?

Simply because it's the Ray Peat Forum not the "free discussion and free thoughts forum especially for some people who were not helped by standard Peat recs," whatever they are.

This is the essential problem that those of you in direct disagreement with Dr. Peat are bumping up against.

It's not a personal issue. It's a structural one.
Go create that forum if you wish. Or resurrect Peatarian, they tried that type of thing and it imploded from all the bickering.

But as sugar daddy has said upthread, we endeavor here to have Peat's views clearly articulated and discussed. And the forum has every right to structure itself as it chooses.

I suggest that both you and stuart engage directly with Ray Peat rather than defame him here. He is not here to defend himself and posting things like, "I don't know how he sleeps at night" when you yourself admit to being a stockbroker, not a doctor but readily give out your advice is questionable to me.

You have not been warned nor requested to not post. I suggest perhaps you read the rules and try to follow them.

That is all that has been asked of anyone.

First of all I am a stock trader not a broker.I do algorithmic trading thus have been developing systems in different fields for a long long time..Secondly I did not think Peat was an MD. . He has a PHD I thought, actually same as me.

I think I articulate Peat's ideas very clearly, but I also articulate mine.And I think I wont post here anymore. Makes no sense at all .Now I understand the reason of creating this forum and I don't think it is right for me to post here. If this were a forum to discuss Ray Peat , then discussions would be in favor and against his ideas. But here you promote a zombie land discussions and Peat praising and it would be silly to be a part of. It is like being a part of big huge infomercial then. I am out, sorry for disturbing your place 4Peat.

Good luck to you all.

You have not given an explanation for your claim that carbon dioxide will cause calcium and magnesium to enter the cell.

 

[XPlus]

The fact that gbolduev lays out many ideas in basic mainstream biochemistry is actually interesting.
Thank you bguldev. I really enjoyed reading your comments.
Your writing style is intriguing, has expanded my knowledge and challenged my thinking.

I can sense high intellect from your writing and you strike me as a straightforward person so I’ll be brutally honest here.

Most of us on the forum are amateurs and your "normal biochem" thoughts regardless of background and experience would be challenging.

No need to qualify yourself to post here. Therefore, no need to brag about your advanced business experience and qualifications.

Also, it’s counterproductive for our and your own sake to compare your knowledge and expertise to someone who specialises in a completely different field and appears to be one of the most renowned in his field.

And it seems from other members’ replies that you’re very welcome to post.

Few more thoughts on my mind in defence of Peat.

Peat's work is not meant to be Biochemistry 101 or Life's encyclopaedia as counter to mainstream knowledge.

A lot of Peat's writings are directly meant to address mainstream issues and dogma. That’s why for example he starts where he assumes that the reader knows steroids cannot be simply labelled on a scale of two extremes, such as good and bad. The action of estrogen is to always be interpreted in reference to its ratio to progesterone. That’s why context matters.

Additionally, I don’t see how Peat contradicts the idea of different body chemistries. If that is what you think Peat proposes, it isn’t. I believe he builds his work on the idea that we all have the same machines but not the exact body chemistry. Energy and structure are independent and their variables interact, along with the environment, to produce different results. That is precisely why context matters.

There’s isn’t much for Peat to market except for the work itself. It's fair for a man to defend his ideology. Picking on this is either arbitrary or low. And, the thinkness of his glasses highly correlates with his age and strain from too much reading.

I’m unsure where the assumption that Peat’s work is the complete gospel of life comes from. This is another idea Peat critics base their presumptions on. It’s not. Another one is the tendency for extreme interpretations.
On more is that people on the ‘Peat diet’ would simply find the answers to all their health problems. This one is especially against Peat’s work. It ignores his basic views of stress.
Health problems as a measure of stress may be mitigated to a large degree but they’re not completely reversible. If it's possible to reverse all stress, we’d also be capable of going back to point 0 in our mother’s wombs. Here, I just demonstrated another aspect neglected in the simplistic views of stress. And that is time.

The most reasonable way to look at it in my book is that Peat offers a better viewpoint of life compared to mainstream science. In general, we’re not close to a point where we have it all figured out and never will be.

The Peat paradigm appears richer than you try to push.
It’s either that you don't read much of his work or simply choose to dismiss it, maybe for personal reasons.

Recently, there seems to be a high turnover of new members who are confident in their knowledge and who immediately come here to dismiss Peat, get grilled and runaway.
The reality is this might bust the balls of some who may have less than mature confidence and understanding of Peat but it’s annoying nonsense to those who have more confidence and understanding.

Your intellect has the potential to bring something to the table.
It’s not a bad idea to relax it and humble up a little.

 

[narouz]

Many of the criticisms of gbolduev are hard to refute.
But let me focus on why I kinda liked him.

I think he has some extreme passion for and intelligence about the world of health.
Sure, a surplus of ego.
A deficit of Peat reading (it would seem),
etc.
And, sure, we can mock the applicability of his credentials, stock trader, to health.

But...ask yourself...
why would a guy like gbolduev be pulled into intense debates
with our illustrious haidut
about the actions and effects of minerals at a cellular level?

I would note that haidut seemed to enjoy the exchange himself.

Seems to me both of those guys have a lot of passion
for a subject area that is extremely obscure for most of us.

gbolduev seemed absolutely convinced he knew what was right in that arena.
That, actually, was something that made me laugh at first
and distrust him.
But...after following him and haidut's talks a while,
I kinda went past the bluster and ego and overstatement
and said to myself:
you know...this guy really seems to have delved deeply into cellular mineral biochemistry.
He may be completely wrong,
but...he really seemed to me to have spent a long time studying his particular Eckian approach,
and, apparently, to have spent a long time looking at very specific Eckian labs
(and his own even more specific labs, like ABGs.)

I would like to have explored his ideas,
and how they might fit into Peat's ideas,
more carefully.

And it is interesting and maybe telling
that gbolduev was attracted to this Ray Peat forum
even though he strongly disagreed with a lot of Peat's ideas.
To my mind,
that shows a kind of unique potentiality for this forum:
it should be all about inquiry, questioning, breaking down barriers, making connections.
And Peat's ideas send out that kind of signal, that kind of allure--
of freedom, free inquiry, exploring new ideas, questioning accepted ideas--
even Peat's.

That is the potential of Peat and this forum.
I am sad that our forum could not find a way to be more relaxed toward and tolerant of
a somewhat difficult poster like gbolduev.
By making him feel unwelcome and pushing him out,
have we accomplished the moderator's goal--
"we endeavor here to have Peat's views clearly articulated and discussed"...?

I must confess, to my mind a rather uninspiring, timid mission statement.
Does "discussion" include real and vital challenges to Peat's ideas?
Or just promotion, clarification, and understanding?
Are we here simply to get Peat Programmed?

gbolduev was different.
I can't say we demonstrated much spunk or vision or daring
in how we deal with difference.