Ray Peat Diet / Protocol Name?

[Philomath]

I bet Peat likes well-designed studies, with proper controls, and with...protocols.
So...my take...you gotta balance those sides of Peat.

He is a scientist after all.
His disdain for biased studies is obvious... as is his utter contempt for protocols based on those studies.

My guess is that Dr. Peat would look at VOS's list and think, everything there is something I've said or written - and it may help people improve various degenerative conditions. However, the decision to use any, or all of these "protocols" should be determined by trial and observation.

 

[sm1693]

I have a lot of respect for the majority of posters on here and many of you are probably far more intelligent than me. But...

I have not personally seen one person call out Haidut for posting views on here that conflict with RP's views. The "lowering serotonin with BCAAs" thread is one of the first ones I stumbled on here, and I just assumed that this was a part of the whole Ray Peat deal.

If people were being indiscriminately fair, there would be at least 20 posts in that thread lambasting Haidut personally and making him rethink posting such a view. Memes would be created describing what a silly person Haidut is for having such an idea. It would be demanded of him to contact RP and receive approval before posting this idea anywhere on the internet.

 

[tara]

I have a lot of respect for the majority of posters on here and many of you are probably far more intelligent than me. But...

I have not personally seen one person call out Haidut for posting views on here that conflict with RP's views. The "lowering serotonin with BCAAs" thread is one of the first ones I stumbled on here, and I just assumed that this was a part of the whole Ray Peat deal.

If people were being indiscriminately fair, there would be at least 20 posts in that thread lambasting Haidut personally and making him rethink posting such a view. Memes would be created describing what a silly person Haidut is for having such an idea. It would be demanded of him to contact RP and receive approval before posting this idea anywhere on the internet.

But Haidut doesn't routinely claim that Peat said we should use those supplements. He points to other research, and often includes cautions.

Maybe there is a case for a clear note on the index page saying this forum is for members interested in learning about and discussing Ray Peat's views, but does not necessarily always represent his views. Ray Peat does not moderate or participate in this forum.

 

[visionofstrength]

I have a lot of respect for the majority of posters on here and many of you are probably far more intelligent than me. But...

I have not personally seen one person call out Haidut for posting views on here that conflict with RP's views. The "lowering serotonin with BCAAs" thread is one of the first ones I stumbled on here, and I just assumed that this was a part of the whole Ray Peat deal.

If people were being indiscriminately fair, there would be at least 20 posts in that thread lambasting Haidut personally and making him rethink posting such a view. Memes would be created describing what a silly person Haidut is for having such an idea. It would be demanded of him to contact RP and receive approval before posting this idea anywhere on the internet.

But Haidut doesn't routinely claim that Peat said we should use those supplements. He points to other research, and often includes cautions.

Maybe there is a case for a clear note on the index page saying this forum is for members interested in learning about and discussing Ray Peat's views, but does not necessarily always represent his views. Ray Peat does not moderate or participate in this forum.

From my perspective, seldom are Peat's views accurately represented on this forum. For that matter, Peat's views are often represented less than accurately by Danny Roddy and Matt Stone, as I see it. Almost no one, in my view, emphasizes enough the crucial role of CO2 as the master compound regulating metabolism.

But that doesn't mean we need to start name-calling each other as being intellectually dishonest. It just means that we respectfully disagree.* We are each free to say what we think Peat actually says in our own way, in our own words.

The far more serious issue is that the forum itself needs a very visible disclaimer that none of the posts here represent Ray Peat's own views --- none of them are authored by Ray Peat or endorsed by him in any way.

Otherwise, a visitor may well be confused into thinking that a forum bearing his name is somehow affiliated with him, or that he participates in it, which he does not.

*And as the mods can see from the events of today, disrespect engenders disrespect.

 

[Dizzryda]

Vos this rda is very helpful. I have a few questions.

Are you saying dhea OR testosterone? If so where can I get testosterone. Also I think ray recommended 5mg dhea per day, but you're saying 5mg every few hours is helpful if you are particularly low?

Is the vitamin a and d supplementation in addition to the a and d in milk?

It would be helpful if you could describe a way to implement all these factors into a reasonable meal plan.

While I'm here I'd like Co2 sensor specs too thanks

 

[tara]

No, I've had to say many times to visitors here, that the views expressed in this forum are not those of Ray Peat. I think the misuse of his name may be responsible for the high bounce rate. At the very least, a disclaimer should be prominently displayed on every page.

I guess you must be discussing this in private. I think it is helpful when people make it clear in the public forum when a posted opinion differs from Peat's. Such discussion certainly occurs some of the time.

I think you have a point that a clear disclaimer would be useful on this foum. It is in discussion now.

I, personally, am utterly free to write reviews of Peat's work as I do, that use Peat's name, when I am clearly the author of the review. It's called the right of fair use, and it's fundamental to free speech. No one can object to that on legal grounds, other than frivolously. That you would find that "libelous" smacks of contempt for our fundamental liberties.

I agree that you have legal and moral freedom to write reviews of Peat's work, with yourself clearly as the author. This may well be valuable.

Morally, it is good to take care not to significantly misrepresent what Peat has said. I was concerned that you might post to a large audience a list called Ray's Daily Allowances, or Recommended Daily Allowances, or some such, that looked as though Peat, rather than you, had invented and/or authored it, and that people would be confused into thinking they were actually Peat's recommendations for everybody. My concern is based on repeated and continuing misrepresentations on this forum. The bigger the audience, the bigger the potential problem. If that is not what are going to do, then good.

People can make genuine mistakes, and genuinely have different opinions. But when opinions are presented as Peat's that clearly and directly contradict what he has said, or are clearly out of context, or are new opinions that he does not seem to have (publicly) expressed, I think it is reasonable to challenge that. My impression is that you are intelligent and if you took care, you could largely avoid this problem. I did not intend name-calling - apologies if it came off that way; my intention was to refer to the specific behaviour, not to character.

I don't like it when other people make such confusions on this forum either.
It is good if people on Stone's or Roddy's site clarify any confusions they make too.
As you know, I consider CO2 a very important aspect of Peat's writing about health. But there is a difference between omissions - not talking about something (enough) and active untruths.

 

[sm1693]

Is it really acceptable to let people ridicule a member for putting new crazy ideas out there? Shall I go to the BCAAs thread and ridicule Haidut because I don't agree with his idea? Is belittling people okay to do on this forum?

Can a moderator please comment on this?

 

[visionofstrength]

Vos this rda is very helpful. I have a few questions.

Are you saying dhea OR testosterone? If so where can I get testosterone. Also I think ray recommended 5mg dhea per day, but you're saying 5mg every few hours is helpful if you are particularly low?

Is the vitamin a and d supplementation in addition to the a and d in milk?

It would be helpful if you could describe a way to implement all these factors into a reasonable meal plan.

While I'm here I'd like Co2 sensor specs too thanks

I'm working on it, yes. These RDAs were a proposal, not meant to be final, awaiting comments from other members, whom I had asked either for their impressions, or for specific citations to Peat's work. I've had mostly impressions with a few citations (thanks you-know-who-you-are), so now I'll try and sort it out, which I'm happy to do.

I think Peat refers to either DHEA OR testosterone, yes, though I haven't asked him that specific question.

The dosage is entirely up to you to gauge for yourself, but in general Peat feels small frequent doses are better than large, bolus doses. I said 5 mg because that seemed to be the smallest measurable amount I could find, but if you can do 2 or 3 mg somehow, I think Peat's mentioned that number, too.

Importantly, Peat has written I think in email to do the progesterone/DHEA combo with thyroid and coffee. Again, the RDAs for thyroid and coffee are suggestions and it's entirely up to you to gauge how much you do.

 

[Jennifer]

Is it really acceptable to let people ridicule a member for putting new crazy ideas out there? Shall I go to the BCAAs thread and ridicule Haidut because I don't agree with his idea? Is belittling people okay to do on this forum?

Can a moderator please comment on this?

I agree!

Please cantstoppeating will you take down that pic you posted?

I get that you don't agree with VoS and you have every right to your opinion. There's no reason we should all agree and perhaps you don't see it this way, but along with mocking VoS, you're also mocking the man in that photo. You see it as fun, but try being the recipient of your "fun." VoS may bite his tongue and just ignore it, but I won't. That's not cool and you're better than that, cantstoppeating.

 

[visionofstrength]

I did not intend name-calling - apologies if it came off that way; my intention was to refer to the specific behaviour, not to character.

I'm afraid it did come off that way, but it was late and perhaps typed up quickly. I do appreciate the apology, and trust you that you wouldn't do that intentionally. As I think you've said, there's no need for disrespect on this forum. We are each entitled to articulate our own views. I welcome disagreement and very much want to learn from everyone here! Everyone, politely please!

 

[Blossom]

Is it really acceptable to let people ridicule a member for putting new crazy ideas out there? Shall I go to the BCAAs thread and ridicule Haidut because I don't agree with his idea? Is belittling people okay to do on this forum?

Can a moderator please comment on this?

Sorry for the delay in responding sm1693. The mods have been in discussions about this issue and it is currently being handled. I also apologize for any offense or discomfort felt by forum members or visitors to this site.

 

[narouz]

I always go back to the simplicity of diet that Ray wrote in his diabetes article:

"I think the basic anti-aging diet is also the best diet for prevention and treatment of diabetes, scleroderma, and the various "connective tissue diseases." This would emphasize high protein, low unsaturated fats, low iron, and high antioxidant consumption, with a moderate or low starch consumption. In practice, this means that a major part of the diet should be milk, cheese, eggs, shellfish, fruits and coconut oil, with vitamin E and salt as the safest supplements. It should be remembered that amino acids, especially in eggs, stimulate insulin secretion, and that this can cause hypoglycemia, which in turn causes cortisol secretion. Eating fruit (or other carbohydrate), coconut oil, and salt at the same meal will decrease this effect of the protein. Magnesium carbonate and epsom salts can also be useful and safe supplements, except when the synthetic material causes an allergic bowel reaction..." RP

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/diabetes.shtml

Yes Jennifer! This is a description of important characteristics of a Peat-inspired/derived diet, without saying anything in particular is completely forbidden, and gives some idea about what a practical application might be.

If you also add in the things he has said at other times about avoiding foods that cause particular digestive irritation, or are allergenic, and favouring sugar oxidation over fat for CO2 etc, it covers quite a lot. He's made some other somewhat similar summaries in other places.

tara-
The Peat quote from Jennifer--
one of many summary statements from him--
you will see, I think,
that it is quite close to pboy's stream-of-consciousness impression.

A couple of thoughts on your remarks,

"This is a description of important characteristics of a Peat-inspired/derived diet..."

I've been thinking about this "Peat-inspired/Peat-derived" language.
In this instance,
there should be no problem at all with referring to the diet described
as, simply, "Peatian."
Because they are Ray Peat's own exact words.

Now, the diet description I have in mind
would rely directly upon the other many such summary statements
which Peat himself expresses.
And as I've said up thread--and in contrast to, say, VoS's protocol--
I would want to remove myself as much as possible
and simply and transparently let Peat's ideas speak for themselves.
Not marketing, no salesmanship,
no invention, no "my spin"--just Peat.

In that case, I'm not sure I would feel guilty
simply referring to such a summary as a Peat Diet Synthesis or something.
Readers could look at the Peat quotes and judge for themselves
if it is a transparent, objective rendering.

In another direction:
because I'm not at all into marketing or selling,
I wouldn't feel the need to "soften" or "warm up" or "enhance"
or present as more "comfort-foody"
Peat's diet.
Nor would I feel the need to strategically try to sell it to one kind of audience or another.
And here I'm talking about an optimal Peat diet--
like the one Peat lays out in Jennifer's quote above.

In the spirit of good scholarship,
my guiding lights
would be fidelity to Peat, accuracy, transparency.

Beyond wishing to scrupulously avoid marketing and selling,
I wouldn't even have an interest in persuading readers to try a Peat diet.
Because if we start doing that,
to my mind,
we would be injecting our own agendas,
instead of just accurately and faithfully representing Peat.

Now...when one starts studying all the stuff Peat says about diet,
it is true that he does leave room for--to take one much debated area--some starches,
what some call, mistakenly I think, the "safe starches,"
like potatoes and limed corn and rice.
But I believe an objective and rigorous reading of Peat
clearly reveals that those foods are not optimal in Peat's view.

Yes, we can say things like:
"yeah, but potatoes might be optimal if you're poor."
Believe me, I've been there and I do sympathize.
Still, I don't believe this obligates us to color the facts,
even out of compassion for the poor.

That said, I think it would be desirable to faithfully and accurately present
some less-than-optimal Peat diet options.
Why let the perfect be the enemy of the good?
But I think clarity and accuracy and fidelity and transparency are the watchwords.
And Peat does distinguish between "okay" foods
and "safe" foods and "better foods."

"... without saying anything in particular is completely forbidden"

Sure, Peat's not gonna do that.
(Well...there are a few isolated instances where Peat leaves no doubt that certain foods are BAD. )
But just because Peat does not step in and Forbid Eating certain foods
does not at all, in my view, indicate that he wishes to encourage eating bad foods.
He's just not gonna try to force anyone.
As would most certainly be the case with the kind of summary I've been proposing.
I mean...it would surely be laughable, wouldn't it?, if I tried to stipulate something like that.
"By reading this diet summary you are tacitly signing a contract
to eat this diet and this diet only for the rest of your life
and if you don't narouz gonna come knockin'!

 

[Jennifer]

Whoops! Narouz, I think those last two quotes you posted are by tara, not me. :)

 

[narouz]

Whoops! Narouz, I think those last two quotes you posted are by tara, not me. :)

Hmmm...don't know how I did that.
But I think I fixed it.
Thanks!

 

[pboy]

just change is to VoS's DA and it will be all good, lol...people just don't want new users that aren't familiar with Peat to think he said all of that in a general sense. It would be like seeing all the things a doctor prescribed to various patients throughout a day then combining them all in a list and saying he said these were good! everyone take em all!

 

[visionofstrength]

Well, I'm soliciting reviews from the members in an effort to make it more general and accurate. I wouldn't have any recommendations of my own, since I only know what I know, if I know it, literally from what Peat has written, or the studies he's cited.

 

[tara]

just change is to VoS's DA and it will be all good, lol...people just don't want new users that aren't familiar with Peat to think he said all of that in a general sense. It would be like seeing all the things a doctor prescribed to various patients throughout a day then combining them all in a list and saying he said these were good! everyone take em all!

Well said. :)

 

[visionofstrength]

While I'm here I'd like Co2 sensor specs too thanks

PM'ed the specs to you.

 

[visionofstrength]

just change is to VoS's DA and it will be all good, lol...people just don't want new users that aren't familiar with Peat to think he said all of that in a general sense. It would be like seeing all the things a doctor prescribed to various patients throughout a day then combining them all in a list and saying he said these were good! everyone take em all!

Well said. :)

Ah yes, I missed the point of the analogy the first time. Peat is different from a doctor in that he doesn't prescribe drugs for curing illnesses. Instead, he suggests safe anti-inflammatories for better tissue oxidation, in dosages that are probably harmless, which work the same in tissues everywhere in the body.

Iron excess? Vitamin E. carcinoma in situ? Vitamin E.

PMS to menopause? progesterone. Balding? progesterone.

You may think of examples yourself.

There are differences in application measured against the risks of individual needs, but the safe anti-inflammatories tend to stay the same.

 

[narouz]

Vacuums and Protocols

On the issues we're having here in this thread,
about attribution, accuracy,
what is a Peat protocol? what is a Peat diet?" etc....

A strong current in forum orthodoxy has it
that "there is no Peat diet."
That dogma circulates even as
most of the readers likely operate under the assumption
that they are eating a Peat diet--
you know, that diet that doesn't exist.

This precious bit of Peatland shtick causes a vacuum.
It is predictable that other stuff--
poorly founded spins, fanciful protocols, marketing schemes--
will fill that vacuum.

In my opinion,
if the forum would simply represent
an accurate, objective, faithful summary of
what a Peat diet is,
according to Peat...
that would go a long way toward filling the vacuum.

For one thing,
it would be a clearly marked depot
where those in sm1693's position might park and peruse some authoritative basics.
(I said "authoritative," not "authoritarian"! )