Ray Peat Diet / Protocol Name?

[visionofstrength]

Here's Peat's description of a framework of a protocol, which was the conclusion of the September newsletter:

Besides selecting a diet that minimizes intestinal inflammation and free fatty acids, and that provides essential amino acids without an excess of cysteine, tryptophan, and arginine, the safe antiinflammatory supplements vitamin E, aspirin, niacinamide, vitamins K and D, thyroid hormone, progesterone, pregnenolone, DHEA, and coffee help to decrease the susceptibility to stress-induced aerobic glycolysis.

In November, Peat's newsletter described ways to improve the GSH/GSSG ratio, and the role of methylene blue.

Now, I'm not proposing actual doses, but a framework for self-dosing these substances that Peat explicitly calls out above. Does that make sense?

Why argue whether it should be a diet or a protocol. I don't like the word diet, because I think it's negative. Diets, so far, have done vastly more harm than good, by making people cut back on eating, rather than eat more.

I think many in this forum don't eat enough, that you should be trying to eat more, up to a point of at least 3,000 calories a day (but based on bodyweight and activity), without gaining bodyfat! Until you can do that, you are not at a high metabolic rate where you need to be.

I hope one thing we can agree on is that each of us has our own personalized day-to-day diet/protocol of food and supplements that we have made for ourselves, or else we may just be binge eating and popping pills whenever the mood strikes.

And I do ask myself, what would Ray Peat do? And I think that if he had the resources I have, or truly, that we have here, that he would do just what I'm proposing, a framework for a customized, self-dosing protocol, with animations on youtube, facebook and google to get the word out, and a mobile app.

He's done a lot with very little. Now it's our turn.

 

[narouz]

...I think there may be an infinite number of possible Peat-derived or Peat-inspired protocols, but not THE Peat Protocol, except perhaps for a very general one.

We're probably in harmony here,
but I did want to expand on those notions a bit
because I think there could be some loopholes
through which many might unhelpfully enjoy driving trucks.

When I use the term "Peat-derived" summary,
I mean to denote that such a summary would be
as much Peat as possible
and as little me as possible.

To make that even more clear
I've considered using terminology like
"An Optimal Peat-derived Diet"
or
"A Faithfully Derived Peat Diet"
or
"A Rigorously Derived Peat Diet"
or somesuch.

I can also see a rationale for calling it something like
"Some Faithfully Derived Peat Diets"
or somethng like that
because, yes, there is not just ONE way to
faithfully or accurately observe a Peat diet.

I could go on in this vein making various caveats
and underlining "the fine print" so to speak,
but I have done so elsewhere including some up this thread.

But the main thing I wanted to talk a bit about here
is your statement that there may be
"an infinite number of possible Peat-derived or Peat-inspired protocols..."

I think I know what you mean there,
and in some real sense it is true.
However, it can also be a big loophole kind of statement.

Construed in certain other ways,
the notion that "there is an infinite number of possible Peat-derived diets"
would mean that a Peat-derived diet could be anything
a person wanted it to be.
It is that kind of gobblety-gook, redutio ad absurdum construction I wish to avoid.
(Again, I don't think you advocate that either.)

I wish to avoid it because it is not true and not faithful to Peat.
There are clear and consistent patterns and themes in Peat's dietary philosophy.
Clear, consistent, and general.
Within those general guidelines there is a lot of flexibility and range.
But not an infinite amount.

 

[visionofstrength]

ive been sleeping without a heater and its like 35 degrees here and im fine,

Peat suggests you try to stay warm especially while you are asleep.

Please my friend, can you get a heater? Cold and dark are two of the greatest inducers of cortisol. That level of cortisol in the morning that's been needed to keep you alive at that temperature alone can wreck your metabolic rate. You're also burning an enormous number of calories from just fighting the cold and the cortisol.

Let's say you burn 2,000 calories from trying to stay warm with cortisol at night, that leaves only 500 calories to burn during the day, if you eat 2,500.

 

[pboy]

well I know its very important, the last few winters I was almost dying of cold, paralyzed me...but my metabolism has goen up significantly, ive been perfecting diet since and added a lot more milk...back then I was hardly having any. That's whats surprising to me but awesome. I have a comforter and blanket that adds some weight and it actually gets hot...like I don't wake up at all cold, when I first wake up in the morning and get up its kind of cold, but I turn the heater on right away then cycle it on and off during the day. I actually always keep a window cracked also for fresh air. I sleep better without it on cause its just like dry air coming right at me and has a humming noise. Its a big indication to me that im doing something right. I don't wake up ravenous either, just like my gut is kind of tight so I crave something to initiate GI movement, but its a stark difference from last year. I try to stay warm all the time, if I was freezing at night I would leave on the heater but im managing to not need it somehow. When im under the covers and breath its like hot air, and I can feel it back against my face so I think im generating a lot of internal heat. My air isn't long but long enough to cover my ears partially so that helps also

and on another note, I dotn take in caffeine other than maybe trace amount sometimes, and only stimulant I use is small amounts tobacco sometimes, and I don't exert a whole lot of physical energy though my brain is pretty active all day, but I think that's why...plus high thyroid, that I can maintain heat with only about 23-2550 calories, plus I guess I don't weigh that much

 

[sm1693]

Ah Narouz I must apologize for not being clear or providing references. If you look at what Mittir said he EATS in a day, it is quite similar to what VoS EATS in a day (as are many Peat-derived diets I've seen). I will look for the links...

I do not agree with VoS' supplement recommendations at all, but I do like the fact that he appears to be a proponent of spreading this "diet/lifestyle" and bettering our world.

 

[visionofstrength]

Ah Narouz I must apologize for not being clear or providing references. If you look at what Mittir said he EATS in a day, it is quite similar to what VoS EATS in a day (as are many Peat-derived diets I've seen). I will look for the links...

I do not agree with VoS' supplement recommendations at all, but I do like the fact that he appears to be a proponent of spreading this "diet/lifestyle" and bettering our world.

I'm asking for reviews here, before I go to the next steps. If there is anything specific in the recommendations that you don't agree with, please let me know?

Please review the proposed RDAs as suggestions, in Peat's words, for "safe anti-inflammatories" in "probably harmless" doses, only for those who have metabolic issues, until those issues are resolved.

 

[visionofstrength]

well I know its very important, the last few winters I was almost dying of cold, paralyzed me...but my metabolism has goen up significantly, ive been perfecting diet since and added a lot more milk...back then I was hardly having any. That's whats surprising to me but awesome. I have a comforter and blanket that adds some weight and it actually gets hot...like I don't wake up at all cold, when I first wake up in the morning and get up its kind of cold, but I turn the heater on right away then cycle it on and off during the day. I actually always keep a window cracked also for fresh air. I sleep better without it on cause its just like dry air coming right at me and has a humming noise. Its a big indication to me that im doing something right. I don't wake up ravenous either, just like my gut is kind of tight so I crave something to initiate GI movement, but its a stark difference from last year. I try to stay warm all the time, if I was freezing at night I would leave on the heater but im managing to not need it somehow. When im under the covers and breath its like hot air, and I can feel it back against my face so I think im generating a lot of internal heat. My air isn't long but long enough to cover my ears partially so that helps also

and on another note, I dotn take in caffeine other than maybe trace amount sometimes, and only stimulant I use is small amounts tobacco sometimes, and I don't exert a whole lot of physical energy though my brain is pretty active all day, but I think that's why...plus high thyroid, that I can maintain heat with only about 23-2550 calories, plus I guess I don't weigh that much

pboy, you sound like me, last year, extremely thin and yet worried about the difference between 2300 and 2550 calories, when in fact I was seriously hypothyroid and didn't even know it.

Now when I was younger like you, I didn't feel the effects yet, but given enough time it did catch up to me, until I got myself eating and drinking a lot more without any difficulties.

The ideal metabolism is a 12-15 year old who can eat large amounts of calories and just waste it. Wasting energy is a sign of a good metabolic rate. In mainstream science it's similar to "uncoupling", but in Peatian terms it's really just excellent tissue oxidation. The difference between 2300 and 2550 calories should be easy to burn off even while sedentary.

 

[pboy]

i mean it is, that's why I say 2300 is a bad day, its a time issue, if I had all day and didn't have to go anywhere id consume more than that, its like all I can get in, im not hypo at all right now

 

[visionofstrength]

2,500 calories on a good day, at your age and height, is not very much, especially given that you sleep in the cold.

The only easy, reliable ways to know for sure if you are hypo (short of paying for blood tests for arterial CO2) are to test your exhaled CO2 at rest, or to eat at least 3,000 calories a day when sedentary and see if you gain bodyfat.

You could measure urine output compared to liquid intake, if you were at average temperature and humidity (which it seems you're not).

 

[HDD]

VoS,
Can't we tell how hypo we are by by temperature, pulse, how we feel, sleep, color of nails, etc? Since you have optimal co2, what is your temperature and pulse throughout the day? Didn't Peat say 101 was ideal temp. Would that be reflective of co2?

"HD: Ok. How about, if the temperature is higher than 98.6 in the afternoon, and the pulse is over 100 ?

RP: The brain and the immune system, for example, the optimum temperature seems to be around 101, maybe even a little higher."

 

[tara]

@narouz,
I think we are probably significantly in accord.
I do not think 'infinite number of possibilities' means 'anything goes'. There are many more possibilities that would not qualify. (There an infinite number of multiples of 13 ...)
I do think general guidelines can be specified, and that reasonably faithfully derived examples could be described.

 

[tara]

First, a proper name for this "method of improving our health" would go a long way towards making it easier to find. It way by pure happenstance that I stumbled on Dr. Peat's work in the comment section of a Paleo site! Someone here, Such_Saturation? pointed out there are about eight or more different ways people refer to this method of eating, in this forum alone. If we truly want to help other people discover Ray Peat so they can learn to become healthy, we need to stop referring to it as Peating, Peatish, etc, and come up with an accurate, concise, understandable name.

[Warning: rambling paragraph, enter at your own risk.]
I wonder whether this desire for a named diet or protocol is something that appeals to people who have come here from a variety of minority subcultures that all have named and specified diets or protocols? You know,
'I had some problems/ I wanted to be really healthy/ I was weight training and trying to get ripped, so I tried vegetarian > gluten-free > raw vegan > GAPS > SCD > LCHF etc diets, and now my body's more wrecked than when I started and I hope the Peat diet will fix it. What is the Peat diet?'
I don't think this is how most people think about food. Amongst the people around me, I know a few people who eat or aspire to specified and possibly named diets, but most people don't. Quite a few people talk in moral terms about being good or bad in conjunction to eating foods that they perceive as healthy or unhealthy. Lots of people, with very different eating habits, tell me they eat a balanced diet. Most people are not in the habit of being seriously restrictive about their eating habits. For me in my circles, it seems much more natural to talk about Peat's ideas, or specific applications, and sometimes refer to the author, Peat, of those ideas. I don't think my people would either take it more seriously or understand the ideas more easily if it were named. I'm not sure it will be generally helpful to assign a name to what we all do, especially given that we do such different things. It may just make it easier for the average person to write us off as another bunch of orthorexics. But if the audience is other orthorexics, then having a name might make it easier.
I have learned a huge amount from Peat. I sometimes refer to him by name, and I sometime say things like ' My understanding of the current science is that PUFAs tend to be antimetabolic, and I'm currently trying to avoid them as much as I can.' It is good to have a good teacher, and it is good to credit him, but it is not all about him, it's the ideas that he has so intelligently synthesised and articulated, most of which are supported by a wide body of evidence. [/ramble]

Second would be a guideline. The term protocol may or may not work by definition, but it has it's merits. It could be called a method, a program or a plan but that's not what we should focus on. We should focus on creating a way for people to start Peating, without harming themselves or quitting for lack of results

I think a useful set of guidelines/methods could composed/compiled - there are a few partial such descriptions in various posts, esp. to new members.

Since there is a great deal of variability involved, maybe we should provide a Peat method that takes peoples starting points into consideration. My starting point would be considerably different than a teenager with ADHD, or a person with Parkinson's. If a someone can't handle dairy, they certainly won't use a protocol that recommends two liters of milk a day, or they may try and possibly hurt themselves.

This looks like a good idea to me.

One good way to do this would be to create a thread having people detail their own journey from start, to good health... in just a couple of paragraphs. From those, we could get a better gauge on what the common foods and supplements are, and where they started from / what they overcame.

So does this.

I envision a graph or chart or something visual that can outline a methodology that begins from various points - if you have better ideas for presentation, now's the time!

I have had vague ideas of a flow chart in mind.

While writing this, I realised that I have been thinking in terms of what would appeal to me. Possibly you all are doing the same. And then I think about how different people tend to learn in different ways, and it's so often useful to hear things described in different ways. So it may be a very good thing if information we have gleaned from Peat and our own experiments and successes gets communicate in different ways. Maybe it's just fine if some people refer to Peating, and some to a Peatish diet, etc, and some avoid such references. I'd prefer that variety to ormally applying a fixed name to this body of knowledge.

 

[tara]

Never say never, I guess.
But I just don't see Peat getting into marketing schemes.

I'm with you on this.
I do like the idea of good information being made widely available in accessible forms, but I have a couple of problems with approaching it as a marketing exercise that are to do with some of the common ways marketing is done. I think it is imortant to avoid these problems.

I think it is a really fundamental part of Peat's approach that he wants people to learn and observe and think about their health, not just follow someone else's thinking blindly.

Marketing is often done by trying to push emotional buttons and deliberately undermine having people think critically about the information.

Often advertising tries to directly contradict the negatives involved, eg 'I like to move it' airline ads.

Marketing often involves simplifying things further than they should be.

Marketing often makes claims well beyond what is supported by the evidence (or sometimes directly against the evidence).

 

[sm1693]

First, a proper name for this "method of improving our health" would go a long way towards making it easier to find. It way by pure happenstance that I stumbled on Dr. Peat's work in the comment section of a Paleo site! Someone here, Such_Saturation? pointed out there are about eight or more different ways people refer to this method of eating, in this forum alone. If we truly want to help other people discover Ray Peat so they can learn to become healthy, we need to stop referring to it as Peating, Peatish, etc, and come up with an accurate, concise, understandable name.

[Warning: rambling paragraph, enter at your own risk.]
I wonder whether this desire for a named diet or protocol is something that appeals to people who have come here from a variety of minority subcultures that all have named and specified diets or protocols? You know,
'I had some problems/ I wanted to be really healthy/ I was weight training and trying to get ripped, so I tried vegetarian > gluten-free > raw vegan > GAPS > SCD > LCHF etc diets, and now my body's more wrecked than when I started and I hope the Peat diet will fix it. What is the Peat diet?'
I don't think this is how most people think about food. Amongst the people around me, I know a few people who eat or aspire to specified and possibly named diets, but most people don't. Quite a few people talk in moral terms about being good or bad in conjunction to eating foods that they perceive as healthy or unhealthy. Lots of people, with very different eating habits, tell me they eat a balanced diet. Most people are not in the habit of being seriously restrictive about their eating habits. For me in my circles, it seems much more natural to talk about Peat's ideas, or specific applications, and sometimes refer to the author, Peat, of those ideas. I don't think my people would either take it more seriously or understand the ideas more easily if it were named. I'm not sure it will be generally helpful to assign a name to what we all do, especially given that we do such different things. It may just make it easier for the average person to write us off as another bunch of orthorexics. But if the audience is other orthorexics, then having a name might make it easier.
I have learned a huge amount from Peat. I sometimes refer to him by name, and I sometime say things like ' My understanding of the current science is that PUFAs tend to be antimetabolic, and I'm currently trying to avoid them as much as I can.' It is good to have a good teacher, and it is good to credit him, but it is not all about him, it's the ideas that he has so intelligently synthesised and articulated, most of which are supported by a wide body of evidence. [/ramble]

Second would be a guideline. The term protocol may or may not work by definition, but it has it's merits. It could be called a method, a program or a plan but that's not what we should focus on. We should focus on creating a way for people to start Peating, without harming themselves or quitting for lack of results

I think a useful set of guidelines/methods could composed/compiled - there are a few partial such descriptions in various posts, esp. to new members.

Since there is a great deal of variability involved, maybe we should provide a Peat method that takes peoples starting points into consideration. My starting point would be considerably different than a teenager with ADHD, or a person with Parkinson's. If a someone can't handle dairy, they certainly won't use a protocol that recommends two liters of milk a day, or they may try and possibly hurt themselves.

This looks like a good idea to me.

One good way to do this would be to create a thread having people detail their own journey from start, to good health... in just a couple of paragraphs. From those, we could get a better gauge on what the common foods and supplements are, and where they started from / what they overcame.

So does this.

I envision a graph or chart or something visual that can outline a methodology that begins from various points - if you have better ideas for presentation, now's the time!

I have had vague ideas of a flow chart in mind.

While writing this, I realised that I have been thinking in terms of what would appeal to me. Possibly you all are doing the same. And then I think about how different people tend to learn in different ways, and it's so often useful to hear things described in different ways. So it may be a very good thing if information we have gleaned from Peat and our own experiments and successes gets communicate in different ways. Maybe it's just fine if some people refer to Peating, and some to a Peatish diet, etc, and some avoid such references. I'd prefer that variety to ormally applying a fixed name to this body of knowledge.

Very well put.

 

[visionofstrength]

VoS,
Can't we tell how hypo we are by by temperature, pulse, how we feel, sleep, color of nails, etc? Since you have optimal co2, what is your temperature and pulse throughout the day? Didn't Peat say 101 was ideal temp. Would that be reflective of co2?

"HD: Ok. How about, if the temperature is higher than 98.6 in the afternoon, and the pulse is over 100 ?

RP: The brain and the immune system, for example, the optimum temperature seems to be around 101, maybe even a little higher."

The issue with temperature and pulse is that cortisol and adrenaline often mask hypothyroidism this way. Also, skin temperature is quite hard to measure accurately. I have tried every type of sensor I can find, including ear lobe, forehead, armpit and oral, and none are reliable enough for me to get good data.

I think Broda Barnes and Peat say you can get positive indicators for hypothyroidism from skin temps (especially after breakfast), though they disagree about measurement: Barnes says armpit, Peat says oral.

But they don't say you can get indicators for optimal metabolic rate this way. Yes, if you could somehow measure brain core temp, the optimal seems to be 100.4 or even 100.6. But how to measure? Rectal temps lag behind, or change too slowly in relation to brain core. Ear lobe temps I find to be unreliable.

The only easy, sure way is to measure exhaled CO2. I'm told by forum members you can get a blood test for arterial CO2, but that it's not easy.

But Peat's other way is good, too: how many calories can you eat and burn regularly without gaining bodyfat. This actually equates to the generated CO2, because, for example, one mole of glucose (680 calories) when burned (completely) generates six moles of carbon dioxide (264 grams), which is the amount of CO2 exhaled in 6 hours at 5% (40 mmhg). [At least, this is my working example, I'm still checking the math. And I've made math errors before!]

But in theory, anyway, the glucose you burn becomes the CO2 that you exhale, and so in round numbers, 2,720 calories would be needed in 24 hours to generate 5% CO2 in exhaled breath (assuming complete oxidation, and that my math is right).

But it also depends on the respiratory volume. By that I mean, if you hyperventilate all the CO2 away, burning a lot of glucose really won't be nearly as beneficial.

The other side of the coin is, that if you hypoventilate, or breathe slowly, you can retain more of the CO2, rather than blow it off when breathing.

Sorry, this is just a short thumbnail and I hope it's not too confusing. I'll try to do more later, when I make the animations.

 

[narouz]

First, a proper name for this "method of improving our health" would go a long way towards making it easier to find. It way by pure happenstance that I stumbled on Dr. Peat's work in the comment section of a Paleo site! Someone here, Such_Saturation? pointed out there are about eight or more different ways people refer to this method of eating, in this forum alone. If we truly want to help other people discover Ray Peat so they can learn to become healthy, we need to stop referring to it as Peating, Peatish, etc, and come up with an accurate, concise, understandable name.

[Warning: rambling paragraph, enter at your own risk.]
I wonder whether this desire for a named diet or protocol is something that appeals to people who have come here from a variety of minority subcultures that all have named and specified diets or protocols? You know,
'I had some problems/ I wanted to be really healthy/ I was weight training and trying to get ripped, so I tried vegetarian > gluten-free > raw vegan > GAPS > SCD > LCHF etc diets, and now my body's more wrecked than when I started and I hope the Peat diet will fix it. What is the Peat diet?'
I don't think this is how most people think about food. Amongst the people around me, I know a few people who eat or aspire to specified and possibly named diets, but most people don't. Quite a few people talk in moral terms about being good or bad in conjunction to eating foods that they perceive as healthy or unhealthy. Lots of people, with very different eating habits, tell me they eat a balanced diet. Most people are not in the habit of being seriously restrictive about their eating habits. For me in my circles, it seems much more natural to talk about Peat's ideas, or specific applications, and sometimes refer to the author, Peat, of those ideas. I don't think my people would either take it more seriously or understand the ideas more easily if it were named. I'm not sure it will be generally helpful to assign a name to what we all do, especially given that we do such different things. It may just make it easier for the average person to write us off as another bunch of orthorexics. But if the audience is other orthorexics, then having a name might make it easier.
I have learned a huge amount from Peat. I sometimes refer to him by name, and I sometime say things like ' My understanding of the current science is that PUFAs tend to be antimetabolic, and I'm currently trying to avoid them as much as I can.' It is good to have a good teacher, and it is good to credit him, but it is not all about him, it's the ideas that he has so intelligently synthesised and articulated, most of which are supported by a wide body of evidence. [/ramble]

Second would be a guideline. The term protocol may or may not work by definition, but it has it's merits. It could be called a method, a program or a plan but that's not what we should focus on. We should focus on creating a way for people to start Peating, without harming themselves or quitting for lack of results

I think a useful set of guidelines/methods could composed/compiled - there are a few partial such descriptions in various posts, esp. to new members.

Since there is a great deal of variability involved, maybe we should provide a Peat method that takes peoples starting points into consideration. My starting point would be considerably different than a teenager with ADHD, or a person with Parkinson's. If a someone can't handle dairy, they certainly won't use a protocol that recommends two liters of milk a day, or they may try and possibly hurt themselves.

This looks like a good idea to me.

One good way to do this would be to create a thread having people detail their own journey from start, to good health... in just a couple of paragraphs. From those, we could get a better gauge on what the common foods and supplements are, and where they started from / what they overcame.

So does this.

I envision a graph or chart or something visual that can outline a methodology that begins from various points - if you have better ideas for presentation, now's the time!

I have had vague ideas of a flow chart in mind.

While writing this, I realised that I have been thinking in terms of what would appeal to me. Possibly you all are doing the same. And then I think about how different people tend to learn in different ways, and it's so often useful to hear things described in different ways. So it may be a very good thing if information we have gleaned from Peat and our own experiments and successes gets communicate in different ways. Maybe it's just fine if some people refer to Peating, and some to a Peatish diet, etc, and some avoid such references. I'd prefer that variety to ormally applying a fixed name to this body of knowledge.

tara-
I'm not scared of rambles.
Ramble on!

Personally speaking, amongst my friends and acquaintances,
my sense is that
if they are open to or seeking new dietary/health/nutritional ideas,
they do, simply, want to know what a given diet is.

They wouldn't be so needy and insecure
as to want the diet to be etched in stone and Nazi-rigid.
In fact, that would probably be off-putting.
They'd simply like to know what the diet, generally, roughly, concisely
consists of.

It's the most natural thing in the world, I'd think.
If I bump into someone I haven't seen for a long while,
and during the course of talking about stuff
I tell them that I'm doing this new diet I'm really into,
and I leave it at that,
mostly likely the next thing out of their mouth will be:
"Well...go on...what diet is that?"
(I know, right?)

So I say it's a Ray Peat diet.
That's right: I probably would forget to say, "It's a Peat-derived diet."

So then what would you guess is the next question they would most likely ask? :)

 

[tara]

@narouz,
Yes, and when they ask, 'so what is this diet?' you and I would probably want to describe it differently, and maybe we would both describe it in different wasys to different audiences. I'll have a go at it when I can get it together in my head.

 

[tara]

@VoS,
I think your list is interesting, and potentially valuable.

I do not think most of these are general recommendations from Peat to everyone, but specific suggestions for particlar contexts.
I think it is your list, not Peat's, especially wrt quantities, and this is best explicitly acknowledged. (By all means acknowledge that you draw on ideas from Peat and Haidut.)
Otherwise I think you would be misrepresenting Peat, which I consider disrespectful to him and potentially confusing to others.

That said, a few of them do seem generally applicable, like sleep, OJ, carrot salad, salt, potato juice, liver, oysters, milk and cheese, low PUFA, and some of them you have reasonably phrased more generally 'as needed'. And many of the others may well be helpful in some contexts, though not necessarily at exactly the amounts you have specified.

Some of it seems directly contradictory to what I have read of Peat's more general recommendations, as far as I can see.
For instance:
* I have seen Peat recommend doses of 100 mg niacinamide 2 or more times a day, not 250mg.
* He has said that various macronutrient ratios can work, but when he has been more specific, they tend to look more like carb:protein of 2:1 or higher. Eg, 80-100 g protein for hypothyroid person, 130-150g for healthy adult (out of ~3000 cals), possibly more for someone very active. He clearly favours more carbs than fat as major fuel source for restoring metabolism.
* Thyroid supps he has clearly said need to be adjusted individually. I think it i very important for people to understand more about this befoer they start experienting, and especialy to know what to watch for to see if they are getting too much. Lots of people here have got themselves into trouble supplementing thyroid. I know Peat says it is often useful, but it does need to be treated with some care.
* With some possible exceptions (salt, niacinamide, vit-E, often thyroid?), Peat does seem to be much more cautious about continuous use of lots of supplements than this list suggests.
* I have not seen Peat recommend 1/4 cup of activated charcoal for every digestive upset. Usually his first recommendations are carrot salad and avoiding irritating substances. He has explicitly expressed concern about the particle size of available activated charcoal. I'm not saying he has never suggested using it - he has, and it does seem to have a useful place for people at times - but not so unreservedly and generally as you suggest here.
* I thought his calcium recommendation was more like 2g, not 5g (though he has referred to some particular healthy populations as eating up to 5g)
* Magnesium, I thought his recommendation for most people was more like 400mg, not 2g, though some people may benefit from more (and some euthyroid people may require less). How do you get 'magnesium bicarbonate (~50 mg per ounce)'? Are you referring to a saturated magnesium bicarbonate solution?
I'm not up with his precise recommendations for fat soluble vitamins, so I won't comment on that.
* Methylene blue: I know he has referred to some helpful effects from methylene blue for various conditions, because of its assistance in part of the respiratory chain, but has he really suggested everybody start using it?

I would hate to see a new-comer find this list as a first introduction, and think this is what The Peat Diet/Protocol is, and that Peat thinks they should immediately start doing them all. It could have a number of problematic consequences, ranging from being written off immediately as impossible or crazy, through to being followed to the letter without sufficient heed to individual needs and getting people into serious health crises.

Again, I do value your thinking about this, and that you share the methods that you are finding to work well for yourself. How about phrasing the title and introduction clearly as what you have been doing and finding useful, instead of presenting it as a protocol for everyone?

 

[narouz]

@narouz,
Yes, and when they ask, 'so what is this diet?' you and I would probably want to describe it differently, and maybe we would both describe it in different wasys to different audiences. I'll have a go at it when I can get it together in my head.

tara-
You mean, to your redneck (do they have those downunder?) friends
you would would say:
"Yeah, steak and potatoes every night, baby!"...?
While to your uppercrust academic buddies
you would say:
"Fruit and cheese, fruit and cheese, topped off with a cappuccino!"...?

It really needn't be so mindbending.
Hell, our own illustrious pboy--just off the cuff!--tossed off a wonderful rough sketch
up the thread a couple pages:
"I guess if you had to say, it would be milk orange juice weekly liver, weekly shellfish, coffee, sugar, gelatin, raw carrot or bamboo shoots, and an optional egg or 2 a day...
...but then cheese, coconut oil, salt, various supplements, cream, some other fruits, greens broth, even occasional small amount beef or lamb, are all like...you shouldn't need them, or they might not be available, but are good in moderation or in certain situations. Then you have even another category below that with like...dunno, chocolate, coke, greek yogurt...we've been through this before! I guess you could make a long list of completely unacceptable, then more acceptable, then certainly acceptable."

I mean, I'm convinced pboy is a genius, but still...
he probably gave it all of 15 seconds thought.
And yet it is a pretty accurate rough sketch,
which would serve the purpose quite well--
the purpose being, concisely answering your friend's simple, reasonable question:
"What is a Peat diet?"

 

[johns74]

Telling them a diet obviously won't work because it will contradict their doctors advice. At least if they're sick. If they aren't, they won't even ask for a new diet.

So you'll have to explain the principles, if they're open to it, at which point they have enough knowledge to deduce what a good diet is, so in the end, whatever diet you told him to practice is not very relevant. Probably that's why there is no Peat diet. Peat didn't create a diet because once you know the principles it's easy to derive a good diet.

If they don't know which aspect of the diet causes what changes (e.g., avoiding PUFA), they would have no goals, no expectaions, no idea if anything is working, so they'll abandon the effort.

Thank God (and Peat) there is no Peat diet, as it would be so worthless as shown above, and for many other reasons not stated.