Studying Peat's Ideas More Scientifically [recommended Books/resources?]

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Has anybody communicated with Peat about what books/resources he would recommend to anyone interested in learning more about the scientific background of his teachings? In other words, if someone would want to get a scientific background with Peatarian emphasis, what should one do? I would imagine Ray would not be very keen on recommending traditional biochemistry, physiology, or medical texts since they all view the body as a machine and the membrane/receptor theories are key topics in all of them. Alternatively, I looked on Amazon and there are quite a few books on bioenergetics, which seems like more in line with Peat's ideas. However, they all seem to be either esoteric (as in describing yogas that survive on photosynthesis) or too simplistic in the sense that they only discuss the Krebs cycle, and only from the point of view of the membrane theory.
Maybe I should just read Gilbert Ling's books, but if anybody has talked to Peat about good scientific materials to study I'd appreciate some pointers in the "right" direction:):
Thanks in advance.
 

andvanwyk

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
31
Here is my email exchange with him:

"Hi Ray.

Hope you're doing well.

I was wondering if you could recommend any good textbooks or books to learn a solid foundation of Biology and Chemistry without learning "incorrect" or "flawed" models.

Thanks Ray
Dre"

I don't know of any single book that assembles the important things, it's probably still necessary to read the original work and some of the things in each field that have built on those. G. N. Lewis, Peter A. Stewart (the "acid base tutorial" on the internet summarizes his approach), Bungenberg de Jong (coacervates), Sidney Fox, Walter Drost-Hansen, A.S. Troshin, Gerald Pollack, Szent-Gyorgyi, Carlos Sonnenschein, James A. Shapiro are people who have tried to avoid the mainstream mistakes, and have suggested new possibilities by the facts they chose to study.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Thanks a lot!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

aguilaroja

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
850
andvanwyk said:
....I don't know of any single book that assembles the important things, it's probably still necessary to read the original work and some of the things in each field that have built on those. G. N. Lewis, Peter A. Stewart (the "acid base tutorial" on the internet summarizes his approach), Bungenberg de Jong (coacervates), Sidney Fox, Walter Drost-Hansen, A.S. Troshin, Gerald Pollack, Szent-Gyorgyi, Carlos Sonnenschein, James A. Shapiro are people who have tried to avoid the mainstream mistakes, and have suggested new possibilities by the facts they chose to study.

---
I asked this question of Dr. Peat at a few intervals some years back. The response was similar, in that many sources were contributory, but there were no one or two summary sources.

Some written material is easier to find than others. Also, some material is written for a wider audience, while other material is written in specialized vocabulary, for a technical audience and often published in small prints runs.

Pollack's "Cells, Gels and the Engines of Life" mentions a number of points either from or related to Ling's work. His newer book, "The Fourth Phase of Water", is also written for a wider audience, and in some passages there are some amplified accounts of ideas points that Dr. Peat made years back.

Among Gilbert Ling's books, I'd suggest reading the most recent one first: "Life at the Cell and Below-Cell Level". It summarizes ideas from his earlier books and articles and was an attempt to reach a wider audience.

F.Z. Meerson has books on adaptation that Dr. Peat has mentioned in newsletters. Additionally, it is useful to look for Hans Selye's writings APART from the 2 popular books ("the Stress of Life" & "Stress without Distress") for more information on physiological stress, before the media focus shifted to "psychological stress". Most all the names that came up in correspondence were mentioned in the newsletters.

Though the books were written decades ago, browsing "Mind and TIssue" and "Generative Energy" will yield some names of pioneering influences.

(This is a small partial list. This is only the impression of a casual inquirer seeking to understand Dr. Peat and is not meant to represent his views.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bruno

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
7
Here's an exchange I had with Mr. Peat, more than a year ago :

Harold Hillman's books are good for surveying the nonfactual aspects of 'biology.' Sometimes I put 'membranes' in quotation marks to indicate that people mean very different things by the word. (For example, the centrifugation 'pellet' is often meant when they say 'membranes'.) F.S. Sjostrand and other electron microscopists working in the 1950s to 1970s are worth looking at. The irrelevancy of the 'membrane' is explained in Gilbert Ling's work.

Hillman's latest book ('Evidence-Based Biology', Shaker Publishing, 2008) is basically a biology book, IMO. It could be a little boring, but it's probably worth a read. His older books are cool too (there's the atlas of the nervous system, and his early little book called 'The Living Cell', for example).
I'd give you a scan of the Table of Contents but my internet signal is the worst right now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

5magicbeans

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
120
Age
59
My 13 yr. old son and I are reading through Gerald Pollock's "Fourth Phase of Water" in lieu of the regular Biology/Chemistry textbooks.
I've had some correspondence with him regarding this and his plans for future publications:

"Thanks so much for your kind note. Really - your 13 year old?

I had hope the message was digestible by bright youngsters, and your response provides some hope. They need to know that science is not the dull stuff it's made out to be, but totally alive.

My next book will deal with basic physics - reinterpreted. The first draft is almost done. It will deal with subject like: why the earth continues to spin on it's own axis; how magnets work; why we get the weather we do; what's the nature of gravitation; what's the structure of the atom, how birds fly; and much more. All concepts differ radically from convention. The central theme is charge.

The subsequent book will return to biology. It won't be a sequel, exactly, to Cells and Gels, but will deal with other biological topics, including health. Again, the explanations will differ from conventional ones.

I think you get the theme of my approach. I hope the subsequent books will live up to your expectations.

By the way, we're also trying to reinvigorate the system of doing science. Here's a presentation that describes our goal . It's been implemented, at least bare bones, and we're now looking for funding. If you have super-wealthy friends, let me know.

Best wishes,
Jerry Pollack"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

aguilaroja

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
850
Bruno said:
Here's an exchange I had with Mr. Peat, more than a year ago :

Harold Hillman's books are good for surveying the nonfactual aspects of 'biology.' Sometimes I put 'membranes' in quotation marks to indicate that people mean very different things by the word. (For example, the centrifugation 'pellet' is often meant when they say 'membranes'.) F.S. Sjostrand and other electron microscopists working in the 1950s to 1970s are worth looking at. The irrelevancy of the 'membrane' is explained in Gilbert Ling's work.

Hillman's latest book ('Evidence-Based Biology', Shaker Publishing, 2008) is basically a biology book, IMO. It could be a little boring, but it's probably worth a read. His older books are cool too (there's the atlas of the nervous system, and his early little book called 'The Living Cell', for example)....

I particularly like Hillman's book "Cellular Structure of the Mammalian Nervous System", written over 25 years ago. One strength of Hillman's arguments is that he documented his evidence in pictures (micrographs). His later Atlas has photos further supporting his findings.

Hillman's assertions are so significant that even if only 1% were true, there would be important implications for biology and medicine. That's a parallel with Dr. Peat. It seems to take creativity and perseverance to seek what is really going on, if it does not match the consensus fashion in science.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mas

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
148
Here is a good basic overview of structured water from Gerald Pollack-

He provides infer that RP has touched upon (and I want to learn more):
• red light therapy
• liquide crystaline structure
•positive and negative charges in cells and healing

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... water.aspx
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ideonaut

Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2015
Messages
499
Location
Seattle
aguilaroja said:
post 39626
I particularly like Hillman's book "Cellular Structure of the Mammalian Nervous System"
I'm hesitant to get it for fear it might be too technical. Can a layman get a useful or edifying better understanding out of it w/o a strong background?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

aguilaroja

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
850
brumpfschmlog said:
"Cellular Structure of the Mammalian Nervous System"
I'm hesitant to get it for fear it might be too technical. Can a layman get a useful or edifying better understanding out of it w/o a strong background?[/quote]

I would guess that the Hillman books would be especially eye-opening if there is some familiarity with the orthodoxy in cell and neural biology.

My recollection is that the book has some excellent summary chapters. It would be edifying even to briefly compare some of Hillman's profoundly simple drawing with the usual nerve cell pictures.

If Hillman is even, in small percentage, partially accurate, the understanding would change biology and medicine dramatically. It sounds a little like the fellow for whom the forum is named. The difference is particularly dramatic since neurobiology is considered one or maybe THE frontier in the life sciences.

There is a website for Hillman that will give some idea of his work. This video, freely accessible, seems representative, and even enhances material in the book:

http://harold-hillman.ling-winston.com/ ... lian-brain
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTOWSXQ_qaI

This might give an idea of the material discussed in the book. Hillman seems to be an excellent historian of histology, cell biology, and neurobiology, in addition to his own work.

This paper discusses some major ideas described in the book:
http://harold-hillman.com/wp-content/un ... d-papers/A Radical 0Reassessment of the Real Cellular Structure of the Mammalian Nervous System.pdf

or

http://harold-hillman.ling-winston.com/ ... stem-paper
 

Giraffe

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,730
In an radio show Peat was asked whether he could refer the listener to a source of information about the working of hormones in the body.

Peat answered that one of the good classical textbooks of endocrinology was "Textbook of Endocrinology" by Constance Martin. [It might be that the title is not correct. There is a book called "Textbook of Endocrine Physiology".]

I can not find the book anywhere. Does anyone have a pdf?

....

He then carries on to talk about Hans Selye, who's work was very influencial for his (Peat's) thinking of endocrinology.
 

MigFon

Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
55
In an radio show Peat was asked whether he could refer the listener to a source of information about the working of hormones in the body.

Peat answered that one of the good classical textbooks of endocrinology was "Textbook of Endocrinology" by Constance Martin. [It might be that the title is not correct. There is a book called "Textbook of Endocrine Physiology".]

I can not find the book anywhere. Does anyone have a pdf?

....

He then carries on to talk about Hans Selye, who's work was very influencial for his (Peat's) thinking of endocrinology.

I have found the Textbook of Endocrinology, but the author is Hans Selye. Here is the link, in case you are interested:

https://ia601509.us.archive.org/28/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.548958/2015.548958.Textbook-of.pdf
 

Tenglish

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Messages
30
Is there a place on the forum where a reading list from beginner to advanced is posted? I read PubMed and have some basic chem and physiology behind me, but want to go much deeper. I have Lings book and articles, and some of Pollack's books. I would imagine many other would like the same. For my purposes, I like to find books also available in kindle or any other digital format. I also dig audio and video, but usually they are only high level. Is this worth a forum section?
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe

Dan W

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
1,528
In what context did Peat mentioned Stewart's approach? As in a good approach on health or something else?
I think just on the acid/base model, but I don't know anything more, just that quote I mentioned (from here) and this one:
Ray Peat said:
Peter Stewart redesigned the handling mathematics for Acids and Base and he showed that almost always the crucial factor is CO2 gas pressure, not the bicarbonate ions that hospitals are measuring and calculating. It happens to be that Peter Stewart and the Gilbert [Lewis] Acid Theory are simply physically correct.
(from this interview)
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
I think just on the acid/base model, but I don't know anything more, just that quote I mentioned (from here) and this one:

(from this interview)

So, has anybody read Stewart's approach/theory? How different it is than the one used in ER and anesthesiologists?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom