1-year On Ray Peat/Pro-metabolic Diet With Some Bad Results

[lollipop]

Yup, I corrected many issues using Rays suggestions. I was in such bad shape I actually tried to take my life, which thankfully I was unsuccessful at. Shortly after I stumbled on Rays website, learned, paid him for consultations, and years later here I am, at 26 years old feeling about 10,000% better that at 16.

What a powerful story @tca300! You continue to inspire myself and many others with your poignant posts. Thank you And I agree with @Regina, sooooooo happy you are here.

 

[tca300]

@Regina @Jsaute21 @lisaferraro

 

[Wagner83]

One of the main reasons I got interested in reading him is that artistic interesting side . With some interesting parts not related to nutritional and hormonal advices I still agree.

[....]

If you think that someoneo is rulling the World or some kind of other conspiracy Paranoia or have a hard time believing what I am saying or why I personaly finally realized what are major weak links in Peat artistic theory than I can't help you with that part. Peating and supplements clearly made it worse.There is no conspiracy my friend...and the end you will end as a real broken man without real connection with the world in believing that someone is pulling the Strings behind the Scenes. There is only a confusion , detaching from traditional kknowledge and and hunger for profit that's making you Paranoid and confused. And unfortunately you choosed to follow recommendations that will only further put You in that black illusion hole.r

[...]

And guess why Koch's work is much mofe truthfull than Peats.? It's because he observed real traditional civilisation diets and knowledge(not some Weston Price Tribal Paleo BS) and personally observed many holistic real world experiments.
Also I think that even despite his very good explanations in work and similarity with traditional diets I still think that some real traditional knowledge are even actually superior to his observations. One example is refined starch or refinment of grains.

I agree, just listened to an other podcast yesterday (damn some of the callers' questions and Andrew who cuts Ray short..) , listening to Ray talk about the body is fascinating, this is where I think you are a bit ungrateful because you speak with a lot of hatred towards Peat, but if you know how to ignore the diet and supplements recommendation it's still a very interesting view on how the organism work, an invitation to learning more (from Koch or other guys, as you did). I tried to listen to a podcast from Chris Masterjohn, boy was that boring I could not make it. In the kmud podcast I listened a caller had gained 30 kg after switching to a 2L milk 1L orange juice diet and supplementing T3, the answers sounded so unhelpful because as you said they can't think outside this little diet box.

I don't enjoy the conspiracy theories (Obama is muslim, Jewish rule the world etc..) , but since you love Koch work, don't you believe his reports of curing cancer with diets and quinones are legit? If you do, then why the hell nobody talks about it and chemotherapy is still the way to go?

 

[cyclops]

@Wagner83, what are the biggest things you think Peat is wrong about in terms of diet and supplementation?

 

[Wagner83]

@Wagner83, what are the biggest things you think Peat is wrong about in terms of diet and supplementation?

As you can see from this forum and its members (or callers on the kmud podcasts etc..) a lot of people do bad on the milk + orange juice + no starch diet. I'm not anyone to say Ray is blatantly wrong in his food choices, I can only say that my experience and the experience of many other people show it does not work for a lot, I wish it did. He based his exclusion of starch on studies done with dry starch and mice, as far as I am concerned the persorption issue of cooked starch is a complete nonsense (but if people do better without it then that's great). A lot of people struggle with huge amounts of milk, too much liquid in the diet, too much coffee etc..
As for supplements he often mentions thyroid supplements as if they were benign and the cure to most diseases , or that you can't have too much of pregnenolone (estrogenic contaminant) etc..

Again I talk from my perspective and what I see happening here , but for sure continuing to insist with a diet when it is so obviously wrong (e.g. see caller from April kmud podcast) for a particular individual makes no sense to me.

 

[cyclops]

As you can see from this forum and its members (or callers on the kmud podcasts etc..) a lot of people do bad on the milk + orange juice + no starch diet. I'm not anyone to say Ray is blatantly wrong in his food choices, I can only say that my experience and the experience of many other people show it does not work for a lot, I wish it did. He based his exclusion of starch on studies done with dry starch and mice, as far as I am concerned the persorption issue of cooked starch is a complete nonsense (but if people do better without it then that's great). A lot of people struggle with huge amounts of milk, too much liquid in the diet, too much coffee etc..
As for supplements he often mentions thyroid supplements as if they were benign and the cure to most diseases , or that you can't have too much of pregnenolone (estrogenic contaminant) etc..

Again I talk from my perspective and what I see happening here , but for sure continuing to insist with a diet when it is so obviously wrong (e.g. see caller from April kmud podcast) for a particular individual makes no sense to me.

I don't really see a Peat diet as orange juice + milk and no starch.

I see it as a higher carb diet with certain fruits being better then others. Sugar and well-cooked starch both good. Some cooked vegetables. Some Milk and Yogurt and Cheese. He lets you know animal products that have allot of nutrients like oyster and liver and should be balanced by gelatin.

 

[sladerunner69]

1gr calcium is more than enough in normal circumstances, let me emphasize MORE THAN ENOUGH. Trying to compensate low magnesium intake and low 25(OH)D levels (<50ng/mL) with extra calcium looks a very bad idea to me, the same way as happens with excess iron.

Sugar is not a big deal used ocassionally but its empty crap as food source since you can use hooney of mapple syrup to sweeten up things. Caffeine is no problem neither from time to time, as long as it won't create you daily dependence.

What's wrong with cheese?? Its a great food, while it won't be made from homogenized milk.

I eat sometimes over 4 grams of calcium in a day, and reliably feel better when my calcium intake is higher. The calcium to phosphate ratio, something never discussed by mainstream "health" gurus, is frequently brought up in Peat's articles. Foods high in calcium tend to promote a strong metabolism and raise temps, while foods heavy in phosphate will lower the metabolism. One could delve into detail about the effects of a poor calcium to phosphate ratio but Dr Peat has already done so at large.

Another factor to consider is calcification of tissues like arteries, which Dr Peat claims is a result of low calcium intake, despite the mainstream interpretation.

 

[sladerunner69]

As you can see from this forum and its members (or callers on the kmud podcasts etc..) a lot of people do bad on the milk + orange juice + no starch diet. I'm not anyone to say Ray is blatantly wrong in his food choices, I can only say that my experience and the experience of many other people show it does not work for a lot, I wish it did. He based his exclusion of starch on studies done with dry starch and mice, as far as I am concerned the persorption issue of cooked starch is a complete nonsense (but if people do better without it then that's great). A lot of people struggle with huge amounts of milk, too much liquid in the diet, too much coffee etc..
As for supplements he often mentions thyroid supplements as if they were benign and the cure to most diseases , or that you can't have too much of pregnenolone (estrogenic contaminant) etc..

Again I talk from my perspective and what I see happening here , but for sure continuing to insist with a diet when it is so obviously wrong (e.g. see caller from April kmud podcast) for a particular individual makes no sense to me.

The only issue with OJ from what I have seen can be acid reflux if the OJ is commercially manufactured and not very sweet. I have never heard of anyone complaining on fresh squeezed pulp free OJ, organic milk, and a zero starch diet. In fact everyone who excises starch from their foods seems to almost immediately heal their gut and digestive issues.

In fact I ran a search for posters doing poorly on OJ/Milk, I found one besides you, and he never mentioned food quality so perhaps he was drinking kroger mass manufactured cartons of OJ and greater value milk with added vitamins....

 

[cyclops]

In fact I ran a search for posters doing poorly on OJ/Milk, I found one besides you, and he never mentioned food quality so perhaps he was drinking kroger mass manufactured cartons of OJ and greater value milk with added vitamins....

All non-whole milk has added vitamins where I'm at. Even organic. Sucks.

 

[sladerunner69]

All non-whole milk has added vitamins where I'm at. Even organic. Sucks.

Yeah I know, same here. Finding a brand that is more tolerable is an option, I think some companies use different solutions to add in the vitamins.

 

[Wagner83]

I don't really see a Peat diet as orange juice + milk and no starch.

I see it as a higher carb diet with certain fruits being better then others. Sugar and well-cooked starch both good. Some cooked vegetables. Some Milk and Yogurt and Cheese. He lets you know animal products that have allot of nutrients like oyster and liver and should be balanced by gelatin.

That's what the standard Peat diet is and what he has recommended countless times along with thyroid medication, it's also his own diet. I agree that he has also been open about certain ideas.

"Question to Ray - If you don't mind me asking a question. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that you think starches are OK or even beneficial to eat, even when Fruit is available. Some are saying that super cooked starch to the point of it being wet and somewhat soggy, has beneficial effects that surpass sucrose. What is your current opinion? Thank you!

Ray Peat's Answer - " When a non-starchy fruit is available I think it’s always preferable to starch. Alkali-processed corn is the only kind that I’m willing to eat, and seldom that (e.g., corundas made with wood ashes)."
"
Sugar Or Starch? Perfect Health Diet Confusion?

The only issue with OJ from what I have seen can be acid reflux if the OJ is commercially manufactured and not very sweet. I have never heard of anyone complaining on fresh squeezed pulp free OJ, organic milk, and a zero starch diet. In fact everyone who excises starch from their foods seems to almost immediately heal their gut and digestive issues.

In fact I ran a search for posters doing poorly on OJ/Milk, I found one besides you, and he never mentioned food quality so perhaps he was drinking kroger mass manufactured cartons of OJ and greater value milk with added vitamins....

That is completely wrong and all you have to do is read the forums and see how people fare with milk, dairy, 0 starch and high sucrose intake. For some it seems to be fine but those are few. I thought it was fine for me for two or three weeks but then issues arose and were resolved by removing juices (fresh) and adding starch back in.

 

[sladerunner69]

That's what the standard Peat diet is and what he has recommended countless times along with thyroid medication, it's also his own diet. I agree that he has also been open about certain ideas.

"Question to Ray - If you don't mind me asking a question. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that you think starches are OK or even beneficial to eat, even when Fruit is available. Some are saying that super cooked starch to the point of it being wet and somewhat soggy, has beneficial effects that surpass sucrose. What is your current opinion? Thank you!

Ray Peat's Answer - " When a non-starchy fruit is available I think it’s always preferable to starch. Alkali-processed corn is the only kind that I’m willing to eat, and seldom that (e.g., corundas made with wood ashes)."
"
Sugar Or Starch? Perfect Health Diet Confusion?



That is completely wrong and all you have to do is read the forums and see how people fare with milk, dairy, 0 starch and high sucrose intake. For some it seems to be fine but those are few. I thought it was fine for me for two or three weeks but then issues arose and were resolved by removing juices (fresh) and adding starch back in.

Well I guess I must be "completely wrong" if you say so. No need to support such a claim with evidence or links to other posts.

 

[Wagner83]

Well I guess I must be "completely wrong" if you say so. No need to support such a claim with evidence or links to other posts.

Well there's me so that's one, Eire24 is an other one, tara does better with small meals with starch, haidut drinks no milk unless he visits friends in the countryside, other people had issues that resolved when they dropped dairy products, Jsaute , in this thread, said he did better with starch and many more but I won't chase them down , as you search the forums you may come across them at some point.
In any case it does not really matter, if you are doing well with such a diet then great for you!

 

[cyclops]

"Question to Ray - If you don't mind me asking a question. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that you think starches are OK or even beneficial to eat, even when Fruit is available. Some are saying that super cooked starch to the point of it being wet and somewhat soggy, has beneficial effects that surpass sucrose. What is your current opinion? Thank you!

Ray Peat's Answer - " When a non-starchy fruit is available I think it’s always preferable to starch. Alkali-processed corn is the only kind that I’m willing to eat, and seldom that (e.g., corundas made with wood ashes)."

Maybe he thinks its preferable for him? I've heard many different quotes by Peat regarding starch. Some quotes he makes starch seem ok.

 

[Wagner83]

Maybe he thinks its preferable for him? I've heard many different quotes by Peat regarding starch. Some quotes he makes starch seem ok.

I think generally speaking he is open minded about things if people say they are doing well on them, however if one had to narrow down the nutrional advice from Peat to people looking to improve their thyroid function and resolve (digestive, endotoxin , estrogens etc..) issues , it is , imo , pretty well known:
2 quarts of milk, 1 of orange juice (pulp free), cooked mushrooms/bambo shoots/carrott salad, some liver , one egg , a bit of cheese , occasional oysters, shrimps, ripe fruits if available (not all though), nixtamilized corn from time to time should be ok, coconut oil etc..
All I'm saying is this diet in particular causes more issues than it solves for some people , me included. I don't want to sound like I'm bashing Peat because I'm not, just saying this diet template will not fit everyone. Dairy (milk in particular), too much liquids and in my experience too much sucrose over glucose all may give issues.

 

[cyclops]

I think generally speaking he is open minded about things if people say they are doing well on them, however if one had to narrow down the nutrional advice from Peat to people looking to improve their thyroid function and resolve (digestive, endotoxin , estrogens etc..) issues , it is , imo , pretty well known:

This seems fair.

Why do you think Peat gets it wrong though? He obviously researched this stuff. Why does he see it this way based on his research? What is he reading the wrong way? His major flawed logic or thinking?

 

[Jsaute21]

This seems fair.

Why do you think Peat gets it wrong though? He obviously researched this stuff. Why does he see it this way based on his research? What is he reading the wrong way? His major flawed logic or thinking?

I think @Wagner83 makes some good points regarding starch, but i think the very underestimated variable in Peat's views on starch is the health of one's gut. He almost always states that if one is very healthy, they can tolerate starch well. For those with not as healthy of bacteria in their stomach, it seems to make more sense to rely on galactose, fructose & sucrose. He pretty much lays that out for us, yet so many keep going back & forth on why does Ray hate starch?!!! He prefers sugars, probably because he naturally does not have the best gut. There is also the endotoxin issue with starch, and i will say, i have noticed as i get older, i do not digest starch as quickly as i used to unless it is a well cooked potato.

However, i am with @sladerunner69 & others that defend the majority of Peat's points. The guy is very very smart, and has led us all (for the most part) to better health. He never tells you not to listen to your body, and drink milk or orange juice when your not thirsty. He never does a lot of the stupid things we often do to ourselves & seem to blame him for. His advice on supplements IMO is brilliant, and he backs it up with very clear reasoning on why each of those supplements helps facilitate a healthy metabolism or can improve symptoms of a low one. He deserves far more credit than blame.

Especially when you think about the majority of "health gurus" out there such as Asprey & others. At worst, they are steroid abusers who preach about not eating carbohydrates. At best, they are extremely under researched and make false claims regarding how inflammatory all carbohydrates are.

 

[churchmouth]

Ray Peat seems to promote context for all things, yet he is being criticised here that his 'diet' doesn't work for everyone. I thought that much is already obvious.

Nikola seems to be in internal conflict, and is throwing insults at Ray Peat as an outlet, for once upon a time worshipping ray peats recommendation without applying own free thought and context. I just find it odd as Ray is quite clear that he doesn't wish to be blindly followed.

Also surveying the mood of the forum isn't a good indicator for whether Peat's philosophy are true or not. I don't report in every milestone success, I think am more likely to post when I need some help. I have been feeling amazing lately, and not taking thyroid supplements (however I don't drink milk, or anything, past the point of contentment).

 

[Jsaute21]

Ray Peat seems to promote context for all things, yet he is being criticised here that his 'diet' doesn't work for everyone. I thought that much is already obvious.

Nikola seems to be in internal conflict, and is throwing insults at Ray Peat as an outlet, for once upon a time worshipping ray peats recommendation without applying own free thought and context. I just find it odd as Ray is quite clear that he doesn't wish to be blindly followed.

Also surveying the mood of the forum isn't a good indicator for whether Peat's philosophy are true or not. I don't report in every milestone success, I think am more likely to post when I need some help. I have been feeling amazing lately, and not taking thyroid supplements (however I don't drink milk, or anything, past the point of contentment).

Very good points. I am not on here much when i feel great, with the exception of looking for research as it interests me.

 

[Broken man]

So, assuming one keeps a steady dietary supply of sucrose (or some other type of sugar), wouldn't the constant presence of glucose in the blood stream keep insulin chronically elevated too? I have read various, and often contradictory, statements from Peat about the whole blood sugar and insulin thing. Often, he says that it is important to always keep blood glucose up to keep cortisol at bay and metabolism high. Of course, this means insulin would be elevated chronically too. On insulin, Ray sometimes says it is a good hormone responsible for anabolism and keeping tumor growth under control. At other times he has said that elevated insulin is not a good thing. So, I am bit confused about the overall dietary guidelines. Should we try to keep blood sugar elevated all the time but at a certain stable (and reasonable) level, which would imply higher (but stable insulin), or should we do pulse feeds which would temporarily bring insulin up to shuttle the glucose to the muscles and then insulin goes down and the body runs on glycogen from the liver?
I suspect a number of people on the forum struggle with this issue as evidenced by several posts of rapid weight gain, elevated blood glucose and insulin on blood tests and worried doctors making recommendations to cut down on sugar, blood pressure rising in people who did not have blood pressure issues before, etc. Some of these things could be beneficial, but there was a post by one person who said her blood pressure went from 120/80 to 150/90 after adopting the higher sugar diet and after some back and forth with her doctor she decided to quit the Peat diet. Then she reported her blood pressure normalizing after reducing sugar intake. Btw, it is well known in the bodybuilding community that cutting carbs works just like diuretics. I am not an advocate of this, but wouldn't people prone to edema and having thyroid problems get their water-retention problems exacerbated if they increase sugar/carbs intake? I guess that would happen at least initially and the theory is that as their metabolism normalizes they should be able to better utilize glucose and then lose all the excess water. So, the million dollar question is how long does one have to re-feed higher carbs diet (and suppress fatty acid oxidation through the Randle effect) until their insulin sensitivity is restored?
Finally, there have been a number of reports on Peatarian and occasionally on this forum of people experiencing proteinuria (protein in the urine) when increasing sugar intake above 200g daily. If you are eating 80g+ of protein then you probably strive to eat at least as many carbs. Peat has said that this proteinuria is due to people burning PUFA, which makes albumin leak in the urine and show up on the tests but as far as I can tell, these people were actually burning fat before adopting the higher sugar diet and only experienced proteinuria after increasing sugar intake. Of course, they could have had this issue all along and only realized it after switching and measuring their urine but there are several reports of this so I doubt it's a random thing. Somebody also posted a study on thousands of university employees and those who consumes the most sugary drinks reported the highest incidence of proteinuria.
It would be nice if we can get some guidelines on this. Personally, I use caffeine to increase the utilization of sugar and don't really have issues with it, but in theory there should be a way to handle sugar from diet without relying on sugar burning aids like caffeine and/or thyroid. Thyroid does not seem to be a good option for me, and I have tried all kinds of supplementing schedules and dosages. As I have posted on other threads, my experience with sugar only improved after I took serious measures to "normalize" my liver function through caffeine and vitamin K2, BUT my liver enzymes were NORMAL according to the standard lab ranges. If the stats are true and over 80% of people over 30 have some degree of fatty liver, which is the real cause behind type II diabetes, then I think many people adopting the Peat diet will likely experience stress reduction through the lower cortisol, but may end up making their fatty liver worse, especially is supplementing niacinamide and aspirin. Such_Saturation and I posted about this in another thread.
So, my main point is that burning sugar is definitely preferable to burning fat based on both Peat's writings and all the studies I have seen about liver disease being caused by increased lipid peroxidation byproducts, and cirrhosis (in alcoholic rats) being easily and succesfully treated by feeding about 60g-70g of saturated fat like butter or coconut oil for a week, while the rats kept drinking alcohol at the same time! So, on the point of burning sugar I think the question is settled that it is preferable to burning fat.
However, the point is to actually BURN the sugar rather than simply feeding ourselves more of it. For people with sluggish livers, many of whom also take niacinamide and aspirin, this is likely to make the metabolism situation worse by fattening the liver even more, even though admittedly the fat synthesized will be saturated since it is made from sugar. But fatty liver will increase your estrogen no matter how saturated the fat is that you are synthesizing. So, fattening up the liver even more probably won't do much good for metabolism. Another suggestion from Peat would be to increase protein intake to at least 80g a day which should support liver function, lower estrogen and increase conversion of T4 into T3. However, that will likely also not work very well in people with sluggish and fatty livers since underperforming liver will convert a lot of that extra protein into ammonia. Even Peat is clear on this point in one of his articles where he says that "hyperammonemia can be caused by exhaustive exercise or hypothyroidism". This is also evidenced by a number of studies showing that people in their late 30s, 40s, and 50s experience chronic fatigue issues that are greatly helped by giving them ammonia-reducing agents like ornithine or sodium benzoate. And those people consume nowhere near the 80g of protein Peat recommends. So, if they are having ammonia issues imagine how would the people loading up on extra protein would feel.
Which brings us to the point that for many people over the age of 30, simply increasing sugar and/or protein will likely not solve the metabolic issues. Thus, the Peat diet, while the correct way to eat, may not be a solution to the issues of hypothyroidism, but rather a way to avoid the worse option of running on cortisol and adrenalin, which while energizing in the short run will ruin you in the longer run.
Considering the Barnes book "Hypoglycemia: It's not your brain, it's your liver", which I read, it seems that restoring optimal liver function is also a key to improving metabolism. Yes, thyroid function is important too, but I think Peat's recommendation on supplementing thyroid even in the presence of normal thyroid labs may cause issues for a number of people. Charlie, and at least 20 other people have posted on struggling with supplementing thyroid. If they take it, they develop teeth issues, skin issues, anxiety or some other unpleasant symptoms. If they don't take it, their digestion slows down to a crawl or they start getting hypothyroid symptoms like brain fog or muscle issues, etc.
So, if the stats are true and the evidence I have seen is legit, then eating according to the peat guidelines is a great strategy AFTER metabolism is fixed. But if 80% of people over 30 are having liver issues or some other problems with metabolism, then the diet will be certainly supportive, but likely not "curative". And for some people with particularly bad liver problems the situation may end up getting worse in a way due to even more fatty liver issues or higher ammonia levels. Just ask anybody over the age of 40 if they are having trouble maintaining (let alone building) muscle mass.
Then the question becomes, what will aid metabolic recovery, other than blindly supplementing thyroid even in the presence of normal thyroid labs? I guess the answer Peat will give is that one needs to wait at least 4 years and get rid of the PUFA before starting to see solid results. There is some solid evidence in favor of lower PUFA fixing metabolic issues. But I wonder if working on liver health or trying to build more muscle will also help while waiting out the PUFA detox period? Uncoupling agents are probably also key, but they should probably be other than aspirin since it may make fatty liver issues worse for many people if used in the doses needed for mitochondrial uncoupling. Finally, increasing CO2 production or intake somehow will also likely have a key role. Just throwing things out there that seem to be cardinal methods for improving metabolism.
Sorry about the long rant, I just felt like this deserves some attention since a number of threads pop on the forum asking the same questions and I have been thinking about this for some time. If someone knows about Peat's definitive opinion on this issue please share it. Maybe I missed it in his articles. IMHO, after reading pretty much all of his published stuff, reading people's testimonies/complaints, cross-referencing this with studies, and my own experience, I think a number of chicken/egg question still remain.
Anybody care to comment?