A Curriculum For Self-education In Biological Nutrition

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
I was wondering if it might make sense to also
work up a listing
of all the scientists/experts
whom Peat has noted as being wrong about stuff
or even having lied about stuff.

A counter-curriculum.

I'll start us off:

-Lustig
-the Burrs
-the "Pure, White, and Deadly" guy
-Ancel Keyes
-Pasteur (in a certain way)
-Noam Chomsky
-Konrad Lorenz
-John Goffman
(radiation propagandist until he saw the light; discussed in latest Rain-Making Time)
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
narouz said:
I was wondering if it might make sense to also
work up a listing
of all the scientists/experts
whom Peat has noted as being wrong about stuff
or even having lied about stuff.


It's pretty common for people including scientists to be right about some things and wrong about others.
I suggest listing specific works that are majorly problematic and why, rather than just names. We can learn useful things from people who have made some errors. In fact, most of what we learn probably comes in this category, since no-one is infallible. And sometimes even the errors are a step forward from previous ideas.
Hasn't Peat suggested everyone read a physiology text to get a basic understanding, but also to read a range of others who are more accurate about particular aspects?

Some of the people on this list (I'm not familiar with all of them) are responsible for some valuable writing, even if they may also have written some things that are mistaken.
It will likely turn out that Peat has been wrong about some things, too.

Confirmed systematic liars and fraudsters may be in a different category.
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
on Pasteur, as a possible scientist for the counter-list:

I can't even quite bring the conversation into focus now,
but on one of the KMUD Herb Doctors
Sarah teased out a fine point about Pasteur that Peat agreed with
and about which I had the idea she'd gotten it from Peat at some time...

...but anyhow:
she was saying that this contemporary of Pasteur's
challenged a key idea of Pasteur's,
and that Pasteur later conceded this.

This basic biological idea is really important in PeatLand, but...damn, I just can't remember...

Seems like it had to do with what Peat talks about as Field Theory.
In Pasteur's time...Sarah knew the French word/equivalent.

I'll try to remember which KMUD.

The deep history of science Peat does blows me away.
He makes a lot of deep historical references.
Swedenborg was the guy, the contemporary of Blake's,
I couldn't think of earlier.

It would be fun to trace a lineage or flowchart of Peat's particular history of science.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
CellularIconoclast said:
burtlancast said:
As Tara wrote, if Keys simply discarded the results that didn't fit his theory and attempted to hide the fact, it equals to scientific fraud, not scientific mistake.

Take a look at Denise Minger's article that I linked on the last page. She goes into depth looking at his data and argues that he didn't do this.

Sorry CI, I should have read your link before I posted - it's a good one.
If I understood it right:
Even if all countries he had access to data for were included, they would still have shown the same fat - heart disease-on-death-certificate correlation, though not quite so strongly.
Minger refers to a critic that pulls Keys study apart in detail. The main problems with his study as I understood it were:
  • The data was highly unreliable. E.g., it relied on accurate cause of death being recorded on a large number of death certificates, and in some countries this was pretty unlikely, particularly poorer/less developed countries (which also tended to eat less animal fat). It also assumed food consumption from food availability, which was also highly inaccurate (especially for richer/more developed countries).
  • It failed to control for any number of likely confounding factors.
  • Even without the above major problems, correlation does not equal causation.
These are the systemic problems that make epidemiological studies, while interesting as a source of hypotheses, not to be relied on for strong evidence of cause.

So Keys was probably wrong, and this wasn't strong science, but it does not constitute fraud.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
narouz said:
on Pasteur, as a possible scientist for the counter-list:
...but anyhow:
she was saying that this contemporary of Pasteur's
challenged a key idea of Pasteur's,
and that Pasteur later conceded this.

This basic biological idea is really important in PeatLand, but...damn, I just can't remember...

Seems like it had to do with what Peat talks about as Field Theory.
In Pasteur's time...Sarah knew the French word/equivalent.

I haven't listened to this interview yet, but was it Claude Bernard something like:
"The terrain is everything; the germ is nothing"?
I think whether Pasteur actually conceded this on his deathbed is controversial?

Bernard looks as if he was an interesting figure in historical physiology. He made early descriptions of homeostasis (millieu interieur), pancreatic secretions, liver glycogen, and scientific method wrt medicine.
 
OP
CellularIconoclast
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
239
tara said:
These are the systemic problems that make epidemiological studies, while interesting as a source of hypotheses, not to be relied on for strong evidence of cause.

So Keys was probably wrong, and this wasn't strong science, but it does not constitute fraud.

I think the fraud was in taking a very weak epidemiological hypothesis, and presenting it to the public as a proven fact. This is a common type of fraud: boil down a complex and controversial issue into a simple slogan or advertising sound-byte and spread it with authority and confidence.

I don't know much about the history of how that happened, and how much of a role Keys played in that process.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
CellularIconoclast said:
I think the fraud was in taking a very weak epidemiological hypothesis, and presenting it to the public as a proven fact. This is a common type of fraud: boil down a complex and controversial issue into a simple slogan or advertising sound-byte and spread it with authority and confidence.

Good point. A common ordinary kind of fraud that can cause so much confusion, while appearing to provide a simple answer.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
narouz said:
she was saying that this contemporary of Pasteur's
challenged a key idea of Pasteur's,
and that Pasteur later conceded this.

She was talking about Bechamp's ideas, that Pasteur simply plagiarized and stole.

Pasteur was an opportunist that stole the scientific ideas of his contemporaries. But instead of stealing one of Bechamp's most fundamental discoveries, which is that microbes spontaneously appear when the conditions inside the body favor it, he attacked it, only to admit on his deathbed that Bechamp was right.


It's all written in this book:"Bechamp or Pasteur: A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology"

(By the way, if you can read this small text, you're really good)
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
tara said:
narouz said:
on Pasteur, as a possible scientist for the counter-list:
...but anyhow:
she was saying that this contemporary of Pasteur's
challenged a key idea of Pasteur's,
and that Pasteur later conceded this.

This basic biological idea is really important in PeatLand, but...damn, I just can't remember...

Seems like it had to do with what Peat talks about as Field Theory.
In Pasteur's time...Sarah knew the French word/equivalent.

I haven't listened to this interview yet, but was it Claude Bernard something like:
"The terrain is everything; the germ is nothing"?
I think whether Pasteur actually conceded this on his deathbed is controversial?

Bernard looks as if he was an interesting figure in historical physiology. He made early descriptions of homeostasis (millieu interieur), pancreatic secretions, liver glycogen, and scientific method wrt medicine.

Yep, Tara, I believe that's the idea, at least.
Sarah was probably using the French word/accent for "terrain."
I don't think I ever properly heard the guy's name.
Thanks!
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
Such_Saturation said:
Élie Metchnikoff

Yeah, Such, I just heard Peat talk about him in the latest interview.
An embryologist.
Damned if can remember what Peat said about him. :roll:

Peat made a connection from Metchnikoff to W.S. Koch
and his theory of oxidative metabolism.
Sure we must have Koch noted already.

Also mentioned in the same interview,
and I'll have to check the spellings,
were
J.D. Cundliff
and
Polly Massinger.

As I understood Peat
he mentioned them in a positive light.
He said they came up with the
Danger or Damage Theory of Immunity
which he contrasted with
the still prevalent view of immunity as a reaction to foreign substances.
 

5magicbeans

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
120
Age
59
This is what RP sent me in response to my request for recommendations for a study of Biology for my son:

"Albert Szent-Gyorgyi's little books, Introduction to a Submolecular Biology, Electronic Biology and Cancer: A New Theory of Cancer, The living state, and Bioelectronics are all well written and worth reading; A.S. Troshin's book on cell regulation is important; H.G. Bungenberg de Jong's book on coacervation is important for biology, but very hard to find. The ideas of James A. Shapiro and Ted Steele on genetics are important to know about, and how Gilbert Ling's work has influenced things such as the MRI technology."
 

aguilaroja

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
850
narouz said:
...Peat made a connection from Metchnikoff to W.S. Koch
and his theory of oxidative metabolism.
Sure we must have Koch noted already....

It is a good thought to bring up Wm Koch. As a minor amendment, which was perhaps a typo, the researcher in question was William F. Koch, Ph. D., M. D.

Thankfully, Dr. Koch's family has faithfully posted the bulk of his writings on the web:

http://www.williamfkoch.com/web/version2/default.php

Even a few of Koch's basic books were nearly impossible to find before the family's web site construction. Now there are many accessible resources. Some of the hard copy books had before and after pictures of ill and, via the Koch reagent, cured people. I don't know if all of those images are included on the website.

Dr. Peat has mentioned Szent-Gyorgi's knowledge of W.F. Koch in articles and conversations:

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

"W.F. Koch, in Detroit, was showing that the ability to use oxygen made the difference between health and sickness, and that the cancer metabolism could be corrected by restoring the efficient use of oxygen. He argued that a respiratory defect was responsible for immunodeficiency, allergy, and defective function of muscles, nerves, and secretory cells, as well as cancer....

Albert Szent-Gyorgyi respected Koch's work, and spent years investigating the involvement of the lactate metabolites, methylgyoxal and glyoxal, in cell physiology, but since the government's campaign against Koch was still active when Szent-Gyorgyi came to the U.S., he worked out many of the implications of Koch's work relating to cellular oxidation without mentioning his name."
 
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
7,370
5magicbeans, thank you for sharing that email!

Élie Metchnikoff studied the innate immune system in a way that highlighted how adaptive it is. At least that's what I understood. This is all forgotten wisdom that they are bringing back in a much more complex form, because they must avoid exposing the paradoxes of the mechanistic model.

Gilbert Ling gave the idea that led to MRI but the reason cancers appeared darker was the metal content, not lack of water structure. Water structure still has a big part in relaxation times of the hydrogen, though.
 

SAFarmer

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
182
For those interested in more history of Ancel Keys, a brilliant scientist and his real legacy, Evelyn of Carbsane has written an excellent post about the man here,

http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2014/06/ ... study.html

Read all the links, watch the video clips and also read the comments (also with good links)
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
Been meaning to add these names
from the recent Greenhouse interview Energy-Protective Materials.

I did the best I could at estimating the spellings.
Hopefully some of you will help straighten them out.

Vunkenburg De Young (Jung?), near beginning
-biochemist
-studied cell-like structures he called "complex coacerbates"

Sidney Fox, near beginning
-showed how in a short lab of one or two hours
he could throw water on lava-like rock (I think it was a bit more complicated, but...)
create cell-like, protein-like molecules
with bacteria- and yeast-like functions.

Gilbert Lewis , 12:03
-defined acids in a very different way
-not based on protons, but on electrons
This led into a bit about Gilbert Ling,
and a fascinating chat about water softeners
working upon Ling's (and perhaps Lewis's) views of pH,
as opposed to the pH measurements still used in hospitals.

Ian Dell Henderson, 19:05 & 27:05
-Yale professor in early 1900's
-CO2 physiology as regulator of oxygen metabolism
-CO2 relaxes arterioles and allows blood to flow freely
-in emergency efforts, showed that 8-10% CO2 ventilation
(vs all-oxygen) produced quicker recoveries

Vladimir Vernadsky, 21:05
-Russian researcher, died near end of WWII,
predicted planetary and human evolution,
CO2 would contribute to larger brain size
and higher metabolic rate--
the "natural development of the planet's ecosystem."
-noted there have been eras of much higher CO2 in past,
and they are associated with rapid evolution
-predicted earth would go through periods of higher CO2,
and this would increase the whole vitality of life on the planet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Vernadsky

Buteyko, 29:10

P.K.C. Cary, 40:10
-first to demonstrate that after menopause, especially,
fat becomes source of estrogen
and aromatase enzymes increase

Cutolo, 40:30
-Italian researcher active the last 10 years
who Peat said was very good on subjects P.K.C. Cary investigated--
stress, diabetes, and inflammation

John Goffman, 1:03:35
-I noted him earlier in the thread
-Peat said he thought of him as a "demon"
-shill for the radiation industry
-Peat said he "came to consciousness" during one such shilling event
and did a 180 to become an ardent critic of the industry
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
narouz said:
I did the best I could at estimating the spellings.
Hopefully some of you will help straighten them out.
...
Ian Dell Henderson, 19:05 & 27:05
-Yale professor in early 1900's
-CO2 physiology as regulator of oxygen metabolism
-CO2 relaxes arterioles and allows blood to flow freely
-in emergency efforts, showed that 8-10% CO2 ventilation
(vs all-oxygen) produced quicker recoveries

Yandell Henderson, I think.
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
aguilaroja said:
narouz said:
...a minor amendment, which was perhaps a typo, the researcher in question was William F. Koch, Ph. D., M. D.

Thank you!
There's gonna be a ton.
I'm just transcribing phonetically.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom