Beware The False Gurus We All Desire And Wish For

[milk_lover]

He thinks that actually it is Prolactin that causes gyno, not Estradiol. Go figure.

Prolactin and estrogen can go hand in hand most of the time, I always struggle to separate the two. Gyno can come from too much progesterone also..

 

[Kartoffel]

One thing I have taken from Gbold is his theory on CO2 retention. Makes a lot of sense to me. I learn from many people, including those that I don't totally agree with. The battle between objective and subjective knowledge is as stake here: what you can directly experience vs what you have to trust from another person. Attacking someone serves no purpose. It's wasting your positive energy on a negative energy. It's like Donald Trump. People say, "Can you believe what DT said?" I retort, "Yeah, I can. And I don't care. Honestly, I never think about him...ever. Why waste my energy on a douchebag?" Works in all aspects of my life.

What exactly is his theory on CO2 retention? All I saw were some weird claims about CO2 inhibiting cytochrome oxidase and cellular respiration. This is simply false and I can't imagine what textbook would state something like that.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@namaste, what is PFS and PSSD? Patellofemoral Syndrome and PTSD? Confused with what Peat can't handle.

 

[Xisca]

Yes we get it, Gbol is a revolutionary like Semmelweis, Galileo and Einstein. Take comfort in the thought that all brilliant ideas are sooner or later acknowledged by at least some part of society, if they are true. In this case though you might have too wait for a very long time...

Nop
Sorry you did not get it.
I was not comparing Bolduev but the PEOPLE who react the same when triggered in their believe.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@Kartoffel, I'm not here to change your mind. Apparently, you have it made up. I think everything comes down to what is going on at the mitochondrial level. Is it lactic acid causing all the problems with CO2 and O2 exchange? Or is the body's inability to dissipate CO2 through lack of exercise? Don't have the answer but what Gbold states is fascinating. To blatantly state Gbold is wrong, is pure Guru-God BS. I agree with RP on most stuff, but there is also stuff from other people I am at least willing to consider.

 

[Milky]

“Once we accept that knowledge is tentative, and that we are probably going to improve our knowledge in important ways when we learn more about the world, we are less likely to reject new information that conflicts with our present ideas. The attitude of expectancy will allow us to apply insights gained at one level of generality to other levels. No particular kind of knowledge will have such authority that it will automatically exclude certain possibilities in another field of knowledge.” -Ray Peat

A lot of you are very narrow minded and hypocritical in your statements. Good luck to you all.

 

[lollipop]

People always want someone with all the answers. They never want to think for themselves. They don't want freedom. They don't want to be in charge of their own intellect. They want to give up their autonomy to someone else that they can just trust.

I don't think that's the case with Dr. Peat. Dr. Peat uses studies and logic both. And I am here because I want to follow Dr. Peats model and Dr. Peats wisdom.

Dr. Peat is more theoretical the practical. He’s not telling you exactly what to do. There’s no such thing as a Peat diet. Peat doesn’t even recommend supplements except for potentially vitamin E or alt. But more than anything else, he encourages you to think for yourself.

This is precisely why he is not popular. This is a very niche forum. He is not popular and doesn’t make much money because he doesn’t tell people what to do.

Other people who've been on this forum have gravitated to Gbold because he does their thinking for him. He's cryptic and seems to have the answers. People love a man who is cryptic and seems to have all the answers.

In reality, Gbold doesn't have studies. He doesn't believe in them. It all comes from textbooks. Somehow these textbooks don't rely on studies. I suppose. It's quite illogical.

The point is this. You have to guard against your desire to find and latch on to some guru who has all the answers. health boards are susceptible to these cultish gurus because we all want to give up our autonomy and just believe in someone else.

+1

 

[lollipop]

Although I wasn't a fan of a lot of his methods myself, you have to allow both sides to each present themselves. If you banish one in favor of the other, you're doing exactly what you're warning about doing in your original post.

While I somewhat agree with you, just some food for thought.

I agree. I don’t think that is what the OP is saying. I read into his thoughts: Perceive, Think, Act. @ecstatichamster did not say: ban, not consider, reject. Anyway, that is how I read the OP.

 

[lollipop]

“Once we accept that knowledge is tentative, and that we are probably going to improve our knowledge in important ways when we learn more about the world, we are less likely to reject new information that conflicts with our present ideas. The attitude of expectancy will allow us to apply insights gained at one level of generality to other levels. No particular kind of knowledge will have such authority that it will automatically exclude certain possibilities in another field of knowledge.” -Ray Peat

A lot of you are very narrow minded and hypocritical in your statements. Good luck to you all.

I think what you are calling out @Milky represents a small percentage of people rather than “a lot”. I think it would be a mistake and a conflation to associate in your mind: RPF Members = narrow mindedness.

Anyways, best of luck to you and everyone else! Best advice ever: Perceive, Think, Act.

 

[jitsmonkey]

what exactly is Peat's methodology?

This isn't it here. Peat doesn't advocate loads of supplements.

But most people here do.

My problem with Gbold is his lack of evidence and proof and his certitude. I hate certitude. Nobody knows anything so if someone is so certain of their views, that automatically certifies them as in-credible.

The only thing I'm certain of is this is the smartest thing anyone has said regarding this guy.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@namaste, PFS--is that Post Finasteride Syndrome? I took Propecia for 8yrs, and I am doing just fine in my recovery. Most people who don't succeed with RP? Non-exercisers! People think they can throw down loads of milk and OJ, sit on their ****, and expect results.

 

[Pet Peeve]

I haven't read every single post by gbolduev but he didn't strike me as particularly hostile to anyone. Most east-european russian people I know come across as quite direct and impatient.

 

[Kartoffel]

Nop
Sorry you did not get it.
I was not comparing Bolduev but the PEOPLE who react the same when triggered in their believe.

Well in my opinion this is not a good comparison since these people challenged existing dogmas with coherent theories that were already supported by evidence. Gbol doesn't have any evidence, at least he doesn't show it to us. His theory is just an unorganized collection of unsupported singular statements glued together by his insistence that everything is relative. And lots of angry insults of course. So how can you compare the people here to contemporaries of Semelweis and Galileo, if there is no one like that here to react to?

 

[Milky]

I think what you are calling out @Milky represents a small percentage of people rather than “a lot”. I think it would be a mistake and a conflation to associate in your mind: RPF Members = narrow mindedness.

Anyways, best of luck to you and everyone else! Best advice ever: Perceive, Think, Act.

Thanks Lisa. What two people mean by "a lot" is probably different. I'm only referring to the guilty ones and they know who they are. In this case, it was enough to bring the atmosphere down in the forum by attacking folks who dared challenge the status quo. New ideas should be able to be discussed respectfully among adults but apparently this isn't a good place for that as has been illuminated recently.

 

[Kartoffel]

@Kartoffel, I'm not here to change your mind. Apparently, you have it made up. I think everything comes down to what is going on at the mitochondrial level. Is it lactic acid causing all the problems with CO2 and O2 exchange? Or is the body's inability to dissipate CO2 through lack of exercise? Don't have the answer but what Gbold states is fascinating. To blatantly state Gbold is wrong, is pure Guru-God BS. I agree with RP on most stuff, but there is also stuff from other people I am at least willing to consider.

No, I don't have it made up. This was a sincere question. I have tried to understand "his theory" so that I could think about it but in all his posts I never found a coherent summary of what his theory actually is. So I am asking you because your post implied that you get his theory. I ask again: what is his theory on CO2 retention?

 

[Kartoffel]

Thanks Lisa. What two people mean by "a lot" is probably different. I'm only referring to the guilty ones and they know who they are. In this case, it was enough to bring the atmosphere down in the forum by attacking folks who dared challenge the status quo. New ideas should be able to be discussed respectfully among adults but apparently this isn't a good place for that as has been illuminated recently.

But how do you discuss an idea if the proponent of the idea refuses any critical discussion and constantly refers to common knowledge and his data that no one can evaluate? There was no basis for discussion since every question that could start a discussion was perceived as a threatening attack or heresy.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@Kartoffel, so many people (including you) want research to back everything. Odd to me. Human physiology and meteorology belong in the same sentence. It's an inexact science because a lot of times it comes down to anecdotal/personal stories of success or failure. I don't know his exact theory because I don't want to study anyone's theories. But he claims CO2 rentention (you name the mechanism) brings about a lot of problems. I lean toward lactic acid hurting O2/CO2 transport in the body, but I can consider CO2 retention. If you want the details of his theory go onto one of his big posts. He breaks it down there. He has real people who work in real labs who deal with real patients who deal with real CO2/O2 issues who consistently show similar CO2 retention effects. Is that anecdotal? Yes, but is it interesting? You bet your **** it is. I work with real people's health problems. Is that your field Kartoffel? I throw out most of the science when I deal with individuals.

 

[Milky]

But how do you discuss an idea if the proponent of the idea refuses any critical discussion and constantly refers to common knowledge and his data that no one can evaluate? There was no basis for discussion since every question that could start a discussion was perceived as a threatening attack or heresy.

A valid response, but this idea has been repeated many times now by several folks. You're still overstating the situation and making absolutist statements which only continues to muck up the truth about what really happened. "There was no basis for discussion since every question..."

Once again I am not defending anyone or anything with respect to specific actions or comments, I'm making a statement on the overall situation that occurred. The statement is this- I think that several people were out of line at different times, not just one, but the one person was not liked by many including the forum owner and that is ultimately why it has been handled this way. It was easier to get rid of him as a scapegoat and get the forum back to its usual state as quick as possible. Ask Charlie how much he wants Bolduev back here. (he doesn't).

 

[charlie]

Ask Charlie how much he wants Bolduev back here. (he doesn't).

Your statements do not fit reality and are made up accusations.

I made him his own subforum so he could get his information out. Gave him warning after warning when he kept breaking the rules. Banned him, then allowed him right back because he said he had a message to get out and I was hoping to hear his message, in a respectful manner and more then willing to give him another go at it. I cringed as he constantly abused people. Watched in awe while he tried to avert the ban by signing up under a different username. I welcomed him here yet he continued to disrespect this community. He was not banned for having different ideas from Ray Peat yet you continue to spread lies and misinformation.

 

[Milky]

Your statements do not fit reality and are made up accusations.

I made him his own subforum so he could get his information out. Gave him warning after warning when he kept breaking the rules. Banned him, then allowed him right back because he said he had a message to get out and I was hoping to hear his message, in a respectful manner and more then willing to give him another go at it. I cringed as he constantly abused people. Watched in awe while he tried to avert the ban by signing up under a different username. I welcomed him here yet he continued to disrespect this community. He was not banned for having different ideas from Ray Peat yet you continue to spread lies and misinformation.

Thanks for your comment, it clarifies a couple things. I'm not spreading anything, where is this misinformation you speak of? I PM'd you a personal request myself and you never responded, nor do you respond to certain comments in the threads directed at you, so all we have to go on are the comments that you HAVE made, which seem to make it obvious you don't want the guy here. And you wouldn't be the only one for sure, so if that was actually the case it's not much of a stretch. Are you saying you disagree then? You think his presence was valuable here? Why do you seem to only focus on his abuse and not the abuse of others? You cringed at what? How often did he ever openly abuse someone without being provoked?