I agree, and I value this too.
I disagree with this, though. Gbold suggests reading textbooks because that's the easiest and quickest way to learn some of the basics. That's what Peat recommends too, and it makes sense. They no doubt are based in part on studies, but you can't learn all of that by reading studies - there are too many of them that go into building up the basic picture. There may be some inaccuracies, but even so, you can't understand them without having some basis to work from.
Gbold is also explicit about saying that some of his own view point is based on some of Ecks work, some experience round ARL or similar, and his own personal experiments, not just textbooks.
I think that amounts to him having potentially some interesting and valuable viewpoints to contribute, but not being automatically right about everything (no one is).
I agree with you that it is not wise to latch onto a guru we cannot understand and blindly follow whatever they say without doing our own thinking and assessing to see what makes sense to us. I'm not sure that gbold is seeking a bunch of followers, but I think it would be wise for people to keep their critical faculties in play in whatever they consider. Remember that everybody is wrong some of the time, and that being confident is no guarantee against that.
Speaks more highly of Paul Eck, I don't think he follows Wilson, even if they share some views.
I don't know if that's true - I certainly don't think he's he is. Some people here treat Peat as though he's to be blindly followed, too, which also doesn't make sense, either. Wanting to find out what a man thinks is not the same as thinking they are the messiah, last I checked.
I was under the impression prolactin had a bit to do with mammary function - does it not affect their size too?
Wouldn't surprise me if there are more factors at play in low vit D, so just supplementing may not be the whole answer. You know there is evidence that sometimes sunlight does not raise it. Do you have reason to believe it's completely unrelated to pH? I know others have also suggested vit D supplements tend to be more useful when people are unbalanced in acid direction.
He doesn't say they all are. Just some of them.
That's not what I read in Xisca's post. The message I got was that just because you don't understand something, in itself, doesn't prove whether it is right or wrong.
Yeah, I have a problem with that, too. Plus lots of rudeness and name-calling and I think a bit of oversimplifying and misrepresenting Peat.
+1
Seems there are people who feel entitled to demand that other people do a lot of work for them, and feel entitled to attack them if they don't do it.
I don't like the anger and insults in either direction.
If you are seriously interested in engaging him in mutually consenting discussion, you could start by getting a grounding in the common knowledge, for instance by reading some text books in the field of common interest, so that you can have a meaningful conversation. Demanding that he start by educating you at that level, while under constant attack, isn't necessarily the most courteous and inviting approach.
I've seen this too. And I've also seen gbolduev repeatedly attacking people. That some of it is frustration and retaliation doesn't make it OK.
Personally, I'd like to see all the attacks in both directions stop, the attacking posts be deleted, and the actual discussion be able to continue, in quarantine if need be to keep it from disrupting other parts of the forum.
How do we know anything about most people who post here?
Use caution about anything you read on the Internet, especially before trusting your life on it.
Attributing such intentions is rude.
Studies are useful for some purposes, and not for others. My kids, at this stage, are not going to learn much by reading studies. Studies are no good for that.
In physiology, you have to understand enough of the context to be able to make sense of them, otherwise they are no good to you. And some of the studies are not well conducted, and therefore don't yield reliable conclusions. And you have to know a bit before you can tell that. So in those senses, they are sometimes no good.
Happy October. :)
+1
Do you think people should only sign up here if they already agree with everything Peat has already said?
I really value a lot of what I have learned from Peat, both in the area of fact and in attitude, but I assume (as Peat explicitly does himself) that he is not omniscient.
If the purpose of the forum is to learn about Peat's ideas, and to discuss how we can use the ideas, then what is important is not that no other ideas be allowed here, but that Peat's ideas not get swamped or too confused, and that we be careful with attribution, so that we don't accidentally make it look as though Peat thinks things that he has never said or written or thought. I certainly will understand Peat better in the context of other ideas compared and contrasted with his. I cannot have confidence in ideas that are presented in isolation, not allowing them to be challenged.
Some of the (at times quite aggressive) challenges people have made to gbolduev's ideas seem to me to show up some serious misunderstandings of Peat - either theirs or mine.
Doesn't guru mean teacher?
Peat is a teacher, and there is nothing wrong with being a teacher. There is a problem when people turn off their minds and blindly follow anyone, and Peat explicitly discourages people from doing that.
+1
Did you really just say you hate certitude?
Tell me you didn't
