Bicarbonate Vs. PaCO2 Blood Tests

gbolduev

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2014
Messages
464
Haidut,

I am sorry but I have to say good bye at this point. It will take me ages to explain my point of view here. I mentioned simple things that are practiced daily in medical field. You can study it yourself , I know you are a smart guy . But I am not going to argue about studies. I have developed a complete system for myself, where I connected almost everything with everything and have it simultaneously changing. So to me all these singled out studies are total nonsense. For instance Ecks computers counts 12 enzymes for each mineral simultaneously and all interactions at the same time and here we talk about some study out of context on one subject. There is a complex system that have to be looed at all at once, and why would I post some stupid studies of pregnant women or a study on single other thing. It makes no sense.

According to my studies , the results dont match anything close to what Peats says, and knowing what I know makes it complete nonsense. I saw 1000 peoples metabolisms for 2 years and 100s of ABGs matches by hairtests. If I gave them all Peats diet, half of them would scream, since they are in complete non applicable diet to calcium let say or progesterone.

I have no idea where you see that Peat is right. YOu seem to look for studies on the internet without having a whole picture on your head. I will find you prove that I am right 10 thousand times also. You can always find a study that says one time one thing and another time another thing. BUt then you will argue on every little piece of that study. SOrry I am not interested in this at all. I test everything myself in the lab and I dont beileve in any study published on PUBmed, most of them is utter bull**** and did nto match what I tested.

If you like what you are doing with Peat, keep doing it. To me it makes absolutely no sense, I will go my way.




Sorry but I dont have time for this. Just posted here to clarify CO2 situation , if you dont understand how ABGs work , then there is not much to talk is there. It is very easy to learn how ABGs work. ANd how to read them and how to test them and what is Co2 ideal values and how to interpret all these tests.

From my population 80% had high CO2 level in blood not low.

I would advise you to study Ecks work, Peat looks like kindergarden player comparing to Eck/ Eck developed the system 40 years ago which is complete and matches every single type.


Bye , I cant post here anymore

Good luck to you all
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
585
gbolduev said:
Haidut,

It is not about toxic metals on the hairtest. If your metabolism is low you wont see anything on the hairtest since you are chelating nothing.It could take years for you to chelate toxic metals and for them to show up in hair. I dont use Dr Ecks system I do my own testing. But to learn as a core his system is superb, it will take years to learn as it did for me.

You misunderstood me, aspirin is a poison for the body since it does not belong there. CO2 is poison if you have too much of it. As in respiratory acidosis you cant take baking soda and they will never give you baking soda in that condition in the emergency room. The balance is the key.

Of course if you are in alkalosis aspirin will make you feel better, but it is still poison since you have to be made feel better by a mineral that is missing not by substition or an acid. I hope you get my point.

If you have high CO2 you can have copper toxicity since that lowers your breathing. Secondly you can have candida which creates CO2 thirdly you can live in the city which has way too much CO2. Also you can eat too much sugar. You have low insulin. Tons of possibilities why you have too much of CO2. Low zinc will cause low bicarb high CO2. Low manganese will cause low acetycholine low breathing drive and respiratory acidosis and high Co2


Asprin of course can cure cancers if you are in alkalosis. If you are in acidosis it will cause cancer.

Cancers that are advanced usually are alkaline, since when all your buffers give up supporting acidity , like bicarbonate will go down , then phosforus , potassium hemoglobin then calcium will be raised with PTH in the last stage, and usualy PTH overdoes its job and causes alkalosis . sometimes aspirin can help in this condition.

If a person is in a stage when cancer is caused by low bicarbonate, like pancreatic cancer, aspirin will kill you .

SO as you see it is all about balance, all these studies are taken out of context. And you can use these substances only in certain conditions that fit your present body chemistry.

Cafeine is definetely a poison for certain body chemistry. Hey water is poison for certain body chemistry . If you are in low electolytes balance and you have both resp and met acidosis , and you drink 3 liters of water a day you will pass out shortly.

Estrogen and serotonin are not poisons they are made in your body. They need to be balanced and if you have low serotonin and low estrogen you will suffer huge. We discussed before that Peat looks at it from one side and this is very wrong to me. For instance if you have tons of estrogen mimics inside of your body , then your estrogen will be very very low in blood and copper will be mistakenly not absorbed since your body already thinks you have too much of it.

It is all about balance, there are no bad things that are made inside of your body. Peat is insane saying that. Serotonin is not bad , nor estrogen. They are made inside of your body, but their balance could be bad , and not from one side only , it could be low estrogen and high estrogen problems high serotonin or low seroton problems.

I have tons of bodybuilders that I helped and they have low estrogen since they suppressed it constantly with drugs. All of them crashed like crazy , when your body raises estrogen it wants copper , they suppress that need. End result major problems.

People age from imbalances not from low serotonin or high serotonin . You will age and die if you have both low or high cortisol. Your killer will be different that is all. IN one case bacteria will kill you and in other virus


Good luck


I think the theme behind your posts is that the body knows best and saying any one thing in the body is bad and that we should eliminate it, is narrow-minded and foolish. There's a good reason our body has high levels of some particularly thing and blindly trying to change its levels is reductionist and more likely to cause other problems. For example, if estrogen is high, then there's a reason it's high and trying to directly lower it without understanding why it's high will result in more problems. Right?

If so, then there's no one here that would disagree with you. Peat has documented what happens when all the stress mechanisms continue to run long after they should and how to correct them.

You're trying to argue about the existence of homeostasis, when the real argument is about how homeostasis is achieved in certain conditions, particularly, the chronic use of stress hormones and their longterm negative effects on the body.
 

InChristAlone

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
5,955
Location
USA
I just re-read some of gbolduev's other posts and now I remember him. His posts are giving me anxiety about this diet! Why did he come back on here when he thinks Peat's ideas are crazy? And who is Dr. Eck?
 

mas

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
148
Gbolduev is now gone, but when here was much too tongue tied to provide simple abstracts to explain simple concepts. Instead he bashed Peat, and gave zero information regarding anything other than unsubstantiated goggleygook.

So I did a search on this fabulous Dr. Eck and came to Wilson’s website.

Take a look at is being sold here: a basic philosophy, books and training in this “science.”
______________________________________

http://drlwilson.com/Books/balancing.htm

The Center For Development, a non-profit, tax-exempt educational foundation
TRAINING IN NUTRITIONAL BALANCING SCIENCE


The Center For Development, a non-profit, tax-exempt educational foundation
TRAINING IN NUTRITIONAL BALANCING SCIENCE
The Center For Development is pleased to offer a basic and advanced training in nutritional balancing science and hair analysis interpretation.

Nutritional balancing is a very exciting, sophisticated, safe, and powerful method to correct body chemistry and improve one’s health and well-being at the deepest levels.
It is based on correcting ‘whole system behaviors’ such as one’s diet and lifestyle, along with correcting specific mineral ratios and levels.  It is mathematically precise, and must be done this way or it won’t work. 

The design of the diet and supplement program is based on a unique way of interpreting a hair tissue mineral analysis.  For accuracy, the mineral testing laboratory must not wash the hair at the lab at all.
The founder of nutritional balancing science, or mineral balancing, as it was sometimes called, was Dr. Paul C. Eck.  He was a brilliant nutritionist, biochemist and researcher who lived from 1925 to 1996.  I was fortunate to study with him for 14 years.

Since his death, I have refined his work, adding new hair analysis patterns, a few important changes in the supplement recommendations, clearer dietary suggestions, and the use of near infrared sauna therapy, coffee enemas and the Roy Masters meditation.  While the basics are the same, these changes have made the programs much more powerful and even safer.

Nutritional balancing does not involve the use of remedies, except on rare occasions.  It also does not involve the use of medical drugs, bio-identical hormones, chelation therapy, or most herbs.  We find these to be either less safe, or less effective than the methods we use. 

FEES FOR THE BASIC TRAINING:
 
USA orders: $500.00
(US Military, NRA or Tea Party members: $475.00.) 
 
International orders. $560.00 US dollars to cover extra shipping and handling.
(US Military or International Tea Party members or International NRA members: $535.00.)
 
NOTE: if you already have a recent edition of one or more of the textbooks, you may take $15.00 off the fee for each book that you have already purchased.  Please let us know which books you have, and we will not send you the books you already have.
 
How to pay:  By cash, Paypal, check in US dollars, or credit card (VISA, Mastercard, Discover, AMEX and perhaps others).

__________________

Remember when this stuff appears on this website again- ONCE BITTEN TWICE SHY!!!!!
 
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
cantstoppeating said:
gbolduev said:
Haidut,

It is not about toxic metals on the hairtest. If your metabolism is low you wont see anything on the hairtest since you are chelating nothing.It could take years for you to chelate toxic metals and for them to show up in hair. I dont use Dr Ecks system I do my own testing. But to learn as a core his system is superb, it will take years to learn as it did for me.

You misunderstood me, aspirin is a poison for the body since it does not belong there. CO2 is poison if you have too much of it. As in respiratory acidosis you cant take baking soda and they will never give you baking soda in that condition in the emergency room. The balance is the key.

Of course if you are in alkalosis aspirin will make you feel better, but it is still poison since you have to be made feel better by a mineral that is missing not by substition or an acid. I hope you get my point.

If you have high CO2 you can have copper toxicity since that lowers your breathing. Secondly you can have candida which creates CO2 thirdly you can live in the city which has way too much CO2. Also you can eat too much sugar. You have low insulin. Tons of possibilities why you have too much of CO2. Low zinc will cause low bicarb high CO2. Low manganese will cause low acetycholine low breathing drive and respiratory acidosis and high Co2


Asprin of course can cure cancers if you are in alkalosis. If you are in acidosis it will cause cancer.

Cancers that are advanced usually are alkaline, since when all your buffers give up supporting acidity , like bicarbonate will go down , then phosforus , potassium hemoglobin then calcium will be raised with PTH in the last stage, and usualy PTH overdoes its job and causes alkalosis . sometimes aspirin can help in this condition.

If a person is in a stage when cancer is caused by low bicarbonate, like pancreatic cancer, aspirin will kill you .

SO as you see it is all about balance, all these studies are taken out of context. And you can use these substances only in certain conditions that fit your present body chemistry.

Cafeine is definetely a poison for certain body chemistry. Hey water is poison for certain body chemistry . If you are in low electolytes balance and you have both resp and met acidosis , and you drink 3 liters of water a day you will pass out shortly.

Estrogen and serotonin are not poisons they are made in your body. They need to be balanced and if you have low serotonin and low estrogen you will suffer huge. We discussed before that Peat looks at it from one side and this is very wrong to me. For instance if you have tons of estrogen mimics inside of your body , then your estrogen will be very very low in blood and copper will be mistakenly not absorbed since your body already thinks you have too much of it.

It is all about balance, there are no bad things that are made inside of your body. Peat is insane saying that. Serotonin is not bad , nor estrogen. They are made inside of your body, but their balance could be bad , and not from one side only , it could be low estrogen and high estrogen problems high serotonin or low seroton problems.

I have tons of bodybuilders that I helped and they have low estrogen since they suppressed it constantly with drugs. All of them crashed like crazy , when your body raises estrogen it wants copper , they suppress that need. End result major problems.

People age from imbalances not from low serotonin or high serotonin . You will age and die if you have both low or high cortisol. Your killer will be different that is all. IN one case bacteria will kill you and in other virus


Good luck


I think the theme behind your posts is that the body knows best and saying any one thing in the body is bad and that we should eliminate it, is narrow-minded and foolish. There's a good reason our body has high levels of some particularly thing and blindly trying to change its levels is reductionist and more likely to cause other problems. For example, if estrogen is high, then there's a reason it's high and trying to directly lower it without understanding why it's high will result in more problems. Right?

If so, then there's no one here that would disagree with you. Peat has documented what happens when all the stress mechanisms continue to run long after they should and how to correct them.

You're trying to argue about the existence of homeostasis, when the real argument is about how homeostasis is achieved in certain conditions, particularly, the chronic use of stress hormones and their longterm negative effects on the body.

My point exactly. Any time I hear about homeostasis and balance I want to know how they are controlled and can be manipulated through their variables so that balance can be restored. With the exception of a guide from Dr. Wilson on supplementing specific minerals and chelation therapy I have not seen anything more specific, or explanations on why it would work. But if it worked for gbolduev then great! One more healthy person who can spend his time helping others.
 

InChristAlone

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
5,955
Location
USA
Yeah I suspected his stuff was similar to Dr. L Wilson. The Dr. who now works with Matt Stone, Garrett Smith, says he does not agree with Wilson's stuff. But then again Dr. G also bashes Peat fans, and does seem to agree that too much calcium causes problems... from SUPPS.... I asked if dairy is an issue and he said no he has not had people eliminate dairy to get calcium back in proper ratio. He is also a fan of carbs but not necessarily sugar.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
mas said:
Gbolduev is now gone, but when here was much too tongue tied to provide simple abstracts to explain simple concepts. Instead he bashed Peat, and gave zero information regarding anything other than unsubstantiated goggleygook.

So I did a search on this fabulous Dr. Eck and came to Wilson’s website.

Take a look at is being sold here: a basic philosophy, books and training in this “science.”
______________________________________

http://drlwilson.com/Books/balancing.htm

The Center For Development, a non-profit, tax-exempt educational foundation
TRAINING IN NUTRITIONAL BALANCING SCIENCE


The Center For Development, a non-profit, tax-exempt educational foundation
TRAINING IN NUTRITIONAL BALANCING SCIENCE
The Center For Development is pleased to offer a basic and advanced training in nutritional balancing science and hair analysis interpretation.

Nutritional balancing is a very exciting, sophisticated, safe, and powerful method to correct body chemistry and improve one’s health and well-being at the deepest levels.
It is based on correcting ‘whole system behaviors’ such as one’s diet and lifestyle, along with correcting specific mineral ratios and levels.  It is mathematically precise, and must be done this way or it won’t work. 

The design of the diet and supplement program is based on a unique way of interpreting a hair tissue mineral analysis.  For accuracy, the mineral testing laboratory must not wash the hair at the lab at all.
The founder of nutritional balancing science, or mineral balancing, as it was sometimes called, was Dr. Paul C. Eck.  He was a brilliant nutritionist, biochemist and researcher who lived from 1925 to 1996.  I was fortunate to study with him for 14 years.

Since his death, I have refined his work, adding new hair analysis patterns, a few important changes in the supplement recommendations, clearer dietary suggestions, and the use of near infrared sauna therapy, coffee enemas and the Roy Masters meditation.  While the basics are the same, these changes have made the programs much more powerful and even safer.

Nutritional balancing does not involve the use of remedies, except on rare occasions.  It also does not involve the use of medical drugs, bio-identical hormones, chelation therapy, or most herbs.  We find these to be either less safe, or less effective than the methods we use. 

FEES FOR THE BASIC TRAINING:
 
USA orders: $500.00
(US Military, NRA or Tea Party members: $475.00.) 
 
International orders. $560.00 US dollars to cover extra shipping and handling.
(US Military or International Tea Party members or International NRA members: $535.00.)
 
NOTE: if you already have a recent edition of one or more of the textbooks, you may take $15.00 off the fee for each book that you have already purchased.  Please let us know which books you have, and we will not send you the books you already have.
 
How to pay:  By cash, Paypal, check in US dollars, or credit card (VISA, Mastercard, Discover, AMEX and perhaps others).

__________________

Remember when this stuff appears on this website again- ONCE BITTEN TWICE SHY!!!!!
 

Actually, I think gbolduev is a pretty smart pal and a good guy. I had some exchanges with him on the forum and over Skype. The Eck theory is basically close to Peat's view of metabolism but focused on manipulating cell health through supplementary minerals, etc. That's why gbolduev keeps talking about "slow oxidation" and "fast oxidation" and adrenals and how they are controlled by minerals. Essentially, these are the hypothyroid and hyperthyroid states Peat has written about. I have not been able to find much in terms of studies backing Eck up. That being said, gbolduev claims to have helped many people and if that's the case then good for him and them. We should not discourage that IMO.
However, back to Peat. His ideas on health are actually very mainstream but several decades ahead of the curve. If you ever doubt Peat, remember this one thing to calm yourself. In Peat world, keeping the cell oxidized is paramount so that the cell keeps converting the glucose to ATP through the Krebs cycle and through glycolysis. If the cell has access to plenty of oxygen due to the high levels of CO2 inside the cell then the cell will stay in an oxidized state. If it does not, then the cell will be in a reduced state. The oxidation state is represented by the NAD/NADH ratio. If you are healthy it is high, if you are sick or stressed it will be low. You can read about this ratio on Peat's website and how niacinamide raises NAD and thus the ratio. I think there is even a Wikipedia page about it.
Now, this ratio is currently all the rage in the pharma world. EVERY pharma company that can afford it has a team working on a drug (or drugs) that manipulate this ratio and try to raise it. You know why? Because they found out that this ratio has a CAUSAL connection to every major class of diseases classified by the official medical profession. Recently I posted clinical trials and studies on raising NAD/NADH ratio as the first CURATIVE therapy for MS. I also posted studies on upping this ration as treatment for Parkinson, AD, lupus, Chron's, CVD, stroke, and cancer. But NAD/NADH is essentially a metabolic marker, not a genetic one. And it is primarily controlled by thyroid hormone, oxygen, CO2, glucose and vitamin B3. So, the big pharma industry has "validated" Peat's ideas by admitting that an epigenetic (and thus subject to constant change) marker is so important for health that they have poured billions of dollars in coming up with drugs that manipulate a metabolic biomarker of cell health. Does that make Peat a quack or what?
Many of the interventions that Peat recommends end up raising the NAD/NADH ratio either directly or as a byproduct. Here are some of the things that raise it:

Methylene Blue
Aspirin
Thyroid
Progesterone
DHEA
Fructose
Glucose (if it is processed right)
Niacinamide
Copper
Pyridoxine

So, Peat is certainly not a niche thinker. Even his support for Ling's theory has recently been endorsed as a result of a study from Harvard, which concluded that the cell must be modelled not as a bag of nutrients, but as an elastic gel, similar to gelatin. And of course there is no membrane.
Pharma industry is not stupid. When something does not work they dump it and search for new ideas. Unless they have money invested in a product that needs to pay for itself. In the last 10 years there have been no blockbuster drugs for any disease, not to mention no cure for any degenerative disease except maybe Hep-C. There was a symposium of pharma execs last year in Las Vegas where the discussion was how to break the stasis. One of the ideas listed as hot and promising was bioenergetics and research into new cellular states, including a state where the cell can be modeled without a membrane or receptors. Does that sound like copying Peat and tens of others going back 100 years ago?
Anyways, everybody is free to decide for themselves. I am sure Peat is not the final answer in biochemistry. Biochemistry is infinite/open-ended just like everything else in this world. But he is more on the right track than anybody I have ever interacted with or done research on.
 

teenpeater

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
5
I've had probably a hundred or so email exchanges with Dr. Peat and I think it's fair to say he would disagree with much (if not all) of what's posted here on this forum. Because he really believes context is everything.

Here's a typical exchange with Dr. Peat at least when I first started writing to him:

Me: So Dr. Peat what do you think of progesterone? Should I take it?

Dr. Peat: What is the context?

Me: [I give my details about myself]

Dr. Peat: [Replies to context.]

Now, the important thing here is, and the reason I leave out the details is, when he writes to me he is replying to my personal context. Not to you or yours.

People here seem to more like, "monkey see, monkey do". See Haidut do, I do. See BigP do, I do . Or see study of 1,000 people do, I do.

That's not really how it should work I think if you are really an avid student of Dr. Peat. You need to think about your own context. Discover how your own body works. And then apply Dr. Peat's ideas for yourself.

Here it feels like people are pretty much all saying, hey, what's the quick fix for me? What supplement can I pop to feel better? What diet can I stick to and magically feel better?

But when you think like that you have not changed the most important thing that Dr. Peat is striving so hard to change, and that is, how we look at the world. The world is not a place with pills you pop, and diets you stick to.

And while I'm at it, I mean, why isn't there a focus here on Dr. Peat's actual work? Why are there all these postings of article abstracts? Why do you want to spend your time reading article abstracts when you most likely can't review the actual research methods of the article (unless you have access to Pub Med) to see the errors and fundamental misconceptions they made?

Besides, don't you have better things to do? For example, I've collected about 2500 pages of Dr. Peat's actual work, between his five books and 20 years of recent newsletters and articles. It takes me about an hour to read and really understand 4 pages on average. At that rate, I've got more than 600 hours of reading to do!

How many people here can honestly say they have even read and really studied all (2500 pages) of Dr. Peat's work? If you have, then kudos to you my friend. I believe you have enriched yourself and the world with the work of this wonderful, amazing author.

PS. Dr. Peat is a Ph. D., not an M.D.
 

teenpeater

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
5
Thanks for that, but many times the person who posted is just posting what was shown on a newsfeed, and makes no pretense to have the time to read or analyze the study.

For example, when I open a full article (if I have access through my school) it can take me several hours to read the whole thing, and its citations. It's seldom worth the investment of my time, when I could have spent that same time reading Dr. Peat!
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
585
teenpeater said:
I've had probably a hundred or so email exchanges with Dr. Peat and I think it's fair to say he would disagree with much (if not all) of what's posted here on this forum. Because he really believes context is everything.

Here's a typical exchange with Dr. Peat at least when I first started writing to him:

Me: So Dr. Peat what do you think of progesterone? Should I take it?

Dr. Peat: What is the context?

Me: [I give my details about myself]

Dr. Peat: [Replies to context.]

Now, the important thing here is, and the reason I leave out the details is, when he writes to me he is replying to my personal context. Not to you or yours.

People here seem to more like, "monkey see, monkey do". See Haidut do, I do. See BigP do, I do . Or see study of 1,000 people do, I do.

That's not really how it should work I think if you are really an avid student of Dr. Peat. You need to think about your own context. Discover how your own body works. And then apply Dr. Peat's ideas for yourself.

Here it feels like people are pretty much all saying, hey, what's the quick fix for me? What supplement can I pop to feel better? What diet can I stick to and magically feel better?

But when you think like that you have not changed the most important thing that Dr. Peat is striving so hard to change, and that is, how we look at the world. The world is not a place with pills you pop, and diets you stick to.

And while I'm at it, I mean, why isn't there a focus here on Dr. Peat's actual work? Why are there all these postings of article abstracts? Why do you want to spend your time reading article abstracts when you most likely can't review the actual research methods of the article (unless you have access to Pub Med) to see the errors and fundamental misconceptions they made?

Besides, don't you have better things to do? For example, I've collected about 2500 pages of Dr. Peat's actual work, between his five books and 20 years of recent newsletters and articles. It takes me about an hour to read and really understand 4 pages on average. At that rate, I've got more than 600 hours of reading to do!

How many people here can honestly say they have even read and really studied all (2500 pages) of Dr. Peat's work? If you have, then kudos to you my friend. I believe you have enriched yourself and the world with the work of this wonderful, amazing author.

PS. Dr. Peat is a Ph. D., not an M.D.

It's true, a lot of people expect easy fixes and magic pills to solve all their problems without the required effort.

But I wanted to quickly address the irony in your post:

...People here seem to more like, "monkey see, monkey do". See Haidut do, I do. See BigP do, I do . Or see study of 1,000 people do, I do...

So your solution is to simply read Peat's work? You've gone from 'see BigP do, I do' to 'see Peat do, I do'. What makes Peat exempt from critical thinking i.e. why accept his ideas?

Those that are thinking for themselves are the ones who are exploring not only Peat's ideas but their citations as well as other relevant research. If you want to be at the cutting edge of discovery, you need to get use to reading research papers. Reading the research, connecting different ideas and coming to sound conclusions is thinking for yourself. And in this field, it requires an adequate knowledge of biochemistry.

Do you have an adequate knowledge of biochem to think for yourself or are you doing what you criticise others of doing i.e. 'monkey see, monkey do', 'see Peat do, I do'?

Besides, your post reads like it was directed at your younger self, before you had over a 100 or so email exchanges will Peat to understand that it's about 'context' and 'thinking for yourself'. For those that can't have 100 or so exchanges with Peat, hopefully this forum will suffice.
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,031
Location
Indiana USA
I think it is in line with Peat's ideas that people remain open and curious in learning through out life as well as sharing their knowledge and experiences both based on his work and in areas directly related (or unrelated for that matter) to it. I can't think of too many places to do that beyond this forum, Facebook and a few blogs.

Most people who try something because it worked for someone else are doing so because they have a analyzed their own context and made an educated decision. Certainly there may be people who just try things for the heck of it but that is still their personal choice to live their life the way they see fit.

I'm glad Dr. Peat is not an M.D. because I think that gives him a different and less dogmatic perspective.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
teenpeater said:
Thanks for that, but many times the person who posted is just posting what was shown on a newsfeed, and makes no pretense to have the time to read or analyze the study.

For example, when I open a full article (if I have access through my school) it can take me several hours to read the whole thing, and its citations. It's seldom worth the investment of my time, when I could have spent that same time reading Dr. Peat!

I think you should give some examples, and not be afraid to name names. If you are referring to me, I think spending some time reviewing my posts will help to see why that is not the case. Even if I have posted just the abstract, I usually have read the article (if I had access to it). One of the reasons is that things like "Materials and Methods" are usually in the actual study and not in the abstract. So, if I want to learn the dosage protocol, duration, control group settings and such I have to read the article. If I could not read the article I post the abstract only if it has enough information to confirm a key Peat idea.
Furthermore, my posts are typically long and make connections with other studies from other threads and news articles. Does that sound like someone who does not read or is trying to do a quick post?
What is your suggestion for direction? While Dr. Peat has decent amount of works, some of most invaluable insights for me have come not from reading his articles, but getting an idea from his articles and then reading 10 studies on it. The long thread on cyproheptadine as wonder drug is one such example. To me Peat is a (great) pointer to (great) additional reading. He can synthesize incredibly well, but there is no substitute in reading the studies and building the picture for yourself in addition to reading studies that may not be directly cited by him.
 

charlie

Admin
The Law & Order Admin
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
14,359
Location
USA
teenpeater said:
I've had probably a hundred or so email exchanges with Dr. Peat and I think it's fair to say he would disagree with much (if not all) of what's posted here on this forum. Because he really believes context is everything.

Here's a typical exchange with Dr. Peat at least when I first started writing to him:

Me: So Dr. Peat what do you think of progesterone? Should I take it?

Dr. Peat: What is the context?

Me: [I give my details about myself]

Dr. Peat: [Replies to context.]

Now, the important thing here is, and the reason I leave out the details is, when he writes to me he is replying to my personal context. Not to you or yours.

People here seem to more like, "monkey see, monkey do". See Haidut do, I do. See BigP do, I do . Or see study of 1,000 people do, I do.

That's not really how it should work I think if you are really an avid student of Dr. Peat. You need to think about your own context. Discover how your own body works. And then apply Dr. Peat's ideas for yourself.

Here it feels like people are pretty much all saying, hey, what's the quick fix for me? What supplement can I pop to feel better? What diet can I stick to and magically feel better?

But when you think like that you have not changed the most important thing that Dr. Peat is striving so hard to change, and that is, how we look at the world. The world is not a place with pills you pop, and diets you stick to.

And while I'm at it, I mean, why isn't there a focus here on Dr. Peat's actual work? Why are there all these postings of article abstracts? Why do you want to spend your time reading article abstracts when you most likely can't review the actual research methods of the article (unless you have access to Pub Med) to see the errors and fundamental misconceptions they made?

Besides, don't you have better things to do? For example, I've collected about 2500 pages of Dr. Peat's actual work, between his five books and 20 years of recent newsletters and articles. It takes me about an hour to read and really understand 4 pages on average. At that rate, I've got more than 600 hours of reading to do!

How many people here can honestly say they have even read and really studied all (2500 pages) of Dr. Peat's work? If you have, then kudos to you my friend. I believe you have enriched yourself and the world with the work of this wonderful, amazing author.

PS. Dr. Peat is a Ph. D., not an M.D.

Mr. Follow Me Monkey Do Himself, Vision of Strength.

Good bye, you are done.
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
We can see in teenpeater's post above
a good example of
a couple of common silly tactics used from time to time on the forum:

1. "I've exchanged over 100 emails with Dr. Peat"--
designed to give the speaker some unearned advantage,
some claim to being something like an extension of Peat. :)

2. "Context is Everything"--
deployed in a seemingly high-minded, intellectual, Peatish way
in an effort to cheaply discredit just about anything someone might wish to say.
It is, much of the time,
simply an empty cloud of fancy gaseous verbiage
signifying nothing. :lol:
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
Charlie said:
teenpeater said:
...Here it feels like people are pretty much all saying, hey, what's the quick fix for me? What supplement can I pop to feel better? What diet can I stick to and magically feel better?

But when you think like that you have not changed the most important thing that Dr. Peat is striving so hard to change, and that is, how we look at the world. The world is not a place with pills you pop, and diets you stick to...

Mr. Follow Me Monkey Do Himself, Vision of Strength.

Good bye, you are done.

Actually, this part does not sound like VoS, does it?
 

SQu

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,308
"That's not really how it should work I think if you are really an avid student of Dr. Peat. You need to think about your own context. Discover how your own body works. And then apply Dr. Peat's ideas for yourself."

This is exactly what I see around me here. Over and over you'll read on threads people feeling their way to deeper, nuanced and individualized understanding of an issue.
 

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
sueq said:
"That's not really how it should work I think if you are really an avid student of Dr. Peat. You need to think about your own context. Discover how your own body works. And then apply Dr. Peat's ideas for yourself."

This is exactly what I see around me here. Over and over you'll read on threads people feeling their way to deeper, nuanced and individualized understanding of an issue.

I would have to say that I perceive the forum and it's inclinations differently, sueq.

To my eyes,
the basic and general notion that
people should feel their way to deeper, nuanced and individualized understanding of an issue
is obviously and actively being observed on just about every thread in the forum.

And, contrary-wise, I see almost a total lack of posters saying things like,
"Oh, dammit, I've tried for years now to drink
2 quarts of milk and 3 quarts of orange juice,
and I'm just not getting anywhere,
but I'm gonna keep on doing exactly the same thing for years to come,
because that is what The Forum commands me to do."

Actually, this general notion that
people should feel their way to deeper, nuanced and individualized understanding of an issue
is not by any means an exclusively original Peat idea.
It is an idea, I would guess, that most posters bring with them
from their various experiences and lives.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom