Can Someone Decipher Tyw?

Discussion in 'Sugar, Honey' started by Elysium, Apr 18, 2017.

  1. Elysium

    Elysium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    141
    Can someone decipher tyw for those us with with an average (or below average) IQ?

    It sure is fascinating reading his thoughts on many subjects in multiple threads, but I surely can't be the only one who doesn't quite get it.

    He seems to be in several disagreements with Peat, mainly on fructose. Can someone sum up the differences and reasoning, like one would to a 10 year old?

    I'm sure there people out there wanting this, the man has a lot to say, and I think this deserves a solo thread (at least until there is tywforums.com...heh).
     
  2. Constatine

    Constatine Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2016
    Messages:
    1,039
    Gender:
    Male
    From my observations tyw seems to be a huge fan of context. He respects how complex we are as organisms and claims that not much can be taken from studies as studies are of a certain context. He favors self experimentation over evidence due to the above. For sure tyw is more traditional in his perspective regarding the human body than most peaters (in a scientific sense).
     
  3. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    6,562
    No, he likes a little bit of fructose...
     
  4. Waynish

    Waynish Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Messages:
    491
    Gender:
    Male
    His threads seem to be about parsing Peat's ideas in the best way possible, and it's obvious that almost each person you read has a unique idea for how they should be applied...
     
  5. jayegray

    jayegray Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2015
    Messages:
    187
    Gender:
    Male
    A very little amount.
     
  6. mujuro

    mujuro Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    504
    I like his attitude. Reminds me of the owner of a previous private forum I was a part of. Nothing is discounted, everything matters in a cumulative sense, and everything has a role to play that is integral to health. Some things will work for some people, and those same things just don't work for others. It is up to each of us to figure it out, which is why self experimentation is so valuable.
     
  7. Westside PUFAs

    Westside PUFAs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,603
    There's nothing to decipher. He eats a starched based, low fat diet, something I've posted here long before he was here. I had to fight through the trenches of so many anti-starch and anti-low fat people here and thanks to Charlie for letting me do that. Now tyw is here and it's nice to have someone on my side. I don't care for minor disagreements on other trivial things, I just like that someone smart came to the same conclusion about a starched based low fat diet for everyday and long term health as the basic template. tyw is a proponent of self experimentation instead of telling you what to do. But if you want to eat like him, better get over your fear of evil starch and your fear of low fat. Also, get used to cooking everyday.

    Ancient Chinese were Peatarians

    Is It Really Possible To Ditch The Starch?

    .
     
  8. Dante

    Dante Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    469
    Gender:
    Male
    I once asked him about his diet, he told that he has high-fat low carlorie diet once every 5-8 days like 4 cans of sardines and mackeral and miscellaneous snacking
     
  9. Westside PUFAs

    Westside PUFAs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,603
    Sure, I do that too, but I do it about once every two weeks and I use coconut fat and mac nuts.

    "Personally, I like my almost entirely starch-based, low protein, low sugar, mostly-plant-based diet ;). Definitely calorically sufficient (2400kcal a day average), and definitely no dairy, though I have nothing against animal foods would eat fish and eggs semi-regularly)." - tyw

    .
     
  10. Mito

    Mito Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2016
    Messages:
    458
    Tyw has said this "I will disagree with some of what Peat says, and will agree with more than I disagree. Some of the disagreements are on principles, and most are just on relatively minor practical tweaks."
     
  11. Mito

    Mito Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2016
    Messages:
    458
    He has said "For example, my position on fructose has been that some is beneficial, and too much is bad, and the middle ground is probably to consume no more than what is needed to fill liver glycogen stores on a daily basis (generally about 50-75g of total fructose as a maximum). The reasoning is simply "try not exceed what your body needs", and I have gone into some details."

    More recently he said "We are left with a decision of risk management, and given the propensity of fructose to energetically overload the liver, we can say that limiting fructose consumption to a threshold below energetic overload will reduce the risk of liver fat accumulation. The oft quoted number is 50 grams of fructose a day, which is what an average liver uses a day."
     
  12. OP
    Elysium

    Elysium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    141
    I think there is a lot to decode, since his arguments operate with a lot of complex biochemistry equations. I would not put his reasoning at the same level as yours. I dont just want to know what, i want to know why. No offense but your posts read like an unconvincing dogma, whereas his are academic papers, admitedly with a little too many emoticons.

    This forum often tends to dwell on obscure passing quotes by peat, yet here we have soneone who seems to contradict peat on a very fundamental issue, and does that in a seemingly very credible way. Id like to know who's right, and why. Many people in this forum are shoving fructose (sucrose) by hundreds of grams per day thinking they are doing the right thing. This is a big deal.
     
  13. Tarmander

    Tarmander Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,420
    Eli5: experiment and find what works best.

    I stopped reading him after awhile because I don't find much use in most of the things he says. The fructose thing is fairly interesting. Maybe I am just too dumb? I dunno. I can't seem to put his scientific explanations into an actionable plan.

    Reading him is a bit like listening to a generic corporate speech: "in the coming year we are going to utilize both existing customers and new customers to extend our brand. Our goal is to increase efficiency and sales across multiple avenues of growth. We will focus both on bringing efficiency to new endeavors as well as supporting our people to give the best customer service, and continually find new ways to innovate on that front. Any challenges that arise will be addressed with our continually evolving problem addressment process that we rolled out last year...blah blah blah."

    Lots of words but I prefer things like "Mercury is not an effective treatment for syphilus."
     
  14. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    6,562
    Just finished my weekly can of fructose that I mix with my table sugar
     
  15. Westside PUFAs

    Westside PUFAs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,603
    Logic would then dictate that studying biochemistry would help you with your goal. If it's specifically his stance on fructose then you can simply ask tyw directly for a layman breakdown. I'm sure he'd do it.

    You're a new member so you may not know but saying that is breaking the forum rules. But in fairness, I should expect that because I was rude to you by saying "there's nothing to decipher." I should have said "Yes, twy is a cool guy and he knows a lot about how to connect the puzzle pieces of biochemistry. I like that he eats a similar diet to me because there aren't many around here who do. Maybe you could ask him to talk about his stance on fructose in a simple manner.."

    But I think his reasoning is actually very similar to mine because he's a fellow starchivore and fellow low fat enthusiast, he "get's it." Do you not know how much hate starchivores and low fat enthusiasts get not just here but everywhere including other places online and in real life too? It's real. We get a lot.

    Unconvincing to you but if I were to grant you access to my PM box (which I can't because that breaks privacy rules), there's about 50 people who are convinced. But I don't care either way. It's not a competition for digital love points. I've been on Peat forums since June of 2012 and this forum since Jan. of 2013 (my username changed twice so the date on mine now is wrong), and one thing I've learned is that if your tone is harsh, you're going to get harsh tone back. It's logical. God, the stuff people have said to me, so much of it is so funny. And stuff I've said too. It's all fun. I simply engage in this stuff because it's a hobby. It's not my goal to convince anyone of anything. I just say what I do and what works for me. But I also enjoy debate and discussion on the topic of nutrition and it's hard to not face palm myself every time I read something really, really stupid. I don't intend to sound like a doosh (yes that's how I spell it), but people make points that don't actually refute the topic and people ignore the nuance, the fine details. So that's when I say "you're forgetting about a. b. and c."

    Because I receive so many PM's that are often the same questions, I might have to make a single page link to where all the FAQ's I get are answered because typing the same thing over and over again is tiring. Anyone who's put effort into posts on forums knows that the more content you put out, the more PM's arrive in your inbox. You could even stop posting altogether but because you have so much content on a forum, people will still message you long after you've stopped posting, or rarely post anymore.

    Technically he's not allowed to do that because the "Ray Peat Debate" section was taken down a long time ago by Charlie. There has a been a big change in the moderation over the last year, presumably because some didn't like some of the political talk that was going on here (which is silly, to those I say "grow up"). But there used to be a debate section and under the title it read "Do not agree with Ray Peats ideas and philosophies? Think you know better? Then let's have a civilized debate about it.."

    Untitled.jpeg

    That section got intense.

    Technically tyw must follow forum rule section 1. letter C: "Make clear if the content of your post is NOT in line with Ray Peat's philosophy."

    .
     
  16. Westside PUFAs

    Westside PUFAs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,603
    The main point I wanted to make @Elysium is that there is a list of "smart" people (I'm not mocking that they are smart or saying they are not smart, I'm just putting it in quotes because people are "fans" of them and they perceive them as smart people), in Peat related circles who's names include @Haidut, Andrew Kim, Danny Roddy, Vision of Strength, Edward, Rob Turner of FPS (I still love RT, lol, context: I've been to the prestigious FPS gym, RT is the man, even if we disagree about starch, SFA and beans :), I used to text RT on my iPhone, I mean come on, it doesn't get anymore Peaty than not emailing, but texting RT, lol) and some others, who are vehemently anti-starch and anti-low saturated fat. So the original point I was making in my first comment here was that tyw is officially the first "smart" person in Peat circles to actually be pro the two things I was being bullied for, for so long (pro high starch and pro low saturated fat, for himself but says one can do well other ways). You have to look at it from my perspective. I've been a proponent of high starch low fat for a long time and there was never anyone who was one of the biochemistry "smart" Peat-circle "celebs" who agreed with me. So I got so much hate for being some low fat starch troll. Andrew Kim, who stopped posting here but had a blog that Danny Roddy loved, was very anti-starch and his post comparing starch vs. sugar went viral in 2013. Edward is a very pro high fat proponent and very anti starch. Haidut is very anti starch. And so was VOS and FPS and others. If anyone can think of other people who fit that category, please list and please don't say "Ray Peat," because then I'll have to post why that isn't true for the hundredth time.

    .
     
  17. lisaferraro

    lisaferraro Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,414
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    This would be interesting @Westside PUFAs. I feel it would be worth doing and could mainly be a copy/paste job of what you have already written. Have you considered writing a blog?
     
  18. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    6,562
    Dunno if you noticed (you have) but most people on the board eat starch frequently. Sorry if they don't fit your definition of notable members.
     
  19. Westside PUFAs

    Westside PUFAs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,603
    I disagree. I'd say its about 70% no starch vs. 30% starch. And when I started posting about starch in Jan. of 2015, it was much less. But it doesn't matter who eats what, I just make arguments for what I do. tyw and I are not trying to convert the world into high amylase producers. We just state what we do as anyone should, and I personally like to make the positive argument using Peat's own words, just as one could do the opposite also using Peat's words. The important context here is that Peat has said some things that also changed the conversation recently, which he's actually already written but now it's in audio.

    You misunderstood my statement with the "notable members" thing. You know what I was talking about. The select handful of "biochemists." But just because one has a well versed dialect of biochemistry, that doesn't make them right, obviously. It's just arguing on another level other than basic. If one views anyone like that as an authority, then they are falling for the appeal to authority fallacy.

    .
     
  20. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    6,562
    There was a forum poll man. I will look for it.
     
Loading...