Low Toxin Supplements Dr Smith's perspective on dextrose powder supplementation

[TheCodez]

FYI he's somewhat opposed to it.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Assuming he does a livestream topic on it, I think it will be interesting to see what scientific evidence he cites to build a case against it.

 

[Peater]

Assuming he does a livestream topic on it, I think it will be interesting to see what scientific evidence he cites to build a case against it.

It was already covered on a livestream, although I don't remember the exact details I think it was put down to suppressing ALDH.

 

[Ras]

Assuming he does a livestream topic on it, I think it will be interesting to see what scientific evidence he cites to build a case against it.

Unlimited studies against it are meaningless to those cured by it.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Unlimited studies against it are meaningless to those cured by it.

Who said making a scientific case against it was meaningful in the first place? It's okay to be interested in meaningless things. No need for 'resistance is futile' jargon when there's no resistance against the things that work in the first place, as you've alluded to before.

 

[Mitchell777]

Assuming he does a livestream topic on it, I think it will be interesting to see what scientific evidence he cites to build a case against it.

Garrett doesn’t work via mechanisms and high quality research papers for many of the things he says. He bases a lot of his ideas on pure skeptics. If you contest it with genuine research in a calm manner, he will still end up nearly blocking you or being rude and sarcastic, making it out like he knows all and that it’s crazy to think what you think. Mechanisms are not the be all end all but they are vital in understanding processes of the body and how we interact with compounds.

Garrett will use the same old ambiguous explanations such as “duration paradox” and “slows down detox” or “well it’s a poison dummy, don’t come crying back to me when you realise that”… if you have watched enough of her long form YouTube live streams you can see the patterns.

 

[Sebastian B]

The only argument he has against using 100% glucose powder is that it is essentially an empty calorie with no nutrients, which is true. However, he overlooks that the people following this protocol do not intend to do so for six months or longer, and the brain needs substantial quantities of glucose to recover from past glucose-limiting events. Furthermore, participants in the forum and his network who are trying the glucose protocol still consume the same nutrient-rich foods that Dr. Garrett Smith himself eats, such as beans, rice, and lean meat. His other argument that glucose powder will slow down ALDH also doesn't make sense because the body needs energy to run detox processes, and if you are eating a lean diet like his, that energy comes from glucose. Another point to consider is that one of the effects of removing from the diet toxins, like vitamin A, is the restoration of glucose metabolism.

 

[kyle]

Calling it "CORN SUGAR" is painfully disingenuous.

As a side note, having an avatar posing with a machine gun in front of a bullet riddled target is a bit of a grim persona to project as a nutritionist.

 

[kyle]

nutrient-rich foods that Dr. Garrett Smith himself eats, such as beans, rice, and lean meat...if you are eating a lean diet like his, that energy comes from glucose.

Whether derived from fats, proteins or starches all energy is utilized in the form of glucose, no?

I think the question is if beans/rice can be accurately characterized as "nutrient-rich" - my experience is there isn't a substantial nutritional benefit of grains or legumes over eating honey or other sugars. Without access to meat or milk/eggs for example, nixtamalized corn or potatoes can act as something of a staple food where sugar becomes something of an "empty calorie." Beans may offer something in the way of staving off total protein deficiency, but I think over a long enough time frame they fare no better than a fruitarian.

 

[mosaic01]

Can someone who is more into Dr. Smith's protocol tell me how his clients get enough calories if he is against fructose, fats as well as starch (glucose)?

If he only supports unrefined starch - it's extremely difficult for a sick person to get enough calories from those on a low fat diet. The energy required to digest thousands of calories of rice is enormous. I see reports in his group that suggest some are struggling with basic things, there's something fundamentally missing in his approach. Without sufficient calories and glycogen, the liver is completely lost.

 

[kyle]

@mosaic01
By the way, thank you for bringing light to Dr. Stephens theory and the brain pull theory. It really paints an interesting picture of physiology that's worthy of consideration. Dr. Stephens spoke in one of his interview on his work on architecture and mental health which I think speaks to a contextual approach and an artist's perspective that I think Dr. Peat would have appreciated.

I clicked this thread because it seemed like every other post was about Dr. Smith whom I have little knowledge of. Seeing so many posts that seem to orbit around this guy's opinions with baited breath strikes me as a bit contrary to a spirit of thinking critically and avoiding dogmatic paradigms. It was a bit distracting from the fascinating theories you had posted. Really seems to have been a shift in the tone on this forum. I'm an infrequent casual lurker so maybe I'm out of the loop.

Like I said, I don't know much about the guy. But the way he writes is really off-putting. Like "we've come this far." What does he even mean by that? Seems narcissistic.

And yeah, this dude didn't grow out of his GI JOE phase either. The whole "David Goggins I'm a bad **** navy seal" thing is dorky and a bit of a macho "look at me" thing. He comes off is narcissistic and dare I say, dogmatic.

 

[mosaic01]

Seeing so many posts that seem to orbit around this guy's opinions with baited breath strikes me as a bit contrary to a spirit of thinking critically and avoiding dogmatic paradigms.

In the beginning when he was basically the only visible persona that one could relate to when it comes to a structured approach to avoiding toxins like retinol, many were led to him and became somewhat dependent on what he said. He also popularized many essential and important concepts that are helping people find health, under the banner of toxic bile theory. The way he puts ideas into practice is often questionable. He's not a good practicioner, but he did play a very important role overall in making the topic known in the first place.

Then there was the transition of this forum which naturally put a lot of temporary focus on Dr. Smith as the vacuum had to be filled.

Now with the growing community and more diverse concepts emerging (Thor Torrens providing interviews, Dr. Stephens, etc.), things should settle down a bit, as the community moves away from Dr. Smith as a single focus.

Like I said, I don't know much about the guy. But the way he writes is really off-putting. Like "we've come this far." What does he even mean by that? Seems narcissistic.

Yes, definitely narcissistic. Now he feels his clients/members are betraying his perfect model. I see lots of desperate members in his group.

Thor and Will backtracked from the glucose protocol immediately. Only Lia Miller did not recant. Women are the new men it seems these days.

 

[kyle]

Pale...dark eye circles.

Not trying to come from a mean spirited place here, dude doesn't look healthy.

 

[kyle]

@mosaic01
Ok, so he eats lean meat, beans and rice... could even make a puritan shudder.

toxins like retinol

Ok, but basically this sounds a lot like the old low-fat "heart healthy" diet of yore.

Consider me flummoxed.

 

[mosaic01]

Not trying to come from a mean spirited place here, dude doesn't look healthy.

I don't judge people by their looks, but by their words and actions.

He has provided lots of valuable knowledge and information that helps many and kickstarted the low toxin movement.

Looks like you haven't even researched the basics of the low toxin approach and are just here to ridicule Dr. Smith with low effort posts. Maybe start educating yourself before judging.

 

[kyle]

What's next?

I've heard culture is cyclical but I didn't see this coming.

 

[kyle]

Maybe start educating yourself before judging.

I'm merely unfamiliar with what the man Dr. Smith advocates. His "diet" though is certainly not 'new' to me in any sense of the word, it's certainly not original. Can you really blame me if I find it a bit surprising it found any currency on a Ray Peat forum? Cut me some slack.

As far as judging a self-proclaimed health 'expert'* on their appearance, I think intent behind my observation is important because I have no ill-will toward him on the level it seems you're implying. If a driving instructor goes off on the meridian around a turn and blows through a red light nobody is going to write that off, right?

Complexion and eye circles are fair diagnostic indicators of health. We can like it or not but I don't see a way around the fact that complexion and dark eye circles don't bode as good indicators of health. Call it distasteful or whatever, fine by me but I'm not convinced it's something to completely disregard.

*Correction: self-proclaimed "World Expert" according to his twitter bio. Humility is truly a lost virtue in our age.

 

[Nick]

Can someone who is more into Dr. Smith's protocol tell me how his clients get enough calories if he is against fructose, fats as well as starch (glucose)?

If he only supports unrefined starch - it's extremely difficult for a sick person to get enough calories from those on a low fat diet. The energy required to digest thousands of calories of rice is enormous. I see reports in his group that suggest some are struggling with basic things, there's something fundamentally missing in his approach. Without sufficient calories and glycogen, the liver is completely lost.

I believe for sicker people he suggests that they eat whatever they can tolerate to get enough calories. For people who tend to be underweight, which he believes to be a minority of people, he suggests adding some more fat. Starch and moderate fruit would be the main energy source for most people following Smith's program.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Not trying to come from a mean spirited place here, dude doesn't look healthy.

You should take a look at his oldest livestreams for comparison.

I have no ill-will toward him on the level it seems you're implying.

Of course you do. You've only written down criticism, vain judgment, and likened his suggestions to the classic food pyramid... which is intentionally turning a blind eye to those who have become healthier on his suggestions, is immature and irrelevant to someone's words and actions, and reveals that you don't even know the basic dietary suggestions to begin with (which makes you sound like a fool), respectively.

Garrett's words and actions tell us he wants people to be healthier and yours tells us that you don't like Garrett for opinions with no substance.

Everybody has an ego, yes. Keep it in check, that's all.

 

[earthspa]

Garrett doesn’t work via mechanisms and high quality research papers for many of the things he says. He bases a lot of his ideas on pure skeptics. If you contest it with genuine research in a calm manner, he will still end up nearly blocking you or being rude and sarcastic, making it out like he knows all and that it’s crazy to think what you think. Mechanisms are not the be all end all but they are vital in understanding processes of the body and how we interact with compounds.

Garrett will use the same old ambiguous explanations such as “duration paradox” and “slows down detox” or “well it’s a poison dummy, don’t come crying back to me when you realise that”… if you have watched enough of her long form YouTube live streams you can see the patterns.

Totally agree