Low Toxin Diet Grant Genereux's Theory Of Vitamin A Toxicity

[Amazoniac]

@Amazoniac
Genetic deletion of Cyp26b1 negatively impacts limb skeletogenesis by inhibiting chondrogenesis

Regulation of retinoic acid distribution is required for proximodistal patterning and outgrowth of the developing mouse limb. - PubMed - NCBI

RA seems to control the speed of the cell cycle of chondrocytes from immature to fully-differentiate ones, or at least between pre-hypertrophy and hypertrophy and then transition to differentiation (resource sufficiency) as well as to apoptosis (resource shortfall due to growth factor dependency and/or other).

In other words, RA spins the cell cycle and determines the health of the resulting cells, like a gatekeeper: it grows healthy cells but helps terminate unhealthy ones and unchecked growth. Too much RA tends to stall growth, but not in all cases, not least due to the complexity of our limbs. It matches the classical view that RA generally aims for a stable differentiated state, even if it promotes some growth to get there.

This means that: in disease states of decreased proliferation (non-immune), RA may impede recovery even whether or not it is in excess (but obviously worse in excess, unless the other factor is worse); in disease states of excessive proliferation, RA can be useful as a pharmacological therapy and may be deficient; but the state in which high RA signaling is meant to be safe and good or signal for is the state of good health - sufficient resources and sufficient cell proliferation and growth - because RA helps you achieve faster and maintain your state, whatever that may be (with some complications along the immune system). It becomes harder to heal as we age and lose growth hormone, which is coincidentally involved with cartilage and joint repair. As an adult, you want growth hormone or some (partial) stand-in like DHEA, along with all cofactors involved in RA synthesis including NAD.

If things are growing, RA helps them finish sooner; otherwise it maintains the state you're currently in[, unless you so far as to trigger apoptosis via p53 and friends] - with possible exceptions for the immune system, where it gets complicated: in principle CYP26 while processing RA may lower available NADPH for other pathways, leading to lower kynurenine monooxygenase (KMO) since it requires NADPH, increasing kynurenine, which stimulates T-cells and can lead to autoimmunity (in addition, kynurenine interferes with muscle growth because it cannot fully substitute for tryptophan yet participates in that signaling anyway - high kynurenine and low tryptophan stalls growth of muscle cells). This may completely explain L-methylfolate's success: it can help regenerate NADPH as well as oppose the effects of RA on GNMT (growth hormone also does this) and allow methylation to increase - all of which counters RA. Coincidentally, carnitine (a heavily methylated product) is important to chondrocyte and other structural cell proliferation because it allows them to grow slowly but surely on a substrate of fat during the night. That's the time of day when the skeleton has the most leeway to grow, but it seems unlikely it can do it on carbs alone because the liver has to feed the brain all throughout the night (which you can partially offset with ketones). In a natural setting you need methylation to temporarily help make tissues especially skeletal more dependent on fat for slow but sufficient nighttime growth.

(Several links omitted because I already posted them once or more)

[On top of that, NADPH itself is known to participate in fatty acid and cholesterol synthesis, so very high RA may drain NADPH and wreck both and even other anabolic pathways; one theoretical consequence of this is a deficiency of lipid rafts, used in immune defense]

Guru, poison A has multiple chances to be regulated before it acts on tissues, this coordinated effect that you're describing requires more than just the all-trans poisonoic acid (the heterodimers), so (indeed) you have to go pharma to override these. But people here are experiencing issues from low quantities of carotenoids that barely have a direct effect on gene expression: it's broader.

Regarding degradation, for it to be significant, you also have to be consuming or using from reserves large amounts. I think that the internal metabolism is more demanding on nutrients than degrading it (CYP26, etc.) because it can cycle multiple times and amplify the dose (as if thee was ingesting way more), whereas once it's converted to poisonoic acid, there isn't much to do with it anymore after it acts on tissues, making it easier to predict the imposition on degradation because it should be no more than what's being eaten if everything else seems stable (the simplified steady state that they often mention). It will be either the extreme ingestion or extraordinary utilization by mobilizing from stores, but degradation is still operating as it should in these cases, it's something else that needs to be addressed to normalize it.

L-methylfolate's success: it can help regenerate NADPH as well as oppose the effects of RA on GNMT (growth hormone also does this) and allow methylation to increase - all of which counters RA.

Has you read this post?

 

[Collden]

well when a pale thin sickly looking vegan youtuber claims every single problem is stemmed from detox, I and many others tend to view the idea of detox as an excuse for an inadequate diet. vit A is a bit more perplexing, but you asked why is the idea of detox silly, and it’s silly cause everyone seems to throw that word around to explain every problem without evidence. If evidence is provided like you and many others have done, then it is more realistic, but i still tend to be apprehensive of detoxing

Something about the notion of ill health being caused by being burdened by some accumulated toxin that needs to be "purged" intuitively appeals to people. I guess thats why the idea of detox appears in almost every alternative health theory, including Peat with years of restrictive dieting required for PUFA detox. I agree it gets thrown around a lot without evidence, but I don't think the basic concept would keep recurring in almost every single theory of health unless there was some underlying truth to it.

 

[postman]

Below is haidut's response in this thread. His short response really destroys Grant Genenereux' work of 800+ pages in one sentence! (sarcasm)

Grants work:
https://ggenereux.blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/extinguishing-the-fires-of-hell2.pdf
https://ggenereux.blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/PoisoningForProfits.pdf

Vinero said:
"Are you going to continue to ignore this topic @haidut? Please stop selling estroban and retinil.
Start your research in how to stimulate the detoxification of vitamin A. Please make Idealabs dedicated to tackle vitamin A toxicity."

Haidut said:
"Lol, you crack me up with your stuff.
A random thread claiming toxicity for one of the most important nutrients out there, by a person who ostensibly cured himself by restricting this one nutrient. No evidence except that one person's report. Wow, I am overwhelmed. /s
So, you think I should take this over the hundreds of large human studies showing no toxicity from hundreds of thousands IU vitamin A daily, and another 20-30 studies showing solid NOAEL of about 25,000 IU daily? And stop selling EstroBan which has a meager 6,000 IU per serving or Retinil which has 2,000 IU - 5,000 IU per drop?? Based on nothing else but this "evidence"??
Did you email Walmart, Amazon and the 10,000+ other vendors selling vitamin A and ask them to stop selling it as well? In case you have not noticed, buying is voluntary. If somebody thinks vitamin A does not sit well with them then they are free to not buy any product containing it. Until I see real evidence that vitamin A is dangerous and is an actual cause of even one chronic condition there is not much to say or do on this topic."

Notice he doesn't actually explain why the vitamin A toxicity theory is wrong. He also simply ignores the real-world experiences of people healing their auto-immune diseases like eczema. Not only Grant has cured himself, but many others have including myself. You can find the positive testimonials scattered throughout this thread, on Grants' forum, and here: Testimonials / Anecdotes / Recoveries from doing the Poison/"Vitamin A" and Glyphosate Detox
Haidut talks about the scientific studies he has read that show no toxicity from vitamin A, but Dr Garret Smith has done really good work of finding tons of studies about the toxic effects of vitamin A, which he posts on the blog forum of nutritionrestored.com. Have a look there and see that the evidence that vitamin A is toxic absolutely exists:
START HERE...Summary, Grant's books, the "rules", the misconceptions, the falsehoods
Conditions / Diseases / Syndromes caused by Poison/"Vitamin A"
Case studies / poisonings / observations about Poison/"Vitamin A" causing poor health and disease
Are we being purposely poisoned with Poison/"Vitamin A"? Interesting coincidences...

And also Chris Masterjohn, who referred to us (the low-vitamin A people) as the "flat earthers of the nutrition world" or something. Gee, thanks for pointing out our positive testimonials about the low-vitamin A diet don't mean anything. This reminds me of when Ray talked about how when he was following Biology classes he was doing some experiments of studying the behavior of cells. When they observed a behavior of cells that wasn't in agreement with the textbook behavior of cells the professors would just pretend they didnt see it. Ofcourse these nutrition-gurus aren't going to admit the vitamin A they have been recommending or selling to people for years could have harmed their clients and followers. By the way, I still haven't seen any of these nutrition-gurus debunk the work of Grant Genereux. They simply dismiss the vitamin A toxicity theory as being too far out there.

Yeah quite embarassing really, it's the same type of response you would expect to get from an allopahtic doctor if you present with hypothyroid symptoms and a TSH of 4.0

 

[sunraiser]

I still think it comes down to impaired liver function. If a person were to ingest too much retinol then the organ involved in processing and removing it is clearly going to impact clearance rates, which means case studies on clearance rates are only relevant to people in non impaired liver (heavy metals?) scenarios.

Seeing as VA avoidance is clearly giving some people a palpable difference in energy and wellbeing levels then it only makes sense to me that lymph stimulating and sweat inducing exercise should be combined as the ACTUAL "detox method".

For me, walking/jogging/running is the most natural form of lymph stimulation.

Jog in a relaxed way til it starts to feel less pleasant, then walk or stop.

The more you do it the more you'll know your intuitive limits. It shouldn't ever be torturous.

If a person is carrying around more weight than their healthy frame size then it might just be walking or very very light jogging, depending how the joints feel.

 

[Terma]

Guru, poison A has multiple chances to be regulated before it acts on tissues, this coordinated effect that you're describing requires more than just the all-trans poisonoic acid (the heterodimers), so (indeed) you have to go pharma to override these. But people here are experiencing issues from low quantities of carotenoids that barely have a direct effect on gene expression: it's broader.

Yes I am especially talking about accutane/isotretinoin/13-cis, which is nothing but a mega dose of bioavailable RA.

These other people likely have some defect in processing, and you already posted possible issues such as iirc PUFA affecting the fate of caretenoids in the gut. Simultaneously, some people seem predisposed to diseases related to cellular NADPH insufficiency - these people would be expected to feel worse from any amount of retinoic acid - so all it takes is for there to exist a shortcut to RA synthesis from its precursors - something that sounds like the PUFA idea or a gut pathogen producing RA.

Regarding degradation, for it to be significant, you also have to be consuming or using from reserves large amounts. I think that the internal metabolism is more demanding on nutrients than degrading it (CYP26, etc.) because it can cycle multiple times and amplify the dose (as if thee was ingesting way more), whereas once it's converted to poisonoic acid, there isn't much to do with it anymore after it acts on tissues, making it easier to predict the imposition on degradation because it should be no more than what's being eaten if everything else seems stable (the simplified steady state that they often mention). It will be either the extreme ingestion or extraordinary utilization by mobilizing from stores, but degradation is still operating as it should in these cases, it's something else that needs to be addressed to normalize it.

P450 monooxygenases are bound by NADPH availability notably in the liver. If that's compromised for any reason you have a problem, and it's quite a popular suspect in mainstream research for a reason. What we suspected time and time again with accutane was that some people are genetically or otherwise susceptible to accutane while others are less, and there was a pattern of autoimmune problems. Some of these people may also have taken accutane only once in the past, but as it is powerful enough to do significant damage to brain structures, it might have damaged or modified their processes in some reactionary way which makes them more suspectible (oh yes) to other problems (in the simplest case, through gut modulation). NADPH or P450 insufficiency combined with increased RA synthesis or bioavailability - through whatever channel - is all you need to have a serious problem.

Has you read this post?

Thanks, but yes I think I got those covered.

 

[RWilly]

But it doesn't rule out the idea that poor liver function could be (probably is?) at the root of people having VA issues. E.g. the liver is full of iron, or just "fatty (what does this comprise of in practice, though?).

I think the liver is full of "something" in these cases. My personal view would be iron as a way of impeding function, but I'm sure there are lots of theories. I think that's why so many have success with lots and lots of liver flushes (though I don't support the idea as occasionally they can cause serious issues).

I think iron is a huge piece of the puzzle, as iron doesn't have any method of excretion and the liver is the primary storage area. That puts everything out of balance. Liver storage can be high while blood levels are low, which is the case in many chronic diseases:

You May Want to Think Twice About that Iron Supplement

 

[Amazoniac]

That's a strong word. How, specifically, has he shown that the idea of detox is silly? I think this theory is one where the idea of detox actually makes good sense and is well supported by clinical observations. That is - there are numerous cases where people who've taken large amounts of VA have symptoms of toxicity and dysregulated VA metabolism for a long time after VA is minimised, in some cases symptoms only begin some time after discontinuation. In some cases "detox" symptoms may rather be symptoms of healing the damage from toxicity.

Massive vitamin A intoxication with ascites and pleural effusion. - PubMed - NCBI
"Vitamin A intoxication was diagnosed in a 14-year-old girl who presented with massive exudative ascites and right pleural effusion, impaired liver enzymes, and hypertriglyceridemia. Electron microscopy of liver biopsy material demonstrated numerous perisinusoidal lipid-filled Ito cells. The patient had taken 100-200,000 I.U. vitamin A per day for 15 months. Serum vitamin A level remained elevated for 4 months after vitamin discontinuation. The unusual severity of portal hypertension was documented by a high wedged hepatic vein pressure level. The ascites occurred 2 months after vitamin A had been discontinued, probably owing to particularly slow mobilization of large hepatic stores of vitamin A. Portal hypertension disappeared after a 6-month low vitamin A diet, but the liver biopsy failed to demonstrate any decrease in number or size of Ito cells, suggesting that lipid venous obstruction is unlikely to be the only mechanism responsible for portal hypertension in vitamin A-induced liver disease."

Vitamin A intoxication presenting with ascites and a normal vitamin A level.
- "Vitamin A intake was minimized. After eight weeks of therapy the patient experienced worsening dermatitis, fissured lips, increased hair loss, irritability, and tenderness of the extremities"

- "It was only after the child received nutritional supplementation (with minimal vitamin A intake) that her serum vitamin A level rose into a clearly toxic range"

- "Although the vitamin A supplementation had been stopped month before admission, the child's condition worsened with the development of overt ascites. It has been proposed that this delay in the onset of ascites is due to the effects of high-dose vitamin A administration on the liver, which appears to result in enlarging and transforming the Ito cells. The enlargement caused by vitamin A in these cells decreases the sinusoidal spaces. Later, fibroblastic transformation of the Ito cells leads to a fibrocongestive hepatic lesion and ascites. This is presumed to be a dose- and time-related phenomenon and may not lead initially to enlargement of the liver."

Severe hypervitaminosis A in siblings: evidence of variable tolerance to retinol intake. - PubMed - NCBI
"The patient's intake of vitamin A was restricted to <300 IU/day. For a subsequent year serum retinol levels remained normal, and retinyl ester levels remained markedly elevated, with occasional wide fluctuations (Fig. 1). Episodic otitis, sepsis, hepatomegaly, and hypercalcemia occurred, and increased intra- cranial pressure persisted. Clinical features of vitamin A intoxication corresponded with relative increases in circulating retinyl ester values."

Hepatic hypervitaminosis A: a familial observation. - PubMed - NCBI
"Four siblings with hepatic fibrosis are described. The liver damage in these patients was secondary to chronic ingestion of massive doses of vitamin A for congenital ichthyosis. Although the extrahepatic manifestations were helpful in the diagnosis of hypervitaminosis A, the distinctive features of hepatic histopathology were confirmatory. The plasma concentrations of vitamin A and retinol-binding protein were misleading. The recovery from the liver damage in these patients was slow despite a complete withdrawal of the vitamin A intake. These cases show the importance of hepatic vitamin A assessment in the diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis."

P450 monooxygenases are bound by NADPH availability notably in the liver. If that's compromised for any reason you have a problem, and it's quite a popular suspect in mainstream research for a reason. What we suspected time and time again with accutane was that some people are genetically or otherwise susceptible to accutane while others are less, and there was a pattern of autoimmune problems. Some of these people may also have taken accutane only once in the past, but as it is powerful enough to do significant damage to brain structures, it might have damaged or modified their processes in some reactionary way which makes them more suspectible (oh yes) to other problems (in the simplest case, through gut modulation). NADPH or P450 insufficiency combined with increased RA synthesis or bioavailability is all you need to have a serious problem.

That's why it's sensible to reduce the intake, but once this is done, the person has to move on to work on repair through other means instead of settling on deprivation with fingers crossed. Otherwise, if it's not corrected before reserves approach exhaustion, the person will be compromised by the deficiency and left in a conflicting position where the body needs it desperately, but when consumed, it fuels issues all over again. Collden's suggestion that it will self-correct over time is giving false hopes because I can't find any indication of this, so I wouldn't be counting on it. Members might be already experiencing manifestations of lower reserves but he's still encouraging them to push further for years.

If a person were to ingest too much retinol then the organ involved in processing and removing it is clearly going to impact clearance rates, which means case studies on clearance rates are only relevant to people in non impaired liver (heavy metals?) scenarios.

You don't need a full storage reset, this is the point.

 

[Terma]

That's why it's sensible to reduce the intake, but once this is done, the person has to move on to work on repair through other means instead of settling on deprivation with fingers crossed. Otherwise, if it's not corrected before reserves approach exhaustion, the person will be compromised by the deficiency and left in a conflicting position where the body needs it desperately, but when consumed, it fuels issues all over again. Collden's suggestion that it will self-correct over time is giving false hopes because I can't find any indication of this, so I wouldn't be counting on it. Members might be already experiencing manifestations of lower reserves but he's still encouraging them to push further for years.

You don't need a full storage reset, this is the point.

Likely the biggest risk of waiting too long (to reintroduce caretenoids/retinol in diet) is simply cancer - worse if you have a bad gut, which is not unlikely after accutane, since butyrate and acetate production get disturbed - and the two together is like a formula for gut cancer.

 

[Amazoniac]

Likely the biggest risk of waiting too long (to reintroduce caretenoids/retinol in diet) is simply cancer - worse if you have a bad gut, which is not unlikely after accutane, since butyrate and acetate production get disturbed - and the two together is like a formula for gut cancer.

Along with impaired immunity, poor tissue regeneration (related to cancre), anemia, adverse hormonal effects, and so on. Everything conductive of the body having to slow down to match the imposed pace, which will eventually go against the initial damage that the body is trying to repair. What if there's a trauma somewhere along the way that demands a rapid response? Gotta be prepared for everything.

 

[Terma]

Yeah, I think high RAR signaling can seen sort of like an "endless day" (that's where I got it for NADPH). It's supposed to tune down at the start of the night to set a different tone for the immune system and allow for anabolic processes and growth. And again we lose growth hormone as we age - and combined with issues caused by kynurenine and CRH/cortisol - you can't heal.

 

[Collden]

That's why it's sensible to reduce the intake, but once this is done, the person has to move on to work on repair through other means instead of settling on deprivation with fingers crossed. Otherwise, if it's not corrected before reserves approach exhaustion, the person will be compromised by the deficiency and left in a conflicting position where the body needs it desperately, but when consumed, it fuels issues all over again. Collden's suggestion that it will self-correct over time is giving false hopes because I can't find any indication of this, so I wouldn't be counting on it. Members might be already experiencing manifestations of lower reserves but he's still encouraging them to push further for years.

Never said a person should do zero-VA for many years. One year would be safe for most and not push them into deficiency even if their stores were perfectly average to begin with. One year should also be enough for almost anyone to evaluate whether the person benefited from the restriction or not and see where to go from there. There are some red flags anyone should be mindful of, like persistent symptoms that just get worse and worse with time, or feeling very deprived and bored with the diet.

Your fear that a person might become more and more deficient and at the same time less able to handle the VA that he so desperately needs and so sink into an vicious cycle of deeper deprivation I think is unfounded. The general picture emerging from those who have done this the longest is rather that they tolerate VA better now than at the beginning. Some did low-VA for close to a year, concluded they were no longer benefitting from it and went back to consuming a moderate-VA diet. I think a person can ultimately use his cravings as a guide to when foods containing VA would be desirable again. Your body is not going to create an aversion to something that it needs.

 

[Tarmander]

That's a strong word. How, specifically, has he shown that the idea of detox is silly? I think this theory is one where the idea of detox actually makes good sense and is well supported by clinical observations. That is - there are numerous cases where people who've taken large amounts of VA have symptoms of toxicity and dysregulated VA metabolism for a long time after VA is minimised, in some cases symptoms only begin some time after discontinuation. In some cases "detox" symptoms may rather be symptoms of healing the damage from toxicity.

Massive vitamin A intoxication with ascites and pleural effusion. - PubMed - NCBI
"Vitamin A intoxication was diagnosed in a 14-year-old girl who presented with massive exudative ascites and right pleural effusion, impaired liver enzymes, and hypertriglyceridemia. Electron microscopy of liver biopsy material demonstrated numerous perisinusoidal lipid-filled Ito cells. The patient had taken 100-200,000 I.U. vitamin A per day for 15 months. Serum vitamin A level remained elevated for 4 months after vitamin discontinuation. The unusual severity of portal hypertension was documented by a high wedged hepatic vein pressure level. The ascites occurred 2 months after vitamin A had been discontinued, probably owing to particularly slow mobilization of large hepatic stores of vitamin A. Portal hypertension disappeared after a 6-month low vitamin A diet, but the liver biopsy failed to demonstrate any decrease in number or size of Ito cells, suggesting that lipid venous obstruction is unlikely to be the only mechanism responsible for portal hypertension in vitamin A-induced liver disease."

Vitamin A intoxication presenting with ascites and a normal vitamin A level.
- "Vitamin A intake was minimized. After eight weeks of therapy the patient experienced worsening dermatitis, fissured lips, increased hair loss, irritability, and tenderness of the extremities"

- "It was only after the child received nutritional supplementation (with minimal vitamin A intake) that her serum vitamin A level rose into a clearly toxic range"

- "Although the vitamin A supplementation had been stopped month before admission, the child's condition worsened with the development of overt ascites. It has been proposed that this delay in the onset of ascites is due to the effects of high-dose vitamin A administration on the liver, which appears to result in enlarging and transforming the Ito cells. The enlargement caused by vitamin A in these cells decreases the sinusoidal spaces. Later, fibroblastic transformation of the Ito cells leads to a fibrocongestive hepatic lesion and ascites. This is presumed to be a dose- and time-related phenomenon and may not lead initially to enlargement of the liver."

Severe hypervitaminosis A in siblings: evidence of variable tolerance to retinol intake. - PubMed - NCBI
"The patient's intake of vitamin A was restricted to <300 IU/day. For a subsequent year serum retinol levels remained normal, and retinyl ester levels remained markedly elevated, with occasional wide fluctuations (Fig. 1). Episodic otitis, sepsis, hepatomegaly, and hypercalcemia occurred, and increased intra- cranial pressure persisted. Clinical features of vitamin A intoxication corresponded with relative increases in circulating retinyl ester values."

Hepatic hypervitaminosis A: a familial observation. - PubMed - NCBI
"Four siblings with hepatic fibrosis are described. The liver damage in these patients was secondary to chronic ingestion of massive doses of vitamin A for congenital ichthyosis. Although the extrahepatic manifestations were helpful in the diagnosis of hypervitaminosis A, the distinctive features of hepatic histopathology were confirmatory. The plasma concentrations of vitamin A and retinol-binding protein were misleading. The recovery from the liver damage in these patients was slow despite a complete withdrawal of the vitamin A intake. These cases show the importance of hepatic vitamin A assessment in the diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis."

You can find many of these studies in similar structure for Mercury and people are caught up in detoxing heavy metals that they can see on hair tests ad infinitum.

I am totally on board with you being right. I would love for detox in this case to be correct and I can just wait it out.

I already see the insidiousness of the "detox" mentality taking over though. Symptoms that people experiencing are being labeled detox and told to push through and as Grant has said himself, sometimes those people push through and things are resolved, and sometimes they get off the diet and are worse off.

"detox" is a way that you can keep believing despite reality showing you that something you are doing is not working. I want people to snap out of this detox mentality and start treating their symptoms seriously, and looking for resolutions. Then we will learn more about this advantageous diet, and will be able to say things like "Oh you got too much sun? You need some vitamin C and cholesterol powder." Or something along those lines. These discoveries will not come until "detox" is debunked...or "detox" for years is true and we can all celebrate.

Collden's suggestion that it will self-correct over time is giving false hopes because I can't find any indication of this, so I wouldn't be counting on it.

Nicely said.

 

[Amazoniac]

Never said a person should do zero-VA for many years. One year would be safe for most and not push them into deficiency even if their stores were perfectly average to begin with. One year should also be enough to evaluate whether the person benefited from the restriction or not and see where to go from there.

Your assertion that a person might become more and more deficient and at the same time less able to handle the VA that he so desperately needs and so sink into an vicious cycle of deeper deprivation I think is unfounded. The general picture emerging from those who have done this the longest is rather that they tolerate VA better now than at the beginning. Some did low-VA for close to a year, concluded they were no longer benefitting from it and went back to consuming a moderate-VA diet. I think a person can ultimately use his cravings as a guide to when foods containing VA would be desirable again. Your body is not going to create an aversion to something it needs.

This all begun with the (erroneous) idea that it's stemming from overfilled livers, but it's not solvable through long-term deprivation either way, as confirmed by not having a single case of complete resolution (and nothing pointing towards anything other than management). Why then are you encouraging this sort of extreme deprivation? What's the point of this distraction since you won't be able to do it indefinitely?

Why would I assert that when a few pages back I was trying to speculate why the tolerance increases slightly?

Might also be due to reserves being low enough that the positives from dosing offsets the negatives at this point.

The general picture is this:

Like I mentioned earlier though, several people who have done VA depletion for 10-12 months report that they have less adverse reactions to VA now than they did earlier in recovery. Not really positive effects, just less negative effects.

How long should people insist on this? Can you at least provide a limit so that it's not left vague for people that believe it will eventually self-correct?

 

[Collden]

Lots of people have experienced tremendous benefits from doing low-VA, in several cases it took many months for those benefits to become fully apparent. If a person did long-term deprivation, experienced benefits, and can finally re-introduce foods with VA without ill effect, the net effect is very positive no? If they did not experience benefits from the deprivation and finally go back to a normal diet or trying something else, what has been lost? The probability of going into deficiency from even a year of total deprivation is minimal for a person with average stores.

Many Vitamin A researchers certainly seem to think that an overfilled liver is important in the pathology of chronic VA toxicity, since hepatic VA content is considered an important diagnostic.

 

[schultz]

Dr Peats training predates the extreme overuse of retinyl palmitate, retin A. I don't think he's realizing how many young people are ill. So many young girls have vulvodynia, Sjorens, Lichen, to name a few.

This person makes it seem like they think Ray is a physician. I sort of think his "training" has never stopped. The guy has been researching non-stop since he graduated. It's not like he went to medical school and then started a practice.

By what mechanism do stimulants deplete PUFA?

increased fat burning burns pufa?

I imagine increased uncoupling would help.

Ray says the best thing to do for excess carotene is to take b12 because b12 converts carotene to retinol. of course, most on this thread are trying to avoid that, so take it how you will.

Taking thyroid would likely help too. I think carotene could be a decent source of vitamin A for someone who is healthy.

 

[Collden]

You can find many of these studies in similar structure for Mercury and people are caught up in detoxing heavy metals that they can see on hair tests ad infinitum.

I am totally on board with you being right. I would love for detox in this case to be correct and I can just wait it out.

I already see the insidiousness of the "detox" mentality taking over though. Symptoms that people experiencing are being labeled detox and told to push through and as Grant has said himself, sometimes those people push through and things are resolved, and sometimes they get off the diet and are worse off.

"detox" is a way that you can keep believing despite reality showing you that something you are doing is not working. I want people to snap out of this detox mentality and start treating their symptoms seriously, and looking for resolutions. Then we will learn more about this advantageous diet, and will be able to say things like "Oh you got too much sun? You need some vitamin C and cholesterol powder." Or something along those lines. These discoveries will not come until "detox" is debunked...or "detox" for years is true and we can all celebrate.
Nicely said.

Right, but what are reliable indicators that something you are doing is not working? What distinguishes a sign of detox or healing from a sign that you're simply doing something wrong or harmful? This is not an easy question to answer. First of all, a symptom that just gets worse and worse over time is of course a definite red flag. But otherwise, for me I keep coming back to trying to follow intuition as much as possible.

If I go out and the sun hitting my skin feels wonderful, but the day after I have flu-like symptoms, I would still interpret the sun exposure as beneficial and whatever followed from it as a necessary evil. I might suspect that the flu-like symptoms can be mitigated by getting some extra Vitamin C or soluble fiber, so if I try some Vitamin C-rich food or beans and it tastes awesome I'll have more of it and conclude that it would likely be helpful, but if it tastes kind of bleh I would conclude that getting more of these factors would not help my current situation, etc, etc.

Eating a low-VA diet feels very intuitive at the moment for me, love the meals and not missing high-VA foods at all, so even if at times I have strange symptoms on this diet, I trust that its all good. It would be a different thing if I was doing some weird juice detox and felt awful after downing a huge vomit-inducing raw veggie smoothie, then I would more readily assume that I had just done something wrong.

Interpreting any symptom as a sign that you are doing something wrong and trying to micromanage that beyond what feels intuitive/comfortable comes with its own potential problems. As a very basic example, exercise is generally beneficial, but if it was of sufficient intensity to induce some beneficial adaptation, it will always come with some pain and discomfort in the following days, even if it was enjoyable in the moment.

 

[CLASH]

I dont understand why this is so convoluted...
If people are worried about excess vitamin A, its seems relatively simple to avoid supplements, liver, and extremely high beta carotene foods like orange carrots and orange sweet potatoes. I doubt the majority of the other foods will make that much of a difference in terms of vit A toxicity, with the exception perhaps of high quantities of milk with supplemental vit A added.

 

[gaze]

I dont understand why this is so convoluted...
If people are worried about excess vitamin A, its seems relatively simple to avoid supplements, liver, and extremely high beta carotene foods like orange carrots and orange sweet potatoes. I doubt the majority of the other foods will make that much of a difference in terms of vit A toxicity, with the exception perhaps of high quantities of milk with supplemental vit A added.

many on here believe any amount of A is toxic. When Grant writes a book called “extinguishing the fires of hell” and comes to the idea that vitamin A is a poison acting as a vitamin that the entire world has missed, people with any health issue get scared, and go 100% no A. Now if they eat any A, i’m sure the stress of eating the food is gonna cause more damage than the A itself. Many people following peat are guilty of this too, as they genuinely feel stress if they eat even an avocado, when peats whole goal is to make the organism resistant to stress

 

[Amazoniac]

If a person did long-term deprivation, experienced benefits, and can finally re-introduce foods with VA without ill effect, the net effect is very positive no?

What about your message quoted in my previous post?

If they did not experience benefits from the deprivation and finally go back to a normal diet or trying something else, what has been lost? The probability of going into deficiency from even a year of total deprivation is minimal for a person with average stores.

Not too much if after a year there wasn't someone such as ours truly telling them to keep pushing further because there hasn't been enough time, implying that they're almost there.

Many Vitamin A researchers certainly seem to think that an overfilled liver is important in the pathology of chronic VA toxicity, since hepatic VA content is considered an important diagnostic.

Again, you're mixing toxicity with accumulation, there are people with insanely high reserves that have it safe without causing any problem, and people with meek ones having its metabolism wrecked, and if we go by the stores level judgement, we're being distracted from the actual problem. You can be a poor converter, have past use of tretinoins, malfunctioning organs/proteins/enzymes, secondary malnutrition, and so on; you'll be treating all these through strict depletion even when the person is close to such state.

Since you hint on every opportunity that it's fine to proceed with this, do you mind answering the following?

How long should people insist on this? Can you at least provide a limit so that it's not left vague for people that believe it will eventually self-correct?

It's a fair request given your encouragement. Can be for a theoretical case that's as critical as the reports that you select.

--

This person makes it seem like they think Ray is a physician. I sort of think his "training" has never stopped. The guy has been researching non-stop since he graduated. It's not like he went to medical school and then started a practice.

Such happens to be a physician and a physicist.

 

[Tarmander]

I dont understand why this is so convoluted...
If people are worried about excess vitamin A, its seems relatively simple to avoid supplements, liver, and extremely high beta carotene foods like orange carrots and orange sweet potatoes. I doubt the majority of the other foods will make that much of a difference in terms of vit A toxicity, with the exception perhaps of high quantities of milk with supplemental vit A added.

It is convoluted because people are feeling great in one sense and having these symptoms that they are trying to explain. If these symptoms were all mild it would not be a big deal but some, like in my case, were debilitating asthma and whether to wait it out or treat it as something wrong is a crucial question.

Right, but what are reliable indicators that something you are doing is not working? What distinguishes a sign of detox or healing from a sign that you're simply doing something wrong or harmful? This is not an easy question to answer. First of all, a symptom that just gets worse and worse over time is of course a definite red flag. But otherwise, for me I keep coming back to trying to follow intuition as much as possible.

If I go out and the sun hitting my skin feels wonderful, but the day after I have flu-like symptoms, I would still interpret the sun exposure as beneficial and whatever followed from it as a necessary evil. I might suspect that the flu-like symptoms can be mitigated by getting some extra Vitamin C or soluble fiber, so if I try some Vitamin C-rich food or beans and it tastes awesome I'll have more of it and conclude that it would likely be helpful, but if it tastes kind of bleh I would conclude that getting more of these factors would not help my current situation, etc, etc.

Eating a low-VA diet feels very intuitive at the moment for me, love the meals and not missing high-VA foods at all, so even if at times I have strange symptoms on this diet, I trust that its all good. It would be a different thing if I was doing some weird juice detox and felt awful after downing a huge vomit-inducing raw veggie smoothie, then I would more readily assume that I had just done something wrong.

Interpreting any symptom as a sign that you are doing something wrong and trying to micromanage that beyond what feels intuitive/comfortable comes with its own potential problems. As a very basic example, exercise is generally beneficial, but if it was of sufficient intensity to induce some beneficial adaptation, it will always come with some pain and discomfort in the following days, even if it was enjoyable in the moment.

Well the fact that we are all still on this diet I think clears the whole "is it helpful" part. Many feel better. To use your sun example, I felt great in the sun for almost a month and a half before the "detox" symptoms overwhelmed me and I started having serious asthma. The question still remains though whether it was detox or something else. The detox answer is just debilitating in your ability to reason and intuit new things. If I go another year and maybe I can get some sun again and not have these issues...well then I will settle on the detox explanation...but I am going to guess that if a year from now I went and started sunbathing again and have the same symptoms, there would still be those who would say "Ahh it must mean you still have RA in your tissues and it is coming out from the sun." I am going to cut ahead in the line and start assuming now that this is not detox, and not wait another year or whatever before detox is debunked like it always is.