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

[InChristAlone]

For reference. This is from a textbook
.

I don't understand how they could say redness of the skin and eczema only results past 100,000 IUs a day for a 150 lb adult (1 IU= 0.3 mcg retinol). I'm sure there's a much wider range of toxicity based on the things Chris was saying. A lot of inconsistencies with vitamin A research.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

Wow, way to take a stand there Chris. People who take too much vitamin A are going to benefit from not taking too much vitamin A. Seriously stepping out of the box there. People who are genetically prone to not clearing A may not need as much A. I am amazed by his acumen. This whole paragraph from him is a giant nothing burger.

Yeah, he didn't really address the matter in the methodical and balanced manner we've come to value.

I've been waiting for him to address it. His treatment of the FCLO scandal a couple years back was very definitive. I was hoping for something similar.

I'm hoping that Peat or Nathan Hatch will address it in a detailed way, but my hopes are not high. I'm not waiting for an authority's opinion to follow, but their knowledge is both broader and deeper than mine, and so they have insights I do not perceive in many situations.

 

[Tarmander]

I dunno, I think he makes a good point. There is always a danger in the health-o-sphere to take something and make extreme statements with it, in this case "Vitamin A is virtually almost always bad". Same with other things I have seen on these forums "Iron is always bad, so donate blood drink caffeine etc to get rid of it". Can any of these things be bad? Yes... but I think he gave the correct diplomatic answer... because there is no one size fits all...

He is correct in the diplomatic, always take the middle road way. What I have come to understand overtime is that people who talk about taking the middle road, and say things like "moderation in all things" are basically saying they are okay with the status quo. If I could choose a slogan for people who are comfortable and don't want to be bothered, it would be "moderation in all things." There is no real wisdom there, only a preference for how things are. Which is fine, but not actual help. They will not be good at getting you out of trouble, or correctly diagnosing a problem. So if you are doing fine and don't want to change, then it is a great motto.

Yeah, he didn't really address the matter in the methodical and balanced manner we've come to value.

I've been waiting for him to address it. His treatment of the FCLO scandal a couple years back was very definitive. I was hoping for something similar.

I'm hoping that Peat or Nathan Hatch will address it in a detailed way, but my hopes are not high. I'm not waiting for an authority's opinion to follow, but their knowledge is both broader and deeper than mine, and so they have insights I do not perceive in many situations.

Yeah he punted that one away.

 

[InChristAlone]

Exactly, supplementation is the only route. Do you supplement? Blossom didn't mention supplementing vitamin E.

I get about 10 mg vitamin E from progesterone for 2 weeks a month. RDA is around 15 mg.

 

[Cirion]

He is correct in the diplomatic, always take the middle road way. What I have come to understand overtime is that people who talk about taking the middle road, and say things like "moderation in all things" are basically saying they are okay with the status quo. If I could choose a slogan for people who are comfortable and don't want to be bothered, it would be "moderation in all things." There is no real wisdom there, only a preference for how things are. Which is fine, but not actual help. They will not be good at getting you out of trouble, or correctly diagnosing a problem. So if you are doing fine and don't want to change, then it is a great motto.



Yeah he punted that one away.

Fair enough, and I haven't really read all this thread. Just got the impression that people are finding the next "Fad" to demonize (in this case Vitamin A)

I really think the real issue is that people take so many freakin supplements. I'm guilty of this myself. So easy to cause all sorts of unforeseen consequences this way.

 

[Tarmander]

Fair enough, and I haven't really read all this thread. Just got the impression that people are finding the next "Fad" to demonize (in this case Vitamin A)

I really think the real issue is that people take so many freakin supplements. I'm guilty of this myself. So easy to cause all sorts of unforeseen consequences this way.

Yeah cutting back is so beneficial

 

[InChristAlone]

I get about 10 mg vitamin E from progesterone for 2 weeks a month. RDA is around 15 mg.

But you are right that for people avoiding PUFA they get very little. I get 2 mg from my diet on a good day. This will probably be my next experiment. I do have a good supplement, just don't like taking a lot.

 

[Makrosky]

He is correct in the diplomatic, always take the middle road way. What I have come to understand overtime is that people who talk about taking the middle road, and say things like "moderation in all things" are basically saying they are okay with the status quo. If I could choose a slogan for people who are comfortable and don't want to be bothered, it would be "moderation in all things." There is no real wisdom there, only a preference for how things are. Which is fine, but not actual help. They will not be good at getting you out of trouble, or correctly diagnosing a problem. So if you are doing fine and don't want to change, then it is a great motto.

Another way to see it is that people will always want some sort of overcomplicated answer for the most simple and obvious things, in this case : too much is too much, too little is too little.

Another way would be cherry picking (like almost everybody does btw) some pubmed studies, elaborate some theory, show some graphs and make a definite statement that looks neat. Pretending human body can be explained through a few pubmed studies. That will bring a false sense of truth to it. You know what I mean ? Go for instance to longecity or anyother forum like that and see how people write down large posts (maybe 2, 3, 6 pages) full of references and reasons and proofs that... paleo diet or serotonin is wonderful and the definite thing health wise. If it was not because of Peat you would bite that bait for sure.

You were expecting something like that from Masterjohn ? What would that change ?

It reminds me to flat earthers. They torture the reality to make it fit their crazy idea and expect the others to debunk it. It is the other way around : "Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence".

My 2 IU's of Vitamin A.

 

[Blossom]

Exactly, supplementation is the only route. Do you supplement? Blossom didn't mention supplementing vitamin E.

I’ve used one or more of the following: progest-e, simply progesterone and healthnatura’s whole E for most of the past 5 plus years minus the time in 2017 that I’ve mentioned previously when I didn’t take anything but thyroid. There were times I used both a progesterone with E and additional E at the same time. For me personally I don’t think it was a lack of vitamin E.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

I dunno, I think he makes a good point. There is always a danger in the health-o-sphere to take something and make extreme statements with it, in this case "Vitamin A is virtually almost always bad". Same with other things I have seen on these forums "Iron is always bad, so donate blood drink caffeine etc to get rid of it". Can any of these things be bad? Yes... but I think he gave the correct diplomatic answer... because there is no one size fits all...

Says the guy aiming for less than 1g of PUFA a day

About iron, I think parallels are not as perfect as people think. From the independent research that I've done, I get the impression that nearly every case of anemia is not a lack of iron, but of some other co-factor involved in hemoglobin synthesis (there are many). Peat's conclusion in this matter is widely held by experts in nearly every segment of the health/medical spectrum. It is the consensus of many researchers over many decades. To contrast, Grant is a singular layman that is discounting a century of research.

Lest we hear about times in history where a lone voice stood firm in the face of overwhelming opposition, Grant's story is not even like Copernicus or Galileo. Not only were they pre-eminent intellectuals of their day, but they were also following up on research and hunches from the Ancient Greeks. They did not conjure up new views of the universe out of whole cloth that eventually became accepted.

 

[InChristAlone]

Another way to see it is that people will always want some sort of overcomplicated answer for the most simple and obvious things, in this case : too much is too much, too little is too little.

Another way would be cherry picking (like almost everybody does btw) some pubmed studies, elaborate some theory, show some graphs and make a definite statement that looks neat. Pretending human body can be explained through a few pubmed studies. That will bring a false sense of truth to it. You know what I mean ? Go for instance to longecity or anyother forum like that and see how people write down large posts (maybe 2, 3, 6 pages) full of references and reasons and proofs that... paleo diet or serotonin is wonderful and the definite thing health wise. If it was not because of Peat you would bite that bait for sure.

It reminds me to flat earthers. They torture the reality to make it fit their crazy idea and expect the others to debunk it. It is the other way around : "Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence".

My 2 IU's of Vitamin A.

My motto is question everything. I questioned SSRI's because I became suicidal on them.

 

[Makrosky]

My motto is question everything. I questioned SSRI's became I became suicidal on them.

I think there's a very big difference on questioning "avoiding this thing does me a lot of good" and "this thing is a poison for everybody".

I'm not saying that is the place where you stand btw, I'm talking about Grant and Garret (Matt Stone I don't even know why anyone would take that guy seriously).

 

[InChristAlone]

I think there's a very big difference on questioning "avoiding this thing does me a lot of good" and "this thing is a poison for everybody".

I'm not saying that is the place where you stand btw, I'm talking about Grant and Garret (Matt Stone I don't even know why anyone would take that guy seriously).

I have not actually read the ebooks yet, I should though because a big question I have is how he got from "limiting A cures many issues" to "it's always a toxin". But for sure a big claim needs extraordinary evidence. For Peat and EFA's he thought the original studies were flawed and actually showed a vitamin B6 deficiency instead of lack of omega 3's. There are parallels with Grant and Peat about these two issues.

 

[Cirion]

Says the guy aiming for less than 1g of PUFA a day

Not even PUFA is universally bad in all cases. But it absolutely is in someone who is recovering hypothyroid like myself.

 

[InChristAlone]

Not even PUFA is universally bad in all cases. But it absolutely is in someone who is recovering hypothyroid like myself.

Wouldn't Peat disagree that PUFA is not universally bad? I mean he has a pretty extreme take on PUFA much like Grant's take on vitamin A. But I think he does realize it is hard to keep it below 4 grams a day and says to use a vitamin E supplement to help.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

I have not actually read the ebooks yet, I should though because a big question I have is how he got from "limiting A cures many issues" to "it's always a toxin". But for sure a big claim needs extraordinary evidence. For Peat and EFA's he thought the original studies were flawed and actually showed a vitamin B6 deficiency instead of lack of omega 3's. There are parallels with Grant and Peat about these two issues.

It wasn't merely Peat, though. Peat mentions a group of researchers at a university in Texas (I think), and they actually did experiments showing EFA deficiency is solved by correcting new deficiencies created by the higher metabolism. Once again, it's not a perfect parallel.

 

[Makrosky]

I have not actually read the ebooks yet, I should though because a big question I have is how he got from "limiting A cures many issues" to "it's always a toxin". But for sure a big claim needs extraordinary evidence. For Peat and EFA's he thought the original studies were flawed and actually showed a vitamin B6 deficiency instead of lack of omega 3's. There are parallels with Grant and Peat about these two issues.

He also got it from Broda Barnes. But anyway I don't think PUFA is bad as long as it's not massive ammounts from refined oils (like in the SAD for instance).
Besides that... Ray seems to have developped a decent part of his theoretical corpus of knowledge about nutrition and health based mainly on what he tried and what it worked best for him. He is not at any distance from the object of study so it is impossible he is being impartial and accurate. Same for Grant and Garret. It is a very very VERY narrowed point of view that at this point of history you think that some miracle cure you try is a definite answer.

Ok enough for today

 

[Steven Bussinger]

And that research buried since there was the seed oil lobby wanting to make money.

Nobody was burying dangerous vitamin A studies. So the cause of incorrect research has to be sheer ineptitude, and not corruption.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

He also got it from Broda Barnes. But anyway I don't think PUFA is bad as long as it's not massive ammounts from refined oils.
Besides that... Ray seems to have developped a decent part of his theoretical corpus of knowledge about nutrition and health based mainly on what he tried and what it worked best for him. He is not at any distance from the object of study so it is impossible he is being impartial and accurate.

Correct. If I remember correctly he recommended seafood once or twice a week on the latest Patrick Timpone show.

 

[Cirion]

Wouldn't Peat disagree that PUFA is not universally bad? I mean he has a pretty extreme take on PUFA much like Grant's take on vitamin A. But I think he does realize it is hard to keep it below 4 grams a day and says to use a vitamin E supplement to help.

Someone who has a robust metabolism can handle the breakdown of PUFA in a healthy way.

If you have the stomach or patience, read about from this page onwards on some of the comments about PUFA

Take It Slow

One of the guys basically says that one can actually eliminate the negative effects of PUFA in a healthy metabolism. It is probably why some people report here little to negative effect eating PUFA's while on vacation in a tropical climate.