MetabolicTrash
Member
Peat wrote that the same factors or processes (like enzymatic activity, viral agents, etc.) that can "put information" in to organisms in regards to embryology, genes, cell development and differentiation and so on is a life long process. In other words I'm sure Peat has written that what same factors affect the pre-natal or embryonic development are still "open to change" in adults. Minding of course that this is well beyond my scope of understanding as of now, but I think the gist of it is that even as adults and lifelong people and their genes, or just their structure and form altogether, are still open to changes from the environment/environmental agents, diet, stresses, hormones, and so forth that can alter the structure of the organism including (I would assume) the face and its structure too. Peat definitely isn't one who believes in the whole "pre-destiny" bit as a way of maybe expressing one's angle of futility in bringing about change or etc. regards to an organism and its health status and genotype/phenotype/etc. If energy has its part in shaping an organism, along with other "environmental agents" that can play a part with continuing to affect you, clearly an issue in fulfilling this evident in early life could be the same one persisting and continuing to hinder more changes down the line or even further worsening one's health if left unexplored -- this is probably why you can't give in to the idea of genetic pre-destiny as you overlook what really might be the bottom line in why such big variations exist under the hood that go beyond "just genes" or "can't change it because." Even things outside of the exact scope of development like genes are affected by processes atop these structures that determine them you could say: think things like electromagnetics/electric fields, hypoxia, viral/bacterial/microorganism activity, mechanical changes even, etc. It seems to become short-sighted if we're to only look at hormones but not what drives hormones/things to less convenient ways for some which lead to disease, poorer structures, health woes, physical means/mental troubles and so on.
If anything the only real difficulty in the idea of "change" in this regard might boil down to simple energetic needs, inefficiency of fulfillment/method/hormonal/etc. needs, and equilibrium. The fact that it appears many things, like looks, can be "set in stone" doesn't point to a genetic rigidity but more so an energetic and structural/"improperly formatted" one if that makes sense how I'm trying to get it across. Genes of course do have their activity and purpose, but I think viewing the pre-natal consequences as lifelong is kind of giving in sort of like the whole "genetics" excuse to explain why people face some health issues while others may not.
Even if you wanted to take it all back to genes it seems quite clear that -- even in epigenetics outside knowing of Peat -- many are aware of how much more malleable things truly are than what the old days "Hitler-Nazi-genetic-superiority" claims would have led on up to this point on how our value is pre-determined and unchangeable because "genes say so and you can't change it."
As to whether or not DHT masculinizes the face, I think it should -- but that doesn't mean just taking it will magically make you look a "certain" way you might have had in mind from just more DHT alone. You can't isolate everything -- the body is unfortunately not a "plug and play" system it seems where individualized, singular approaches/factors can drive massive systemic changes of convenience (usually not, but maybe sometimes).
If anything the only real difficulty in the idea of "change" in this regard might boil down to simple energetic needs, inefficiency of fulfillment/method/hormonal/etc. needs, and equilibrium. The fact that it appears many things, like looks, can be "set in stone" doesn't point to a genetic rigidity but more so an energetic and structural/"improperly formatted" one if that makes sense how I'm trying to get it across. Genes of course do have their activity and purpose, but I think viewing the pre-natal consequences as lifelong is kind of giving in sort of like the whole "genetics" excuse to explain why people face some health issues while others may not.
Even if you wanted to take it all back to genes it seems quite clear that -- even in epigenetics outside knowing of Peat -- many are aware of how much more malleable things truly are than what the old days "Hitler-Nazi-genetic-superiority" claims would have led on up to this point on how our value is pre-determined and unchangeable because "genes say so and you can't change it."
As to whether or not DHT masculinizes the face, I think it should -- but that doesn't mean just taking it will magically make you look a "certain" way you might have had in mind from just more DHT alone. You can't isolate everything -- the body is unfortunately not a "plug and play" system it seems where individualized, singular approaches/factors can drive massive systemic changes of convenience (usually not, but maybe sometimes).
Last edited:
