Is Ray Peat Even Healthy?

[charlie]

Yeah, it doesn't work like that. Once you go on thyroid medication you really can't go completely off of it.

Not true.

 

[Spokey]

Only if they ate the thyroid glands of other animals.

That's right for thyroid. And they did.

 

[Risingfire]

False.

Are you serious? I took thyroid for 2 years and no longer take it.

Peat has said he only takes it in the winter now. Are you refuting Peat and his own experiences?

 

[Risingfire]

No, concurrent periodization with squats and deadlifts. Meaning switching between rep ranges every few weeks. Basically a powerlifting template. So weeks 1-2 you start with 3×10@70%, then weeks 3-4 you do 3×8@75%, then weeks 5-6 you do 3×6@80%, then weeks 7-8, 3×5@85%. You test your max again after this cycle then restart with your new percentages.

Weight lifting strength does necessarily correlate to functional strength. I've been weight lifting for half my life(since I was 16) and that strength isn't always useful and translates to real world correlation. Stairs are a fantastic way to build leg strength. If you're not an experience lifter, squatting can create or amplify muscular imbalances.

 

[sladerunner69]

I haven't read it but I agree with what they are saying and I think was taught by people who learnt from that book. Charles Poliquin is someone I have purchased books of and read a lot of articles by, although I don't agree with his diet and supplement recommendations which some totally oppose Rays ideas, he has great experience with training athletes and respects posture.

I think there is solid literature that have findings with what I'm referring too, I haven't the time to find them, maybe have a search around. especially people talking about rotator cuff and bench press. I learnt heaps from Paul Chek about the machines not being good for joints but not sure where he was getting his info from but he has a lot of experience and knowledge on the body from an holistic standpoint. I don't agree with a lot of what he says in regards to diet and spirituality and is authoritarian but his work in the gym and the physical body is valuable.

So then what you've learned is that free weights are virtually always superior to machines? One of the themes in "Body by Science" is that machines are superior to weights because they put the body less at risk for injury. They recommend only using nautilus or similarly inspired equipment. A big factor here is reaching failure, they recommend reaching absolute, painful, vomit-inducing failure but only performing one real working set per muscle group, with a couple warm up sets before. And then of course the week long rest. This is similar to Arthur miller's program, and of course all of this inspired Dante's doggcrapp, even though that program is all about muscle hypertrophy and much less about health.

If a machine is well designed to conform to the movements of your muscles and joints, then it seems that this would be preferable to using free weights, which offer more lateral movement but do not necessarily conform to optimal movement. I mean, think about it, the path of most resistance in free weights is always a vertical line, against the pull of gravity. The fact that the weights are free allow some lateral adjustments to be made, but these are actually inefficient. In comparison, a well designed machine will flow with optimal movement, and not have inefficiencies of lateral movment/balancing which can potentially cause problems. To me and Body by Science this actually gives machines an edge most of the times, with exceptions for things like standing overhead press and squat which help to train the core and stability muscles.

 

[sladerunner69]

I agree with the t3 vs levo especially in compromised people at the start of the treatment. It provides relief to live/sleep, energizes the cells so the body can do what it needs to do and if someone is pooling like rt3 because the body says "not right now" it will help clear it. As long as you can babysit your t3(which most of us watch temps and do snacks and meals) and watch the dose to be very small at first its a nice easy way to feel better.


The weightlifting thing has a couple answers.

Its well known that loading a joint is what allows for nutrients and oxygen to perfuse into the tissue. Obviously walking can accompliah this but synovial joints when cared for are fine in the long hail.

Mechanically: if you are doing things incorrectly or something that you are not built for/something that doesnt load your muscles properly/causes you pain - youre going to get hurt or cause issues with time.

Bottomline: If it hurts, either your body cant activate things yet, some portion acting on the joint is tight, weak or both OR you just arent built to do it.

Theres a ton of ***t regarding this but..

Example 1: I am absolutely not built for barbell pressing on a flat or incline bench and I cannot do military press with a barbell without pain. I recognized this early and prevented a ton of issues. Solution for me: I use dumbells. It allows for my own movement and allows me to position myself in better power - and personally I like a lot of acclimation work before heavier loads and I do my compounds last - despite what all the "magazines" and online coach garbage recommends.

Example 2: I am posterior chain dominant when I squat. I squat **** to grass. My stance is narrow and my knees travel IN LINE with my feet but also out over. My glutes and hamstrings grow much easier than my quads. Eventually this leads to a tightness dysfunction. Add to the fact that the medial head of my own quad, the VMO(google this) is dormant compared to the lateral head so my patella tends to track a little goofy which leads to crazy knee pain.

Solution: Im the only person in my gym squatting at the end of a workout, the only person using a clean grip front squat so I can focus on loading my quads. I do all my non core involved stuff first and I recommend single leg stuff with a balance(like a hand on a rack) so you can concentrate on the movement without thinking "im going to fall over". Train balance separate.


That said, poor mechanics will absolutely send you with a one way ticket to snapcity. Maybe not immediately but tons of guys have issues into adulthood because they just HAD to flat bench or backsquat. Hell I would love to throw weight, but my joints are important so I have always checked ego.

However if youre mechanically good and its pain free, go for it

Read: too many people dont realize they dont have to take the "program" they read online literally.


As far as metabolism I think its a dynamic situation and multi faceted.

I think for hardgainers, training past failure can be helpful SOMETIMES. This is assuming they are metabolically near perfect.

I absolutely think that efficient mechanical work is much more effective than metabolically taxing work(pump, burn, extended sets) with less than perfect mechanics.

So momentary failure > metabolic conditioning in some cases.

So if two metabolically compromised people(me now) had to use the gym, i think until their health is restored and they can create energy efficiently, I think the rise in catecholamines and the unexpected drop in energy producers in the longer sets are really bad. I was a huge proponent of intensity when healthy, but I think instead of maximizing tension in a set, a compromised lifter should focus on mechanics and keeping the sets short. If you get a pump fine, but the second you need to take a non normal breath it means lactate threshold is reached, youre crossing out of phosphocreatine/glycolytic energy and more toward slow oxidative glyco/aero energy and the body is looking to find 02 to continue the work and buffer the waste. The issue is compromised people tend to have pathetic mito function to begin with so asking a stress task is bot a good idea. Sets are probably going to be shorter(probably 20-25 sec vs the usual 40-60 sec)

So absolute failure in a healthy person? If the mechanics are there its probably fine sparingly or in a shorter training cycle because they can dissolve the stress. In a compromised person, no way would I try it if health was a priority, not until it returned. As people get better I think approaching momentary failure is fine as long as the set is short, but again only when your own metrics are good and your health markers are better. Full rest between sets is a really good idea here too.(never thought id say that either)

Ill probably edit this, ill put extra edits below this line.

TL;DR
1. Find exercises that work for you, not the program your buddy is on
1b. Mechanics and control trump everything
2. If it hurts dont do it
3. Failure is fine if youre healthy, probably not if youre metabolically compromised because your mitochondria suck
4. Keep 3 or so reps in the tank at the end of a set that is short and with controlled breathing

So do you think that shortness of breath in a metabolically healthy person is okay? I normally breath controlled through my nose, but when I weight lift or spend time on the treadmill I am typically forced to breath more heavily through my mouth. I do not run, but walk briskly at an incline. This is still endurance exercise, I know, but it is fairly lightweight endurance and I almost never get tired from it. I can do this kind of walking, and the stationary bike, and the rowing machine, for about 45 minutes until I start to get hungry. I don't think this approach would have any long term effects on the metabolism, because they are all forward contraction movements which have been empirically shown to heal the mitochondria, and it avoids heavy aerobic stuff that could take the body out of glycolysis and is especially stressful. So I think the benefit of it probably outweighs the heavy breathing.

And as for my weightlifting, I have traditionally always gone to failure, but lately have been saving a few reps in the tank because I have heard this is much less stressful. I do both machines and free weights, and usually get a good amount of res tin between sets even though the "body by science" authors assert that less rest is ideal metabolically. I am thinking a 15-20 minute circuit workout where I do jump from one exercise to the next is probably what I will do next. I won't train to failuire and will experience heavy breathing but only for those 15-20 min, and give myself a couple days recovery.


Interesting about your hams and glutes responding faster than quads, I have always noticed something similar. I am more posterior chain dominant as well, and have performed plenty of front squats in the past to get my quads to grow after my **** got big from doing lots of back squats. I stopped doing back squats because they seem to make my spine and back feel bad the next few days, and they are uncomfortable in my knees as well. I think all of the anti-aromatase stuff I take like aspirin, k2, e, makes my knees feel "dry" and not properly lubricated. When I squat my knees do an awful lot cracking and popping, although they don't necessarily hurt, at least not most of the time. They are uncomfortable, but not painful, if that makes sense.

 

[JKX]

So then what you've learned is that free weights are virtually always superior to machines? One of the themes in "Body by Science" is that machines are superior to weights because they put the body less at risk for injury. They recommend only using nautilus or similarly inspired equipment. A big factor here is reaching failure, they recommend reaching absolute, painful, vomit-inducing failure but only performing one real working set per muscle group, with a couple warm up sets before. And then of course the week long rest. This is similar to Arthur miller's program, and of course all of this inspired Dante's doggcrapp, even though that program is all about muscle hypertrophy and much less about health.

If a machine is well designed to conform to the movements of your muscles and joints, then it seems that this would be preferable to using free weights, which offer more lateral movement but do not necessarily conform to optimal movement. I mean, think about it, the path of most resistance in free weights is always a vertical line, against the pull of gravity. The fact that the weights are free allow some lateral adjustments to be made, but these are actually inefficient. In comparison, a well designed machine will flow with optimal movement, and not have inefficiencies of lateral movment/balancing which can potentially cause problems. To me and Body by Science this actually gives machines an edge most of the times, with exceptions for things like standing overhead press and squat which help to train the core and stability muscles.

All fair points and I'd agree that machines have the edge where targeting individual muscles are concerned and can be a safe way to introduce someone to lifting weights. I've yet to see a well designed machine adapted to all shapes and sizes. The reason gyms are crammed full of them is because you don't have to take the time to teach someone to lift safely/well and I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing. Learning to lift free weights with good form is a skill. It takes a large amount of time to master and subsequently results in a large amount of confidence is gained once reasonably proficient.

I'd also counter that working with free weights can be superior in real world terms due to the stabilization requirements of minor muscles surrounding the major groups which are forced to work to maintain the path of the bar so the inefficiencies can actually be helpful. From a sports specific or even just general movement point of view I'd argue free weights have a significant advantage because of this.

Sure, in gravity terms the most efficient way to life a weigh would be straight up and down, but this isn't always the case in real world terms. Taking the example of an Oly lifter pulling from the floor, the bar will move in a slight arc to keep it as close to the body as possible.

 

[Luckytype]

So do you think that shortness of breath in a metabolically healthy person is okay? I normally breath controlled through my nose, but when I weight lift or spend time on the treadmill I am typically forced to breath more heavily through my mouth. I do not run, but walk briskly at an incline. This is still endurance exercise, I know, but it is fairly lightweight endurance and I almost never get tired from it. I can do this kind of walking, and the stationary bike, and the rowing machine, for about 45 minutes until I start to get hungry. I don't think this approach would have any long term effects on the metabolism, because they are all forward contraction movements which have been empirically shown to heal the mitochondria, and it avoids heavy aerobic stuff that could take the body out of glycolysis and is especially stressful. So I think the benefit of it probably outweighs the heavy breathing.

And as for my weightlifting, I have traditionally always gone to failure, but lately have been saving a few reps in the tank because I have heard this is much less stressful. I do both machines and free weights, and usually get a good amount of res tin between sets even though the "body by science" authors assert that less rest is ideal metabolically. I am thinking a 15-20 minute circuit workout where I do jump from one exercise to the next is probably what I will do next. I won't train to failuire and will experience heavy breathing but only for those 15-20 min, and give myself a couple days recovery.


Interesting about your hams and glutes responding faster than quads, I have always noticed something similar. I am more posterior chain dominant as well, and have performed plenty of front squats in the past to get my quads to grow after my **** got big from doing lots of back squats. I stopped doing back squats because they seem to make my spine and back feel bad the next few days, and they are uncomfortable in my knees as well. I think all of the anti-aromatase stuff I take like aspirin, k2, e, makes my knees feel "dry" and not properly lubricated. When I squat my knees do an awful lot cracking and popping, although they don't necessarily hurt, at least not most of the time. They are uncomfortable, but not painful, if that makes sense.

There are a lot of things that control the urge and sensation to take bigger breaths. Some are obvious: waste products, co2, anything of a fight or flight response etc.

The not so obvious: large joint movements(even passive, like me moving your legs), strong eventhough brief contractions of muscles. Mechanoreceptors are built in and serve as a preparatory response because body assumes that with large movement and/big contraction may come a further need for oxygen and fuel.

So if someone bounds up a short set of stairs, the body may want to breath deeply and rapidly as a response to this but denying the breath results in nothing negative. Obviously its an explosive fuel system being used and no real immediate need for oxygen.

The other part is the urge to breathe like that is pretty primal and could be considered a safety mechanism - "better to have 02 and not need it and to blow off all the co2 rather than need 02 and not have it." This urge can obviously be denied eventhough it reallly feels like you HAVE TO breathe. In January when I started my prolactin reducing quest, i was walking daily and the first week was hell on my breathing. Incline, no more than 5percent maybe at 3mph was really tough, as time went on I was able to delay the breath by just a bit and now when I walk i can consiously control my own breathing to retain co2 a little better and hopefully signal some mitochondrial upreg, I can also almost hold my breath while walking with no real sense of wanting to gasp - I certainly couldnt do this in the beginning.

So to answer the question yes, in a healthy person its probably fine because the mitochondria are entering all fuels into the deeper processes of aerobic metabolism its ok. But like in my case im compromised and have probably been unintentionally hyperventilating and blowing co2 off for years in and out of the gym. As long as your mitos are good, youre good. Its not the absolute retention thats needed, its the balanced exchange. Compromised mitochondria cant do the latter.

I was the worst in the past - I loved the challenge and the pump. I loved the progress. I would to failure, reduce load and go to failure again, I would be taking short rest and doing way too much volume. I was stupid calorically and nutritionally and I now I have a ton of repair and recovery to do. In healthy people we have these systems as an adaptation to buffer the stress and still maintain life. Its a good thing and fine when healthy. Muscle is an adaptation, sometimes people forget that its a stress modulator, the ability to contract forcefully and the ability to store fuel locally so you dont drag the whole body into it. Its a local adaptation.

If you concentrate on quad activation, mentally concentrating on the VMO contracting first then the rest coming into play, you may be able to reduce some of your pain. Being able to control quad heads the way most can control their biceps or pecs can make a HUGE difference in knee pain and noise. Functional training says a leg extension is no good for "life", I disagree and say if you can learn to mild preexhaust and get local metabolism up a bit and get a good mind muscle connection first controlling literally with your hands on your quad head as a queue, you should be able to squat a little more comfortably and be less "aware" of the knee. A foot position change and some better heel cord mobility can also help.

 

[brainfog]

Are you serious? I took thyroid for 2 years and no longer take it.

Peat has said he only takes it in the winter now. Are you refuting Peat and his own experiences?

Where does he mention that?

 

[Eric Yim]

Young people can be very unhealthy

Yeah, young people who have horrible diets and are 20 pounds overweight.

 

[Eric Yim]

Where does he mention that?

In his dreams

 

[BrianF]

He died of a heart attack while getting a haircut.

We've all went in for a haircut and got the fright of our lives when its finished. It might have been an absolute shocker and he just couldn't handle it.

 

[Birdie]

But did he take the natural dessicated Thyroid? In one of his articles he states that the kind of synthetic thyroid that most doctors prescribe is not good for T4 only good for T3 and sometimes a weak liver has trouble converting it to T4? I am confused about the the thyroid issue since my doctor will ONLY prescribe Levothyroxine, the synthetic which produces T3. I also don't understand why he was so against people taking Iodine as it supports the thyroid and most people are deficient? Can someone explain this better to me? Does anyone here taking J Crowe's Iodine drops?

Hi Franny,
Most docs will Rx only the synthetic T4.
Some of us have followed this advice:

HOW TO FIND A GOOD DOCTOR

https://stopthethyroidmadness.com/how-to-find-a-good-doc/

 

[Birdie]

Are you serious? I took thyroid for 2 years and no longer take it.

Peat has said he only takes it in the winter now. Are you refuting Peat and his own experiences?

Oh, that's interesting. I'm surprised to hear Ray just takes Thyroid in winter now. But he is always evolving.
He changes things as his needs change or as he finds new info. I know he used to say that he took twice as much in winter as in summer.
That's about where I am with my doses.

Oh, another thing for @frannybananny is that Ray has said he uses synthetic Cynoplus and Cynomel from Mexico.

 

[Sexypizza]

In, my opinion Ray Peat is definitely more healthy than most people. I'm 26 and I'm pretty sure he's healthier than me lol

However, he's now 82 years old now I believe so he cant is in "perfect health". Ray sees the aging process as a toxic phenomenon with similar effects to radiation and estrogen. So despite his best efforts, his health is slowly degrading, but unfortunately, there isn't much anyone can do about that.

The other thing is that there is PUFA in everything. So The PUFA will despite his best efforts will still start to add up in his fat tissue over time unless he has PUFA free lab synthesized food from somewhere.

 

[Mossy]

So you don't have any scientific literature to share with me? That's a shame I would be interested in reading that. I have never seen nor heard of a study which demonstrated that weightlifting was detrimental to the joints. I would like to know if there was one. I have read "body by science" which is essentially a strength training program designed by PhD's in physiology and such, and they recommend strength training as therapeutic for the joints and point to some well constructed studies which showed that seniors with joint and bone health issues improved dramatically after following a program for a couple years. Another central message of the book is their assertion that most bodybuilders, weightlifters, gym rat, are yes in fact spending far too much time in the gym. Their program is fully just one 20 minute session performed once every seven to ten days. They believe that weightlifting can cause problems without adequate recovery time, and that most guys aren't achieving full recovery especially with the nervous system and ligaments and joints, even if they are letting the muscles fully recover. So I think your observations could ultimately be due tot he fact that weightlifters very often don't give enough time for recovery, because most of them are lifting 4-5 days a week for at least an hour each workout.

I own and have read this book as well.

I do like the less is more approach, with regard to not over-training your body, which I think is pro-Peat. The one aspect I don't like, and that I think you could say is anti-Peat, is the extremely slow movement. This would seem to put extra stress on the joints and ligaments. Maybe using a light amount of weight would remedy that.

Lastly, the aspect that I didn't like about this 7-10 day cycle, is that being active more frequently can have a benefit to it, that goes beyond the specific "science" and efficiently of this method. But, all-in-all, this is an interesting, and I think viable, method of working out.

Oh, one last thing, and I was a little let down by this, the photos in the book, and the description for the form of the exercises seem really off for certain ones. The one that really stood out was for the squats--which seemed to put undue stress on the knees and ankles.

 

[Hans]

Solution: Im the only person in my gym squatting at the end of a workout, the only person using a clean grip front squat so I can focus on loading my quads.

Hey Lucky, why you use the clean grip during front squats and not the regular position where you rest the bar on the front delts? I always feel there is too much pressure on my elbows and wrists in the clean position.

 

[Luckytype]

Hey Lucky, why you use the clean grip during front squats and not the regular position where you rest the bar on the front delts? I always feel there is too much pressure on my elbows and wrists in the clean position.

Eh, in the end its personal preference however..

Once someone has the mobility in shoulder, wrist and forearm, its much much easier to create a shelf and a valley for the bar to rest within. The bar obviously wants to continually roll forward, even in a modified "t-rex" clean grip(where people havent quite got the mobility yet for palmar) it counters the forward roll with it rolling back out of the hand.

So considering the classic thoracic spine mobility exercise where you cross your arms press them against your head then extend the spine, the cross type grip inadvertenly forces your t-spine out of the power groove when you fight against the fatigue later in a set. Clean grip instead gives you a pivot point for the set when you fatigue and elbows fall, the elbow drive up and allows you to keep the bar in the same place while not influencing the t-spine too much.

Tertiary its easier to bail and push away.

Quaternary there is no bicep cramping

Because my arms are bigger, i take a slightly wider grip and externally rotate the glenohumoral joint so as to not stack the forearm over the upper arm putting crazy pressure on the elbow.

The external rotation in some takes a bit of time in some people.

 

[Hans]

Eh, in the end its personal preference however..

Once someone has the mobility in shoulder, wrist and forearm, its much much easier to create a shelf and a valley for the bar to rest within. The bar obviously wants to continually roll forward, even in a modified "t-rex" clean grip(where people havent quite got the mobility yet for palmar) it counters the forward roll with it rolling back out of the hand.

So considering the classic thoracic spine mobility exercise where you cross your arms press them against your head then extend the spine, the cross type grip inadvertenly forces your t-spine out of the power groove when you fight against the fatigue later in a set. Clean grip instead gives you a pivot point for the set when you fatigue and elbows fall, the elbow drive up and allows you to keep the bar in the same place while not influencing the t-spine too much.

Tertiary its easier to bail and push away.

Quaternary there is no bicep cramping

Because my arms are bigger, i take a slightly wider grip and externally rotate the glenohumoral joint so as to not stack the forearm over the upper arm putting crazy pressure on the elbow.

The external rotation in some takes a bit of time in some people.

Good explanation thanks. Yes I have found my upperback fatigues as the set goes on with the cross over grip when I don't do front squats regularly, but I have also felt that the bar pinches my shoulders when my arms are externally rotated compared to more internally rotated. So I'll go with the crossover grip lol. Yes I can see how the clean grip keeps you more upright, so I might try that again in the future and see if I can prevent the bar from pinching my shoulders so badly. I have also found that my back becomes accustomed to doing the cross arm grip when I do front squats regularly and that it does not fatigue first in the set, and that the bar doesn't slip down all the time, which is nice.

 

[BestSinceDAYONE]

Actually, I didn't bring up physical appearance. I think you glossed over the 2nd post in this topic, regarding Peat's physical appearance. Context is important:


Also I didn't select Rich Piana to portray "perfect health" lol...I actually did the exact opposite (notice I wrote "DEAD" under Piana).
In case my view is unclear: Physical appearance is not always an indicator of health, that includes missing teeth.


Since you brought it up though...

Getting a six pack doesn't just "happen" unless someone is extremely low BF%. In the west, most of the time, getting a six-pack requires being consistent with one's diet and doing some abdominal exercises or a basic level of fitness (AND having hormones aligned in a way conducive to muscle growth, usually high T.)

So from a purely physical appearance aspect, Piana does "look" healthier than Peat. Except he wasn't.
But if I saw Peat on the street, I wouldn't necessarily think he looks super healthy or good for his age, but I WOULD think Piana looks like a top -Tier giga-male. Regardless of what you or I think constitutes health, a LOT of guys see Piana externally and would automatically assume his health is in check.


Perhaps I should have explained my photo comparison more.

LOL Piana looks in good health? People on the street would think he was juiced to the ***s and will die of a heart attack. And his muscles are filled with collagen / synthol implants.

You think it's normal to have a gut that protrudes like that when you have Abs?

He was a walking zombie.