Jordan Peterson's Chicken And Broccoli Diet

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
People will make improvements in their diet and start preaching, but there's really no limit to how much you can improve. I am sure that eating brocolli, chicken, and avoiding grains is better than what most Canadians are eating but a person could still do better.
 

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
Am also over this guy. Classic example of insecure sheep turning someone into a messiah simply because he said a handful of rational, articulate, against-the-grain things. He is knowledgeable about some things, but why on earth would I go to him for diet guidance?? People will literally hear that podcast and make drastic changes to their life, simply cos Jordan told them so.

He should be doing more to dissuade people from blindly following and hero worshipping him. I guess ego's a cunning beast.
He's an academic and also a professional talker, much like a psychologist. "Inflate your egos and buy my books."

As an academic, he's a victim of peer review, and the same democratization of knowledge that underlies group-think. "If many believe it, it's probably so," such as with the public's view of medicine.

Dr. Peterson's good at integrating ideas, and his strengths lie in his charisma and articulative abilities. He's risk-averse because he needs to be, so he often rides the line between fact and opinion and doesn't press hard points. Not as far as "controlled opposition," he certainly has a greater opportunity for truth-telling, but he serves as a gatekeeper in some regards.
 
Last edited:

schultz

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
2,653
There absolutely is a limit.

That limit is not clearly defined though. Theoretically there is a limit. For example, milk is great but maybe you can improve yourself by getting some grass-fed product. Okay, that's great but maybe buying a cow and milking it yourself is better. But maybe you can improve your cows health by feeding it better food therefore improving the milk. Well, maybe there is a limit to how good the milk can be based on your geography so you move to the tropics with the cow to get year round fresh pasture. Maybe the species of cow could be better, the type of animal being milked could be better, you could learn how to scientifically remove the tryptophan in the milk, on and on and on... There are almost infinite ways to improve your health, even if those things are slight.
 

omnivoracious

Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2017
Messages
51
People will make improvements in their diet and start preaching, but there's really no limit to how much you can improve. I am sure that eating brocolli, chicken, and avoiding grains is better than what most Canadians are eating but a person could still do better.

Oh there's no doubt he can do better. For as intelligent he is in his field of study it's clear he has just now moved on from the food pyramid of the 1970s that suggested grains are the best and super healthy. At least he's starting to move in the right direction. While Paleo isn't perfect it's a great way to transition off the poison our food conglomerates sell us.
 

SB4

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2016
Messages
288
I believe that you can become very healthy both on "paleo" and on "peating" depending on a bunch of factors. I absolutely believe that Peterson/etc got massive health improvements from keto.

I think it's highly likely that some people on this site just did keto wrong, and on the other hand, some would just work out better depending on there situation with peating.

Personally I had big problems with peating in regards to dieting but I'm pretty sure I did it wrong and my case is unique, and do better with more keto.
 

Lurker

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
317
He's an academic and also a professional talker, much like a psychologist. "Inflate your egos and buy my books."

As an academic, he's a victim of peer review, and the same democratization of knowledge that underlies group-think. "If many believe it, it's probably so," such as with the public's view of medicine.

Dr. Peterson's good at integrating ideas, and his strengths lie in his charisma and articulative abilities. He's risk-averse because he needs to be, so he often rides the line between fact and opinion and doesn't press hard points. Not as far as "controlled opposition," he certainly has a greater opportunity for truth-telling, but he serves as a gatekeeper in some regards.

I don’t think you know JBP very well. In addition to his professorship, he is also a clinical psychologist so he has 20+ years of practical experience seeing patients (including at least one member here). He is also strong critic of universities as postmodernist/neomarxist indoctrination institutions and critical of the humanities specifically for their group think and lack of impact.

I also wouldn’t characterize him as risk averse. Taking a stand against the SJW ideology and the compelled speech/thought police legislation going on there in Canada is highly risky especially with respect to his role as an employee at university.

He is not the second coming but still an interesting person. He doesn’t have it all right but all in all seems to have a unique point of view. I would be more interested in his detailed analysis of Islam (which he has avoided) than in his diet.
 

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
I don’t think you know JBP very well. In addition to his professorship, he is also a clinical psychologist so he has 20+ years of practical experience seeing patients (including at least one member here). He is also strong critic of universities as postmodernist/neomarxist indoctrination institutions and critical of the humanities specifically for their group think and lack of impact.

I also wouldn’t characterize him as risk averse. Taking a stand against the SJW ideology and the compelled speech/thought police legislation going on there in Canada is highly risky especially with respect to his role as an employee at university.

He is not the second coming but still an interesting person. He doesn’t have it all right but all in all seems to have a unique point of view. I would be more interested in his detailed analysis of Islam (which he has avoided) than in his diet.
No, I don't know him personally. I've only watched many of his lectures, and I enjoyed them. He creates good content, but only selectively. His minimization of coverage for other religions and groups (such as Islam and Muslims) potentially could reach a lot of people, but he instead chooses not to follow those paths, and he's stated before that he's chosen not be political, as he wants to foundationally influence his students, rather than offer conclusions. It's his choice.
 

Lurker

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
317
I’d say this is quite radical (and reasonable) and pretty far from group think (at least not the dominant paradigm):
Episode 34 - The Perilous State of the University - Jonathan Haidt
I recently traveled to New York University to talk with Dr. Jonathan Haidt about, among other things, disgust, purity, fear and belief; the perilous state of the modern university; and his work with Heterodox Academy (https://heterodoxacademy.org/) an organization designed to draw attention to the lack of diversity of political belief in the humanities and the social sciences. Dr. Haidt is Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University's Stern School of Business and a social psychologist. He studies the psychology of morality and the moral emotions. He has been described as a top global thinker by both Foreign Policy and Prospect magazines. Dr. Haidt is the author of three books: The newest is The Coddling of the American Mind: How Bad Ideas and Good Intentions are Setting up a Generation for Failure (http://amzn.to/2AN87a6). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion (http://amzn.to/2yOOQnU) The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (http://amzn.to/2hJ0TzT) His
writings on diversity viewpoint for the Heterodox Academy are at (Viewpoint Diversity in the Academy)
It’s absolutely amazing to me that there would be this much resistance to something as fundamental to a free speech meritocracy. Between this kind of stuff and telling millennials to clean their room, I generally like what he has to say. It’s “true enough.”
 

Fon

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
36
Im so sick of tbis jordan peterson ***t
i am sure he is tired of you too. ive only read a few of your comments, but, i am wondering, do you ever say anything that other membersmightelpfullfind h and constructive. or do you just is going to him for diet quidanceallthetim
Am also over this guy. Classic example of insecure sheep turning someone into a messiah simply because he said a handful of rational, articulate, against-the-grain things. He is knowledgeable about some things, but why on earth would I go to him for diet guidance?? People will literally hear that podcast and make drastic changes to their life, simply cos Jordan told them so.

He should be doing more to dissuade people from blindly following and hero worshipping him. I guess ego's a cunning beast.
Who is going to him for diet guidance? i think your missing his whole point. it always seems that the ones that dont get it ,are the ones that need it the most.
eelp
 

Jem Oz

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
405

"Who is going to him for diet guidance? i think your missing his whole point. it always seems that the ones that dont get it ,are the ones that need it the most."


I GUARANTEE there are people who have heard that podcast and made changes to their diet. I don't have their names and addresses, but I bet the farm they are out there. The whole point of my comment was that there are a lot of frightened sheep who are looking for a singular voice to tell them how to live. Whether he wants to admit it or not, Jordan Peterson has grown rich off these people.

In fact you saying that I'm "missing his whole point" is quite telling. What exactly is Peterson's "whole point"? I haven't 'missed' anything, I actively resist people/ideas that reduce life to a handful of pithy 'rules'. And I have zero respect for any attempt to define people through rigid personality categories (the backbone of "Western psychology").

All of that said, I actually think Peterson is a brave man for standing up against the SJW tidal waves rolling across the land. And he seems very likeable and sincere.
 

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
I think we should resist the urge to attempt to fit serotonin into a good–bad paradigm. Besides missing details, categorizing these too simply tends to give a false sense of 'having it figured‐out'—accompanied by a reluctance to investigate further. I don't think it should be too surprising that serotonin, dominance, and 'success' have been correlated since serotonin promotes physical movement and social behaviour. But serotonin is not how great works of literature, paintings, and inventions are created; for people who do those things—and probably have lower brain serotonin on average—'success' as commonly measured matters less so they will be less‐inclined to seek 'it.' Perhaps you could almost say that 'success' attracts the serotonergic phenotype, and also that serotonin creates it by maintaining and creating power structures.

If 'success' was measured by artistic talent, IQ scores, or magnanimity, I don't think it would be correlated with serotonin.

And besides any psychological aspects of serotonin, you have physical considerations as well: High serotonin necessarily means high tryptophan and growth hormone, which makes for bigger muscles in males—on average.
 

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
That limit is not clearly defined though. Theoretically there is a limit. For example, milk is great but maybe you can improve yourself by getting some grass-fed product. Okay, that's great but maybe buying a cow and milking it yourself is better. But maybe you can improve your cows health by feeding it better food therefore improving the milk. Well, maybe there is a limit to how good the milk can be based on your geography so you move to the tropics with the cow to get year round fresh pasture. Maybe the species of cow could be better, the type of animal being milked could be better, you could learn how to scientifically remove the tryptophan in the milk, on and on and on... There are almost infinite ways to improve your health, even if those things are slight.
Exactly. There's no limit to knowledge, imagination, or understanding. Even if there was a 'limit,' it could never be strictly defined and nobody would know what it is—or even could know what it is. You would always have those 'what ifs?' from inquisitors and critics and would need to keep abreast of hundreds of new scientific studies every day; even something as simple as the perfect Na⁺/K⁺, tryptophan∶Σ(CAA), and Ca²⁺/Mg²⁺ ratios would be in a constant state of refinement.
 

theLaw

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,403
Just a reminder to anyone interested, this forum has a great Ignore feature found under the member's tab at the top left. Just type a members name in the search box on the right side, and then choose "ignore" on the right hand side.

Unfortunately, this forum attracts trolls of all kinds who aren't searching for debate, but just looking for attention in the form of argument.

Cheers!:D
 
L

lollipop

Guest
Just a reminder to anyone interested, this forum has a great Ignore feature found under the member's tab at the top left. Just type a members name in the search box on the right side, and then choose "ignore" on the right hand side.

Unfortunately, this forum attracts trolls of all kinds who aren't searching for debate, but just looking for attention in the form of argument.

Cheers!:D
+1
 

dbh25

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
653
Just a reminder to anyone interested, this forum has a great Ignore feature found under the member's tab at the top left. Just type a members name in the search box on the right side, and then choose "ignore" on the right hand side.

Unfortunately, this forum attracts trolls of all kinds who aren't searching for debate, but just looking for attention in the form of argument.

Cheers!:D
Thank you so much
 

Koveras

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Messages
720
I think we should resist the urge to attempt to fit serotonin into a good–bad paradigm. Besides missing details, categorizing these too simply tends to give a false sense of 'having it figured‐out'—accompanied by a reluctance to investigate further. I don't think it should be too surprising that serotonin, dominance, and 'success' have been correlated since serotonin promotes physical movement and social behaviour. But serotonin is not how great works of literature, paintings, and inventions are created; for people who do those things—and probably have lower brain serotonin on average—'success' as commonly measured matters less so they will be less‐inclined to seek 'it.' Perhaps you could almost say that 'success' attracts the serotonergic phenotype, and also that serotonin creates it by maintaining and creating power structures.

If 'success' was measured by artistic talent, IQ scores, or magnanimity, I don't think it would be correlated with serotonin.

And besides any psychological aspects of serotonin, you have physical considerations as well: High serotonin necessarily means high tryptophan and growth hormone, which makes for bigger muscles in males—on average.

What movement does serotonin promote, aside from palsy?

Ryu, Y., Ogata, T., Nagao, M., Sawada, Y., Nishimura, R., & Fujita, N. (2018). Effects of treadmill training combined with serotonergic interventions on spasticity after contusive spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. doi:10.1089/neu.2017.5400
Drobyshevsky, A., Takada, S. H., Luo, K., Derrick, M., Yu, L., Quinlan, K. A., . . . Tan, S. (2015). Elevated spinal monoamine neurotransmitters after antenatal hypoxia-ischemia in rabbit cerebral palsy model. J Neurochem, 132(4), 394-402. doi:10.1111/jnc.12997​

I tend to associate dopamine with activity, open-mindedness, and exploratory behaviour ...and serotonin with energy conservation, territorialism, and defensive behaviours... There's a lot of interesting obesity/dieting research on how impaired dopamine signalling will promote physical inactivity

Beeler?

Beeler, J. A., Frazier, C. R., & Zhuang, X. (2012). Putting desire on a budget: dopamine and energy expenditure, reconciling reward and resources. Front Integr Neurosci, 6, 49. doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00049
Kravitz, A. V., O'Neal, T. J., & Friend, D. M. (2016). Do Dopaminergic Impairments Underlie Physical Inactivity in People with Obesity? Front Hum Neurosci, 10, 514. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00514​

Screen Shot 2018-02-10 at 8.37.00 PM.png


There does seem to be a general opposition between dopamine and serotonin, and I think serotonin's effect of interfering with ATP production fits well with the model of energy conservation, and serotonin is likely one of the more upstream signals in the counter-regulatory response to low glucose/glycogen/insulin - stimulating CRH/ACTH and prolactin in turn - with all of their downstream effects.

On that note, I would counter the argument that serotonin would be associated with bigger muscles. Cells respond to an enormous amount of signals at any given time, and the end result is going to be the balance of everything. Growth hormone can be anabolic through it's stimulation of IGF-1 production when supported by other steroid hormones, and maybe this would be the response to a brief exercise stressor ...but when growth hormone is released as part of the counter-regulatory stress response to help survive during perceived starvation ...with elevated adrenaline, noradrenaline, cortisol, glucagon, prolactin, etc - then growth hormone's action will be primarily lipolytic/catabolic.

Serotonin itself can be quite detrimental to muscle tissue (as with many other tissues).

Patten, B. M., Oliver, K. L., & Engel, W. K. (1974). Serotonin-induced muscle weakness. Arch Neurol, 31(5), 347-349.
O'Steen, W. K., Barnard, J. L., Jr., & Yates, R. D. (1967). Morphologic changes in skeletal muscle induced by serotonin treatment: a light- and electron-microscope study. Exp Mol Pathol, 7(2), 145-155.

Screen Shot 2018-02-10 at 8.56.54 PM.png Screen Shot 2018-02-10 at 8.57.36 PM.png
Dopamine on the other hand, is anabolic

Reichart, D. L., Hinkle, R. T., Lefever, F. R., Dolan, E. T., Dietrich, J. A., Sibley, D. R., & Isfort, R. J. (2011). Activation of the dopamine 1 and dopamine 5 receptors increase skeletal muscle mass and force production under non-atrophying and atrophying conditions. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 12, 27. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-12-27​
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom