Paul Jaminet TMAO

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,783
Location
UK
In particular, the following claim seems opposed to RP recommendations:

This means that if the proportion of bacteria who feed on protein, carnitine, and choline is too high, it’s probably because there is insufficient food for the competing bacteria who feed on carbohydrate forms of fiber. If you have a lot of gut bacteria feeding on fiber, there’s no room in the gut for large amounts of bacteria who feed on meat.
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
PJ says that a course of antibiotics followed by a meat diet increases levels of TMAO because the bacteria who feed on protein flourish. However, if you keep your gut sterile, there is no need to worry about TMAO being produced, correct?
 

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,783
Location
UK
Before reading RP, I kept reading that antibiotic were bad because although at first they reduced the bacteria count, the bad bacteria would then have more room to flourish.
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
Given how thorough PJ can be picking apart studies that are in conflict with the PHD, it seems like he is being a bit dishonest in his latest post by using that TMAO study to support his PHD hypothesis.
 

cliff

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
425
Age
35
Location
Los Angeles
Red meats only bad if you have mythical gut flora that you don't get on my diet. That's the gist of his argument :)

It's pretty classic that he just randomly implicates sugar, flour and low fiber foods. He's grasping at straws, paul is the definition of cherry picker.
 

key

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
122
Mark Sisson has a post on his blog about the TMAO debacle. He posts a study saying carbohydrates feed the bacteria that make TMAO from carnitine, but when you go to the study it is a high fiber diet too. So is it the high fiber or the high carbs; I'm guessing high fiber. Which makes Paul's post kinda dumb and the paleo diet(high fiber+high meat) would be the most potent generator of TMAO if you follow Mark's logic.

Chris Masterjohn post makes the most sense.
 

montmorency

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
255
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
Chris seems to be an honest kind of guy, and very thorough.

I discovered him via low-carbing, and looking at cholesterol etc (of which he's written a lot).

I think he is fairly pro-fruit though.

I would think there might be a reasonable degree of overlap between Ray and Chris, but they are coming from different places I think. And Chris is still relatively young ... I think he only got his PhD a few years ago, so Ray wins on experience!
 

4peatssake

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
2,055
Age
62
montmorency said:
I would think there might be a reasonable degree of overlap between Ray and Chris, but they are coming from different places I think. And Chris is still relatively young ... I think he only got his PhD a few years ago, so Ray wins on experience!
This is more of a random train of thought, predicated upon my understanding of Ray and his life experience and work, and my own.

I also should say that I have little experience with the other fellows mentioned, having more knowledge/awareness of Mark Sisson and his work.

That said,I don't think that any of the others mentioned have anywhere near the understanding that Ray has about what has been done within the "hallowed halls" of science and medicine nor has the ability to work clearly within this reality. Too much damage/brainwashing has been done and they are still working within a terribly corrupt "system."

So in essence I see all of them as still being in the Matrix so to speak, and all jockeying for position trying to prove their theory is more right than the other, all the while virtually everything they study and use to make their claims is deeply infected with vast amounts of lies and deceit.

Recognizing long ago the futility of such endeavor, Ray discovered how to continue his work outside the Matrix. He has the ability to recognize the lies and deceit not just as the result of his genius, but he himself was both targeted and marginalized when he began to ask questions that shouldn't be asked and teach others things the establishment didn't want taught.

He was able to pinpoint exactly when Big Pharma muscled in and took control of scientific research and dictated where it was to go.

As such, he very often cites scientific studies prior to this takeover, when scientists truly were free thinkers, curious and honorable, and not being paid to produce specific results.

Ray Peat said:
For more than 50 years the U.S. Government and the main medical institutions actively fought the idea that a free radical or quinone could serve as a biological catalyst to correct a wide variety of health problems...

Koch and Szent-Gyorgyi were applying to biology and medicine concepts that were simultaneously being developed in metallurgy, electrochemistry, colloid and surface science, and electronics. They were in the scientific mainstream, and it was the medical-pharmaceutical industry that moved away from this kind of exploration of the interactions of substances, electrons, and organisms.

For Koch, antibiotics and anticancer agents weren’t necessarily distinct from each other, and would be expected to have other beneficial effects as well.

But an entirely different view of the immune system was taking over the medical culture just as Koch began his research. Mechnikov’s morphogenic view, in which the essential function of “the immune system” was to maintain the integrity of the organism, was submerged by Ehrlich’s approach, which emphasized killing pathogens, and at the same time, the genetic theory of cancer was replacing the developmental-environmental theory.

Without a clear understanding of this environment and how things really are in this culture, or simply ignoring its impact on virtually all scientific endeavor, most of these others are spinning their wheels and for the most part coming up empty, or grossly off the mark.

They pose no threat to the status quo.

Sadly, it likely won't be until one of them has the CIA knocking on their doorstep and shutting them down, that any of them may actually be on to something.

BTW, I'm not saying they don't mean well. Most of them probably do. Only they know the truth about themselves.

Ray Peat does not even see this current culture as being salvageable.

What impact would you like to see your research make on society? Reaching the largest amount of people? or a certain type of person? Or are you completely detached from the outcome?

I’d like to see it lead to the disestablishment of medicine. The same general outcomes Ivan Illich worked for.

Source
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom