Ray Peat Diet / Protocol Name?

[Philomath]

I've been on the forum for several months now and I've heard various terms for the Dr. Peat way of eating (peating, peat diet etc.) Has the group ever considered a standard name for this protocol?

 

[Such_Saturation]

What's a Ray Peat Diet / Protocol?

 

[Philomath]

It's how people are describing this method of eating, supplimenting and exercising.

 

[narouz]

It's how people are describing this method of eating, supplimenting and exercising.

As for the food part of it,
a good way to go might be
"Peat Derived Diet" or "Good Peat Derived Diet" or "Optimal Peat Derived Diet" or somesuch....

Personally,
and at the same time saying I do think red light, correct exercise, some supplementing is important,
I don't like terms like "Peating"
or "Living a Peat LifeStyle."
It conveys too much of a totalitarian vibe,
you know?
BE like Peat, See the World Like Peat Does, Live Like Peat....

Love Peat, but still...

As to the "There is no Peat Diet" orthodoxy:
1. insisting on a technicality
2. aloof and intentionally mysterious in a particularly grating New Age-y way
and/or
3. just darn silly

 

[pboy]

are turnips part of the ray peat diet?

 

[narouz]

are turnips part of the ray peat diet?

I thought that was covered in an earlier chapter...?

 

[Such_Saturation]

Man, all this time thinking I was on a modified William Brown diet!?

The diet was limited to sucrose, potato starch, baking powder, sodium chloride, ferric citrate, viosterol, carotene
(vitamin A), orange juice, citric acid, anise oil, liquid petrola
tum and milk practically freed of its fat. The daily protein
intake was derived from 3 quarts of the specially defatted
milk, taken as such, and the cottage cheese made from an
additional quart of the same milk. Sucrose provided the bulk
of the carbohydrate allowance but was supplemented by a
biscuit made from potato starch, skimmed milk, baking pow
der, salt and mineral oil. The mineral oil was added to serve
as shortening and to prevent constipation. Daily supplements
of 10 mg. of ferric citrate, 2.5 mg. of carotene, 0.02 cc. con
centrated viosterol in oil (8000 U.S.P. units vitamin D) and the juice from one-half of a large orange were given to insure
an adequate supply of iron and of vitamins. That the diet was of the extremely 'low-fat,' rather than the 'fat-free,'
type was recognized when the experiment was planned, but experience with crude diets (Burr and Brown, unpublished data) in studies on the rat had shown this to be satisfactory for our purpose. The chief source of fat in the diet was the skimmed milk. Periodic analyses of this milk as specially prepared showed it to have an average fatty acid content of less than 0.08%. This type of fat (butterfat) has been found to be of such low protective or curative value for rats on a fat deficient regimen that the 2 gm. contained in the daily diet of our subject was not considered sufficient to affect seriously the experiment. As potato starch contains only minute traces of fat, the small amount fed was likewise considered unim portant. A uniform consumption of food, providing 2500 calories daily, was maintained throughout the experiment. The sugar was taken in the form of a syrup with citric acid or anise added for flavoring. Frequent small meals were found to be most satisfactory. The syrup was taken at hourly intervals from the time of rising until the time of the evening meal. The orange juice was taken at bed time.

The subject remained clinically well throughout the entire
period of observation, not having even a common cold. There
was never any itching of the skin nor pain. At no time did any of the food ingredients 2 become distasteful. One of the
most noticeable subjective effects of the diet was the marked
absence of fatigue. The somewhat tired feeling usually ex perienced after a day's work in the laboratory disappeared
within a few days from institution of the diet. From child hood the subject had suffered from frequent attacks of mi graine. These had been occurring at intervals of 7 or 8 days immediately before the present experiment was begun. After being 6 weeks on the diet, he observed that these periodic attacks of headache had subsided completely. Strangely enough, they have never recurred.
The complete physical examinations, made 1 week apart just before the experiment was begun, revealed no definite abnormality other then a mild degree of arterial hypertension. was particularly observed that the skin and mucous mem branes were clear and soft. The only demonstrable physical changes resulting from the diet, as determined by regular weekly examinations were a moderate loss of body weight and a decrease in blood pressure. Blood pressure readings, taken when the subject was on a normal diet, varied between 140 to 150 mm. of mercury systolic and 95 to 100 diastolic, values which were regarded as being definitely higher than normal. There was a distinct decrease in the blood pressure after institution of the fat-free diet, the minimum values being obtained 4 to 5 months after the diet was started. Readings at that time remained quite consistently around 130 mm. of mercury systolic and 85 to 88 diastolic. Several months after the low-fat diet had been discontinued, the blood pressure had again risen to its former level.
There was a gradual decrease in weight during the first 3 months from 152 pounds (69.1 kg.) to 138 pounds (62.7 kg.). The weight thereafter remained about the same for nearly 3 months, that is, until the special diet was discontinued. This decrease in body weight in spite of a supposedly adequate caloric intake is of special interest. Unfortunately, however, the exact composition of the weight loss could not be deter mined.
Energy metabolism
The basal metabolic rate before and several months after the experimental period varied between 9 and 12% on four occasions, whereas it was found to be 2% just before the low-fat diet was discontinued. The respiratory quotients showed a distinct alteration. One of the most striking efects of low-fat diet on the rat is the rise in respiratory quotient after a meal. A similar tendency was found in the case of
our human subject. During the sixth month of the experimental diet the folowing respiratory quotients were obtained : 1.03,1.1 and 1.14. To attain these quotients it was necesary to starve the subject overnight and then give him a liberal suply (over 200 calories) of the sugar-milk diet within the course of 2 hours. Two hours later the maximum quotient was reached. Using the same technic the highest quotients reached before and after the low-fat experimental period were 0.9 and 0.97. It would sem, therefore, that in this respect the human subject reacts to a low-fat diet in the same way that the rat does.

[http://jn.nutrition.org/content/16/6/511.full.pdf]

Please, stop wasting your time.

 

[Kasper]

Ray Peat always insist that there is no Ray Peat protocol, and that the only valid protocol would consist of the three steps:

1. observe
2. think
3. act

On the other hand, if people ask Ray Peat on advice, on what to eat etc, he always comes with a some what limited set of foods. You can't deny that the set of foods that Ray Peat thinks are healthy are extremely limited. Allmost all vegetables, seeds and nuts are off the list, even most fruits. I think there are only something like 10 maybe 20 fruits that Ray Peat said were good. And then, if you then think of the fruits that are practical and affordable to eat on a daily basis, you most of the time end up with citrus fruits or melons. And then when you think it can not get any stricter, he also recommands removing allmost all the fiber.

As it comes to vegetables, he talks about root vegetables such as carrots and potatoes, some fruit like vegetables such as squashes, but that is about it I think. And all of this only in little amounts in a diet.

Then on the animal food side, we have dairy of course, as much as you like as long as it is not fermented, we have eggs, seafood and other animal food, but not animal food high in PUFA, so no fish, no chicken, no pork. So there you end up with lamb and beef. But then he says to watch out for too high phosporus/calcium ratios and too much cysteine/methionine and too little glycine.

Well then you end up with only bone broth from beef or lamb with lots of gelatin. Or a beef/lamb steak with added gelatin and calcium.

I don't think there is any diet, that is as restricted as this. Let's be honest, can you think of any ? I dont say this to rant about the diet, cause I think he may be pretty right, but I find it strange that Ray Peat insist there is no Ray Peat diet or protocol, but when you ask him which food to eat or not to eat, he comes with the most restricted list any dieterian has ever come up with.

 

[pboy]

hes probably read too much over the years and knows a lot so he doesn't want to recommend anything that isn't ideal, or that has come up negative in any experiment, and naturally the list is short. Something like cooked greens, you could make as our protein source, but its impractical and probably time consuming and might give a bit more gastric upset than milk. Potatoes same thing as opposed to fruit juice. I get where hes coming from. In nature, I think I pointed out somewhere else, even tho primates have a very diverse diet, they rely on staple foods that make up almost all their diet, so being specific isn't unusual. Figs are a large part of African ape diets, and figs happen to (besides their low protein, lack vitamin A, and potential issues if you chew the seeds) fit into Peat recommendation, low PUFA (if no seed chewing), very high calcium to phos ratio, simply sugars, lots of alkaline minerals, ect. They supplement protein with greens and bugs, which I guess we could do to but its not practical in our type of lives, so milk works out and other dairy foods. Its pretty crazy when you realize this, that most of the food supply is suboptimal food and that the real food we should be eating a lot of are generally far removed from our diet...like we don't even know. We get a choice of like 8-10 types of tropical fruit that are generally low quality, unripe and expensive, where as in nature, in a place humans could live like a tropical environment, theres hundreds of fruits we don't know about that probably fit into a Peat plan. Then theers the fact as humans having to use our brain, and how our society is, we cant afford to be as full of fiber and GI irritants and have to go to the bathroom and have gas all day. It does appear limited what he recommends, but I think most humans throughout history who have had any kind of choice and wisdom come to similar conclusions...a lot of the spiritual holidays in various traditions don't allow starches and meat or spices on those days. Yogis recommend dairy and fruit as their main diet, in Native America they had specific diets that were meant for healing, or for before entheogenic trips to clear yourself out, consisting of mostly fruit and corn masa. I thinkt he fact we have so much choice these days is good on one hand, but on the other hand it makes people feel the need to eat diverse exotic foods just because they exist, when throughout most history people didn't have much choice and just stuck with what worked. I think we have to be picky when living in such a strange foreign situation to our biology. I think the only way to call Peats 'diet' and actual diet is if you set it up like in gradations of best better good bad worse kind of thing, cause theres a loot of gray area on whats 'ok', but the optimal (things he always recommends) are pretty established. It also requires a lot of tweaking, like if you have this then you cant have that, but if you didn't have this you could have more of that...having to do with ratios and PUFA. It is a diet plan no doubt, but its so unconventional as to what the average person on the internet or trying to lose weight is used to, its kind of dangerous to set them up thinking its a similar diet...they'll be bound to fail. Narouz had it pretty right I think when he says 'Peat derived diet', cause that's really what it is...its a diet derived from knowing the principles about the body...and you gotta keep query'ing the information based on whatever situation youre in to come up with the diet for you at the time. The only really top protein sources are milk and gelatin, and the only top carbohydrate sources are ripe fruit juice and perhaps a little sugar in there....everything else is situational or has to be limited in some way to avoid something else

 

[narouz]

Ray Peat always insist that there is no Ray Peat protocol, and that the only valid protocol would consist of the three steps:

1. observe
2. think
3. act

On the other hand, if people ask Ray Peat on advice, on what to eat etc, he always comes with a some what limited set of foods. You can't deny that the set of foods that Ray Peat thinks are healthy are extremely limited. Allmost all vegetables, seeds and nuts are off the list, even most fruits. I think there are only something like 10 maybe 20 fruits that Ray Peat said were good. And then, if you then think of the fruits that are practical and affordable to eat on a daily basis, you most of the time end up with citrus fruits or melons. And then when you think it can not get any stricter, he also recommands removing allmost all the fiber.

As it comes to vegetables, he talks about root vegetables such as carrots and potatoes, some fruit like vegetables such as squashes, but that is about it I think. And all of this only in little amounts in a diet.

Then on the animal food side, we have dairy of course, as much as you like as long as it is not fermented, we have eggs, seafood and other animal food, but not animal food high in PUFA, so no fish, no chicken, no pork. So there you end up with lamb and beef. But then he says to watch out for too high phosporus/calcium ratios and too much cysteine/methionine and too little glycine.

Well then you end up with only bone broth from beef or lamb with lots of gelatin. Or a beef/lamb steak with added gelatin and calcium.

I don't think there is any diet, that is as restricted as this. Let's be honest, can you think of any ? I dont say this to rant about the diet, cause I think he may be pretty right, but I find it strange that Ray Peat insist there is no Ray Peat diet or protocol, but when you ask him which food to eat or not to eat, he comes with the most restricted list any dieterian has ever come up with.

You make good points, Kasper.
One need not be a genius to see that
eating a really good Peat-derived diet
will be a tough, tough challenge for most people in, let's say, the developed world.
It is very restrictive.

And yet--see some of my old threads about Peat diet and pleasure/appetite/intuition--
the overwhelming majority of posters
insisted that such a diet was the least restrictive they'd ever eaten
(or, alternatively, that they enjoyed and welcomed the restrictiveness,
which made it pleasurable and satisfying ),
and declared that the diet was the most satisfying they had ever eaten!

There were other strange eddies of thought on the topic,
one, for instance, arguing that a Peat diet could never be communicated
because words/language are too fallible a vessel.

And still others argued that it was out of line to even ask such questions
(if a Peat-derived diet is satisfying, intuitive, pleasurable, difficult, restrictive, etc)
because that implied a lack of gratitude to Peat for giving the world his ideas. :)
(in case anyone wonders: I am grateful.)

I came to realize that there is a tension on the forum
between conceiving of it as a
Forum of Belief and Healing
or as a
Forum of Questioning and Exploring.

Those who see the forum primarily as a site for Belief and Healing
like to see "Peating" as A Way of Life or A Lifestyle to Follow or The Way to Healing,
and they tend to dislike separating out the dietary aspects
or even using the word "diet."
They will say, with a dreamy, mystical look in their eyes:
"Peat is So much more."
To me, such views exude a bit of a religious vibe.
But that's just me.

 

[freyasam]

It's easier to say "I've been Peating for a year" instead of "I've been avoiding PUFAs, emphasizing fruit over starch, limiting vegetables except for carrots and potatoes, getting as much light as possible, watching calcium to phosphorus ratio, and experimenting with aspirin, niacinamide, progest-e, magnesium, etc, for a year."

If a diet is "the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually eats," then I'd say this is a diet. And a pretty restrictive one at that, as mentioned above.

 

[Amazoniac]

Just one question..
Why some people refer to it as Peatarian and not Peatatarian approach?
Take for example meat and meatatarianism.

 

[charlie]

I like what visionofstrength calls it, "Peatian".

 

[narouz]

I've been on the forum for several months now and I've heard various terms for the Dr. Peat way of eating (peating, peat diet etc.) Has the group ever considered a standard name for this protocol?

Philo-
In a related vein and since to mention the term "protocol":

In response to a question--
and I can't recall exactly what the question was,
but I think it was about diet--
Peat said, rather sarcastically:
"I think you must have me confused with someone who designs protocols and..."
(I can't remember the rest of his answer, sorry to say).

Now, that raises an interesting question.
Some interpret that response by Peat to mean
that he disdains the use of protocols.

But I can't interpret him that way.
He consistently uses rigorous analysis of scientific experiments
looking for all the well-known criteria of scientific scholarship--
including proper use of protocols.

So, to me, this illustrates a kind of mistake people sometimes make, misreading Peat.
The way I see his response
is that he was sortuv parrying the questioner.
As I say, I believe it was a question about diet.
And Peat was trying to slip out of giving a direct answer.

Peat often does that.
If asked about a Peat diet,
especially if asked about where listeners/readers can find a concise summary,
Peat will say something like:
"Oh no...there is stuff about the diet scattered here and there throughout my writings."

And I think Peat's motive, being a lifelong teacher,
is to force or at least encourage people to read his (and other) stuff more deeply and broadly.

Fine and understandable.
But: I don't see that as a signal that we here
are bound to try to act as Little Peats,
giving Sphinx-like non-answers about diet and
trying to force people to figure it out for themselves.
Peat=Artist/Original Thinker
We=Students/Critics.
Just my take....

 

[Kasper]

I think you misread him to be honest narouz.

He said:

"Authoritarians talk about protocols, but the only valid ‘protocol’ would be something like ‘perceive, think, act."

I do think Ray Peat disdains from authoritarians, and as according to him those people talk about protocols, he doesn't want to talk about protocols...

I think Ray Peat underestimates the value of a protocol, I think he even underestimates the value of authoritarians in society.

Of course, there is an inherent problem about a protocol, that people may stop thinking, stop perceiving and only try to follow the protocol, because they blindly trust the protocol, or because they are forced. etc.

But you could also think about a protocol more as a (scientific) model. All models are simplified reflections of reality. In other words, they are not true reflections of reality. But despite that, they are extremely useful. For example, Newtons law of motions predict quite accurately the position of physical objects in time and space. Those laws only predict reality in some contexts (such as the earth), and even in those contexts, the model is off a tiny tiny tiny bit. Nobody noticed that for hundered of years, but Einstein showed a model which predicts it just a bit better.

So just as you can't and shouldn't confuse a scientific model for reality, you shouldn't blindly trust some health protocol. That said, a scientific model can be extremely useful, and in the same sense I think a strict protocol for achieving better health is much more useful than Ray Peat seems to think.

I think the whole reason that a forum like this is so popular, is because people here are searching for the protocol behind Ray Peat thoughts. Protocol gives structure and clearity, just don't follow them blindly. Ray Peat says that the only valid protocol would be something as ' perceive, think, act'. I think a more effective protocol would be:

1. Set a goal (for example, having a better health, curing hypothyrodism)
2. Write down your goal as a measurable result, be very specific (for example having a heart rate of above 70 throughout the day)
3. Find a protocol, a map, a plan, that you think will give you this result.
4. Follow this protocol very strictly.
5. Notice if the protocol is working or not in achieving this result.
6a. If it is not working, adjust the protocol, and go back to step 3.
6b. If it is working, and you get your measurable result, notice if you indeed also got your goal, if not, write down some other measurable result and go back to step 3.

I think that everybody that tries to achieve a goal, such as getting a better health, follow some version of this 6-step protocol anyway. Following a protocol imho opinion only becomes problematic if you skip step 5.

 

[narouz]

I think you misread him to be honest narouz.

He said:

"Authoritarians talk about protocols, but the only valid ‘protocol’ would be something like ‘perceive, think, act."

I do think Ray Peat disdains from authoritarians, and as according to him those people talk about protocols, he doesn't want to talk about protocols...

I think Ray Peat underestimates the value of a protocol, I think he even underestimates the value of authoritarians in society.

Of course, there is an inherent problem about a protocol, that people may stop thinking, stop perceiving and only try to follow the protocol, because they blindly trust the protocol, or because they are forced. etc.

But you could also think about a protocol more as a (scientific) model. All models are simplified reflections of reality. In other words, they are not true reflections of reality. But despite that, they are extremely useful. For example, Newtons law of motions predict quite accurately the position of physical objects in time and space. Those laws only predict reality in some contexts (such as the earth), and even in those contexts, the model is off a tiny tiny tiny bit. Nobody noticed that for hundered of years, but Einstein showed a model which predicts it just a bit better.

So just as you can't and shouldn't confuse a scientific model for reality, you shouldn't blindly trust some health protocol. That said, a scientific model can be extremely useful, and in the same sense I think a strict protocol for achieving better health is much more useful than Ray Peat seems to think.

I think the whole reason that a forum like this is so popular, is because people here are searching for the protocol behind Ray Peat thoughts. Protocol gives structure and clearity, just don't follow them blindly. Ray Peat says that the only valid protocol would be something as ' perceive, think, act'. I think a more effective protocol would be:

1. Set a goal (for example, having a better health, curing hypothyrodism)
2. Write down your goal as a measurable result, be very specific (for example having a heart rate of above 70 throughout the day)
3. Find a protocol, a map, a plan, that you think will give you this result.
4. Follow this protocol very strictly.
5. Notice if the protocol is working or not in achieving this result.
6a. If it is not working, adjust the protocol, and go back to step 3.
6b. If it is working, and you get your measurable result, notice if you indeed also got your goal, if not, write down some other measurable result and go back to step 3.

I think in some way, that try to achieve a goal, such as getting a better health, follow some version of this 6-step protocol anyway. Following a protocol imho opinion only becomes problematic if you skip step 5.

Kasper-
It was another quote I'm thinking of.
I am familiar with yours too, though.

 

[pboy]

so is peat a diet protocol designing authoritarian, preaching his law to people? HEIL PEAT!!! (right arm angled upward)

I think he probably knows he easily could design and specify a diet, but he probably refuses to be lumped in with other 'diet gurus' and have the scope of his work reduced to a yes and no diet. I mean he even talks about history and philosophy and lots of stuff...he probably knows he does give diet recommendations but I think he just doesn't want to be seen in that light, for some reason, which is cool with me, cause he still gives valuable information about diet plus more

 

[narouz]

I think you misread him to be honest narouz.

He said:

"Authoritarians talk about protocols, but the only valid ‘protocol’ would be something like ‘perceive, think, act."

I do think Ray Peat disdains from authoritarians, and as according to him those people talk about protocols, he doesn't want to talk about protocols...

I think Ray Peat underestimates the value of a protocol, I think he even underestimates the value of authoritarians in society.

Of course, there is an inherent problem about a protocol, that people may stop thinking, stop perceiving and only try to follow the protocol, because they blindly trust the protocol, or because they are forced. etc.

But you could also think about a protocol more as a (scientific) model. All models are simplified reflections of reality. In other words, they are not true reflections of reality. But despite that, they are extremely useful. For example, Newtons law of motions predict quite accurately the position of physical objects in time and space. Those laws only predict reality in some contexts (such as the earth), and even in those contexts, the model is off a tiny tiny tiny bit. Nobody noticed that for hundered of years, but Einstein showed a model which predicts it just a bit better.

So just as you can't and shouldn't confuse a scientific model for reality, you shouldn't blindly trust some health protocol. That said, a scientific model can be extremely useful, and in the same sense I think a strict protocol for achieving better health is much more useful than Ray Peat seems to think.

I think the whole reason that a forum like this is so popular, is because people here are searching for the protocol behind Ray Peat thoughts. Protocol gives structure and clearity, just don't follow them blindly. Ray Peat says that the only valid protocol would be something as ' perceive, think, act'. I think a more effective protocol would be:

1. Set a goal (for example, having a better health, curing hypothyrodism)
2. Write down your goal as a measurable result, be very specific (for example having a heart rate of above 70 throughout the day)
3. Find a protocol, a map, a plan, that you think will give you this result.
4. Follow this protocol very strictly.
5. Notice if the protocol is working or not in achieving this result.
6a. If it is not working, adjust the protocol, and go back to step 3.
6b. If it is working, and you get your measurable result, notice if you indeed also got your goal, if not, write down some other measurable result and go back to step 3.

I think that everybody that tries to achieve a goal, such as getting a better health, follow some version of this 6-step protocol anyway. Following a protocol imho opinion only becomes problematic if you skip step 5.

Kasper-
Returning to your post...had to watch my college football team's 2nd half... :)

As I said above, it was a different Peat quote about protocols I had referred to.
But thinking more on this one, the one you quote...

I may agree with you.
I don't know.
I still can't seriously believe Peat believes protocols are evil/authoritarian.
After all, his interviews/articles are chock full of him referring approvingly
to studies done with protocols.
Unless I'm misunderstanding what a scientific protocol is.
For instance--this one pops into my head because I listened recently--
he discusses a study in which there were 4 sets of rats.
Some ate PUFA
Some ate saturated fat.
Some ate something else.
Some ate something different.
The results supported Peat's views about saturated fats v PUFAs.

That's a protocol, right?

Or take another example.
When asked how to proceed when one is first introducing thyroid meds,
Peat says something like
1. add a quarter grain
2. check pulse and temps for 2 weeks
3. if temps/pulses still low
4. add another quarter grain
5. wait 2 weeks
6. rinse, lather, repeat.
Isn't that a protocol?

I am not a scientist,
but protocols would seem to be a basic and respectable tool of scientific study.
Peat would seem to me to have stood on the shoulders of many scientists
who used protocols effectively.

So...I'm at a bit of a loss how to interpret Peat when he says stuff like that.
I think you're interpretation is pretty good, Kasper.
Peat may be using protocols symbolically and loosely, I guess.
He means to mock those scientists or "scientists" or doctors or book writers or entrepreneurs
who get their balance and priorities wrong
and start getting too zoomed in upon protocols
and losing the big picture and the creative juice.
Maybe he's implying that they get lost in the money-making end of things also.

I think this may be in the same ballpark as what you're saying, Kasper....

 

[narouz]

so is peat a diet protocol designing authoritarian, preaching his law to people? HEIL PEAT!!! (right arm angled upward)

I think he probably knows he easily could design and specify a diet, but he probably refuses to be lumped in with other 'diet gurus' and have the scope of his work reduced to a yes and no diet. I mean he even talks about history and philosophy and lots of stuff...he probably knows he does give diet recommendations but I think he just doesn't want to be seen in that light, for some reason, which is cool with me, cause he still gives valuable information about diet plus more

pboy-
I think Peat may've been a little traumatized by life.
Hell...haven't we all?
When you consider the way he was persecuted by the dark forces of his own government,
his experience with his college, etc...
And so my guess is he has a strong sensitivity to authoritarians.
Generally, I am sympathetic to his point of view there.
At some points I wonder if he might be a little overly-sensitized.

If you look into his views on teaching
you will find that he really likes some very non-teacher-centered thinkers.
If you look into his ideas about therapy
you will see that he likes Carl Rodgers' philosophy,
which de-centers the therapist-centric cosmos.

Like you, I'm fine with those ways of looking at the world.
Generally, I strongly agree.
I just don't think we are obligated to set ourselves the task here on this forum
of essentially reduplicating every personality proclivity of Dr. Peat.

He doesn't want to present a diet in summary form,
I completely get it and understand and even admire.
But that doesn't mean we can't,
nor does it mean we would be Authoritarians if we did.

 

[pboy]

yea true, and I think we are! I mean...theres an image of it in a pinned topic and tons of other topics about it...yet, I think its still incomplete in many users eyes, and then theres always random new things like the turnip or methylene blue, so it keeps changing

haven't there been people that have written books on a Peat diet? (someone posted a topic about it here a little while ago) Id be interested to see what they wrote and how they explained it...somehow I think many people here would disagree and some agree with it...its just the nature of Peat's work somehow for that to happen. I think youre right about Peat being sensitive to labeling himself in some way or being very definite about things, perhaps it is to do with covering himself from the higher ups or something, I somehow actually think its a quite good approach. If people simply accepted him as a leader, or authoritarian figure, then a lot of the value of his quotes like 'think, perceive, act" would be lost, and theres many more too. Maybe we could open another topic to specifically address the crux of the diet questions and flesh it all out there, it would be quite lengthy to actually describe I think

it would be a "diet derived from the information presented by Ray Peat", but couldn't straight up be 'the Peat diet', out of respect if nothing else