Ray Peat's work is a ton of hypothesis

[Blinkyrocket]

??? my whole point was that whatever sugar does, it does it even if we don't know what it does... Unless that's not true............................... Which I think it is. My point is that we don't have to know what sugar does for sugar to do what it does. Im having trouble not calling you an idiot because I just think you didn't read my comment correctly.


On the topic of sugar, we have taste sensors for it, and our brain recognizes it as good so I'm gonna eat it.

Also, what if thinking we have the solution (placebo) IS the solution? than, don't ruin it for us, gosh dangit.

Are you talking about sucrose? Cane sugar? We do know what it does. It's just pure sucrose which is half glucose and half fructose. It is simply sucrose extracted from the sugarcane plant. There is sucrose in fruits too. You could extrat sucrose from fruits if you wanted to too. The body uses it for energy.

"Although plain sucrose can alleviate the metabolic suppression of an average diet, the effect of sugars in the diet is much more likely to be healthful in the long run when they are associated with an abundance of minerals, as in milk and fruit, which provide potassium and calcium and other protective nutrients." - Raymond Peat, PhD

"Refined granulated sugar is extremely pure, but it lacks all of the essential nutrients, so it should be considered as a temporary therapeutic material, or as an occasional substitute when good fruit isn't available, or when available honey is allergenic." - Raymond Peat, PhD

http://beesandbutterflies.org/46094/hav ... show=46137

Yeah, I'm being purely theoretical though.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

The Danny Roddys of the world, in my humble opinion, are unashamedly amateurish and, at worst, cynical businessmen. Unfortunately, most of his self-proclaimed acolytes are given to certitude while Ray comes across quite considered and open-minded himself. Given that his followers are not likely to be (true) experts in nutrition, their views should only be considered entertainment.

Of course it’s amateurish because everyone is stupid, as in the general public, so he has to dumb it down to attempt to make it understandable to the layman. But at the same time Danny has clearly been humble in saying “I’m just a regular guy who researches this stuff so I always encourage people to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.” He’s said that in all of his audio interviews and in type.

Do you think everyone holds a doctorate degree and is literate in things like biology and physiology? Come on. People are more concerned with Kim K’s bum than fruit and thyroid. People don’t care. But for those that seek to solve their own health problems, people like Danny actually do make a difference.

“experts in nutrition” ??? :P You can't be serious. There's no such thing:

“Nutritional research has hardly begun to investigate the optimal ratios of minerals, fats, amino acids, and other things in foods, and how they interact with the natural toxicants, antinutrients, and hormone disrupters in many organisms used for food.” - RP

"Nutrition is one of the most important sciences, and should certainly be as prestigious and well financed as astrophysics and nuclear physics, but while people say “it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure that out,” no one says “it doesn’t take a nutritionist to understand that.” Partly, that’s because medicine treated scientific nutrition as an illegitimate step-child, and refused throughout the 20th century to recognize that it is a central part of scientific health care." - RP

I don't like how people immediately start throwing sarcastic comments at the topic starter. That's what stupid paleo, low-carbers, and vegans do too whenever someone starts asking questions about the dietary philosophy.

I understand where you're coming from but there are are 2 problems with this. 1. This is Charlie's forum and he makes the rules, so if he says debate is over then its over. Don’t like it then start your own forum. 2. Aside from that, I have considered the other views like keto, vegan etc., and I’ve decided they are wrong, therefore I’m trying to further understand Peat’s views on things that go far beyond trivial dietary matters. Thats not to say that diet is not important, it is, but its crucial to understand all of the other things I pointed out in my list above, like estrogen, serotonin, light, iron, lactic acid etc., things that other "camps" don't touch with a 1000-foot pole.

 

[Sheik]

As far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as fact. The only data that matters is the data I gather myself from my own experiences.

I don't know something until I know it for myself. Believing in a study is really just trusting the people conducting and presenting it.

The best you or I can do is to find someone whose judgement we trust to guide us as we learn for ourselves because this game is so complicated and risky, and nobody really knows how it works.

Ray Peat is a living person, with a ton of experience and knowledge. Science is an attempt to put the universe into a formula, but the problem is that there has to be someone there to discover and experience life as it happens. A formula or law could never keep up.

I have zero faith in science. I have some faith in people, especially strong and experienced people. And I have experience to know where I trust my own judgement.

 

[schultz]

The foods that come to mind when I think of Ray Peat are mainly milk and fruit. Why do people always think that followers of Ray only eat ice cream and gummy bears all day?

The whole idea of the diet is to get maximum nutrition with minimal consequences. We use the metabolism as a "health gauge" because if the metabolism is strong, the body is healthy and is getting what it needs. The whole thing is actually quite simple once you wrap your head around it. Ray does make a few "leaps" with his theories, but in my opinion they are very well though out and I'm willing to bet that he will be right about all of them.

Keep reading Ray's work, even if you disagree. It's worth it.

 

[Peat's_Girl]

Yep. Ray Peat includes a lottle of anecdotes in his articles/ interviews, as in "I once knew a woman who ate this and that and lost weight". Some people take it as fact and quote him on that, but I'd just focus on the his research and the things that make sense to you.

 

[Anonymous]

This thread needs to be closed again. This guy wanted a reaction and he's getting exactly that. There's no need for anyone to spend another breath defending Ray's work.

 

[Suikerbuik]

sugar and the effects it has on your body still do the exact same thing they always have EVEN BEFORE they did studies on it...

That is absolutely not true...

I kind of feel for anthony though I do not consider Peat's work as a ton of hypothesis. The basic things mentioned by Westse PUFAs are undoubtedly behind western ailments..

To note, we see a lot of studies coming by supporting Peat views, but studies contradicting Peat's views are not really posted. Sure we can also use common sense (still hypothesis.. ) and also our feelings to validate his work, but we clearly don't exactly know how things work at cellular level. We are only beginning to grasp what is happening. I too have the feeling that people, after reading Peat's work, think they have an answer to everything.. I.e that things like sugar or calories or reduction of serotonin through medication is the solution. There is still a lot to be explored!!

??? my whole point was that whatever sugar does, it does it even if we don't know what it does... Unless that's not true............................... Which I think it is. My point is that we don't have to know what sugar does for sugar to do what it does. Unless you actually think that by reading a study on sugar, it's effects on the body can change (it wouldn't be sugar, but you can actually inflict change on your body just by believing it will happen) than I think you misread my post.


On the topic of sugar, we have taste sensors for it, and our brain recognizes it as good so I'm gonna eat it.

Also, what if thinking we have the solution (placebo) IS the solution? than, don't ruin it for us, gosh dangit.

I hope to go to college someday for biology and see some of this stuff for myself, hopefully I don't get corrupted by money before I'm able to see what sugar and PUFA's do, after that I plan on getting corrupted for money :P
(I'm joking)
And hopefully I actually get a job, but oh well if I'm gonna go to college it might as well be to learn something academic.

Yeah, I'm being purely theoretical though.

That answers it.

In other words, practically, what sugar does is dependent on the state of your organs or tissue if you like. The dose is also something important, if you can't process it, the extra sugar you are eating will only be a burden for the body.
This is not: "the exact same thing as it always has", in reality a body is very dynamic.

Goodluck with your choices. I can only recommend biology.

I think Peat's Girl is raising a good point here. Another point that is still unclear is the membrane part.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

sugar and the effects it has on your body still do the exact same thing they always have EVEN BEFORE they did studies on it...

That is absolutely not true...

I kind of feel for anthony though I do not consider Peat's work as a ton of hypothesis. The basic things mentioned by Westse PUFAs are undoubtedly behind western ailments..

To note, we see a lot of studies coming by supporting Peat views, but studies contradicting Peat's views are not really posted. Sure we can also use common sense (still hypothesis.. ) and also our feelings to validate his work, but we clearly don't exactly know how things work at cellular level. We are only beginning to grasp what is happening. I too have the feeling that people, after reading Peat's work, think they have an answer to everything.. I.e that things like sugar or calories or reduction of serotonin through medication is the solution. There is still a lot to be explored!!

??? my whole point was that whatever sugar does, it does it even if we don't know what it does... Unless that's not true............................... Which I think it is. My point is that we don't have to know what sugar does for sugar to do what it does. Unless you actually think that by reading a study on sugar, it's effects on the body can change (it wouldn't be sugar, but you can actually inflict change on your body just by believing it will happen) than I think you misread my post.


On the topic of sugar, we have taste sensors for it, and our brain recognizes it as good so I'm gonna eat it.

Also, what if thinking we have the solution (placebo) IS the solution? than, don't ruin it for us, gosh dangit.

I hope to go to college someday for biology and see some of this stuff for myself, hopefully I don't get corrupted by money before I'm able to see what sugar and PUFA's do, after that I plan on getting corrupted for money :P
(I'm joking)
And hopefully I actually get a job, but oh well if I'm gonna go to college it might as well be to learn something academic.

Yeah, I'm being purely theoretical though.

That answers it.

In other words, practically, what sugar does is dependent on the state of your organs or tissue if you like. The dose is also something important, if you can't process it, the extra sugar you are eating will only be a burden for the body.
This is not: "the exact same thing as it always has", in reality a body is very dynamic.

Goodluck with your choices. I can only recommend biology.

I think Peat's Girl is raising a good point here. Another point that is still unclear is the membrane part.

You seem to lack an enzyme required for understanding, oh well Im not in a generous mood seen as how I cant freaking sleep ever since I watched The Machinist.

 

[Suikerbuik]

sugar and the effects it has on your body still do the exact same thing they always have EVEN BEFORE they did studies on it

Carefully read what you said and relax a bit my friend.
Sure, genetics have not changed significantly over the last decades/centuries, but epi-genetics/cellular environment is undoubtedly changing, which is more important than genetics. In the context of a westernized diet, loaded with empty starch and a presence of excess inflammation, in your terms, sugar does not do what it always has done. Since you are too intelligent and already understanding this, though not expressing, I won't argue more. Take it easy Blinky and be practical instead of theoretical.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

sugar and the effects it has on your body still do the exact same thing they always have EVEN BEFORE they did studies on it

Carefully read what you said and relax a bit my friend.
Sure, genetics have not changed significantly over the last decades/centuries, but epi-genetics/cellular environment is undoubtedly changing, which is more important than genetics. In the context of a westernized diet, loaded with empty starch and a presence of excess inflammation, in your terms, sugar does not do what it always has done. Since you are too intelligent and already understanding this, though not expressing, I won't argue more. Take it easy Blinky and be practical instead of theoretical.

I want to burn you alive, what is so wrong with screaming I hate you all? Why can't I? Show me the person who hates humanity more than me and I'll kill him so I'll be the one who hates humanity the most.

 

[Suikerbuik]

What you should do is don't take things personally.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

What you should do is don't take things personally.

Since I obviously can't come to you, can you burn yourself for me? I mean all over your body, not just a little stove touch.

 

[BobbyDukes]

What you should do is don't take things personally.

Since I obviously can't come to you, can you burn yourself for me? I mean all over your body, not just a little stove touch.

Suikerbuik not on your xmas card list this year, blink.

 

[Suikerbuik]

I got your point Blinky, but let me propose something similar. You are born you become old and die - why live in between?? Hope you agree with me that this does not make sense.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

I got your point Blinky, but let me propose something similar. You are born you become old and die - why live in between?? Hope you agree with me that this does not make sense.

What doesn't make sense, living, or the idea of why live?

 

[Suikerbuik]

From this particular point or view: why live while you die anyway.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

From this particular point or view: why live while you die anyway.

That's a good question, although I don't necessarily understand. I know what it's like to feel peace and I won't stop til I get it again and keep it this time, even though the sun's now coming up and I don't see sleep in my future. I hate everyone but that doesn't mean I wanna die, even though I do, but I want peace and sleep more.

 

[Suikerbuik]

The flow of sugar is like the flow of life. If thinking the flow of sugar makes no sense because it's imprinted/ fixed. Why bother about the flow of life? (With life it is practically the same, you are born and you die.)

Though the mechanisms of both are fixed the flow is not. Understanding and improving the flow the of sugar is inherent to improving the flow and quality of life. So that is why I find it insane to not bother about life or the flow of sugar. Hope the misconfusion is clears.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

The flow of sugar is like the flow of life. If thinking the flow of sugar makes no sense because it's imprinted/ fixed. Why bother about the flow of life? (With life it is practically the same, you are born and you die.)

Though the mechanisms of both are fixed the flow is not. Understanding and improving the flow the of sugar is inherent to improving the flow and quality of life. So that is why I find it insane to not bother about life or the flow of sugar. Hope the misconfusion is clears.

misconfusion? I know sugar is metabolized differently depending on stuff, I wasn't talking about sugar, my whole point is that the earth revolved around the sun even when we thought the sun revolved around earth and scientific study supported that, there are some constants, I didn't mean sugar alone.

 

[4peatssake]

Topic being locked pending moderation/action regarding threatening comments.
Threatening people with bodily harm is illegal and quite obviously is in violation of our forum rules.