Rhonda Patrick PhD

[dreamcatcher]

I'm very interested in her work, I think she's awesome. What do you think?

 

[Hugh Johnson]

I think she is a mediocrity and has little useful information.

 

[dreamcatcher]

Lol

 

[Waynish]

She's smart and earnest. But I believe she's read too many journal articles too quickly to see clearly where the emphasis should be. Seems like a common side effect of putting career ahead of everything - and then trying to be a good mother at the same time. Sounds stressful. Surely it can be done, but having fewer doctor mentors is a likely requirement.

 

[Aleeri]

I think she's interesting but neglecting a lot of the data, not to mention doesn't experiment with everything herself.

 

[Aaron]

She is operating on such an average level (especially when compared to Peat) and quick to jump on the "just eat and do everything a study suggests is beneficial" bandwagon. She goes extreme on her own lifestyle choices and doesn't seem to reap benefits from it. She looks average for her age. On the rare occasions she puts a spotlight on something I hadn't heard about, she doesn't seem like a good source for the information itself; she often sensationalizes things and she speaks like she's reading from an abstract while being extra wordy.

Her earlier videos, where her mouth is very close to the camera as she frantically lists facts, are funny to me though.

 

[Aleeri]

She is operating on such an average level (especially when compared to Peat) and quick to jump on the "just eat and do everything a study suggests is beneficial" bandwagon. On the rare occasions she puts a spotlight on something I hadn't heard about, she doesn't seem like a good source for the information itself; she often sensationalizes things and she speaks like she's reading from an abstract while being extra wordy.

Indeed, she talks a ton about Sulforaphane for example and the foods that contain them in a positive light but never addressed their effects on the thyroid. It's more like cherry picking and not covering the whole.

I also think relying on genetics too much is stupid considering epigenetics and environmental influence. I followed my genetic suggestions at they lead me nowhere, if you consider those then I should be minimizing protein, caffeine and anything that is dopaminergic because of COMT. But I have learned that it is much more complicated than that and I can find benefit from things I should not be "able" to benefit from.

Low carb was crap for me in the long term so nowadays I do not trust anyone who promotes it extensively. I think it's all about metabolism.

 

[thomas00]

Before we dig into the specifics of Dr Rhonda Patrick diet, lets look at her core diet strategies:

Time Restricted Feeding – Rhonda aims to fit her meals into a 10 hour eating window – such that she fasts for 14 hours per day (based on promising research by Dr Satchin Panda)
Cutting out refined sugars & grains – Rhonda avoids grains and simple carbohydrates; foods like bread, rice, pasta, chips, cake, cookies etc. Resulting in her diet being almost entirely vegetables, fruit, meat & fish. One caveat is that she does consume oats (for their beta glucan content) and quinoa up to a couple of times per week.
Micronutrient rich smoothies – Rhonda uses these as a core method of increasing her raw vegetable intake, enriching her diet with micronutrients and pre-biotic fibre.
Sulforaphane – Rhonda consumes sulforaphane containing broccoli sprouts multiple times per week in her smoothies – sulforaphane has a whole host of health benefits which we discuss more below.

Dr Rhonda Patrick Diet - What, Why & How She Eats - 2018 Update

pretty much like every other instagramming health hack in the market who are all too comfortable with their own ideas

 

[thomas00]

Recent internet news indicated the conviction of an oncologist who attempted to kill her boyfriend who was involved with another woman. The weapon of choice was ethylene glycol, popularly known as antifreeze, which had been placed in his coffee just after coitus. Although emergency measures saved the boyfriend's life, extensive deposits of oxalate crystals, the main toxic metabolite of ethylene glycol, had caused extensive kidney and liver damage, reducing the man's lifespan by about half.

Similar results in sabotaging your own health can occur through the regular consumption of a popular concoction called a "green smoothie". A recent Google search for "green smoothie" yielded 609,000 hits. In addition, a recent "improving your diet" seminar I attended promoted this same idea. Interestingly, on the same day, I reviewed test results of a urine organic acid test of a woman with oxalate values three times the upper limit of normal. A conversation with the patient indicated that she had recently turned to consuming daily "green smoothies" to "clean up her diet".

.......The author also discovered that in addition to leading to excessive death and defective reproduction in the rats, high oxalate foods also cause soft and pliable bones and defective teeth.

Recent evidence also points to the involvement of oxalates in stroke, atherosclerosis, and in endothelial cell dysfunction (19-21). High amounts of oxalates were found concentrated in atherosclerotic lesions of the aortas and coronary arteries of a number of individuals at autopsy. These individuals did not have oxalate deposits in the kidney but did have oxalate deposits in other organs such as the thyroid gland and testis.

https://www.greatplainslaboratory.c...lth-hell-is-paved-with-toxic-oxalate-crystals

Bottoms up

 

[Evgenius]

She takes as a fact everything she says.
And I know that if you are that convinced in something you are either stupid or trying to sell me something.

 

[David PS]

Rhonda's mentor is Bruce Ames. He has a triage theory that has increased my sense of urgency about getting vitamins and minerals (from food).

 

[dreamcatcher]

Rhonda's mentor is Bruce Ames. He has a triage theory that has increased my sense of urgency about getting vitamins and minerals (from food).

 

[dreamcatcher]

Chris Masterjohn seems to like her.
Rhonda Patrick is quite new on the health field, she might change her views in the near future..just like Ray Peat did. Ray wasn't in favour of sugar many years ago-as can be read in the Nutrition for Women until he changed his mind.

 

[aguilaroja]

Rhonda's mentor is Bruce Ames. He has a triage theory that has increased my sense of urgency about getting vitamins and minerals (from food).

Props to this post by @narouz, which adds historical perspective:

https://raypeatforum.com/community/threads/for-me-the-significance-of-his-experiment-was.297/
“Bruce Ames, at the University of California, devised a method of screening for mutagens, using bacteria….He described tests in which he had compared DDT to extracts of food herbs, and found DDT to be less mutagenic than several of the most commonly used flavoring herbs. His message, which was eagerly received by his audience of chemistry and biology professors, was that we should not worry about environmental pollution, because it's not as harmful as the things that we do to ourselves. He said that if everyone would eat more unsaturated vegetable oil, and didn't smoke, they wouldn't have anything to worry about.

For me, the significance of his experiment was that plants contain natural pesticides that should be taken more seriously, without taking industrial toxins less seriously."

--Ray Peat in Vegetables, etc.—Who Defines Food?
Vegetables, etc.—Who Defines Food?

 

[Curiousman]

She is operating on such an average level (especially when compared to Peat) and quick to jump on the "just eat and do everything a study suggests is beneficial" bandwagon. She goes extreme on her own lifestyle choices and doesn't seem to reap benefits from it. She looks average for her age. On the rare occasions she puts a spotlight on something I hadn't heard about, she doesn't seem like a good source for the information itself; she often sensationalizes things and she speaks like she's reading from an abstract while being extra wordy.

Her earlier videos, where her mouth is very close to the camera as she frantically lists facts, are funny to me though.

It seems that she putted oil in her face.

 

[x-ray peat]

I like my gurus to be on the older side. I dont think she has the clinical experience to see what really works and is seems be just a pubmed summarizer.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

She thinks "sugar" causes heart disease without addressing the fact that glucose is the most important molecule for humans. She ignores the amount of fat people consume and does the typical "carb" blaming when in reality people don't eat traditional carbohydrates in their traditional form like boiled or steamed with no fat added. They eat flour products with lots of fat. She's heavy on supplements and new-age type of jargon. She was appalled at Rich Roll when he told her that he didn't take any vitamin D because he gets plenty from the sun. She thought that he should still take it. She's just a mainstream new age type nutritionist for all the basic b's and bro's out there.

 

[MrSmart]

I think she is very well read, and does have clinical experience.

Her quote of a study done on human milk foreign proteins blew my mind.

 

[Amazoniac]

Rhonda's mentor is Bruce Ames. He has a triage theory that has increased my sense of urgency about getting vitamins and minerals (from food).

Vegetables, etc.—Who Defines Food?

"Bruce Ames, at the University of California, devised a method of screening for mutagens, using bacteria. One of his graduate students using the technique found that the flame retardants in children's pajamas and bedding were powerful mutagens, and were probably causing cancer. That event made Ames a celebrity, and in the 1980s he went on a lecture tour supported by the American Cancer Society. His lectures reflected the doctrine of the A.C.S., that industrial chemicals aren't responsible for cancer, but that individual actions, such as smoking or dietary choices, are the main causes of cancer. He used a fraudulently "age adjusted" graph of cancer mortality, that falsely showed that mortality from all types of cancer except lung cancer had leveled off after the A.C.S. came into existence. He described tests in which he had compared DDT to extracts of food herbs, and found DDT to be less mutagenic than several of the most commonly used flavoring herbs. His message, which was eagerly received by his audience of chemistry and biology professors, was that we should not worry about environmental pollution, because it's not as harmful as the things that we do to ourselves. He said that if everyone would eat more unsaturated vegetable oil, and didn't smoke, they wouldn't have anything to worry about.

For me, the significance of his experiment was that plants contain natural pesticides that should be taken more seriously[*], without taking industrial toxins less seriously."​

Breast Cancer

"Anyone who knows about the baby boom that started right after the second world war must also realize that in 1940, at the end of the great depression, when infant and childhood mortality was very high and people postponed having children, the population had a disproportionate number of old people, and that it would be outrageous to use the rate of cancer in the pre-war population to evaluate the rate of cancer in the post-war population. But that is what is being done, and the mass media are helping to prevent the public from questioning the official story about cancer.

If the health of the population in 1940 is to be compared to that of a very differently constituted later population, the appropriate method is to compare the rate of death among people of a certain age. The death rate from leukemia, especially among children, was greatly increased in the post-war years, when people were being exposed to radiation from atomic bomb tests. The death rates among adults of various ages, from breast cancer, prostate cancer, and melanoma have steadily increased. Rodu and Cole, who declared victory in the war against cancer, said the decline in total cancer mortality began in 1991. (Cole and Rodu, 1996) If lung cancer is excluded, they say mortality from other cancers has been declining since 1950! (“The fifty-year decline of cancer in America,” Rodu and Cole, 2001.) The first time I saw this bizarre use of “age restandardization” was when Professor Bruce Ames was on a lecture tour for the American Cancer Society, and was speaking to the biology department at the University of Oregon. He showed a graph indicating that the mortality curves for most types of cancer in the U.S. had begun their downward curve in the late 1940s just after the A.C.S. came onto the scene. Even though I think the A.C.S. probably initiated the practice of age-standardizing with reference to the 1940 population, they don’t always find that date suitable for their purposes. In fund-raising literature showing their past success in curing childhood leukemia, they restandardized mortality with reference to the postwar year when the leukemia death rate was at its highest, with the result that their cures appeared to be steadily lowering the death rate. But the incidence rate varied according to the intensity of the radioactive intensity that pregnant women were exposed to, and so both the incidence and the mortality fell after atmospheric testing was stopped."​

In one of his lectures the subject of spleen came up, he said something like: I don't what it is for, I'm not a MD, I'm a researcher. But at least he was honest enough to confess it without evading the topic.

With that said, I also find some of his work interesting.
High-dose vitamin therapy stimulates variant enzymes with decreased coenzyme binding affinity (increased Km): relevance to genetic disease and polymorphisms

 

[Ideonaut]

I think she is a mediocrity and has little useful information.

Yeah, and she mangles the English language too badly for me to listen to.