The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned

[Hans]

I thought it was about time to write something about the man himself. It would be great if as many people as possible would share this article to bring as much awareness to this man's work as possible. Thanks, guys. Also, I want to thank Georgi Dinkov and Danny Roddy for their input in this article.

The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned » MENELITE

The question is, why isn’t credit being given where it’s due? Arnold Schwarzenegger most likely wouldn’t have achieved success, or in the way that he did, if it wasn’t for … Continue reading The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned

men-elite.com

 

[PolishSun]

Very interesting, I sometimes think that being moral it's just a sadistic invention of some psychopath, as the majority of the population is immoral. Maybe it's an energy issue.

 

[Cloudhands]

I hope he sees this article :) it was well deserved by the man

 

[Blaze]

I thought it was about time to write something about the man himself. It would be great if as many people as possible would share this article to bring as much awareness to this man's work as possible. Thanks, guys. Also, I want to thank Georgi Dinkov and Danny Roddy for their input in this article.

The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned » MENELITE

The question is, why isn’t credit being given where it’s due? Arnold Schwarzenegger most likely wouldn’t have achieved success, or in the way that he did, if it wasn’t for … Continue reading The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned

men-elite.com

Absolutely wrong premise, though I do wish that you were correct, my friend. I cannot see how Ray is "The man with the biggest influence in the health industry". Perhaps the biggest influence and balance that offsets the misinformation and dogma from academia and formal healthcare. His influence has been huge and bless the man for all the knowledge he has shared. He has made a huge difference in many lives but it has been quite outside of the formal health industry which is entrenched in dogma and fallacy , and in academia his views are largely shunned. (as were those of Gilbert Ling and others.) His huge influence has been more of a rebel outsider speaking truth and challenging misconceptions and outright fallacies. And the huge popularity he enjoys today is with the common man like you, not those in the health industry.

To your point, within the healthcare system the only examples of his uncredited influence I can find is that he was indeed the man who coined the term estrogen dominance. He certainly never gets credit for that term from our heath industry which uses that term often.

Other than that, the examples of mainstream Doctors or people in the healthcare industry which espouse Peat teachings giving him credit or not giving him credit are very few, Dr. John Lee M.D. comes to mind.

He is simply a rebel outsider preaching truth as he perceives it.

​

 

[Ben.]

Very interesting, I sometimes think that being moral it's just a sadistic invention of some psychopath, as the majority of the population is immoral. Maybe it's an energy issue.

Being moral is a personal stance based on emotions and ones own perception of good/bad or right/wrong.

Other people behaving/acting contrary to someones morals doesn't mean much other than that the human race and each and every individual in it to be vastly different and unique to eachother.

But perhaps you could elaborate more why you think so? Maybe i missunderstood the post.

 

[Cloudhands]

Absolutely wrong premise, though I do wish that you were correct, my friend. I cannot see how Ray is The man with the biggest influence in the health industry. Perhaps the biggest influence and balance that offsets the misinformation and dogma from academia and formal healthcare. His influence has been huge and bless the man for all the knowledge he has shared. He has made a huge difference in many lives but it has been quite outside of the formal health industry which is entrenched in dogma and fallacy and in academia his views are largely shunned. (as were those of Gilbert Ling and others.) His influence has been more of a rebel outsider speaking truth and challenging misconceptions and outright fallacies. And the huge popularity he enjoys today is with the common man, not those in the health industry.

To your point, within the healthcare system the only examples of his uncredited influence I can find is that he was indeed the man who coined the term estrogen dominance. He certainly never gets credit for that term from the heath industry which uses that term often.

Other than that, the examples of mainstream Doctors or people in the healthcare industry which espouse Peat teachings giving him credit or not giving him credit are very few, Dr. John Lee comes to mind.

He is simply a rebel outsider preaching truth as he perceives it.

​

Being moral is a personal stance based on emotions and ones own perception of good/bad or right/wrong.

Other people behaving/acting contrary to someones morals doesn't mean much other than that the human race and each and every individual in it to be vastly different and unique to eachother.

But perhaps you could elaborate more why you think so? Maybe i missunderstood the post.

Id disagree, maybe some cultural mores can be percieved that way, but when it comes to empathy and altruism, i tend to believe that unless youre a psychopath theres a clear idea of whats right and wrong, and taking someone elses property, even if its intellectual property, falls under that, along with dishonesty

 

[PolishSun]

Being moral is a personal stance based on emotions and ones own perception of good/bad or right/wrong.

Other people behaving/acting contrary to someones morals doesn't mean much other than that the human race and each and every individual in it to be vastly different and unique to eachother.

But perhaps you could elaborate more why you think so? Maybe i missunderstood the post.

Morality could be understood like: do not do to others that you would not want to be done to you or your loved ones.
Metabolically speaking, cells in the body do their job, they just peacefully exist, do their functions and enjoy the provided energy. Immoral are cancer cells.

 

[Ben.]

Id disagree, maybe some cultural mores can be percieved that way, but when it comes to empathy and altruism, i tend to believe that unless youre a psychopath theres a clear idea of whats right and wrong, and taking someone elses property, even if its intellectual property, falls under that, along with dishonesty

Perhaps there are instances where it is clear, altough personal gain / benefit often times leads to people doing "imoral" things. Like stealing from a blind person or something. Sometimes life circumstances such as "starvation" and poverty can lead to "imoral" behaviours for the sole purpose of survival.

Other instances like relationships (cheating) for example is not a topic where there is a clear moral concept. For some cheating is just a "natural" thing that everybody does and excuse it with evolutionary reasoning for their polygamic tendencies while for the others it is not acceptable and imoral.

In a world where the majority of "land" and housing is owned by corporations and a certain amount of rich people, one could argue that it is imoral to benefit from the basic need of a human to have a "roof under ones head" which is unfortunately tied to extremely high cost which in turn creates another barrier for the "common man" to build up more wealth, same goes for land to grow foods on. Imo the entire systemic construct we have is build and operated on a imoral standpoint.

Morality could be understood like: do not do to others that you would not want to be done to you or your loved ones.
Metabolically speaking, cells in the body do their job, they just peacefully exist, do their functions and enjoy the provided energy. Immoral are cancer cells.

I like the first sentence. Sadly many people do not follow it.
If i understand it correctly, you are implying that the imoral actions/behaviours are a result of low energy? Maybe there is something to it but i can think of certain instances that would contradict that idea.

---

Either way im sorry, i did not ment to derail the thread. I see it similar to Blaze. While Ray is awsome and so important for so many people, i believe that unfortunaley many people that are far less qualified or have even damaged countless of people had a far bigger impact on humanity/society. But that does not mean that in X amount of years his teachings couldn't - in theory- become a "new" and widely accepted basis of which we as a society operate on.

 

[Dr. B]

good article. I think Peat is not popular enough and his views contradict many mainstream ones. his views on saturated fat vs pufa are starting to gain more traction. many bbers/fitness folk still consider omega 6 and 3 'essential' and even believe you can eat many grams of both as long as you keep their ratio 1:1, which is much different than even WAPF who believe they are essential yet only in the small amounts found in animal foods.

 

[Braveheart]

Absolutely wrong premise, though I do wish that you were correct, my friend. I cannot see how Ray is "The man with the biggest influence in the health industry". Perhaps the biggest influence and balance that offsets the misinformation and dogma from academia and formal healthcare. His influence has been huge and bless the man for all the knowledge he has shared. He has made a huge difference in many lives but it has been quite outside of the formal health industry which is entrenched in dogma and fallacy , and in academia his views are largely shunned. (as were those of Gilbert Ling and others.) His huge influence has been more of a rebel outsider speaking truth and challenging misconceptions and outright fallacies. And the huge popularity he enjoys today is with the common man like you, not those in the health industry.

To your point, within the healthcare system the only examples of his uncredited influence I can find is that he was indeed the man who coined the term estrogen dominance. He certainly never gets credit for that term from our heath industry which uses that term often.

Other than that, the examples of mainstream Doctors or people in the healthcare industry which espouse Peat teachings giving him credit or not giving him credit are very few, Dr. John Lee M.D. comes to mind.

He is simply a rebel outsider preaching truth as he perceives it.

​

 

[PolishSun]

Could correct "The man with the biggest POSITIVE influence in the health industry"

 

[Hans]

Absolutely wrong premise, though I do wish that you were correct, my friend. I cannot see how Ray is "The man with the biggest influence in the health industry". Perhaps the biggest influence and balance that offsets the misinformation and dogma from academia and formal healthcare. His influence has been huge and bless the man for all the knowledge he has shared. He has made a huge difference in many lives but it has been quite outside of the formal health industry which is entrenched in dogma and fallacy , and in academia his views are largely shunned. (as were those of Gilbert Ling and others.) His huge influence has been more of a rebel outsider speaking truth and challenging misconceptions and outright fallacies. And the huge popularity he enjoys today is with the common man like you, not those in the health industry.

To your point, within the healthcare system the only examples of his uncredited influence I can find is that he was indeed the man who coined the term estrogen dominance. He certainly never gets credit for that term from our heath industry which uses that term often.

Other than that, the examples of mainstream Doctors or people in the healthcare industry which espouse Peat teachings giving him credit or not giving him credit are very few, Dr. John Lee M.D. comes to mind.

He is simply a rebel outsider preaching truth as he perceives it.

​

With the "health industry," I'm not referring to healthcare. The health industry is big, with multiple different categories such as biohacking, anti-aging, fat loss, beauty, etc.
Many people in the health sphere/industry, such as Chris Kresser, Paul Saladino, etc, etc., (although they might not be squarely in the middle of the mainstream), don't give him any credit. Although there are people in the health sphere giving him credit, most of them surely aren't very famous. The more famous someone is, the less likely they are to give him credit.
And by "biggest influence", I'm meaning to say his work is influencing people (free thinkers; not those close-minded indoctrinated people) to change their views/come to different conclusions. But because people see him as a "quark", they never mention him because they might not agree with everything he says. Or at least, they can't afford to mention him because as they're "transitioning" to his beliefs, they can't admit that they were wrong and are following someone else's work.
I'm just saying that if someone in the health/beauty/anti-aging industry (not healthcare) has been influenced by his work, it would be good if they can give credit where it's due.

I can add though that there are people in the healthcare system that could choose to give Ray Peat credit if they do follow his work. E.g. Mike Fave was a nurse and yes he couldn't deviate far from protocol but yet he still openly follows Peat's work and has no problem giving him credit.

But I agree with what you're saying about Peat being a "rebel outsider" but not by choice and he definitely deserves a lot more credit than he's getting.

 

[Blaze]

With the "health industry," I'm not referring to healthcare. The health industry is big, with multiple different categories such as biohacking, anti-aging, fat loss, beauty, etc.
Many people in the health sphere/industry, such as Chris Kresser, Paul Saladino, etc, etc., (although they might not be squarely in the middle of the mainstream), don't give him any credit. Although there are people in the health sphere giving him credit, most of them surely aren't very famous. The more famous someone is, the less likely they are to give him credit.
And by "biggest influence", I'm meaning to say his work is influencing people (free thinkers; not those close-minded indoctrinated people) to change their views/come to different conclusions. But because people see him as a "quark", they never mention him because they might not agree with everything he says. Or at least, they can't afford to mention him because as they're "transitioning" to his beliefs, they can't admit that they were wrong and are following someone else's work.
I'm just saying that if someone in the health/beauty/anti-aging industry (not healthcare) has been influenced by his work, it would be good if they can give credit where it's due.

I can add though that there are people in the healthcare system that could choose to give Ray Peat credit if they do follow his work. E.g. Mike Fave was a nurse and yes he couldn't deviate far from protocol but yet he still openly follows Peat's work and has no problem giving him credit.

But I agree with what you're saying about Peat being a "rebel outsider" but not by choice and he definitely deserves a lot more credit than he's getting.

Appreciate your clarification and I did enjoy your article. Ray Peat seems to have learned from a young age through careful observation what ideas have a solid foundation and which ideas seem faulty. Based on the stories he has shared in the Interview from On the Back of a Tiger, his parents Sidney and Lou Ella were very independent thinkers and he grew up in an environment that encouraged independent thought. Peat has the definitive advantage that early on he ignored the academic paradigm and he only showed loyalty to things based in science. He even enjoys telling stories of how that would sometimes get under the skin of his instructors. I wish that his Blake College effort had been more successful and was now one of the dominant institutions in modern thought, but sadly it is not.
So, as to those who now appear to be espousing Ray Peat principles.......it's difficult sometimes to know whether they are:

1. directly stealing Peat ideas without crediting him

2. or it is merely coincidental, they are just simply being slowly dragged kicking and screaming into the light by the same science Ray was influenced by, which they tried to ignore for so long in favor of their dogma.

We probably would never even have heard of Ray if he had just stayed with his love of art and not branched out into biology, and all the concepts you now know would have never been learned by you from him.

 

[BearWithMe]

Very interesting, I sometimes think that being moral it's just a sadistic invention of some psychopath, as the majority of the population is immoral. Maybe it's an energy issue.

Being moral is completely normal and natural. Healthy person have no desire to do anything immoral. Healthy person would feel super bad when doing anything immoral.

Don't confuse real morality with the modern mainstream definition of morality, though. The "official" definition of morality pushed by governments is there only to brainwash you to be good, obedient slave of the system. This have nothing to do with real morality.

So yes, the "official" definition of morality actually is sadistic invention of some psychopath.

I don't think majority of the population is immoral, they are just too dumb to understand the consequences of their actions.

 

[BearWithMe]

How many industry professionals do you see running around, promoting high sugar, low pufa, low antinutrient diets based on milk and fruit, @Hans ?

Yeah, me neither.

Tell average person that he or she should eat a lot of sugar and avoid omega-3 and fiber to be healthy, they will think you are completely insane.

 

[Hans]

How many industry professionals do you see running around, promoting high sugar, low pufa, low antinutrient diets based on milk and fruit, @Hans ?

Yeah, me neither.

Tell average person that he or she should eat a lot of sugar and avoid omega-3 and fiber to be healthy, they will think you are completely insane.

Based on your comment I'm not even sure if you actually read my article...

As I mentioned in the article, the amount of people are increasing more and more. The few things I listed in the article are some of the main topics that well-known people (in the health industry) are starting to talk about more and more.

I would not have written this article if it wasn't for that fact.

And as I mentioned (and Georgi mentioned this as well), that more and more people are quoting Peat's work and copying text from his articles (verbatim) without even mentioning him. Georgi will be able to give you a lot of examples; he sent me a few.

 

[S-VV]

Appreciate your clarification and I did enjoy your article. Ray Peat seems to have learned from a young age through careful observation what ideas have a solid foundation and which ideas seem faulty. Based on the stories he has shared in the Interview from On the Back of a Tiger, his parents Sidney and Lou Ella were very independent thinkers and he grew up in an environment that encouraged independent thought. Peat has the definitive advantage that early on he ignored the academic paradigm and he only showed loyalty to things based in science. He even enjoys telling stories of how that would sometimes get under the skin of his instructors. I wish that his Blake College effort had been more successful and was now one of the dominant institutions in modern thought, but sadly it is not.
So, as to those who now appear to be espousing Ray Peat principles.......it's difficult sometimes to know whether they are:

1. directly stealing Peat ideas without crediting him

2. or it is merely coincidental, they are just simply being slowly dragged kicking and screaming into the light by the same science Ray was influenced by, which they tried to ignore for so long in favor of their dogma.View attachment 24217





We probably would never even have heard of Ray if he had just stayed with his love of art and not branched out into biology, and all the concepts you now know would have never been learned by you from him.



View attachment 24219

Nice Ray pics. Can we get more?

 

[Blaze]

Nice Ray pics. Can we get more?

I post a few every so often ................. more to come in the future. Was reflecting today on how far Ray's popularity has come in recent years. From relative obscurity in 1957 painting oil paintings for $20 and giving violin and trumpet lessons for just $1 at Sherry Ross Hall - University of Oregon, to supplement his income ,
To teaching high school for a while in San Diego and in 1967 teaching art at Junction City high school in Oregon, then at last getting his Biology degree in 1972 was now finally mentally armed with the knowledge we so love to hear him share with us today.

 

[HealthisWealth]

Yes ray peat = sugar, salt, cholesterol, sunlight

 

[Jon2547]

I thought it was about time to write something about the man himself. It would be great if as many people as possible would share this article to bring as much awareness to this man's work as possible. Thanks, guys. Also, I want to thank Georgi Dinkov and Danny Roddy for their input in this article.

The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned » MENELITE

The question is, why isn’t credit being given where it’s due? Arnold Schwarzenegger most likely wouldn’t have achieved success, or in the way that he did, if it wasn’t for … Continue reading The man with the biggest influence in the health industry, but whose name is never mentioned

men-elite.com

I think Hans may be in line to carry the torch when that time comes. And by the way, the article above, it could be made into a book. Keep up the good work Hans, You are a smart young man. The world is in dire need of smart men right now. An endangered species, I might add.