[VIDEO] Game Changers DEBUNKED By More Doctors

[Rafael Lao Wai]

 

[TheBeard]

I'm finding the anti plant based/vegan sentiment on this forum quite amusing and very misguided, surely you understand the irony of posting a video like that on the Ray Peat forum. Ray Peat literally advocates for getting the bulk of nutritional requirements (I think Ray suggests at least 60%) from plant sources (sugar cane, fruit juice, sweet ripe fruits, jams, potatoes, refined sugar, chocolate, coffee, coca cola, cocoa, etc). Further, Ray advocates eating raw carrots daily for the insoluble fibre and antimicrobial properties, well cooked mushrooms regularly, cooked kale and other leafy green broths which he say he has at least once a week, coconut oil. Ray obviously advocates for a lot of dairy as well, minimal muscle meat, some gelatinous cuts of meat well cooked and some organ meat. This is a diet that is so far from what that video discusses. Further, Ray Peat has said many times that a well planned vegan diet in line with his principles is more than suitable for health and high metabolism, ticking all the boxes required. Perhaps you are little confused about what the fundamental principles of Ray Peat's nutritional paradigm are? This anti vegan, anti plant based, "vegan agenda" type sentiment and the adversity to a plant based diet is kinda ignorant in the context of Ray Peat and his nutritional physiological framework and philosophy. Ideology and nutritional dogma is a waste of time and energy, better to look at the rationale and the physiology. What is indicated and what is not. I mean at the end of the day, that's what Peat is all about.

For more info see: Peat's Surprising Response To My Email. A "Ray Peat Vegan" Is Possible

Can you stop sucking Ray's **** for one second and recognize this video for what it is: a rebutal of the theory that a non-meat diet is healthy. How does that go against Ray's principles? Even if it did, why can't we be open to discussion?

 

[Ritchie]

Can you stop sucking Ray's **** for one second and recognize this video for what it is: a rebutal of the theory that a non-meat diet is healthy. How does that go against Ray's principles? Even if it did, why can't we be open to discussion?

Well this is the Ray Peat Forum dude, the idea is to discuss things like nutrition in the context of his paradigm. In case that isn't clear lol
And that video is far from a "rebuttal of the theory that a non-meat diet is healthy". But if that's what you take as a high standard of evidence and enough info to convince you to believe and follow what they are arguing for, go for it. Knock ya self out.
The "carnivore diet" is quite possibly the dumbest nutritional paradigm and ideology of the modern era. Based on zero evidence, science or physiological understanding. Advocates for zero sugars/fruits/carbohydrates. Relies on anecdotes as evidence of its efficacy, and some vague references to the inuits or some other indigenous diet. Goes against everything that is understood about physiology and nutrition. Certainly goes completely in the face of Ray Peat's position.
I'm not saying that Peat suggests cutting out meat entirely from the diet.. Although he does advocate for minimising it, particularly muscle meat, and to only eat small amounts of gelatinous cuts and a little organ meat like liver, while getting the bulk of nutrition from fruits, sugars, carbohydrates, coconut oil, veges like carrots, mushrooms, leafy greens, some eggs, some shellfish like oysters (and dairy).
What I'm doing is discussing a plant based diet in the context of Peat's understanding and breakdown of physiology and nutrition. Building on, and borrowing from his ideas and applying it. There is a lot of evidence and rationale to show that cutting out animal products, particularly meat, has a lot of benefit to human nutrition and health. For one thing, heme iron is highly problematic. But the list goes on. Dairy has it's long list of issues too but I won't get into that here.

 

[yerrag]

to only eat small amounts of gelatinous cuts

Ray did not advocate low gelatin.

 

[Ritchie]

Ray did not advocate low gelatin.

No not small amounts of isolated gelatin, I said small amounts of “gelatinous cuts” of meat

 

[yerrag]

No not small amounts of isolated gelatin, I said small amounts of “gelatinous cuts” of meat

Still, small amounts of gelatinous cuts isn't what he recommends. The operative word is "small." He recommends plenty of gelatin. And gelatin isn't isolated in the sense glycine is.

 

[Ritchie]

Still, small amounts of gelatinous cuts isn't what he recommends. The operative word is "small." He recommends plenty of gelatin. And gelatin isn't isolated in the sense glycine is.

Well you can get gelatin powder, or collagen powder (many supplement with this). Or you can make a broth (Peat has discussed this) whereby the gelatin separates from the meat once it sets and refrigerates . . But when Peat recommends consuming gelatinous cuts of meat, he suggests eating relatively small amounts relative to carbohydrates. The meat is still high in iron obviously, and I think he suggests averaging around 100 g of protein per day, which isn’t high comparatively

 

[yerrag]

Well you can get gelatin powder, or collagen power (many supplement with this). Or you can make a broth (Peat has discussed this) whereby the gelatin separates from the meat. . But when Peat recommends consuming gelatinous cuts of meat, he suggests eating relatively small amounts relative to carbohydrates. The meat is still high in iron obviously, and I think he suggests averaging around 120 g of protein, which isn’t high comparatively

I agree Ray isn't big on heavy protein consumption, which also means he's not big on heavy meat consumption. But for non-growing people, he recommends a much higher portion of gelatin in the meat eaten. Saying he recommends small gelatinous cuts doesn't drive home the point. More gelatin is recommended than what "small gelatinous cuts" conveys.

 

[Ritchie]

I agree Ray isn't big on heavy protein consumption, which also means he's not big on heavy meat consumption. But for non-growing people, he recommends a much higher portion of gelatin in the meat eaten. Saying he recommends small gelatinous cuts doesn't drive home the point. More gelatin is recommended than what "small gelatinous cuts" conveys.

Well he also wants to minimise meat consumption due to the high iron levels in meat. Further, a big part of the rationale for gelatin is to balance out the inflammatory aminos like methionine, tryptophan and cysteine as part of the overall protein consumption. So with that in mind, gelatinous cuts of meat are preferable to muscle meat but still not to be consumed in high amounts due to the issues with the actual meat. Some people, including Peat, like to supplement extra gelatin, but that would be without the meat which comes with gelatinous cuts. Hence broths that seperate out the gelatin, or powdered gelatin supplements like from Great Lakes.

 

[yerrag]

Well he also wants to minimise meat consumption due to the high iron levels in meat. Further, a big part of the rationale for gelatin is to balance out the inflammatory aminos like methionine, tryptophan and cysteine as part of the overall protein consumption. So with that in mind, gelatinous cuts of meat are preferable to muscle meat but still not to be consumed in high amounts due to the issues with the actual meat. Some people, including Peat, like to supplement extra gelatin, but that would be without the meat which comes with gelatinous cuts. Hence broths that seperate out the gelatin, or powdered gelatin supplements like from Great Lakes.

Your insistence on low meat consumption is like preaching to a choir ad nauseum.

I'm talking about a higher percentage of gelatin in relation to protein intake, which you clearly understand. But you're laboring your point.

 

[Ritchie]

Your insistence on low meat consumption is like preaching to a choir ad nauseum.

I'm talking about a higher percentage of gelatin in relation to protein intake, which you clearly understand. But you're laboring your point.

Yeah cool, I was addressing your point though. Sounds like we’re in agreement.

 

[yerrag]

Cool!

 

[gaze]

Well you can get gelatin powder, or collagen powder (many supplement with this). Or you can make a broth (Peat has discussed this) whereby the gelatin separates from the meat once it sets and refrigerates . . But when Peat recommends consuming gelatinous cuts of meat, he suggests eating relatively small amounts relative to carbohydrates. The meat is still high in iron obviously, and I think he suggests averaging around 120 g of protein per day, which isn’t high comparatively

120g is more than the average person eats. Also 120 is near impossible to hit daily on a vegan diet without eating beans or using a pea protein. you need milk, cheese, meat, gelatin, seafood, eggs, to hit that. you are wrongly trying to minimize the importance of animals products in a peat diet, they are essential for protein, zinc, calcium, vitamin A, good quality Bs. All the anti stress stuff. sugar is essential, also, but vegan carnivore debate is bull****, they’re both wrong and dangerous rhetoric

 

[gaze]

also if if you ate a steak a day and get 60 ish grams of protein and that’s only around 30% of your daily iron, and if you eat it with milk and coffee your getting even less. the avoidance of whole grains and fortified food allows liberal red meat consumption without iron overload, considering it’s a very small portion of the diet in large. Ray himself said the iron from organs and red meat isn’t a problem given ones avoiding fortified food and isn’t relying on red meat as the sole source of protein. any food isolated is unhealthy. which is why you should eat plants and animals, which peat recommends.

 

[TheBeard]

The "carnivore diet" is quite possibly the dumbest nutritional paradigm and ideology of the modern era.

As long as you eat the animal products raw, it's the healthiest thing you can do to yourself.
Read into Aajonus Vonderplanitz, it will open your eyes to a new world.

 

[yerrag]

also if if you ate a steak a day and get 60 ish grams of protein and that’s only around 30% of your daily iron, and if you eat it with milk and coffee your getting even less. the avoidance of whole grains and fortified food allows liberal red meat consumption without iron overload, considering it’s a very small portion of the diet in large. Ray himself said the iron from organs and red meat isn’t a problem given ones avoiding fortified food and isn’t relying on red meat as the sole source of protein. any food isolated is unhealthy. which is why you should eat plants and animals, which peat recommends.

Good points!

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

The "carnivore diet" is quite possibly the dumbest nutritional paradigm and ideology of the modern era. Based on zero evidence, science or physiological understanding. Advocates for zero sugars/fruits/carbohydrates. Relies on anecdotes as evidence of its efficacy, and some vague references to the inuits or some other indigenous diet. Goes against everything that is understood about physiology and nutrition. Certainly goes completely in the face of Ray Peat's position.

Eating zero carb isn't good, but erasing animal products, including meat, from the diet is a huge mistake.

Lol what about those studies that I posted a long time ago? You still haven't debunked them. The only person going against physiology and nutrition here is you.

Anecdotes or epidemiology, take your pick.

A vegan diet also goes in the face of Ray's position. He recommends animal foods in the diet.

 

[Ritchie]

Eating zero carb isn't good, but erasing animal products, including meat, from the diet is a huge mistake.

Lol what about those studies that I posted a long time ago? You still haven't debunked them. The only person going against physiology and nutrition here is you.

Hasn't been a huge mistake for me, feeling better than ever. Granted I still eat oysters once a week/fortnight.

Ah yes, apologies I was meaning to get around to looking into them and thanks for posting them. They were about creatine and I really know very little about creatine. When I get a chance I will look into it and get back to you with my thoughts on them.

 

[Ritchie]

120g is more than the average person eats. Also 120 is near impossible to hit daily on a vegan diet without eating beans or using a pea protein. you need milk, cheese, meat, gelatin, seafood, eggs, to hit that. you are wrongly trying to minimize the importance of animals products in a peat diet, they are essential for protein, zinc, calcium, vitamin A, good quality Bs. All the anti stress stuff. sugar is essential, also, but vegan carnivore debate is bull****, they’re both wrong and dangerous rhetoric

Yeah I may have overshot what Peat recommends in protein.. I think it's somewhere between 80-120 g depending on the person and the situation. But perhaps someone has a solid quote/position from him on this... Certainly based on quite a bit of research that does seem to be the sweet spot for most active people. Very easy to reach on a plant based diet. Don't forget the protein in things like fruit and potatoes which is of a very high quality and many, including Peat, believe to be understated and under calculated in the food science discipline. That aside I do eat well prepared beans and lentils, similar to the prep I do for potatoes and mushrooms.. Cook well in water. Sometimes I soak the legumes overnight or sprout them before cooking. Zinc, calcium, Bs and vitamin A all very easily met eating plant based.
As far as the iron goes, based on the extensive amount of literature, heme iron is the problem. I have never seen any evidence showing non-heme iron (i.e. iron found in plants) to be of any issue to human health unless it is in some highly concentrated/supplemented form. Certainly not at the organic levels found in whole grains and so forth. Conversely there is a ton of research showing heme iron to be extremely problematic. I think they do fortify foods with heme iron and I would certainly avoid that, however the non-heme iron found in whole grains is fine. Also heme iron has a far higher absorption rate than non-heme iron.. If you have any evidence showing different I'm open to seeing it...

 

[tankasnowgod]

As far as the iron goes, based on the extensive amount of literature, heme iron is the problem. I have never seen any evidence showing non-heme iron (i.e. iron found in plants) to be of any issue to human health unless it is in some highly concentrated/supplemented form. Certainly not at the organic levels found in whole grains and so forth. Conversely there is a ton of research showing heme iron to be extremely problematic. I think they do fortify foods with heme iron and I would certainly avoid that, however the non-heme iron found in whole grains is fine. Also heme iron has a far higher absorption rate than non-heme iron.. If you have any evidence showing different I'm open to seeing it...

I have read a lot about iron, and have never seen ANY thing to suggest that heme iron is any more or less of a problem than non-heme. Personally, I think the only iron that's a problem (in general) is non heme Fortified iron. If you have any studies to suggest heme iron is a problem in any way, please post them, as I would be keen to review them. Neither natural non heme (say, from spinach) nor heme (from meat) cause gi issues like supplemental forms do. Beyond that, it's all about your own body iron levels, and your strategy to get it to a good spot.

Of note, supplemental forms of iron (like ferrous sulfate and iron bis glyscinate) are non heme. They aren't fortifying wheat by dumping pigs blood on it (that would be heme). They are dumping the raw metal into it. The raw metal is always non heme.