Would A Knowledgeable Doctor Be Helpful Around Here?

[Heroico]

Yerrag: Ray Peat was both. He's better than me both ways. Lots of people on this forum are better, Haidut being the one I know best. Mostly I'm looking to do some practical medical work for many years to come if it makes sense and I can be useful to the community.

On the practical side here are some possibilities:

1) I could apply for licenses in say the top five locations and do virtual visits and write prescriptions in those states. Applications are very laborious.
2) I could wait for the regulations regaring telehealth to ease further.
3) I could take virtual visits from anywhere but would not be able to write a presccription in a state in which I don't have a license. In that case I would provide a medical note to take to your PA or minute clinic. But I'm not sure that would be of much help to you- if you could find such a person willing to take a prescrxiption recommendadtion, perhaps you could just convince them yourself..-?
4) If seen once in the office I believe I could then do followups virtually in most states. That would involve traveling to North Carolina or, when I get it done, DC.

So, there are some real roadblocks there.

Does anyone know how the members are distributed?

 

[Heroico]

I should have said Ray Peat is both...I was thinking of his effect on me when I began reading his books many years ago. He's even better today.
Regarding calcium, can you write up something on what's going on there and let's put it in another thread..

 

[GMT100]

can you do Florida or NY?

Yerrag: Ray Peat was both. He's better than me both ways. Lots of people on this forum are better, Haidut being the one I know best. Mostly I'm looking to do some practical medical work for many years to come if it makes sense and I can be useful to the community.

On the practical side here are some possibilities:

1) I could apply for licenses in say the top five locations and do virtual visits and write prescriptions in those states. Applications are very laborious.
2) I could wait for the regulations regaring telehealth to ease further.
3) I could take virtual visits from anywhere but would not be able to write a presccription in a state in which I don't have a license. In that case I would provide a medical note to take to your PA or minute clinic. But I'm not sure that would be of much help to you- if you could find such a person willing to take a prescrxiption recommendadtion, perhaps you could just convince them yourself..-?
4) If seen once in the office I believe I could then do followups virtually in most states. That would involve traveling to North Carolina or, when I get it done, DC.

So, there are some real roadblocks there.

Does anyone know how the members are distributed?

Yerrag: Ray Peat was both. He's better than me both ways. Lots of people on this forum are better, Haidut being the one I know best. Mostly I'm looking to do some practical medical work for many years to come if it makes sense and I can be useful to the community.

On the practical side here are some possibilities:

1) I could apply for licenses in say the top five locations and do virtual visits and write prescriptions in those states. Applications are very laborious.
2) I could wait for the regulations regaring telehealth to ease further.
3) I could take virtual visits from anywhere but would not be able to write a presccription in a state in which I don't have a license. In that case I would provide a medical note to take to your PA or minute clinic. But I'm not sure that would be of much help to you- if you could find such a person willing to take a prescrxiption recommendadtion, perhaps you could just convince them yourself..-?
4) If seen once in the office I believe I could then do followups virtually in most states. That would involve traveling to North Carolina or, when I get it done, DC.

So, there are some real roadblocks there.

Does anyone know how the members are distributed?

 

[yerrag]

Yerrag: Ray Peat was both. He's better than me both ways.

The best thing that Ray Peat can do is directional - so we don't get lost and be ensnared in a thicket of thorns in a sea of medical propaganda and whitewashing. We each still have a lot left to do to get to our destination health-wise. You have a lot of good ideas, and I hope you can get the one-on-one consultation going here to showcase what a Ray Peat doctor would do in the real world. You must have heard someone's cry here for a Ray Peat doctor.

If you've been lurking around, you'll see that despite all the good information being shared in the forum, not all that information gets easily translated into actual positive end results. Cure is still elusive, and it's actually a rare sighting. In any posting asking for guidance, it is still up to the OP (original poster) to decide what course of action to take - after getting a lot of advice from the many forum members. I wouldn't want to speculate on why, but I just feel that there's a need to put some structure in the process of healing, and maybe you can provide that. And certainly, charging a fee is fine. If you're good, you should charge well. Besides, no one ever values free advice, no matter how good that advice is.

On the practical side here are some possibilities:

1) I could apply for licenses in say the top five locations and do virtual visits and write prescriptions in those states. Applications are very laborious.
2) I could wait for the regulations regarding telehealth to ease further.
3) I could take virtual visits from anywhere but would not be able to write a prescription in a state in which I don't have a license. In that case I would provide a medical note to take to your PA or minute clinic. But I'm not sure that would be of much help to you- if you could find such a person willing to take a prescription recommendation, perhaps you could just convince them yourself..-?
4) If seen once in the office I believe I could then do followups virtually in most states. That would involve traveling to North Carolina or, when I get it done, DC.

So, there are some real roadblocks there.

It certainly would help if members can get prescriptions from you. That puts some certainty into them carrying out the advice given them. I suppose the problem is that you can't get a license that allows you to practice telemedicine in all 50 states, and that makes it difficult. But consider that if I live in Nevada, I can go to California to consult with a doctor based there. So, if say I send a robotic presence of myself to California, would the consultation be considered valid? If that is so, why can't I video chat with you and have my screen representation of me in your monitor be a legal representation of my being? I'm sure it's not that easy, as the law would not necessarily be something that's fair and just, but one that would protect established interests.

But I suppose you could just make it simpler and choose a state with a large population and get a license there. It will likely be the case that there would be many forum members living in that state. You could make a survey post and get an idea. But it's just an idea, as responses from members would vary.

I should have said Ray Peat is both...I was thinking of his effect on me when I began reading his books many years ago. He's even better today.

Yes, I'm glad he is healthy and productive. He is at his prime when it comes to his mind and what more insights he can synthesize to share with us.

 

[Heroico]

Yerrag, thanks.

I'm starting to think I should do a trial podcast in DC (I seem to remember Haidut has many tapes from broadcasters in the area, they might be willing to try this concept of a full hour on a single patient). The community would suggest a patient and hopefully some of you in the DC area would participate directly and otherwise by phone.

An ideal patient would be one with multiple diagnoses and expensive medications and several specialists and is not getting well (three strikes and you're out for the FDA). The conversation would range over deetails, specifics, controversies, and implementation problems, and some basic controversies in science and physiology if we can reach for it. At the end I would write up something and work with the patient to find a prescribing doc in the box in their state. The written record and the recording would basically work as a defense of the prescription which would not be "standard of care".

There are a lot of details here- HIPAA compliance, medical record responsibility, licensure- I know about these and basically it can be done.

One thing to consider is that once a primary is found in a state, they would function as a future resource. That's basically what the company Roman does- they find somobody dto write the rx in each state for a small fee. In fact, I could check with that "provider" first.

I appreciate the observations about fair fees. However, I think that would be far off after seeing how this works. And, perhaps the podcast/advertising format might work. At this time in life I'm more interested in doing something meaningful, we're OK financially.

 

[Heroico]

One problem with the podcast is that it's only one patient at a time. If we built up a network of doctors in a handful of states I could do trials. I've been fascinated by the idea that you could do an open label trial and have patients fund their own study medication. The trial design goes through an instirutional review board and is then first approved by a panel of other physicians. I am somewhat familiar with this and feel it could work. Then the patients fitting this criteria could be reqruited in volume. Cognitive problems and dementia might work very well (methylene blue, low dose lithium, many other available candidates).

 

[Amazoniac]

Guru, are suggestions welcome? If so, here's one for you:

There's the habit of looking down on mainstream medicine for missing the biological importance of waste productide (CO2) with an 'us and them' mindset. Yet, it seems that viewing carbionic annihilase as a wasteful enzyme that deserves inhibition at all costs is just as ignorant, if not more; at least waste productide is a terminal product of respiration, so it's understandable to presume it as something to be disposed/exchanged, however with the enzyme, you not only have proven functions that rely on the reverse reaction, but even the movement throughout the body depends on it.

It might be fruitful to scan the brains of these people after constitutional defects.

I witness people having no problem in trying to inhibit it directly without first asking basic questions like: if I'm benefiting from more WP2, where's the drive to retain it? What exactly is responsible for the overactivation of the enzyme? What's the purpose to it? If tissues aren't getting enough oxygen, up until when is it productive to oxygenate when you can't respire properly (countless deficiencies)? Do I generate enough WP2 and it's being metabolized abnormally or the other way around?

It may be that the situation is being controlled by the body in the least harmful way at the expense of lowering WP2. Although people's experience suggest otherwise, that it started to do harm regardless of the intent, improving from its inhibition doesn't mean that there aren't trade-offs.

If it's common to experience acid build-up due to incomplete respiration, doesn't it raise suspicion that some parts are going to be sacrificed in the process of its inhibition? Contrary to bases, there are no acid reserves in the body as far as I know.

Rather than viewing it as an evil or wasteful enzyme, understanding what the body is trying to do may lean you towards a prudent approach that's justified in cases that aren't emergencies: there's time to search for the root and it could be addressed indirectly, but it's easier said than done.

Perhaps what's best to do as management whenever possible is not to inhibit the enzyme, but to conserve waste productide; you may need all metabolites, it's not necessary to sacrifice one. Maybe at some point you'll have enough 'hydrogen carbonate' to allow redistribution and WP2 will come up again. Artificial inhibition of the enzyme is a rudimentary solution. Respiratory versus metabolic acidosis.

I'm not knowledgeable, just trying to make sense of it, I can be missing something. What I know is that worshipping waste productide appears silly to me, less attachment prevents fanaticialism, which is dangerous, better regulated as drugs. We need to be as emotional as rocks, exercise dulling and endear nothing, not even our fetuses so that they grow independent.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

I know that some people have sought out doctors with good understanding of RP principles. If you manage to marry RP knowledge with the modern medicine resources and methods you could be very helpful, and have a rewarding career too. I would also suggest looking into other doctors that have challenged the dominant view. I think David R. Hawkins and Peter Breggins are good examples. THey had some trouble and Hawkins was very successful in every way, yet his methods were ignored. You could learn from them to have easier time with it.

 

[Peatful]

@Heroico

Peat has gotten better with time, indeed.

I’m in awe of how a mind and heart like yours lasted in the current western medicine milieu/ethos.

I was in PM&R for about 20 years and it broke me.

I’m a fellow Carolinian with roots in Prince George’s County too.

So glad you’re here. Welcome.

 

[CLASH]

@Heroico
I'm located in Florida and starting FNP school this summer. My goal in going to NP school was to be able to practice as a primary care physician bridging the gap between modern medical care and the ideas of bioenergetics. I'd be interested in being involved with the ideas you presented here and I'd also be interested in any book recommendations you have for pharmacology, diagnostics, assessment etc. from the modern medical perspective. From what I understand the NP education is relatively poor, so I will be studying on the side on my own time, so I dont come out into practice not having a clue (which is what I see with many of the NP's I worked with, especially the ones who havent worked as nurses prior).

@raysputin

 

[charlie]

@Heroico, welcome to the forum!

To answer your original question, yes, it would be a blessing to many.

 

[koky]

@Heroico a very welcome offer - let's not get carried away with telemdicine.
Ancient Chinese medicine and Ayurveyda are over 5,000 years old and still practiced successfully today
and both are based on a close personal relationship of practitioner and patient, primarily based on smell, sound,
touch, emotion. Of prime importance in diagnosis is familial history and relationships, diet, daily activities, work, and dreams of the future.

 

[thomas00]

I think there are a few other doctors here, perhaps a radiologist. Insider's perspectives are always interesting to read, particularly about the machinations and politics of the systems they operate in. Very sorry for your son, Heroico.

 

[Heroico]

Clash- thanks for your interest. I am going to have licesnses in the states around DC but I am interested in helping you in a Peat-inspired practice. We may do some trials for cognitdive dysfunction and I would be pleased to provide an opinion letter for a patient you are working with...

 

[Heroico]

thomas00, koky- thank you

 

[Tristan Loscha]

Clash- thanks for your interest. I am going to have licesnses in the states around DC but I am interested in helping you in a Peat-inspired practice. We may do some trials for cognitdive dysfunction and I would be pleased to provide an opinion letter for a patient you are working with...

A sincere welcome, and Greetings from Germany,dear Heroico!

What issues are possible for members engaging with that type of scheme?Did you do that before and are you in that role engaged on similar forums.Can selph-help type of communities like this become disrupted by introducing this line of work,do you have first hand knowledge,or seen dynamics like those you envision before?
As an example,.."some trials for cognitdive dysfunction",what issues can arise out of standard-type Diagnostics for members and these forums as a whole.You are a new member,welcoming you again dear Heroico,you should participate and contribute to this forum to better gauge this ambitious idea of yours.

 

[Heroico]

Greetings from USA dear Tristan! My German is horrible so English is it for me (a little French, maybe, and I can read German on a good day).
If I understand you correctly, you are aware of the difficulties of doing stodies. I am thinking of what may be a novel approach- large, open label studies (the patients know what they are taking) and, EVEN WORSE, they pay for their medication.

I believe that 1) I can get a committee of physicisns functioning as a review board to approve the design, 2) there are advantaages to such an open study when the search space is very large (looking for a rare anecdote for example). By itself the "gold standard" double blind study is too expensive to search the space and we have few such studies compared to the size of the number of questions. By itself a crowd-sourced open study has some advantages of "crowd search". There's some nice math around these questions, the optimum answers can be calculated.

Another problem is the ethics of "selling" medications to sick people. It would have to be done scruoupously, probably through a nonprofit. I am setting up a nonprofit now to contain my provisioinal patent for methylene blue for migraine. It's interesting to consider what a good definition is of a quack- it's someone who makes money on a cure but won't submit it colleague review. I think these studies would only be a first step on that journey. In the meantime, it's a way to get Peat-type substances such as T3 and MB into the hands of those who may benefit with better safety than the current haphazard sourcing and iniformed consent.

Maybe we can find a way for our paths to cross. Tristan, sincere thanks for your thoughts!

 

[alywest]

Yerrag: Ray Peat was both. He's better than me both ways. Lots of people on this forum are better, Haidut being the one I know best. Mostly I'm looking to do some practical medical work for many years to come if it makes sense and I can be useful to the community.

On the practical side here are some possibilities:

1) I could apply for licenses in say the top five locations and do virtual visits and write prescriptions in those states. Applications are very laborious.
2) I could wait for the regulations regaring telehealth to ease further.
3) I could take virtual visits from anywhere but would not be able to write a presccription in a state in which I don't have a license. In that case I would provide a medical note to take to your PA or minute clinic. But I'm not sure that would be of much help to you- if you could find such a person willing to take a prescrxiption recommendadtion, perhaps you could just convince them yourself..-?
4) If seen once in the office I believe I could then do followups virtually in most states. That would involve traveling to North Carolina or, when I get it done, DC.

So, there are some real roadblocks there.

Does anyone know how the members are distributed?

Usually once you’ve been prescribed something from a doctor you can go to another doctor (in another state) and say this was prescribed to me in the past. You don’t even usually have to have proof. I know this from moving out of state several times, but of course things like acetazolamide are trickier. There are off-label uses for things like losartan such as migraines. If a doctor believes you took it in the past without harm they’re more inclined to give you whatever prescriptions you need. I got cyproheptadine for migraines because a neurologist agreed it was worth a try.
Also you can send an rx to a pharmacy in one state and then have it transferred to you at the pharmacy in another state. I don’t know how long this works but I’ve been doing that for several months without incident. Just my 2c
Of course some things are better coming from Mexico anyway, such as cynomel.

 

[Momentum]

The ME/CFS as well as Gulf War Syndrome people are doing privately funded open studies collaborating their findings across research groups around the world. They are making significant headway. They have been forced into this position due to lack of funding from the NIH.
I see this as a blessing - they are working for the patient. I have listened to dozens if not hundreds of hours of their medical symposiums for the last two years and have been greatly impressed with their headway (with the exception of a study on LDN). However, sadly, the scientists are working frantically to prove a hypothesis to get the attention of big pharma to develop a drug rather than either looking for a cure or a biohack. In one way they are being very open minded in their research and in another way so closed minded because once they have pharma's attention all research goes behind closed doors. (BTW - they have proven all types of hypothesis, far more than most any other disease, but their funding continues to be denied - thank God.) It goes without saying that getting funding is difficult, but I think it's due to the model they are using. I think there is great room for education and improvement in the marketing of fundraising for crowdsourcing/patient funded studies.

Being well aware of the corruption within universities, pharma, the cdc and fda, patients would do much better to provide funding for what ails them. I think you would be in an amazing position with support from patients. But your battle with the big guys..... IDK.

On another note, I know a doctor who does nothing but fill LDN prescriptions all day long. He is licensed in all 50 states. He might be a possibility. I also know a PA who specializes in in BHRT and does telehealth in all 50 states - both of these were in business prior to CoVid and the new relaxed rules. I think more and more doctors who are desperately trying to remain independent are looking for ways to help their patients and stay in business. We currently have a wave of doctors whose eyes are being opened - the time is now.

Recently I had an appointment with an out of state doctor (6 hours away and I'm not driving more than down the street right now) and they were certain they couldn't do telehealth with me. I pushed them to look into it further. One option we discussed was for me to drive to my doc in their state (30 minutes) and have a three way conference appointment. In the end they found out that they could indeed do telehealth with me. They said it was because there wasn't such a specialist in my state but I'm not sure that was the real reason. Maybe.

If the rules aren't relaxed enough for all 50 states, then I would add WA and CA to your list.

 

[Tristan Loscha]

However, sadly, the scientists are working frantically to prove a hypothesis to get the attention of big pharma to develop a drug rather than either looking for a cure or a biohack. In one way they are being very open minded in their research and in another way so closed minded because once they have pharma's attention all research goes behind closed doors.

Haha,really makes you think!