Simplifying Bioenergetics for others
-
Generally I think one of the simplest things people can do that will improve their health is to avoid processed foods. "If man made it, don't eat it."
-
@pittybitty
I'll agree with not giving too much detail, however if they have already engaged by saying "olive oil is good too", then i'll inform them that we live in an area where much of it is counterfeit, that the genuine product still has 10% PUFA. With moderation it's good etc. That's as far as i'll go unless they keep engaging.Otherwise i'll leave out other unnecessary info like Greek and North African olive oil seems to be fine, don't overheat it etc, it is too much info for most.
edit, clarified.
-
I live in the US and interact mostly with Americans. I would say that <3% have a serious, non-academically structured approach to nutrition. If you've ever downloaded and read a pop nutrition book, without it being for a class or physician-pushed dietary shift, then you're in a tiny minority(<10% of Americans). If you've downloaded and read a nutrition book that wasn't a pop nutrition book or for class or doctor diet, then you're an even tinier minority(<3%). If you're going to talk about nutrition, assume that the person you're speaking to knows no terminology, no chemistry, no historical literature, and certainly, no credulity about what you say. Beyond "do you have a peer-reviewed study?" most people take any printed word as 10x more legitimate than anything said out loud. Now, that is not to say that people will actually read that printed word and assess it's quality- many Americans "read" but do not read.
That being said, you also have to account for your audience. I find that conservatives are much easier to talk bioenergetics with due to pre-existing enjoyments of meat and skepticism about pharma/mainstream science. Milktoast liberals are open to discussions but will demand citations and will pester you with "I read a plant-based book written by a doctor, what do you think about it? Have you heard about Blue Zones?" More often that not, their questions are sincere and an answer that addresses the question clearly and fully will get you a positive response.
Leftists are often the most resistant to bioenergetic nutrition because you have to talk about the differences btwn animal and plant nutrition, which immediately gets walled-off with environmental and moral concerns. I rarely get a leftist argue against animal-based or bioenergetic diets on scientific grounds, but almost always get the response "cows cause climate change, you are killing the planet" or "I am plant-based because I don't like hurting animals." Leftists seek to make issues of nutrition and science into moral issues, without leniency on who's morality we're using. This is why I think Ray said he focused on nutrition, rather than politics because the radical movements are incapable of working together.
I would add that many American leftists crave a sense of moral worth, mostly because they are besieged by anti-Human propaganda. They can derive no positive moral feelings from being Human and alive, so they shift their moral feelings towards the animal, the plant, and the inanimate. Humanity and human institutions become lightning rods for a hodgepodge of apathy, (un)controlled outbursts, and catharsis. I think to how many leftists in my life were going to anti-police protests every single day for an entire summer and are now constantly complaining that "nothing has changed, we accomplished nothing, come to our reading group and mutual aid meeting on Thursday plz."
I'm getting off topic. My top three steps for simplifying bioenergetic discussions are these:
- Give positive encouragement regularly for someone asking questions or sharing information with you. Even if they're sending you a link to some tired vegan argument, say "I appreciate you sharing this with me, I have seen this argument before and I understand its roots, let's talk more about it." Americans need positive encouragement and replying "no, that's wrong and those people are wrong" is a great way to have people dismiss you, even if what you say is correct. For many Americans, they are raised with an idea that "you have to give someone a chance to explain themselves before you lecture them."
Positive encouragement, positive encouragement, positive encouragement. Encouraging questions makes it easier to let ideas and themes seem more like the person is coming up with them, rather than you imposing questions and themes. People who feel like you're listening to them will volunteer information, open up about skepticisms, and ultimately make it easy to say "y'know, you were saying earlier that your dad had heart disease but was a really healthy guy and didn't eat much fat. That's actually a really good observation that others have had and it's kind of a crazy story about the situation behind that. Want to hear it?" Never impose information on someone, give them the opportunity to say "yes, I would like to know more."
-
Emphasize that a bioenergetic diet is tasty. When people see on a forum some long list of "approved" foods, they check out. The food is not a plate with taste and smell, but rather a list. This goes for bioenergetics and many other diets. Most people don't conjure a delicious chickpea tikka masala when they see "chickpeas," they think about some grainy shit from a can that they only buy when a roommate wants to make the worst hummus ever. This is why Danny and others emphasize having tasty food pictures on social media, as a major part of the Peat propaganda effort.
-
Do not expect to win someone over in one conversation. My biggest Peat pillings have happened when someone and myself run into each other at our bar hangout over the course of a few weeks. Most people know they are unhealthy, their families are unhealthy, and the future is unhealthy. If you seem sincere about health and you're not pushing products on them, then people can be very receptive.
As an aside, I don't like encouraging people to "stop stressing so much." This isn't good advice and it ignores that many people's stresses are outside of their control. I encourage people to take steps to improve their quality of life, quality of job, etc. but never "don't stress so much."
Greift nur hinein ins volle Menschenleben! Ein jeder lebt's, nicht vielen ist's bekannt, und wo ihr's packt, da ist's interessant.
Ray Peat first-ever interview(July 1987 on UofO Student Radio)
-
@JulofEnoch Good advice! Especially the part about positive encouragement and not telling people to simply stop stressing.
But that's the part that was actual advice and not a crazy rant about bourgeois psyop victims somehow being these activists. Germans can't help being German I guess.
I would really like it if people stopped misquoting Ray. He never said what you quoted him saying and it's not nitpicking here. This is very important to me because I don't think it's respectful. I suggest you acquaint yourself with Ray's ideas. Infantile interpretation of a thoroughly politically engaged intellectual. Search the quote on bioenergetic.life and you will hear Ray talk about his real political beliefs - but you guys just put your fingers in your ears and go 'NA NA NA NA NA' whenever he speaks from the heart about his ideas.
What I said about fascists wanting inferior people dead or sick is based on years of interaction with these people - ergo their own words. So it is very fair for me to exclude them here, that was the only purpose to that part of it.
Now I will say I am living with a German at the moment and it's funny because she cooks almost 90% of her meals, which would be fantastic if she ate a little more traditional food. It seems these people - especially the liberal urban 'activists' - put a lot of effort into eating the most indigestible slop and adding a ton of PUFA to their meals. I've never seen so much tahini in my life.
-
@JulofEnoch oh you're not German haha oopsie. well.
-
I suspect that 99% of this strange reply to me is the result of you mistaking me for a German or part of some "you guys" fascist group.
If you're interested in speaking to me, then don't waste my time. I am aware that I was massively paraphrasing Ray on nutrition vs talking politics- I have no interest in starting every conversation with the struggle against capital, especially when it more often than not proves a fruitless way of getting into nutrition, health, and quite frankly, the subject of capital itself. If you wish to take this route from the jump, that's fine, but I have done so several times and my starting with nutrition/health is derived from personal experience.
What I said about fascists wanting inferior people dead or sick is based on years of interaction with these people - ergo their own words. So it is very fair for me to exclude them here, that was the only purpose to that part of it.
I have no idea where in my reply you saw that I was arguing against your assessment of fascists. Perhaps, you have a reflex about anytime someone critiques leftists who they meet in their lives but I'm not interested in managing your reflexes. It's painfully clear that I am talking about "American leftists", as I said explicitly in my post, but I guess not explicitly enough. If you don't understand that an "American xyz" is an especially ignorant, emotional, moralistic, and reflexive version of most ideologies, then you don't understand Americans.
oh you're not German haha oopsie. well.
As I suspected, you took a reflexive response to me and as such wasted yours and my time. I don't fault you for it, despite my saying that I interact mostly with Americans, live in the US, and explicitly stating "American leftists." I ask that you don't take such a reflexive and condescending tone with me, now and in the future.
Greift nur hinein ins volle Menschenleben! Ein jeder lebt's, nicht vielen ist's bekannt, und wo ihr's packt, da ist's interessant.
Ray Peat first-ever interview(July 1987 on UofO Student Radio)
-
@JulofEnoch You're the one that went off on an unhinged political rant in my thread about a totally different topic
-
I think the whole anti-seed oil thing is really useful as an introduction to Ray's ideas.
It is pretty intuitive - many commonly maligned foods are high in these, and it's pretty suspicious how many different products contain them once you start checking.
It introduces the general idea that PUFA is a source of health problems and saturated fat is good.
It fits the common narrative of modern, "processed" food as a problem as these oils are industrial products that have become ubiquitous less than 100 years ago.
Most importantly, anyone can try a "low seed-oil" diet without major behavioral change and almost anyone will see some improvement from it, which primes them for further interest.
-
@DonkeyDude 'what's a saturated?'
-
@DonkeyDude
Agreed.The topic also builds upon the "it turns out that butter is good for you" narrative from a decade or two ago. Many folks have become aware of it, the seed oil and PUFA topic fits right into the same conversation.
What you can say, and how much you can say, will obviously depend on your audience.
-
@CO3 Where I live the topic is somewhat well known; for example, TV nutrition experts often promote a rule of thumb that the more liquid a dietary fat is in room temperature, the healthier it is. Confidently stating the opposite at least gets some attention, and if someone is unable to understand the solid fat/liquid oil distinction I'm not sure it's possible to simplify it even more.
