@risingfire He only said that recently if I'm not mistaken.
![](/assets/uploads/profile/1491-profileavatar-1709801737201.jpeg)
Posts made by Creuset
-
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
-
RE: If Ray Peat is so great, why is he dead?
@Isaac Because he was a pioneer, and never claimed to be 100% right about everything or to hold definitive answers and truths in biology. He still lived older than average, in good health, while having suffered heavy health issues when he was younger which is a good indicator that he was in the right direction for a lot of things. It's now our responsability to take his work one step further.
-
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
Seems Garett Smith has anger issues, probably from his lack of neurosteroids: https://x.com/MikeFaveScience/status/1769961846037954747?s=20
Reminds me of Walter Sobchak in The Great Lebowski.
-
RE: Sleep Issues - Please Help
@_K How many calories do you eat per day, what's your weight, height and age? I used to suffer from similar problems when I wasn't eating enough calories.
-
RE: Why are Statins bad if your cholesterol puts you in the range of CVD risk
@GreekDemiGod said in Why are Statins bad if your cholesterol puts you in the range of CVD risk:
@Creuset You want to reduce the risk in normal population, who is not mindful of PUFA intake and will never be. People need to be given solutions that work without changing their nutrition or lifestyle much.
I personally don't want anything no, I am not a moralist nor a politician, and I don't consider other humans as cattle that need to be led by a shepherd. I am just trying to describe what we know about a specific topic and to be accurate about it (and I don't claim to hold the absolute truth on a topic, always open to new evidence).
Besides, if the current medical recommendations were actually working to reduce risk of CVD, we would see a reduction, yet we actually see the opposite.
I just got out of the ICU, I'm still in the hospital and getting lots of blood thinners and anti coagulants, honestly, I'm very scared of the future, when I get home or start to work again, bit is not the reason I came here.
I have 1m 70cm, 86kg, strong build but definitely have a dad belly. Since I was a kid I have a very high cholesterol, when it was discovered (10 years old) it was about 800, and I was not a normal kid, my case was even used in a conference to show that body fat is not exactly equal to low cholesterol.
I have a history of heart disease in my father's side, my grandpa had a heart attack at 52 and my father had a defective valve on the aorta, he died in the surgery about 15 years ago.
https://www.reddit.com/r/keto/comments/16eocc8/im_27_and_just_had_a_heart_attack/This is anecdotal evidence. I already posted this earlier, how do you explain it:
There are people that are genetically predisposed to have high LDL and high cholesterol levels, yet they don't get a higher rate of cardiovascular diseases than people with normal cholesterol levels: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391
-
RE: Why are Statins bad if your cholesterol puts you in the range of CVD risk
@GreekDemiGod What is your evidence for this statement?
Also, do they only have hypercholesterolemia, or also high oxLDL, triglyclerides, obesity, hypothyroidism, and other metabolic problems?
And how many PUFA are they consumming?
I see many possible confounding variables if you only analyze things from this single angle.
-
RE: why does the cheap store milk make me feel warm and depressed?
@peatyourmeat Probably because coffee is anti-opioid: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15088081/
Travis on the previous RPF used to talk about this kind of things.
-
RE: Metabolism: sloth to a dopaminergic child
@insufferable said in Metabolism: sloth to a dopaminergic child:
I agree that internet distraction is bad but I've done long days on my LCD working with text only (almost all black and white) with very little distracting internet browsing, and still felt super drained at the end. But on my E-Ink device, I can even watch videos and click around, and still feel very good at the end of the day.
Have you ever tried used an app like f.lux to reduce the blue light emitted by your screen? Would be interested to know if you would feel the same as when using your E-ink screen.
-
RE: Why are Statins bad if your cholesterol puts you in the range of CVD risk
@Nabokov said in Why are Statins bad if your cholesterol puts you in the range of CVD risk:
Ray wrote about the false link between cholesterol and heart disease, but I just came across this study which conclusively links pravastatin to a lowered cardiovascular rate and the data and design look sound. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26864092/
There are many studies on the apparent efficacy of statins, this one isn't particularly special, but it does seem to prove that they work, which Ray disputed. Does anyone have a better understanding of cholesterol, CVD, and statins?
The main problem is oxidized cholesterol, particularly oxLDL (oxidized by PUFA or other oxidative and inflammatory things).
There are people that are genetically predisposed to have high LDL and high cholesterol, yet they don't get a higher rate of cardiovascular diseases: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391
Some studies show that statins can be anti-inflammatory and anti-microbial aside from their anti-cholesterol effect, so this might be why some studies find that it lowers CVD:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd1901
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4447369/ -
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
@yerrag said in New "Mission" of RPF:
@Creuset said in New "Mission" of RPF:
@yerrag said in New "Mission" of RPF:
Are you saying this because you trust everyone and you leave your house doors and car doors unlocked? Either you live in the boondocks or you are too smart for your own good.
You seem to be assuming too many stuff and on defense mode man, relax, I was not talking about you but about Tara.
I will make it clearer since you didn't understand: Tara used to be a wise member, but when the covid craze hit, she got into full paranoia mode, probably because she is a nurse and everybody around her got afraid. Fear can be very contagious, and make smart people act stupid, especially for women who are usually more easily scared than men. I still remember perfectly when this pandemic hit, everyone around me was freaking out and completely irrational, so I'm not surprised at all that she would act this way.
Not saying that your hypothesis about her or Charlie are necessarily wrong by the way, even though I don't think the likelihood of this happening is high.
Sorry for taking your words out of context. I couldn't see thru the forest here, thanks for clarifying. You make a good point about Tara. Being in the trenches would be traumatic, and her perception could have been affected greatly.
It's still hard to think she could be so rattled. My impression of here was that of someone who has a moderating demeanor, and not one to easily be influenced by noise around her. She was nice to be around, like a fixture at RPF.
No offense taken, thank you for your respectful reply.
I know what you mean about Tara, I was also very surprised by how she reacted. However I've observed intelligent and wise people snap under specific circumstances already, so wouldn't be surprised if that's what happened to her.
-
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
@yerrag said in New "Mission" of RPF:
Are you saying this because you trust everyone and you leave your house doors and car doors unlocked? Either you live in the boondocks or you are too smart for your own good.
You seem to be assuming too many stuff and on defense mode man, relax, I was not talking about you but about Tara.
I will make it clearer since you didn't understand: Tara used to be a wise member, but when the covid craze hit, she got into full paranoia mode, probably because she is a nurse and everybody around her got afraid. Fear can be very contagious, and make smart people act stupid, especially for women who are usually more easily scared than men. I still remember perfectly when this pandemic hit, everyone around me was freaking out and completely irrational, so I'm not surprised at all that she would act this way.
Not saying that your hypothesis about her or Charlie are necessarily wrong by the way, even though I don't think the likelihood of this happening is high.
-
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
@yerrag said in New "Mission" of RPF:
I feel I know Tara well enough. I know how she writes. Her persona became wooden as seen in her writing. Like someone was ghost writing for her online impersonification. Her being a nurse does not necessarily make her automatically indoctrinated into the COVID Hoax narrative.
Once someone who identity is concealed is targeted, it's just a matter of time for the powers that be to replace the real person behind that online persona. What is all this technology developed by DARPA for but to make the safety of anonymity a honeypot to attract leaders of the genuine opposition, only to entrap and eradicate them when the moment is ripe, the moment being when they start to gain a following that is a budding threat to the established order.
Fear can make even the best of us crazy and stupid.
-
RE: New "Mission" of RPF
@risingfire said in New "Mission" of RPF:
@yerrag I'm not sure that a new Charlie is at the helm. Charlie has evolved quite a bit over the years. I saw the biggest change(besides low VA) when he became the "Law and Order Admin." I doubt he would severely change up the forum like he has now unless there was significant financial incentive for him to do so.
I'm not sure if it's traffic to Garrett's site for customers which most likely wouldn't pay that much.
He is the owner of the Lifegivingstore that he has been promoting on the forum for years while never being transparent about it.
-
RE: why does the cheap store milk make me feel warm and depressed?
@peatyourmeat said in why does the cheap store milk make me feel warm and depressed?:
i found that i can digest the shit cheap skim-2% milk (as low as 1$/gallon) if i use it as the base of a soup with some meat and some plant matter. If i drink it from cup cold or microwaved my stomach explode
It makes me radiate warmth, but feel tired, not sleepy just kind of out of it + sluggish. Also depressive type thoughts at a slow mental pace. I don't think just blood sugar at play, i tried with lot of sugar, and still this effect.
Opioid effect, maybe increasing your prolactin. Many people don't tolerate milk even after years of trying to consume it. Listen to your body, don't force yourself to eat something that doesn't do well with you, no matter what other people say.
-
RE: Beware of the Low Vitamin A Zealots- New Thorough Video by Mike Fave
@Kvothe said in Beware of the Low Vitamin A Zealots- New Thorough Video by Mike Fave:
Those degenerates are pretty upset about Mike's video getting some attention. Charlie is already doing overtime throwing suitable insults at Mike, and making up random statements of Peaters how they supposedly destroyed their health, teeth, what will you. You can picture him shaking his can of beans in anger as he realizes that participation on his forum is at an all time low, and all but the most retarded customers are slowly disappearing.
Seriously, and then mister holy Lion will say that he is a christian, while being so hateful. The man has no sense of guilt.
-
RE: The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy
@Kilgore said in The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy:
Evolutionary fitness changes due to circumstances. The goal of evolution is not to be "Aryan"; the goal is to produce the most successful offspring's. The bar for an offspring to be successful is the lowest ever. The weak will prevail. The future is dysgenic.
Then if you think the goal of evolution is to produce the most successful offsprings, I will ask again: What about heterosis/hybrid vigor that sometimes happen when you mix races?
The IQ of a white person dropped 15 points in the last 100 years. A 15-point difference represents the difference between a high school science teacher and a security guard.
What's your evidence for this 15 points drop in this specific population?
Also, let's entertain for an instant that IQ is a 100% valid model: Why was there a Flynn effect before the supposedly more recent drop in IQ, that coincides with worse environmental conditions, diet, pollution, stress, huge increase in blue light exposure and the likes?
@Creuset said in The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy:
Have you ever read what Ray Peat said about eugenics and euthenics? Or how Mae Wan Ho debunked Darwinism, the Central dogma of molecular biology, the Modern evolutionary synthesis and other things mostly ignored by promoters of eugenics?
Why do so many people base ALL their opinions on what Ray said?.
I don't base all of my opinions on what Ray said, you can for example read what I've posted in other threads about anarco-capitalism, Natural Law or my defense of deductive methods in some contexts. Although it is clear to me that Ray was a very smart man, and that most of the things he said were very carefully researched, that's why I find it difficult to disagree with him on many topics, especially related to biology. I am an independent thinker, and I have no problem to admit even truths that would be emotionally hard to swallow for most people (what you kids would call "black pill").
The reason I agree with Ray on this specific topic is that there is ample evidence that genetic determinism is an outdated paradigm. And if you understand what the scientific method is, when your null hypothesis is invalidated by contradicting evidence, you change your paradigm with a new one that can accurately account for the new evidence. If you don't, then your approach is not based on science but on faith, definitely not the kind of reaction you would expect from someone with a supposedly high IQ. By the way, so far Norwegian Mugabe took my feedback and did not reject the evidence that I provided, and I respect that as this means that he is able to update his worldview based on evidence. I wonder how many of the other people claiming to be eugenists or nazis on this forum will be able to do so?
You can also try to provide all of the meta-analysis that you want to try to cling to the old paradigm, if they don't account for the new evidence, then they just provide an incomplete view of what's happening.
Eugenics obviously works. You can say its not ethical but cant deny that it works. It works for cows and horses it will work for humans as well
It probably works, otherwise breeders wouldn't use it, I'm just saying that this is an outdated model and method, and that new ones exist that are more effective, quicker, and also pose much less moral problems as we don't have to treat humans like animals.
To use a metaphor, the way I see most eugenics proponents in 2024 is that they try to defend fighting cancer with chemotherapy, when better methods exist. Sure, it works in some contexts to remove cancer cells, but it's like trying to kill an ant with a nuclear bomb. And like I said, eugenics also doesn't take into account current disastrous environmental degradation that's destroying our health globally.
I would expect that people that are intelligent would be able to understand all of this and be more nuanced in their thinking and hold a more complex view on this topic, especially since high IQ is supposedly usually associated with higher empathy and nuance. Actually, if you really have a high metabolic rate and a high IQ, or whatever you want to use to justify that you are a superior being, your high energy state would have you hold unconditionally altruistic views of humanity like Ray did, you would want to help and develop all of humanity, not castrate, sterilize or kill people based on their current circumstances.
Have you ever taken time to read the criticisms of IQ written by Nassim Taleb? And debunks of the Bell Curve?
Of course, Taleb is against IQ. [...] Taleb still believes the vaxx is working, and for a long time he actually thought Ukraine was winning the war (credit to him; he admitted his mistake a while ago).
Fair points, I don't have anything to say against that, even Nassim Taleb that I highly respect can be wrong about some things (even though I will need to take some time this week end to reread all of the IQ debate).
He has proven himself incapable of having a neutral viewpoint on sensitive topics. He is greatly influenced by his feelings. Perhaps that is the reason he has such a unique investing strategy with his friend Mark Spitznagel (his books are worth reading, btw). That being said, I liked his books, though I liked more of the "general knowledge" he shared. (It's also funny how he ignored vaxx producers having NO skin in the game and sucked up for them. Despite writing a whole books on this topic).
So I am white, I've been detected as a gifted individual when I was a child, I am 6'5, I have success with women and I am in the top 1% of income earners. Given that, I should have no problem with all of your claims about IQ and eugenics. I'm not saying this to brag, but to show that despite all of that, here I am arguing that this is bad science, even though this should be a good ego boost for me. And to stay nuanced, I am not here to deny that IQ isn't probably at least partially and in some contexts pointing to things related to intelligence, otherwise studies wouldn't probably find correlations, yet I don't conflate this map with the territory and I see flaws and weaknesses in the model. Same with nosology for mental health diseases and conditions, there are obviously methodological flaws and weaknesses when we define a set of symptoms as "schizophrenia" in an individual, this is a simplification of reality, especially since "schizophrenia" can have multiple different causes.
I have otherwise no problem with people having personal preferences. If you, or Norwegian Mugabe prefer to have blonde and blue-eyed wives and kids and want to preserve these phenotypes, or if you only want to live with white people on your territory, that's your right and I have nothing to say about that, and would even take your defense if you were ostracized for these choices.
However, if you start promoting eugenics, then I will just chime in to remind you that this is based on bad science. And if you try to promote aggressive measures such as sterilizing non-consenting individuals, I will of course manifest bluntly that I am against that and find it stupid.
Check out this great documentary about a Chinese man who wants to order some gravel in the Congo.
Everything that can be associated with having low iq can be seen here. No accountability, a lack of understanding of the consequences of ones actions, not recognizing good opportunities, stealing from their own employers. They are literally adult children. Goebbels couldn't have made a better propaganda video and the funny thing is that this is a documentary.
Africa is a weird continent. It's very hard to build ports on the coasts due to waters being too shallow, rivers cannot be navigated normally because of rapids, and horses did not exist on the continent. There were no efficient ways of travelling, thus there were much less cultural exchanges between tribes and less memetic emergence than in other places with more favorable geographic conditions. Europe provides good geographic conditions for memetic emergence, and really started to develop culturally when protestants challenged the centralized clergy, and that the printing press was invented so that people could read the Bible and verify claims made by the centralized clergy. Information could become decentralized and circulate much faster, that was the start of a cultural emergence and revolution. I think that all of this had much more influence than just IQ.
I am otherwise familiar with the Milwaukee Project and adoption of black kids by white families supposedly bringing only minor changes in IQ. That's not a topic that I've studied extensively so I will avoid making any claims for now, even though to my knowledge there aren't been studies made on more than 1 generation, which to me seems insufficient evidence to claim that IQ is fixed.
Did you know that Michael Levin, who works on morphogenetic fields, has been able to "cure" a fatal genetic defect in an animal model by using bioelectricity?
My grandparents use a copper rod that send small frequencies of electricity through them to heal themselves (they hold it in both hands and its connected to a machine). Different frequencies for different problems. Have no idea if its working or not. But interesting nonetheless. Will check this guy out. Thanks.
On a side note, Levin is working with planarian flatworms because they are basically immortal and have endless regenerative abilities (you can cut them into different pieces and the pieces will just develop and regenerate into individual flatworms). He explains that they accumulate a lot of mutations that should make their genomes very unstable, and even have weird irregular number of chromosomes, yet they don't develop any health problems and keep their regenerative abilities and immortality as long as they are not killed. Again, more evidence that genetic determinism is an outdated paradigm.
-
RE: The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy:
@Creuset I am not familiar with Michael Levin, thanks for pointing me in that direction.
You're welcome. You will see that he is doing incredible things with biolectricity and morphogenetic fields, not just correcting genetical defects. He actually created real chimeras, new organisms that have never existed and were not selected (which makes him skeptical of natural selection), biological robots made from frog skin cells, he regenerated full limbs in amputated animals, and many other things. He basically says that wanting to work with genes is akin to "micromanaging" and seems to think that working with bioelectricity yields much better results. His work is groundbreaking, and a confirmation of a lot of Peat's ideas in the field of genetics and other biological ideas, which should have you at least question a bit of your current ideas, and at least nuance them.
Ray undervalued the importance of genetics.
I don't think he necessarily undervalued it, I think that he wasn't a genetic determinist as he understood a lot of things, as a pioneer, that are not yet known in mainstream science, and was annoyed that this deterministic paradigm was polluting scientific progress, and used as a dumb justification for eugenics. He saw that other pathways could optimize organisms' health and promote other desirable traits, especially morphogenetic fields, and that science in the future would completely change, whereas staying trapped into this genetic determinism paradigm is litterally preventing us from evolving culturally. Fortunately, people like Michael Levin had the courage and means to explore these topics, and he is slowly bringing them to the mainstream.
You can foster a great or bad bulldog by changing its energy levels, but it still will not become a Schäfer.
I'm not talking about epigenetics or just changing the environment, but directly altering morphogenetic fields. If I remember correctly, a geneticist called Eva Jablonka was promoting the idea of dimensionality in evolution, involving Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic evolution. I think this is a much more balanced view that just denying one dimension in favor of another. I would also add Lamarckian evolution and Morphogenetic evolution to other dimensions, and I suspect that Morphogenetic evolution would be probably the most fundamental one.Here is a hint that Morphogenetic evolution could happen in nature: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/12/231205114816.htm
By the way, Lamarckianism goes way further than just epigenetics, as this implies a mutation of the genetic structure, not just the expression of genes. You even have weird phenomenon like Phenocopy that don't involve any genetic mutation.
Genes are as important as the environment.
I'm not denying that genes are important, but that doesn't make me a genetic determinist and a eugenist (which implies sterilizing people by force and is based on hatred and aggression).
I strongly advocate for eugenics within all races.
Eugenics alone wouldn't do much for the improvement of global health and intelligence, especially since the environment is so polluted and life conditions are declining worldwide. Epigenetic inheritance is also a thing.
I also believe that this is a very inhuman way of treating humans in 2024, considering that our scientific understanding has evolved and that we can optimize things without necessarily needing discrimination, aggression or forcing people to do things against their will.
Taleb's view of IQ has been refuted again and again ([See an example] https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2019/01/08/nassim-taleb-on-iq/)).
I've read this refutation few years ago and if I remember correctly, I had spotted some mistakes. I will need to reread it though as I did not take notes back then and will let you know if I can find them back.
IQ is real, heritable, and of extremely great value.
Then why are there studies that show that children of mixed races sometimes get "hybrid vigor" or heterosis, in this case they get taller than both parents, and get a higher measured IQ than any of the parents? https://socgen.ucla.edu/2015/07/02/diverse-parental-genes-lead-to-taller-smarter-children-finds-extensive-study/
-
RE: The coming of the ultimate Aryan eugenic supercycle - an explanation of metabolic group hierarchy
@Norwegian-Mugabe Have you ever read what Ray Peat said about eugenics and euthenics? Or how Mae Wan Ho debunked Darwinism, the Central dogma of molecular biology, the Modern evolutionary synthesis and other things mostly ignored by promoters of eugenics?
Have you ever heard about hybrid vigor?
Have you ever taken time to read the criticisms of IQ written by Nassim Taleb? And debunks of the Bell Curve?
Did you know that Michael Levin, who works on morphogenetic fields, has been able to "cure" a fatal genetic defect in an animal model by using bioelectricity?
You're probably new to all of these ideas, but since you're on this forum and interested by Peat's ideas, you can learn.
-
RE: there is no one source of all your problems
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in there is no one source of all your problems:
on the other forum, all your problems are due to vitamin A, or a copper deficiency, or something. I'm not sure. But one thing -- and if you fix that, everything is golden.
However, in the real world, nothing by itself will fix your problems.
It's always lots and lots of things.
Weird how the body works.
A low energy state makes it hard for the brain to see things in context, in a nuanced complex way and from different perspectives. You need energy for that, and it's way easier to think that your problems come from only one cause, and for some people it makes life less scary as they feel they finally understand and have control over what's happening.
-
RE: How libertarian leaning is this forum?
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Creuset you can make up the concept of collectivism, but there are only individuals. There is only me. I can be fairly certain of my own existence, but not of yours. There really is no "we."
I would tend to think that collectivism is a heuristic and not a concept. However, I wouldn't say that your definition of individuality/individuals "there is only me" is a concept either, you're describing a subjective felt sense and some kind of solipsism which is also a heuristic.