Posts made by VehmicJuryman

@Samyo have you tried the carrot salad

They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.

There is a theory that this was due to methionine. It isn't well known even amongst Peaters that milk depletes glycine and is excessively high in methionine and all the vitamin A people said they had problems when they were consuming lots of milk.

https://lowtoxinforum.com/threads/vitamin-a-or-methionine-adverse-reaction.50563/

To answer my own question, it looks like Peat said that the fiber in carrots and root vegetables (he also mentioned potatoes) have uniquely antibiotic qualities due to growing underground. He also mentioned bamboo, mushroom and even wheat and oat bran fiber positively, and named cellulose as a fiber that's resistant to bacteria.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0x2447196/raypeatarchive/main/transcripts/jf-190910-how-to-fix-your-digestion-poop.vtt

Greetings bioenergeticists,

In my health journey I have concluded that my current plateau is caused by estrogen or other endotoxins that my body isn't properly detoxing. I came to this conclusion because every night as I start to drift into sleep I will suddenly be awoken by a surge of estrogenic, negative thoughts.

I've been researching Peaty ways to detox and I'm getting confused. The world famous Ray Peat carrot salad is based on the idea that the carrot fiber binds to toxins and helps poop them out. However Peat was generally anti-fiber, usually saying that they get fermented in the gut by bacteria and create even more endotoxins. He even said negative things about fiber from fruits and discouraged drinking orange juice with pulp for that reason.

Can someone explain this to me? Are carrots literally the only Peaty fiber in existence? Are there any better ways to detox? Peat also usually condemned fasting, which is the other way to detox that I'm aware of. Any help is appreciated.

https://tools.myfooddata.com/nutrient-ranking-tool#modal

This is why I use the artisan hand soaps made of goat milk and coconut oil

@Rah1woot

The USSR could increase literacy to 100%, but nothing it could do would ever make it so that IQs between ethnic Germans and Russians and Tatars were par with each other. Maybe this is why leftists like mass migration so much? It looks like Germany and the US are currently on par with Russia's IQ, presumably as a result of mass migration. Mass migration is the solution that finally achieves what Communism never could: equality between the First and Third world.

I think the correct position would have been for Russia to modernize into a nationalist state. At the very least, Communism would probably been more successful in its goals had it openly presented itself as what it actually is: an alliance of underachieving ethnic groups in conflict with First World nations. This is more or less what modern Russia is and the idea behind 'Third Worldism' and the 'Global South'. No reason to waste 50-70 years on mass killings of their own population and severe government mismanagement of the economy, Russia and China could have skipped that stage and immediately arrived at what they are now, geopolitical leaders of the Third World with functioning liberal economies. This is probably what would have happened if Lenin hadn't stolen power from the SRs. Ultimately, Russians and Chinese are high IQ peoples who would be better off without shackling themselves to either the 'international proletariat' or the 'Third World' but if that's what they want it would be more effective than rigid economic Marxism.

That communism retards economic growth is pretty well established. Note that I said it retards growth, not that it leads to economic decline. Compare Finland to the USSR, West Germany to East Germany, Taiwan to China, South Korea to North Korea, or Thailand to SE Asian communist states like Vietnam and Laos. I've never seen a convincing argument that any of these places would have been better off under communism.

@Rah1woot

Nationalists don't reduce absolutely everything to genes or ethnicity without regard to environment. They simply have a better understanding of the role of genes and ethnicity in human society than anyone else, especially liberals and communists. The USSR was very ignorant about the role of these things and ascribed almost all racial differences to 'material conditions'. The USSR has been described as the world's first "affirmative action empire". It had double standards nationalism for its petty peripheral minorities while denigrating and discriminating against Russians, for example, up until Stalin was forced to make a limited embrace of Russian nationalism in the face of WW2. Even after that it spent the entire Cold War supporting Third World anti-colonial revolutions based on the idea that "exploitation" and "imperialism" explained the clear racial differences at play. One of the central tenets of Marxism is that workers of different nations have more in common with each other than their own upper class countrymen.

The US accomplished its objectives in Korea. Vietnamese are actually one of the highest IQ populations in the world (higher average IQ than Swedes) and were fighting on their home turf in a conflict where their adversaries had huge domestic political problems in continuing the conflict. Rhodesians decisively outperformed the Black militants in every military engagement but ultimately surrendered due to economic sanctions from other White countries. None of this conflicts with the nationalism understander's view of history. In fact it's pretty clear to me that racial competition theory explains these conflicts far better than Marxist theory. Vietnamese and Blacks etc. didn't like colonialism because of race, not because of economics. Economic conditions in these places were severely retarded by communism, but they would rather be impoverished and ruled by communist members of their own race than prosperous and ruled by foreigners.

@CO3 said in Ray Peat name drop during American Communist Party convention speech:

@VehmicJuryman said in Ray Peat name drop during American Communist Party convention speech:

Also, lol @ the double standard of saying that the USSR was justified in reclaiming the Russian Empire's territories in Poland but Germany wasn't justified in reclaiming the German Empire's territories in Poland. The situation is literally identical, but like the liberals of 1939 you give a pass to your ideologically preferred side.
.

The USSR would have been jusitifed in LIBERATING all of Europe, you fucking retard. Justification has nothing to do with it.

You wrote two sentences that immediately and blatantly contradict each other. No offense but you are genuinely an imbecile, and overly emotional too.

@Rah1woot I'm still not seeing any refutation of Stalin and Khruschev's claim. You are being very selective with figures to craft your narrative - 10% of aircraft. No mention of the percentage of trucks, munitions, raw materials, etc provided by the liberal US to the communists. Even pointing out that Lend Lease provided only 10% of aircraft doesn't actually refute the point, since that 10% could be what made the difference.

Since it's impossible to definitively prove a counterfactual (i.e. that Germany would have defeated the communists if the liberals hadn't bailed them out), we can demonstrate the point in a different way. If racial and national differences aren't real, which Eastern Bloc country had the highest living standards and economic productivity per capita? Why is it that the answer to that question is exactly what a "Nazi" race scientist would predict?

Also, lol @ the double standard of saying that the USSR was justified in reclaiming the Russian Empire's territories in Poland but Germany wasn't justified in reclaiming the German Empire's territories in Poland. The situation is literally identical, but like the liberals of 1939 you give a pass to your ideologically preferred side.

@Rah1woot said in Ray Peat name drop during American Communist Party convention speech:

the reality is that they waited on the sidelines of the real USSR-Nazi conflict until the last possible moment to prevent the USSR from conquering all of Europe.

In reality, the UK and France declared war on Germany in September 1939, after Germany invaded Poland. The USSR also invaded Poland on September 17, but the Allies gave the communists a pass for what was apparently cause enough for a war with Germany. The communists did not enter the war with Germany until 1941.

@Rah1woot Note that this reply does not refute the substance of the claim by Stalin.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me." - Nikita Khrushchev

"Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war." -Stalin

Are you getting enough magnesium? It's necessary for cellular metabolism. Eating a lot of white rice could deplete thiamine and magnesium, you need both.

Also, I agree with the others that starch might be feeding SIBO. Maybe consuming more carbs from fruit juice would help. I had similar cystic acne, and consuming more simple sugars actually helped reduce it by a lot.

A few months ago, taking 400mg of magnesium glycinate resolved my ruminations and anxiety when trying to fall asleep.

I unironically believe that most cultural and political problems (i.e. liberalism) are downstream from American seed oil consumption.

I've been thinking about adding canned light tuna to my diet for easy protein. It's much lower in mercury than bigger tuna varieties and has almost no fat.

@Mauritio said in Methionine/Cysteine restriction increases longetivity AND energy expenditure:

@VehmicJuryman said in Methionine/Cysteine restriction increases longetivity AND energy expenditure:

@Mauritio said in Methionine/Cysteine restriction increases longetivity AND energy expenditure:

i think it makes sense to look into the differing methionine and cysteine contens of foods.

For example milk and milk products have a lot less of those amino acids than meat. So you can eat a higher amount of cheese, yoghurt or milk, as compared to meat.

But even amongst cheeses there is a big difference in methionine content. Parmesan for example is very high.

For example : if you ate cheddar or mozzarella cheese instead of parmesan you could eat almost twice as much and still get the same amount of methionine.
If you ate feta you could eat almost 3 times the amount comapred to parmesan.
And if you eat cottage cheese you could eat almost 4 times as much.

So if you eat the right type of protein like milk and find a low methionine cheese you can make your life a lot easier while still eating resting methionine.

Another good food is, Cocoa/ Chocolate. It's low in methionine, moderately high in cysteine and low in tryptophan. I think it is also a high quality protein for anabolism, haidut posted a study on that IIRC

Heres a good list:
https://fitaudit.com/categories/mlk/methionine

Egg yolks seem to be a lot lower in methionine than whites, another reason to discard the whites:
https://fitaudit.com/categories/egg/methionine

This site even shows the cysteine content:
https://cystinuria.org/methionine-levels/

Milk and dairy products actually have more methionine than glycine, unlike meat which has more glycine than methionine. Dairy products have the highest methionine to glycine ratio of any food.

The ratio is less important than the absolute content. And meat has way, more methionine and Cysteine than milk.

Plus, glycine is easy to supplement, so milk + added glycine is a really good food in terms of MR.

200 calories of milk has 78% of the methionine content of 200 calories of ground beef (272mg in milk / 348mg in beef). And the milk has only 22% of the glycine of the beef.
https://tools.myfooddata.com/nutrition-comparison/171265-174036/200cals-200cals/1-1/1

I'm not convinced that the ratio is less important, or that the benefits of methionine restriction aren't actually benefits of having a better gly:met ratio.

@Mauritio said in Methionine/Cysteine restriction increases longetivity AND energy expenditure:

i think it makes sense to look into the differing methionine and cysteine contens of foods.

For example milk and milk products have a lot less of those amino acids than meat. So you can eat a higher amount of cheese, yoghurt or milk, as compared to meat.

But even amongst cheeses there is a big difference in methionine content. Parmesan for example is very high.

For example : if you ate cheddar or mozzarella cheese instead of parmesan you could eat almost twice as much and still get the same amount of methionine.
If you ate feta you could eat almost 3 times the amount comapred to parmesan.
And if you eat cottage cheese you could eat almost 4 times as much.

So if you eat the right type of protein like milk and find a low methionine cheese you can make your life a lot easier while still eating resting methionine.

Another good food is, Cocoa/ Chocolate. It's low in methionine, moderately high in cysteine and low in tryptophan. I think it is also a high quality protein for anabolism, haidut posted a study on that IIRC

Heres a good list:
https://fitaudit.com/categories/mlk/methionine

Egg yolks seem to be a lot lower in methionine than whites, another reason to discard the whites:
https://fitaudit.com/categories/egg/methionine

This site even shows the cysteine content:
https://cystinuria.org/methionine-levels/

Milk and dairy products actually have more methionine than glycine, unlike meat which has more glycine than methionine. Dairy products have the highest methionine to glycine ratio of any food.