The Ray Peat Forum is welcoming back banned members

For long time readers of this blog you will of course know that I was banned from the Ray Peat Forum in October of 2013. When I left the forum I basically started writing here and I guess I have achieved “legend” status as every now and then since then if I’m mentioned on the forum I will occasionally get emails from people saying as much. And when others have been banned I sometimes have gotten emails from them as well.

Today I received an email with the following quote:

If anyone has been banned and would like to come back and be a helpful, peaceful, loving member of this community. Reach out to me and let’s work things out.” ~Charlie

I documented my original banishment into exile here. I did enjoy my time contributing to the community, and I was “a helpful, peaceful, loving member” but I think a large part of me since then has blossomed into something more promising.

This quote just never set well with me:

“The forum was created specifically for people to come and discuss the work of Ray Peat – not to debate it, to discuss it, share insights about it and work together to understand it while gaining their health through the practical use of his information.” ~Charlie

I’m just not into manufacturing consent. I know a lot about manufacturing consent. It happens every day all around you and I do my best to avoid it. Although I don’t get to post a lot on here I do have loyal readers and people who send emails asking how I’m doing, post interesting comments that are sometimes funny, sometimes challenging to my own ideas, but always thoughtful.

There is something very sexy about truth even though she can be ugly sometimes. She isn’t always attractive, but she never lies.

And finally a quote from the good book (NIV):

“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” ~Matthew 7:6

Best wishes.

8 Comments The Ray Peat Forum is welcoming back banned members

  1. Matt

    Yeah there are two kinds of internet communities: places that are broad-minded and open to discussion, and then there are echo chambers. The second type is best left alone, even if it has a lot of potential, as you will meet with more opposition than its worth going through, and will be perceived as a troll. Maybe the close-mindedness is a direct reflection of the flaws in the paradigm that directly impact the health of the individuals, or maybe its just human nature to drift into one of the two categories.

  2. Zach

    Not that I think you are interested in posting on a RP forum anymore but all of us BBC (banned by Charlie) members created a seperate forum free from bans, where you can openly discuss or critique Rays work (or anything else).

  3. Vanner

    I really like the ideas on the difference between energy and structure; and observing the structures of the body and how they generate energy substrates for the cells.

    Given this idea, I can’t help but look at the structure of the pancreas and how it supports the breakdown of protein, fat, and starch.

    Macro ratios aside, it appears our structure supports the metabolism of starch, fat and protein and sugar to a small degree; which is why I’m baffled by recommendations to lower any specific macro to low levels (e.g. low fat and starch for Peat interpreters, low carb for keto supporters).

    I believe health is a response, not a goal. Therefore we must find how we respond best to different foods. I personally seem to work best with higher fat and starch with modest amounts of protein and sugar. Moderate alcohol (e.g. red wine and bitter beers) and fermented foods also seem to support digestion and stabilize mood for me. Too much sugar and/or caffeine will consistently make me uncomfortably manic and neurotic; however low sugar with caffeine seems to not impact my mood too much. Nicotine (gum, mint, patch) 2-7g also seems to support mood in a good way.

    Interesting enough, our structures seem to degrade with disuse. For example, if you only eat fruit juice and low fat milk for an extended period of time, your structures may loose the ability to easily digest fats.

    I’m also not sure about the mother’s milk ideas. What’s appropriate for a baby may not be ideal for adults precisely due to structural changes as we mature. We can also observe that the macros in mothers milk do not align to grown mammals diets; therefore, why would we believe it would align to ours?

  4. Isaac Roths

    I just tried this today, got banned again for mentioning Ray Peat’s mistakes on a few things. Someone needs to take that website down and pay damages to all the people they (moderators) psychologically abused.

  5. George Henderson (@puddleg)

    +1, Vanner.
    I find what works best is not eating starch daily, but favouring roots and legumes when I do, eating a little fruit and chocolate and a very little sugar daily, wine and fermented food most days, a middling amount of animal protein, including a little dairy, assorted low carb vegetables, and various fats, mainly ghee and cream, coconut, olive, and bacon.

  6. Brian

    Re: Vanner

    Starch isn’t a macronutrient.

    There are only three macronutrients: carbohydrates, protein, fat (4 if you include alcohol but that’s a stretch).

    Starch is a subcategory of carbohydrates. It’s a polymer of glucose molecules. Ray Peat’s recommendations are not analogous to keto. Keto recommends low carb which is the restriction of a macronutrient. Ray Peat recommends a balanced ratio of the three macronutrients but feels that sugar is a superior form of carbohydrate to starch. I tend to agree, although everyone is different so I can’t generalize that to all people.

    I cannot tolerate starch or fiber in any form. I function much better on sugar, especially regarding blood glucose levels. My blood glucose is more stable eating only sugar for my carbohydrates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *