5 ms·

Dr Paul Mason claims that he has reviewed the studies on statins and found the only statistically significant effect was one study showed a 1 day shortening of

Dr Paul Mason claims that he has reviewed the studies on statins and found the only statistically significant effect was one study showed a 1 day shortening of life. e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7r4j1u42V8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7r4j1u42V8 is one of his presentations. Slightly aside - I've been trying to work out if the "Low Vitamin A" diet of Grant Genereux has anything to it. If someone cites his work, he's a random Joe Bloggs engineer with no medical credentials, so can't have an opinion. If someone cites a Dr such as Garret Smith, that's are arguing by authority and so it doesn't hold water. If someone cites papers, that's cherry picking. If someone argues with biochemical pathways and effects, they know the words but how can I verify if they understand them or are doing a human ChatGPT. If they argue from trial and effect, that's anecdotal and doesn't count. If they argue that big companies are lying for money, we agree that happened with tobacco and with DuPont and Teflon manufacture, but that's no proof it's happening in this specific case. If we argue from vegetarian vs carnivore that's argument from literary genre. If we argue from "ancestral" paleo scenarios, that's argument from story telling and fictional paradise. If we dismiss because it's conspiratorial quackery, we risk throwing the gold out with the riverwaters. If we find one or two flaws in the reasoning, that doesn't mean the whole thing has no substance. If we stand back and say "eat a balanced diet" that's a cop-out which assumes that there can be such a thing, and that we know what we are trying to balance, and have enough information to be able to do it. It's rather difficult to decide anything as a layperson, other than "go with the mainstream recommendation" - except then Gell-Mann amnesia comes in. We know the "best practices" in computing are really more like the "cover your ass" recommendations of "nobody got fired for buying IBM" and inviduals can do much better than "best practices" in specific areas, but then turn to another area and we can't do better than go with the crowd ... except in nutrition terms, the crowd doesn't have a good consensus. Most people who eat a Standard American/Western Diet (SAD) are ill, as per the article here.

michaelmrose 3y ago
> Most people who eat a Standard American/Western Diet (SAD) are ill, as per the article here. This seems to be a fairly poor analysis. By your definition someone who treats a condition having nothing whatsoever to diet is ill if he takes a prescription but well if he does not. A good example would be allergy medication. More ridiculous yet if said medication became available over the counter it would magically make him well again. It's not like other metrics aren't available to more directly measure. The honest truth is you can be fairly healthy just by doing the things we already know are unambiguously true. Eat reasonable portions. Don't eat the shit tons of sugar we all eat. Exercise. Don't live on obviously unhealthy fast food. Don't smoke or vape. Maintain a healthy weight which is nearly entirely a function of getting enough exercise and not eating too many calories. To the degree that we are unhealthy it is 99.9% a function of simple things on which there is no complexity nor disagreement.
- jodrellblank 3y ago
  > "To the degree that we are unhealthy it is 99.9% a function of simple things on which there is no complexity nor disagreement." What would you expect to see different in the world if that wasn't true, how would you know? You accept that smoking causes slow cumulative damage which doesn't show until decades later, and maybe that sugar in the diet can(?) but you reject the idea that something else in food could be doing the same? Why do you claim there is no disagreement when there's clearly a lot of disagreement about dietary and nutritional advice, and part of that is because it is complex? For one slightly off-topic example, common advice is to eat fibre to cure constipation. Yet here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435786/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435786/ in the World Gastroenterology Journal is a study of 63 people who reduced dietary fibre and improved their constipation. Not only that, the authors say ""Whilst it is often stated in physiology textbooks that bulking agents improve peristalsis, there is no proof of this in practice nor experimentally.". It's 2023, it shouldn't be possible to have such a disagreement, and you can't get away from it by just saying "there is no disagreement". > "By your definition someone who treats a condition having nothing whatsoever to diet is ill if he takes a prescription but well if he does not. A good example would be allergy medication." Here's a place where there is disagreement, for example. I can google "carnivore healed allergies" and find claims: "Laura healed her allergies on a carnivore diet" - https://carnivore.diet/laura-healed-allergies-asthma-gi-issues-on-carnivore-diet/ https://carnivore.diet/laura-healed-allergies-asthma-gi-issu... or "vegan healed allergies": "How a vegan diet can eliminate allergies" - https://www.crvitality.com/2019/01/going-vegan-cured-my-allergies-elimination-diet/ https://www.crvitality.com/2019/01/going-vegan-cured-my-alle... or various others: "How changing your diet in a keto way can ease allergies" - https://perfectketo.com/diet-allergies/ https://perfectketo.com/diet-allergies/ "Foods that may help curb your allergies" - https://www.webmd.com/allergies/features/foods-fight-allergies https://www.webmd.com/allergies/features/foods-fight-allergi... "How to get rid of allergies with diet, Dr Paul Young" - https://paulyoungmd.com/how-to-get-rid-of-allergies-with-diet/ https://paulyoungmd.com/how-to-get-rid-of-allergies-with-die... "These 7 Foods Might Help Alleviate Seasonal Allergy Symptoms" - https://www.healthline.com/health/seasonal-allergies-best-foods https://www.healthline.com/health/seasonal-allergies-best-fo... "“Microdosing” Kids with Peanut Allergies May End Risk of Serious Reactions" - https://www.verywellfamily.com/microdosing-kids-with-peanut-allergies-may-end-risk-of-life-threatening-reactions-5091564 https://www.verywellfamily.com/microdosing-kids-with-peanut-... These are of course biased self-interested self-promotional sites, but if allergies have "nothing whatsoever to do with diet" these shouldn't exist at all, there should be no results from studies microdosing kids with peanut protein, and nobody would be testing that because eating peanuts can't cause or cure allergies. Certainly there's a non-trivial amount of people who think allergies can be affected by diet. Where's the convincing, conclusive, studies that say it can't be? Can there even be such studies proving a negative? Food is the main way we put things into our bodies, enormous numbers of molecules of it every day, the idea that such a thing couldn't affect our body's reaction to things is odd. > "More ridiculous yet if said medication became available over the counter it would magically make him well again. It's not like other metrics aren't available to more directly measure." Taking OTC medications wouldn't magically make him well again, nor did I say it would, what are you talking about? > "The honest truth is you can be fairly healthy just by doing the things we already know are unambiguously true. Eat reasonable portions. Don't eat the shit tons of sugar we all eat. Exercise. Don't live on obviously unhealthy fast food. Don't smoke or vape. Maintain a healthy weight which is nearly entirely a function of getting enough exercise and not eating too many calories." In the USA there are 28 million diabetics, 96 million pre-diabetics, 14 million with severe depressive episodes in a year, 23 million people with autoimmune conditions. 240 million overweight. 100 million obese. The USA has 7% of population with an autoimmune condition, Japan has 2%. And Japan's population skews older. You might expect exercise to improve diabetes, but not to prevent or cure autoimmune conditions, right? Yet anecdotally people do cure 'incurable' diseases with diets - carnivore or vegan or fruitarian being the most common extreme ones but also ones which don't work for a lot of people. Your answer is like the "I became rich, and if I can, anyone can. I started with an ice cream van" of millionaire Duncan Bannatyne. Yes, nobody else had thought of running an ice cream van before, it's so easy. Yours is the "I exercise and eat kale and I'm healthy, so everyone who doesn't is just lazy and impulsive". Ignoring that there are lots of other people who do, and aren't. Like the original guy I mentioned who bicycled to work every day, ate vegetables, didn't smoke or vape or binge drink, and became increasingly ill and then chronically ill and tried to fix it by eating more vegetables and drinking more dairy and exercising more (until he couldn't anymore).
jodrellblank 3y ago
For anyone mildly curious, the weak version (easier to accept) is: Vitamin A (retinol compounds like Retinoic Acid and its precursors like Beta Carotene) are harmful in very low amounts above the daily recommended value. In America where dairy must be fortified with them, and flour and breakfast cereals often are, it's very easy to go way over the daily recommended value, the damage builds up over years and decades, and it's a big contributor to diseases of "old age" and autoimmune diseases. The mechanism of harm is cumulative damage, the damage is retinoic acid's effects on epithelial cells and stem cells causing skin damage, and its effects on DNA mechanisms causing misformed proteins. The original anecdote is that Grant was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease in around 2007, given five years to live, three or four years later he had chronic fatigue, concentration problems, memory problems, was severely disabled, was trying an "athlete" diet of lots of fruits and vegetables and milk, developed eczema, came up with the idea to try avoiding Vitamin A, and after a three or four weeks of eating lean beef and white rice ... his decade of knee pain disappeared along with the brian fog and memory and concentration problems. So he stuck with it, his gum disease and dry eyes cleared up, his eczema cleared up, his kidneys stopped failing, and he's 16 years on from his 5 year life expectancy. The strong (harder to accept) version is that retinol compounds should never have been classified as vitamins at all, the 'deficiency' symptoms are not right, the original 1920s studies were not conclusive and the most prominent one saying they are vitamins was bad science which poisoned the rats with retinoic acid overdoses and then took those symptoms as deficiency symptoms. Grant is now stronger at the gym age 62 than he was at 22 despite exercising only weekly, his greying hair has darkened again, his liver spots and skin blemishes and varicose veins have cleared up and his eyesight has improved. The possible reasons to believe there's something to it is that other people have tried it, and seen their skin conditions improve, their joint pain, posture, vision, memory, insomnia, digestion, body fat, people have found plenty of papers of biological damage evidence, or studies on people contradicting the normal expected outcomes. There is claimed correlation of vast increases in serious health conditions matching the 1970s fortification of dairy with retinol compounds in the USA, and decreases in serious health conditions in Eastern Canada following the 1992 closure of a cod fishing plant, with correlations to oily fish and cod liver oil. Retinol compounds in the form of Isotretinoin were used as chemotherapy agents because they are so harmful to cells, and in the form of Accutane they're used for acne medication which has as its known side effects the symptoms of most autoimmune diseases, which happen in far more people who take it than you'd expect for a common medication. Possible reasons to believe there's nothing to it is that other people have tried it and found no improvement, sometimes worsening. Many of the people who tried it were seriously ill and trying everything they could think of, including lots of vitamin and mineral adjustments and gut microbiome adjustements and other treatments, so there's too much in play to be sure of cause and effect, and anyway it's all self-selected confirmation bias and anecdotes and correlation != causation and anyway engineers thinking someone else's field is easy and simple is a common trope, besides with so many people researching nutrition wouldn't this be well known by now? The dose makes the poison and of course "too much" is harmful, who would expect otherwise? (See weak version: perhaps "too much" is far lower quantities than commonly thought, but the effects take years to show up?). Or that this study showing diabetes mellitus makes a foetus more vulnerable to retinoic acid damage and birth defects[1] is a study in mice, not humans. There isn't a single cause of disease, no lead bullet (but this isn't claiming it's the only cause). The crazy (internet kook) version is that chronic Vitamin A toxicity is a significant contributer to all autoimmune diseases, Alzheimers/dementia, type 2 diabetes, autism, ADHD, it's the real cause of Scurvy (but the cause and effect is non-trivial, ascorbic acid is good at calming the symptoms rather than curing the disease), that Scurvy is very close in symptoms to Type 2 Diabetes because they have the same root cause, that retinoic acid is a contributer to male pattern baldness as well as "old age" gray hair, that retinoic acid is documented as affecting 500 gene expressions but that's really a misunderstanding, what it's doing is random chaotic damage, that the documented Vitamin A defficiency eye conditions are all in people with very unbalanced diets with a lot of other defficienies... ---- You can see on his blog and forum anecdotes like user YH: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/nearly-7-months-progress/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/nearly-7-months-prog... who says their eyesight is improved, back pain is gone, humpback has gone, chapped lips and dry skin are healed, new hair growing on their balding crown, skin condition is improved, hand-eye coordination in sketching has improved, depression has gone. Or PuddleDuck who improved from years of chronic fatigue on it: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/puddleducks-progress-cfs-symptoms/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/puddleducks-progress... who says "I know this post is going to be so long, but since Grant’s theory is the only one I’ve ever read that MIGHT explain why the heck that happened to me, I feel compelled to share in detail.". Or Sarabeth whose experiments with diet have improved her children's behaviour, outbursts, bedwetting, food intolerances, and more: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/our-family-behavioral-outburts-acne-urinary-problems-hormones-oh-my/?part=5 https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/our-family-behaviora... Or El: "it's been six months since i read gareth and grant has been on this diet for almost close to seven months. It changed my life. I had chronic fatigue, dizziness, eye pain, muscle pain, blurred vision. hearing loss" - https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/hi-2/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/hi-2/ Or Sand, whose vision has improved to the point they "can manage life now" https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/sands-progress-report/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/sands-progress-repor... Or BodeFofinho who developed Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults in his 30s, and after a year of no/low Vitamin A reversed it ... but then after two years found the diet worsening his health and moved away from it: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/my-diabetes-type-i-recovery-story/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/my-diabetes-type-i-r... Or if you don't want the rah-rah versions, "Why I don't think this is a valid theory anymore", and in the middle of that pay attention to Johannes-2 posts which are full of biochemistry with study citations and references: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/why-i-dont-think-this-is-a-legit-theory-anymore/?part=9 https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/why-i-dont-think-thi... Or if you want more details of mechanisms of action, this https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/biotransformation-of-retinol-finally-revealed/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/biotransformation-of... which I can't read and says "It is now no longer difficult to imagine how retinoic acid could cause auto-immune disease, since the data appears to show that retinoic acid is essentially a pro-inflammatory cytokine that is stored in the liver and, once the liver is saturated, in different types of tissue all over the body, especially in epithelial cells that constitute blood–tissue barriers". Or if you want reasons to dismiss it as all nonsense, look only for the COVID/vaccine claims, the guy who dismisses vitamin supplements because they're made in Chinese factories, the people who wear Electro-Magnetic Field blocking clothes, the guy who thinks dust in bottled water made him ill but raw ocean water up his nose didn't ... it's really really easy to dismiss this all as crank bullshit. ... Except, the arguments are interesting and pointing from many directions, and the claimed mechanisms of action are far more plausible than - say - claims of how the Pyramids were electrical energy collectors. And there certainly are many health crises around. And it's pretty clear that some food can be harmful, short and long term. And that grouping food by (plant/animal) or (low fat/high fat) or (low carb/high carb) or (processed/unprocessed) isn't enough, and the argument that we need to look at the molecular content of foods rather than where they came from is reasonable. To my previous comment, how can one ever know? [1] https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/does-sugar-increase-your-symptoms/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/does-sugar-increase-...
jodrellblank 3y ago
3 downvotes, have any of you downvoters watched the talk?

michaelmrose 3y ago

> Most people who eat a Standard American/Western Diet (SAD) are ill, as per the article here. This seems to be a fairly poor analysis. By your definition someone who treats a condition having nothing whatsoever to diet is ill if he takes a prescription but well if he does not. A good example would be allergy medication. More ridiculous yet if said medication became available over the counter it would magically make him well again. It's not like other metrics aren't available to more directly measure. The honest truth is you can be fairly healthy just by doing the things we already know are unambiguously true. Eat reasonable portions. Don't eat the shit tons of sugar we all eat. Exercise. Don't live on obviously unhealthy fast food. Don't smoke or vape. Maintain a healthy weight which is nearly entirely a function of getting enough exercise and not eating too many calories. To the degree that we are unhealthy it is 99.9% a function of simple things on which there is no complexity nor disagreement.

jodrellblank 3y ago
> "To the degree that we are unhealthy it is 99.9% a function of simple things on which there is no complexity nor disagreement." What would you expect to see different in the world if that wasn't true, how would you know? You accept that smoking causes slow cumulative damage which doesn't show until decades later, and maybe that sugar in the diet can(?) but you reject the idea that something else in food could be doing the same? Why do you claim there is no disagreement when there's clearly a lot of disagreement about dietary and nutritional advice, and part of that is because it is complex? For one slightly off-topic example, common advice is to eat fibre to cure constipation. Yet here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435786/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435786/ in the World Gastroenterology Journal is a study of 63 people who reduced dietary fibre and improved their constipation. Not only that, the authors say ""Whilst it is often stated in physiology textbooks that bulking agents improve peristalsis, there is no proof of this in practice nor experimentally.". It's 2023, it shouldn't be possible to have such a disagreement, and you can't get away from it by just saying "there is no disagreement". > "By your definition someone who treats a condition having nothing whatsoever to diet is ill if he takes a prescription but well if he does not. A good example would be allergy medication." Here's a place where there is disagreement, for example. I can google "carnivore healed allergies" and find claims: "Laura healed her allergies on a carnivore diet" - https://carnivore.diet/laura-healed-allergies-asthma-gi-issues-on-carnivore-diet/ https://carnivore.diet/laura-healed-allergies-asthma-gi-issu... or "vegan healed allergies": "How a vegan diet can eliminate allergies" - https://www.crvitality.com/2019/01/going-vegan-cured-my-allergies-elimination-diet/ https://www.crvitality.com/2019/01/going-vegan-cured-my-alle... or various others: "How changing your diet in a keto way can ease allergies" - https://perfectketo.com/diet-allergies/ https://perfectketo.com/diet-allergies/ "Foods that may help curb your allergies" - https://www.webmd.com/allergies/features/foods-fight-allergies https://www.webmd.com/allergies/features/foods-fight-allergi... "How to get rid of allergies with diet, Dr Paul Young" - https://paulyoungmd.com/how-to-get-rid-of-allergies-with-diet/ https://paulyoungmd.com/how-to-get-rid-of-allergies-with-die... "These 7 Foods Might Help Alleviate Seasonal Allergy Symptoms" - https://www.healthline.com/health/seasonal-allergies-best-foods https://www.healthline.com/health/seasonal-allergies-best-fo... "“Microdosing” Kids with Peanut Allergies May End Risk of Serious Reactions" - https://www.verywellfamily.com/microdosing-kids-with-peanut-allergies-may-end-risk-of-life-threatening-reactions-5091564 https://www.verywellfamily.com/microdosing-kids-with-peanut-... These are of course biased self-interested self-promotional sites, but if allergies have "nothing whatsoever to do with diet" these shouldn't exist at all, there should be no results from studies microdosing kids with peanut protein, and nobody would be testing that because eating peanuts can't cause or cure allergies. Certainly there's a non-trivial amount of people who think allergies can be affected by diet. Where's the convincing, conclusive, studies that say it can't be? Can there even be such studies proving a negative? Food is the main way we put things into our bodies, enormous numbers of molecules of it every day, the idea that such a thing couldn't affect our body's reaction to things is odd. > "More ridiculous yet if said medication became available over the counter it would magically make him well again. It's not like other metrics aren't available to more directly measure." Taking OTC medications wouldn't magically make him well again, nor did I say it would, what are you talking about? > "The honest truth is you can be fairly healthy just by doing the things we already know are unambiguously true. Eat reasonable portions. Don't eat the shit tons of sugar we all eat. Exercise. Don't live on obviously unhealthy fast food. Don't smoke or vape. Maintain a healthy weight which is nearly entirely a function of getting enough exercise and not eating too many calories." In the USA there are 28 million diabetics, 96 million pre-diabetics, 14 million with severe depressive episodes in a year, 23 million people with autoimmune conditions. 240 million overweight. 100 million obese. The USA has 7% of population with an autoimmune condition, Japan has 2%. And Japan's population skews older. You might expect exercise to improve diabetes, but not to prevent or cure autoimmune conditions, right? Yet anecdotally people do cure 'incurable' diseases with diets - carnivore or vegan or fruitarian being the most common extreme ones but also ones which don't work for a lot of people. Your answer is like the "I became rich, and if I can, anyone can. I started with an ice cream van" of millionaire Duncan Bannatyne. Yes, nobody else had thought of running an ice cream van before, it's so easy. Yours is the "I exercise and eat kale and I'm healthy, so everyone who doesn't is just lazy and impulsive". Ignoring that there are lots of other people who do, and aren't. Like the original guy I mentioned who bicycled to work every day, ate vegetables, didn't smoke or vape or binge drink, and became increasingly ill and then chronically ill and tried to fix it by eating more vegetables and drinking more dairy and exercising more (until he couldn't anymore).

jodrellblank 3y ago

For anyone mildly curious, the weak version (easier to accept) is: Vitamin A (retinol compounds like Retinoic Acid and its precursors like Beta Carotene) are harmful in very low amounts above the daily recommended value. In America where dairy must be fortified with them, and flour and breakfast cereals often are, it's very easy to go way over the daily recommended value, the damage builds up over years and decades, and it's a big contributor to diseases of "old age" and autoimmune diseases. The mechanism of harm is cumulative damage, the damage is retinoic acid's effects on epithelial cells and stem cells causing skin damage, and its effects on DNA mechanisms causing misformed proteins. The original anecdote is that Grant was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease in around 2007, given five years to live, three or four years later he had chronic fatigue, concentration problems, memory problems, was severely disabled, was trying an "athlete" diet of lots of fruits and vegetables and milk, developed eczema, came up with the idea to try avoiding Vitamin A, and after a three or four weeks of eating lean beef and white rice ... his decade of knee pain disappeared along with the brian fog and memory and concentration problems. So he stuck with it, his gum disease and dry eyes cleared up, his eczema cleared up, his kidneys stopped failing, and he's 16 years on from his 5 year life expectancy. The strong (harder to accept) version is that retinol compounds should never have been classified as vitamins at all, the 'deficiency' symptoms are not right, the original 1920s studies were not conclusive and the most prominent one saying they are vitamins was bad science which poisoned the rats with retinoic acid overdoses and then took those symptoms as deficiency symptoms. Grant is now stronger at the gym age 62 than he was at 22 despite exercising only weekly, his greying hair has darkened again, his liver spots and skin blemishes and varicose veins have cleared up and his eyesight has improved. The possible reasons to believe there's something to it is that other people have tried it, and seen their skin conditions improve, their joint pain, posture, vision, memory, insomnia, digestion, body fat, people have found plenty of papers of biological damage evidence, or studies on people contradicting the normal expected outcomes. There is claimed correlation of vast increases in serious health conditions matching the 1970s fortification of dairy with retinol compounds in the USA, and decreases in serious health conditions in Eastern Canada following the 1992 closure of a cod fishing plant, with correlations to oily fish and cod liver oil. Retinol compounds in the form of Isotretinoin were used as chemotherapy agents because they are so harmful to cells, and in the form of Accutane they're used for acne medication which has as its known side effects the symptoms of most autoimmune diseases, which happen in far more people who take it than you'd expect for a common medication. Possible reasons to believe there's nothing to it is that other people have tried it and found no improvement, sometimes worsening. Many of the people who tried it were seriously ill and trying everything they could think of, including lots of vitamin and mineral adjustments and gut microbiome adjustements and other treatments, so there's too much in play to be sure of cause and effect, and anyway it's all self-selected confirmation bias and anecdotes and correlation != causation and anyway engineers thinking someone else's field is easy and simple is a common trope, besides with so many people researching nutrition wouldn't this be well known by now? The dose makes the poison and of course "too much" is harmful, who would expect otherwise? (See weak version: perhaps "too much" is far lower quantities than commonly thought, but the effects take years to show up?). Or that this study showing diabetes mellitus makes a foetus more vulnerable to retinoic acid damage and birth defects[1] is a study in mice, not humans. There isn't a single cause of disease, no lead bullet (but this isn't claiming it's the only cause). The crazy (internet kook) version is that chronic Vitamin A toxicity is a significant contributer to all autoimmune diseases, Alzheimers/dementia, type 2 diabetes, autism, ADHD, it's the real cause of Scurvy (but the cause and effect is non-trivial, ascorbic acid is good at calming the symptoms rather than curing the disease), that Scurvy is very close in symptoms to Type 2 Diabetes because they have the same root cause, that retinoic acid is a contributer to male pattern baldness as well as "old age" gray hair, that retinoic acid is documented as affecting 500 gene expressions but that's really a misunderstanding, what it's doing is random chaotic damage, that the documented Vitamin A defficiency eye conditions are all in people with very unbalanced diets with a lot of other defficienies... ---- You can see on his blog and forum anecdotes like user YH: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/nearly-7-months-progress/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/nearly-7-months-prog... who says their eyesight is improved, back pain is gone, humpback has gone, chapped lips and dry skin are healed, new hair growing on their balding crown, skin condition is improved, hand-eye coordination in sketching has improved, depression has gone. Or PuddleDuck who improved from years of chronic fatigue on it: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/puddleducks-progress-cfs-symptoms/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/puddleducks-progress... who says "I know this post is going to be so long, but since Grant’s theory is the only one I’ve ever read that MIGHT explain why the heck that happened to me, I feel compelled to share in detail.". Or Sarabeth whose experiments with diet have improved her children's behaviour, outbursts, bedwetting, food intolerances, and more: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/our-family-behavioral-outburts-acne-urinary-problems-hormones-oh-my/?part=5 https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/our-family-behaviora... Or El: "it's been six months since i read gareth and grant has been on this diet for almost close to seven months. It changed my life. I had chronic fatigue, dizziness, eye pain, muscle pain, blurred vision. hearing loss" - https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/hi-2/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/hi-2/ Or Sand, whose vision has improved to the point they "can manage life now" https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/sands-progress-report/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/sands-progress-repor... Or BodeFofinho who developed Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults in his 30s, and after a year of no/low Vitamin A reversed it ... but then after two years found the diet worsening his health and moved away from it: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/my-diabetes-type-i-recovery-story/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/my-diabetes-type-i-r... Or if you don't want the rah-rah versions, "Why I don't think this is a valid theory anymore", and in the middle of that pay attention to Johannes-2 posts which are full of biochemistry with study citations and references: https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/why-i-dont-think-this-is-a-legit-theory-anymore/?part=9 https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/why-i-dont-think-thi... Or if you want more details of mechanisms of action, this https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/biotransformation-of-retinol-finally-revealed/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/biotransformation-of... which I can't read and says "It is now no longer difficult to imagine how retinoic acid could cause auto-immune disease, since the data appears to show that retinoic acid is essentially a pro-inflammatory cytokine that is stored in the liver and, once the liver is saturated, in different types of tissue all over the body, especially in epithelial cells that constitute blood–tissue barriers". Or if you want reasons to dismiss it as all nonsense, look only for the COVID/vaccine claims, the guy who dismisses vitamin supplements because they're made in Chinese factories, the people who wear Electro-Magnetic Field blocking clothes, the guy who thinks dust in bottled water made him ill but raw ocean water up his nose didn't ... it's really really easy to dismiss this all as crank bullshit. ... Except, the arguments are interesting and pointing from many directions, and the claimed mechanisms of action are far more plausible than - say - claims of how the Pyramids were electrical energy collectors. And there certainly are many health crises around. And it's pretty clear that some food can be harmful, short and long term. And that grouping food by (plant/animal) or (low fat/high fat) or (low carb/high carb) or (processed/unprocessed) isn't enough, and the argument that we need to look at the molecular content of foods rather than where they came from is reasonable. To my previous comment, how can one ever know? [1] https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/does-sugar-increase-your-symptoms/ https://ggenereux.blog/discussion/topic/does-sugar-increase-...

jodrellblank 3y ago

3 downvotes, have any of you downvoters watched the talk?