4 ms·

Many appear to be public information. Here are some listed on his RationalWiki entry: Avocados Peat claimed that avocados are carcinogenic because they contai

by dfxm12 2y ago

Many appear to be public information. Here are some listed on his RationalWiki entry: Avocados Peat claimed that avocados are carcinogenic because they contain a lot of unsaturated fat.[8] Like all the other nonsense he spouted, he failed to back up this ridiculous claim with any scientific evidence. Orange juice Peat was a big fan of orange juice which he said is "anti-estrogenic".[41] He also claimed that orange juice is good because it raises people's cholesterol.[42] There is not any evidence in the medical literature that shows orange juice consumption raises cholesterol. Studies have found the opposite, as it lows LDL-c and total cholesterol.[43][44] A 2022 review of clinical trials found that orange juice significantly reduces circulating total cholesterol levels.[45] Everything Peat said about foods should be fact-checked because in most cases he was entirely wrong in what he had claimed. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat

runjake 2y ago
Thanks. Great page. For some reason, this one didn't show up for me in the first few pages of Google results.
- yieldcrv 2y ago
  That’s scary, no shared reality Guess it’s why it takes half the population forever to still be “doing their research”
NewUser76312 2y ago
It's important to actually read sources when it comes to controversial people and topics, rather than trusting some Wiki's summation of something. The Wiki completely misrepresents what Dr. Peat said. "He made many other ridiculous claims such as avocados causing cancer.[8]" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat#cite_ref-Vegetables_8-0 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat#cite_ref-Vegetables_8... Link [8]: "Vegetables". raypeat.com. Goes to: https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/vegetables.shtml https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/vegetables.shtml The quote in question: "Not all fruits, of course, are perfectly safe--avocados, for example, contain so much unsaturated fat that they can be carcinogenic and hepatotoxic." Note that phrasing "can be", "Not... perfectly safe.". Also btw, did you know that carrots "can be" hepatotoxic (toxic to the liver) because of all the vitamin A? This doesn't mean that carrots are bad, but rather that they shouldn't be an excessively large part of one's daily diet. They are not "perfectly safe". Let's examine how Peat came to this idea based on the research. Remember, the actual claim is that "avocados.. can be carcinogenic and hepatotixic." Not that avocados cause cancer. That is not what he wrote. That wiki article has a clear bias. Anyways, his research for the actual claim: "In Vivo 1998 Nov-Dec;12(6):675-89. Comparative anticancer effects of vaccination and dietary factors on experimentally-induced cancers. ... Experiments in mammary glands cancer showed that a 15% olive-oil diet reduced significantly the tumor incidence caused by 9,10-dimethyl-1,2-benzanthracene. The antitumor effect of the olive-oil diet was connected to its content of monounsaturated fatty acids, such as oleic and palmitic acids. The promotive tumorigenic effects of other high-fat diets (avocado, soybeans) were associated with high content of some polyunsaturated fatty acids (linoleic and alpha-linolenic). Different diets have different targets. The effect of the same diet depends on its anti-tumor substances content. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination and some diets have similar mechanism in their tumor-preventive effects." "Ann Nutr Metab 1991;35(5):253-60. Effect of dietary avocado oils on hepatic collagen metabolism. Wermam MJ, Mokady S, Neeman I Department of Food Engineering and Biotechnology, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa. The effect of various avocado and soybean oils on collagen metabolism in the liver was studied in growing female rats for 8 weeks and in day-old chicks for 1 week. In comparison with rats fed either refined avocado oil, refined or unrefined soybean oils, rats fed unrefined avocado oil showed a significant decrease in total collagen solubility in the liver, while there were no changes in total collagen, protein and moisture content. Chicks fed unrefined avocado oil as compared to those fed refined avocado oil also showed a decrease in hepatic total soluble collagen while hepatic total collagen remained unaffected. Electron micrographs and light-microscope examinations of rats' liver revealed collagen accumulation in the periportal location. This is suggestive of the early stages of fibrosis." All he did was link real-world research to a possible hypothesis. A logical argument. Now you can criticize this argument and say that we can't draw any such conclusions from in vivo and animal model experiments, but at least then you'd be actually engaging with the content of the ideas, not outsourcing your thinking to a poorly-written Wiki article.
- runjake 2y ago
  Indeed, thanks. I try to be skeptical about assumptions, even my own.
- pitpatagain 2y ago
  Cherry picking bits and pieces of research and then escalating them to much more general claims then they actually make really is the essence of good quality quackery though. "avocados, for example, contain so much unsaturated fat that they can be carcinogenic and hepatotoxic" is exactly what he says in the article text. That explicitly read as "consumption of avocados can cause cancer", not the much weaker claim "it's possible that there's a mechanism by which avocados might cause cancer or be hepatotoxic but we don't actually know", which is what you actually get if you look at those reference. Even the quotes he chooses are mismatched to what he says in the text. The liver one is about dietary avocado oils specifically, not avocados generally, and has the weakest possible conclusion that the chicks have something "suggestive of early stages of fibrosis" for unrefined but not refined. It's beyond just in vivo and animal model limitations, it: doesn't address dietary avocado consumption and doesn't conclusively show liver toxicity. That this reference is so weak, and yet the one he chose, is itself quite damning.

by dfxm12 2y ago

runjake 2y ago

Thanks. Great page. For some reason, this one didn't show up for me in the first few pages of Google results.

yieldcrv 2y ago
That’s scary, no shared reality Guess it’s why it takes half the population forever to still be “doing their research”

NewUser76312 2y ago

It's important to actually read sources when it comes to controversial people and topics, rather than trusting some Wiki's summation of something. The Wiki completely misrepresents what Dr. Peat said. "He made many other ridiculous claims such as avocados causing cancer.[8]" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat#cite_ref-Vegetables_8-0 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Peat#cite_ref-Vegetables_8... Link [8]: "Vegetables". raypeat.com. Goes to: https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/vegetables.shtml https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/vegetables.shtml The quote in question: "Not all fruits, of course, are perfectly safe--avocados, for example, contain so much unsaturated fat that they can be carcinogenic and hepatotoxic." Note that phrasing "can be", "Not... perfectly safe.". Also btw, did you know that carrots "can be" hepatotoxic (toxic to the liver) because of all the vitamin A? This doesn't mean that carrots are bad, but rather that they shouldn't be an excessively large part of one's daily diet. They are not "perfectly safe". Let's examine how Peat came to this idea based on the research. Remember, the actual claim is that "avocados.. can be carcinogenic and hepatotixic." Not that avocados cause cancer. That is not what he wrote. That wiki article has a clear bias. Anyways, his research for the actual claim: "In Vivo 1998 Nov-Dec;12(6):675-89. Comparative anticancer effects of vaccination and dietary factors on experimentally-induced cancers. ... Experiments in mammary glands cancer showed that a 15% olive-oil diet reduced significantly the tumor incidence caused by 9,10-dimethyl-1,2-benzanthracene. The antitumor effect of the olive-oil diet was connected to its content of monounsaturated fatty acids, such as oleic and palmitic acids. The promotive tumorigenic effects of other high-fat diets (avocado, soybeans) were associated with high content of some polyunsaturated fatty acids (linoleic and alpha-linolenic). Different diets have different targets. The effect of the same diet depends on its anti-tumor substances content. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination and some diets have similar mechanism in their tumor-preventive effects." "Ann Nutr Metab 1991;35(5):253-60. Effect of dietary avocado oils on hepatic collagen metabolism. Wermam MJ, Mokady S, Neeman I Department of Food Engineering and Biotechnology, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa. The effect of various avocado and soybean oils on collagen metabolism in the liver was studied in growing female rats for 8 weeks and in day-old chicks for 1 week. In comparison with rats fed either refined avocado oil, refined or unrefined soybean oils, rats fed unrefined avocado oil showed a significant decrease in total collagen solubility in the liver, while there were no changes in total collagen, protein and moisture content. Chicks fed unrefined avocado oil as compared to those fed refined avocado oil also showed a decrease in hepatic total soluble collagen while hepatic total collagen remained unaffected. Electron micrographs and light-microscope examinations of rats' liver revealed collagen accumulation in the periportal location. This is suggestive of the early stages of fibrosis." All he did was link real-world research to a possible hypothesis. A logical argument. Now you can criticize this argument and say that we can't draw any such conclusions from in vivo and animal model experiments, but at least then you'd be actually engaging with the content of the ideas, not outsourcing your thinking to a poorly-written Wiki article.

runjake 2y ago
Indeed, thanks. I try to be skeptical about assumptions, even my own.
pitpatagain 2y ago
Cherry picking bits and pieces of research and then escalating them to much more general claims then they actually make really is the essence of good quality quackery though. "avocados, for example, contain so much unsaturated fat that they can be carcinogenic and hepatotoxic" is exactly what he says in the article text. That explicitly read as "consumption of avocados can cause cancer", not the much weaker claim "it's possible that there's a mechanism by which avocados might cause cancer or be hepatotoxic but we don't actually know", which is what you actually get if you look at those reference. Even the quotes he chooses are mismatched to what he says in the text. The liver one is about dietary avocado oils specifically, not avocados generally, and has the weakest possible conclusion that the chicks have something "suggestive of early stages of fibrosis" for unrefined but not refined. It's beyond just in vivo and animal model limitations, it: doesn't address dietary avocado consumption and doesn't conclusively show liver toxicity. That this reference is so weak, and yet the one he chose, is itself quite damning.