[00:00:00] Jay Feldman: Welcome to Episode 5 of the Bioenergetic View. In today's episode, we're joined by Jack and Dalton from Analyze and Optimize, and we'll be discussing how Jack and Dalton were introduced to the work of Ray Peet. We'll also discuss Robert Lustig's claims that fructose is as harmful to the liver as alcohol.

[00:00:18] We'll go over whether Jordan Peterson's serotonin hierarchy has any merit. We'll also discuss the negative effects of the carnivore diet, especially on gut health. We'll go over the link between birth control and cancer and the protective effects of progesterone, as well as what we think of Dave Asprey's thoughts on the Ray P diet.

[00:00:35] And with that, let's jump right in.

[00:00:38] Danny Roddy: Okay. Welcome to a bioenergetic view and we have analyze and optimize here, AKA Dalton and Jack. And so they have taken the Twitter world by storm. How are you guys?

[00:00:52] Jack: Good, man. How

[00:00:52] Danny Roddy: about you? Good. It's just what you guys have been able to accomplish is nothing short of amazing in my estimation.

[00:00:59] I, I probably, I don't know, a few times a week people tell me that they know of Ray Peete because of you guys. And so I think you guys are some of the premier kind of evangelists for the bioenergetic perspective.

[00:01:11] Dalton: First of all, thank you. A lot of stuff means a ton and what I'm really trying to do with the Twitter and with a lot of this content, Instagram, and whatever the case may be is just to lay out the fundamentals, so I did three or four threads about pregnant alone.

[00:01:25] I did one thread about why serotonin is involved in GI disease and things like that. And I find that because I feel like a lot of times when people are trying to get into this stuff, they have trouble like understanding it on that fundamental level. And then, guys taking five idea labs, products and breathing into a bag and doing all this, like stuff that is, whatever we would consider it to be much further down the line.

[00:01:54] But yeah I guess one of the reasons why a lot of people have liked it is because. It's like peat pilling, if you will. It's just like trying to introduce people to that. But yeah, so in terms of how we got into it, I was doing a keto fasting carnivore for about a year it was about two and a half years.

[00:02:13] And then one of my buddies showed me. Started talking to me about Pete stuff because he used to be a big carnivore diet guy. Yeah he showed me generative energy and I think he actually appeared on one of them the Q and a ones, but yeah, so he, we started talking to me about why coffee is good for you and how Ray used to drink 20 cups a day when he was hypothyroid and, why sugar is actually the preferred fuel source and all this crazy stuff.

[00:02:42] And at this point, like I still had like my very rigid high serotonin carnivore perspective. But I was like, I was not having a good time. It was like the lockdowns and yeah, I was struggling with my health still and all these types of things. So I ended up watching some generative energy probably for the first time around November, December of 2020.

[00:03:06] And yeah, I just binged it. From there, till Now, I guess I still watch it all the time. So yeah, that was that was our thing. And then, we had this slow progression from being like a very keto and fasting channel with the YouTube, which had been started like a year prior.

[00:03:24] And then, we came up with the first video about maybe why keto isn't good. And then we got a lot of hate for that. And then, a year later we're debunking Robert Lustig's sugar, the bitter truth talk and, all hell breaks loose, yeah, that's been, that's been our sort of journey with this stuff.

[00:03:39] Danny Roddy: The end of 2020 was especially psychotic year to get into that podcast. But the first time I remember becoming aware of you guys was maybe Dalton, you had given like a presentation at your school or something. Is that right? About seed oils.

[00:03:52] Dalton: Yeah. Yeah. We, yeah. I posted that video. That was like late 2020.

[00:03:57] I'm shocked that you saw that. That was like one of our least viewed videos. But yeah,

[00:04:01] Mike Fave: so

[00:04:03] Dalton: I had been, yeah, so that was still while I was, keto car, not I was full blown keto carnivore fasting and things. But yeah, so I'd been, interested in. In learning about this stuff more and I think it was only a matter of time before we we're looking for things that provided more answers and more context and whatnot.

[00:04:22] And that's the whole idea is that we're always looking for more information and more things that can help us out and help understand these things better. But yeah I remember I remember commenting in one of your live chats before. It was like right after our serotonin video was released in like August or September of 2021.

[00:04:40] And I was like, Danny, you should check this video. And you're like, Oh yeah, I saw it. I thought it was really good. And I was like, very, I was very like star struck in that moment because like you guys had meant so much to me. Yeah. I've been listening to you guys for a couple of months at that point, and it was such a huge paradigm shift.

[00:04:56] I was like, Danny Roddy watched my video.

[00:04:58] Danny Roddy: You noticed that an F list internet celebrity had watched your video.

[00:05:04] Dalton: I think I peaked at that moment.

[00:05:05] Danny Roddy: You guys just bring something so unique to the table, like the video editing, like how high quality it is. And the research depth is just two things that you just don't see.

[00:05:15] And again I don't know how to edit a video to save my life, so seeing something like that is just absolutely incredible. You guys have just a gift of explaining these things and breaking it down. So it's just so ridiculously valuable. Thank you, ma'am.

[00:05:30] Mike Fave: I was always curious. What's the dynamic with you guys?

[00:05:32] How do you guys, how is everything structured? Do you like, does one person do the research? And then one guy is like making the videos and stuff. Like, how do you guys, how does the analyze and optimize system work?

[00:05:47] Jack: So we pretty much have a bunch of ideas. Like we have a whole. A Google doc with I don't know, hundreds of ideas that, we just try to find what'll work and what we want to do most.

[00:05:58] And then depending on the topic, like Dalton does a lot more in depth on the science, and then I'll take some like history or kind of other stuff, and then we'll each write a script together or each write it separately and then edit it together. Then one of us will record it and then. I'll pretty much do, final cut the video editing stuff and then we'll both be finding the clips and whatnot and I'll edit it together and then that's pretty much it.

[00:06:27] Dalton: Yeah, I would say Jack is really what brings the videos to life and makes it not just some random guy droning on about God knows what. So he really, takes, what is, Basically, like an article, essentially, and turns it into an experience, if you will with the music and with the editing and the memes kind of stuff just making it a much more engaging thing.

[00:06:53] But yeah, I, I come from a background of, studying science and whatnot. Jack is more, he's always been, very adept at knowing about like historical political conspiracy things as long as I can remember. Cause we actually, we grew up together and literally as, as long as I can remember, Jack was savvy about all this kind of stuff.

[00:07:15] Like I literally remember in like seventh or eighth grade, Jack told me about like the Illuminati and like how Jay Z was going like this and Jack, you're my man,

[00:07:22] Robert Lustig: buddy.

[00:07:25] Dalton: It's, it really is a match made in heaven. And then, yeah, so we both share that skepticism of these institutions and whatnot and how these things kind of work.

[00:07:34] So yeah, it's. It's honestly like insane that it worked out the way that it did, growing up together, sharing these like complimenting interests and then eventually going to college together. And then starting this and yeah, the beautiful thing is that, we feel like we're still really just hitting our stride now.

[00:07:51] And and we have a lot we have a lot of stuff that we want to accomplish going forward. So we want this to really be like our legacy.

[00:07:59] Mike Fave: That's awesome. So basically, Jack, you're like the, like history, like contextual pieces, and then like bringing the video to life with the With the editing and the the B roll and the music and all types of stuff.

[00:08:11] And then Dalton, you're like diving into the biochemistry and the, so you guys like divide and conquer. That's awesome.

[00:08:19] Jay Feldman: Yeah. I love the marriage, especially for anyone who's new to the space, the documentary style and contextualizing it with the history and politics helps so much to think open someone's mind.

[00:08:30] If you just dig into this idea that plant saturated fats are harmful, or you might want to question the, anti fructose narrative, it's a lot easier when you see the history of it. I love that. Ray Pete always did that. And yeah, I think that the way you guys are doing that into documentary style videos is great, and you guys have done a number of really awesome ones that we want to highlight.

[00:08:49] You did the debunking of Robert Lustig's sugar presentation. You've done some good videos on serotonin. I'm pretty cool too.

[00:08:57] Mike Fave: What's that Mike? That weight loss one was pretty cool too, like just breaking down all these possible areas that could be affecting your weight loss.

[00:09:05] Jay Feldman: Yeah. And there's a bunch on seed oils, which are awesome.

[00:09:07] And then of course the birth control one is the most recent, which is a really extensive one. But again, so much history to go through and so much misconception, which I love. And so we pulled out a bunch of clips for us to review here. They're all based around a lot of these. different narratives that are out there and documentaries that you guys have done on these topics.

[00:09:24] So yeah, I'm excited to dig into all those. Have you guys commented on them?

[00:09:30] Danny Roddy: Awesome. We can start with Robert Lustig first. Here we go. Is fruit good or bad for you? And Jay, do you want to contextualize this clip? How did you find it?

[00:09:42] Jay Feldman: Oh, I, it's, you guys did this again. You did this really great documentary on his sugar, the bitter truth presentation.

[00:09:49] And pointing out some of the issues with the claims he made and he makes some of them here and his general notion that fructose is a poison, which he's literally said word for word. And so he talks about that here and make some claims as well about why that is entirely inapplicable to fruit, which maybe we'll challenge a little bit.

[00:10:06] Yeah.

[00:10:07] Danny Roddy: Everybody knows that fructose is bad for you, but I'll play this clip anyways.

[00:10:11] Robert Lustig: The goal is to keep your consumption of added sugars below 25 grams a day. That'd be six teaspoons. That's about what your liver can handle. Very similar to, by the way, to what your liver can do with alcohol.

[00:10:28] That's about as much as your liver can handle alcohol too. And the reason is because alcohol and fructose metabolize the same way. So it makes sense that about six teaspoons of fructose. I'm sorry, have sugar, therefore three teaspoons or 12 grams of fructose, 25 grams of sugar because they're 50 50 would be the maximum.

[00:10:51] If you eat whole food, you have nothing to worry about because if you eat whole food, your fructose content beyond fruit is minimal and the fruit has fructose, but it's not very much and you're not going to absorb it because of the fiber.

[00:11:09] Danny Roddy: I don't know how you could argue with that, but I don't know, Dalton, do you want to take a stab at it?

[00:11:13] Dalton: Do I? I there's just, there's quite a bit to, to unpack there. I would love to know where he's getting the 25 figure from. I would assume it's from some kind of like epidemiological work where they're just looking at different populations and saying, oh these people. eat this much and then this people, these people eat this much.

[00:11:33] And then they're manufacturing a threshold of sugar intake from there. But yeah, I also don't really know what he means when he says like how much it can handle what is I assume he's implying that like past that you're going to get the novel lipogenesis. So you're going to start creating fat.

[00:11:49] But there's, I just don't really understand where that really comes from. I think it's because fructose tends to be more lipogenic than straight glucose. But even with that considered, if you look at fatty liver disease the vast majority of the fat contained in the liver is mainly from free fatty acids, which ironically is, what becomes elevated when you're fasting or stressed or obese or whatever the case may be.

[00:12:17] There's that. But I don't really know where the 25 figure is coming from, and I have never really understood where this whole like alcohol parallel thing came from. Because I think everyone knows at this point that glucose is something that, your body makes and that it metabolizes that it needs.

[00:12:39] And fructose is not very far removed from glucose at all in terms of it, how it works metabolically. undergoes two enzymatic steps and then it basically goes into the same metabolic pathway that, that glucose does. So I don't know where this idea comes from that it is metabolized at all similarly to, to alcohol.

[00:13:03] But he does that thing in his. And you see this picture like surface around quite a bit where he has like this big picture of the cell. And then it's like all these arrows with all these different reactions and all this stuff. And if you don't, if you don't understand biochemistry very well, then it's like very intimidating.

[00:13:20] And it's some doctor talking with all of this confidence and you're like, oh, wow I already know sugar's bad, so he's got to be, he's got to be right. And then people just run with it. Bye. If you actually look inside that diagram, like a lot of the arrows and what he's implying he makes huge leaps of faith, if you will in his assumptions of how this stuff works.

[00:13:42] When in reality, that's not, It's not really my understanding of fructose metabolism. And one thing I want to point out is that a lot of the studies that are done showing that fructose is really bad it's typically with isolated fructose. And that is a problem because isolated fructose is very poorly absorbed in your intestines.

[00:14:04] And then it is basically led. Or sorry, it's basically left over to the colonic bacteria where it ferments and things. And this is where, you can get as little as like 15 grams of isolated fructose. I think the figure is that will cause GI problems in about 50 percent of healthy people.

[00:14:21] So it's very poorly absorbed on its own. So what happens is that when you co administer glucose or you're giving sucrose, which is a link of fructose and glucose, the intestinal absorption of fructose. shoots up dramatically and you absorb pretty much all of it. And I think it's pretty unclear as to why that is, but we do know that glucose basically upregulates the absorption of fructose.

[00:14:46] So that's a big deal because if you have the fructose not getting absorbed and then it's feeding these clonic bacteria, it's causing all this irritation in the gut, probably elevating serotonin, causing some element of intestinal permeability that can cause systemic inflammation. And that is really going to drive all these different conditions, not the fructose being metabolized itself, I don't think.

[00:15:08] And then you can see in some of these studies, you can administer antibiotics alongside the isolated fructose and largely protect against those effects of the isolated fructose. So those would be my main comments on that. Again, we did the whole video which by the way is like our by far most hated video.

[00:15:27] It's really funny because we have, everyone's sees us as like these like freedom fighters that come in and dismantle these like arguments about like big pharma and big food. And they're like, yeah, like you guys are really like doing great stuff, like destroying these like big corporations.

[00:15:41] And then it's you look at the comments under the law stick video and it's these guys are just paid off by big sugar. They have no idea what they're talking about. How much did you get paid to do this? Like it's a, it's pretty funny.

[00:15:52] Danny Roddy: Dalton, you should disclose your domino funding, your domino sugar funding.

[00:15:57] I think that's disingenuous that you don't disclose that on your videos.

[00:16:01] Dalton: Yeah, we get called, we get gold shills for a lot of things. We got we did the whole video on methylene blue people. People were saying like, Oh my God, this is like a carcinogen. It's so dangerous.

[00:16:10] Like you're going to give people serotonin syndrome and. And all these things I remember one comment literally said drip blood, so much blood on your hands from talking about taking low dose methylene blue. It can honestly like getting your head at points. And I'm like, am I causing a heart?

[00:16:26] And then I'm like, no it's not, they're not even coming with anything substantial in a lot of those instances. But yeah, we get accused of being shills. Quite a bit. So yeah, if we had some kind of commission to sell sugar please believe it would be, we would advertise that and we would take our cuts.

[00:16:46] So

[00:16:48] Jack: It's just funny hearing like people say that we're shills for anything. It gives you a new lens because a lot of people say that a lot of other people are controlled opposition or whatever. And then it's like people calling us that Kind of just opened my eyes that like maybe not everyone's controlled opposition.

[00:17:04] Obviously some people are but it's just funny yeah, literally two guys just making videos and people think that we're getting paid off by like sugar lobbyists Like we're going in the back rooms and everyone's in suits

[00:17:16] Danny Roddy: Unfortunately, Jack that's exactly what controlled opposition would claim.

[00:17:19] So I'm gonna have to put you in that camp. Yeah So sometimes when I'm thinking, Oh man, like I got so much heat for this or that. And then I'm thinking like how did Ray field doing this for 50 plus years? Like it really puts things into perspective when you've been doing it for 10 years and he's been doing it for so much longer and like swimming upstream can take a lot out of a person, but that's why it's good to find hobbies.

[00:17:46] Definitely.

[00:17:47] Dalton: It's

[00:17:49] Danny Roddy: funny

[00:17:51] Mike Fave: when you read the research to on fructose, like people talk about being like a shill for something and then you go through the studies with fructose and you see all the problems and you see the every single article just starts out like fructose is increased, like high fructose, corn syrup, all this type of stuff.

[00:18:09] And it's a health, it's a health problem and whatnot. And then you go and look at the evidence. You go and look at what the studies are actually showing. You have Lustig talking about six grams of, or 12 grams of fructose being a problem. And when you look in the research, they are like, they're giving people 0.75 grams of fructose per kilogram of body weight.

[00:18:28] So I'm like 90 kilos, or say I'm a hundred kilos, that's 75 grams of fructose in one sitting, which would be the equivalent of 150 grams of sugar. And then not really finding massive problems in healthy people. And so it's you're looking at that, and you're looking at what they're doing in rats with fructose and whatnot, and it's there's a difference in ability to actually, for the rats to actually metabolize fructose compared to humans.

[00:18:52] And then, as to what you were talking about there, Dalton, is they actually find increased portal blood levels of endotoxin after fructose challenges in animals. So that's literally can create endotoxin, endotoxin can up regulate the inflammatory pathways in the liver. I think Lustig is saying that the J and K pathway is the one that is triggering issues from fructose in both alcohol.

[00:19:17] And then just like this blanket statement that, oh, they're metabolized the same. And then you can, you go and look at the metabolism of alcohol versus fructose. And it's Fructose being converted into lactate, glucose, ATP, with a less than 3 percent de novo lipogenesis. And then you look at alcohol and it's gets converted into acetyl aldehyde, and then creates a whole bunch of ROS and like damage to liver structure.

[00:19:41] And it's like, where's the comparison? Like you're talking about this one downstream pathway, and it could be related to these other factors. And then it's, and then you're seeing like the difference between the metabolites of fructose and alcohol. And it's not even the same thing. Like they're not even close to comparable.

[00:19:58] So those types, this type of argument, I don't know where he's getting, that 25 gram recommendation, like it's especially because they have the isotope tracer studies where they give people sugar and they have the sugar molecules tag so you can see like how they're metabolized in the body.

[00:20:17] And you're not seeing these problems that people are talking about. You're not really seeing high levels of fat production from fructose. You're not seeing it cause high levels of inflammation, not seeing changes in people's liver function values or their uric acid or anything like that. So it's just that's baseless claims.

[00:20:32] And it's even supported further when he starts talking about fruit is fine because fiber inhibits fructose absorption. It's That is completely false. Like you, you are going to get the fructose from the fruit that you're going to eat. If it has a marginal decrease in absorption, it's still like irrelevant to the overall picture.

[00:20:51] It, and the other thing too, is like three oranges will give you that, that amount of fructose that he's saying is absolutely toxic and there's no studies really supporting. the, that fruits or fruit juice or anything like that is actually causing these metabolic issues in healthy people. What you're seeing more so is if you take diabetic people and you dose them with fructose by itself, or you give them ridiculously high doses of sucrose in overfeeding studies, yeah, then they have problems, but it's you can't parse that out between overfeeding.

[00:21:21] So it was like, it, there's just no, there's no support for these claims. And then it's, let's wax this one pathway, and then. And then when you have cognitive dissonance, that fruit isn't causing these problems, then we have to say, Oh, fiber is the reason it's because fiber is inhibiting absorption.

[00:21:36] And it's these, this is not that's not as a researcher that is like questionable to just make claims like that. And push that out to people as if this is how it actually is those types of things. There's only one study I've seen some random Iranian study that showed feeding people like fruit, some fruit products, which included a whole group of things, Possibly caused issues.

[00:21:57] And the most, the rest of them is like orange juice does this it improves these values or grape juice improves these values, whatever the deal is. So the lustic thing, yeah, we've talked about it ad nauseum as well, even on, on energy balance or a, on this podcast, it's just, it's ridiculous.

[00:22:12] The stuff, the things that get said

[00:22:14] Jay Feldman: there. And they are the most hated on videos for sure. Just like you guys said, the comments people feel really defensive for Robert Lustig here. And yeah, these claims, some of them are ridiculous. To call fructose a poison and then to say that if you have it with fiber, it's fine.

[00:22:29] Like anything that's an actual poison, we're talking mercury, arsenic, like real poisons. Having fiber with it doesn't do anything. It's not going to save you from consuming those things. And it's not going to also prevent fructose absorption as you were saying, Mike, and this idea that 12, 12 grams is what the liver can handle is insane.

[00:22:48] There's no, like the evidence for this is not there at all. For one, Our livers are incredibly effective at handling fructose. As you were saying they oxidize it, convert it to glycogen or convert it to glucose or lactate and send it out. And the study is looking at even pure fructose, looking at a 30 gram bolus versus 60 gram in humans.

[00:23:06] We handle it just as well. And that's pure fructose, not considering all of the absorption issues you guys have mentioned as well. And to compare it to alcohol, like it does is just disingenuous. There's. Two pathways he points to, one is the JNK inflammation pathway and the other is de novo lipogenesis, which are heavily disfavored pathways.

[00:23:25] When it comes to fructose, like 99 percent of that fructose is not going to be influencing those pathways, but it uses rat studies where they're given pure fructose, massive amounts of endotoxin and polyunsaturated fats, which if you account for the endotoxin and polyunsaturated fats, that effective fructose goes away even in the rats.

[00:23:41] So we know that avoiding fructose is not the solution, but when it comes to creating a diet to help you maximize your metabolism, there's a lot of conflicting information out there. And that's why I've created the energy balance food guide to help you determine exactly what to eat to optimally support your metabolism and help you lose weight, improve your digestion, get amazing sleep, boost your energy, and so much more.

[00:24:04] The energy balance food guide is a one page infographic that organizes foods on a spectrum based on how effectively they support your metabolism. And it also has a separate spectrum that adjusts the scale for you. In the case that you're dealing with various digestive symptoms, The food guide makes it extremely easy to get started with a bioenergetic approach to optimizing your health.

[00:24:24] So head over to J Feldman wellness. com slash guide to download your free energy balance food guide. Yeah, it's you got your, you guys did a great. Again, like a great video talking and could say debunking, even though I hate that word. His,

[00:24:40] Dalton: yeah, honestly, there, there were probably, yeah, there were probably a number of things that I would have done differently with that video.

[00:24:48] Looking back on it. But yeah, I would agree that like the debunk thing is like is a bit authoritarian in and of itself. So I would agree with that. actually,

[00:24:58] Jay Feldman: I think it's just overused and

[00:25:03] Dalton: yeah, no, for sure. For sure. But I would actually, I would even go a step further and say even like just white sugar again is different from isolated fructose or even things like high fructose corn syrup.

[00:25:16] And, we did a whole I did a whole thread on Twitter about this, which people were exploding over, but basically showing that in the basically in the pre, I would say sixties era, it was very common for families to be, a lot of it's per capita, just like purchasing data, but it was very normal for families to, allocate essentially like 100 grams of white sugar per day per person in the household.

[00:25:45] So even if you were to account for waste there, which is like at best, like five or 10%, you're still talking about massive loads of just pure white sugar. And that's, Exactly what they use in some of the in some of the animal studies for the, I know Kyle has mentioned this before on one of Danny's older generative energies, but what they use for the control diets in, in animals, a lot of the times if you're doing a low fat diet it'll be typically like 70 percent carbohydrate and 35 percent of that will come from pure sugar and that's what you're using in order to keep the animals lean because you know it's going to maintain them at this weight.

[00:26:27] It's literally the diet that you use to compare what you think is going to be unhealthy because you're so sure it's going to keep the animals lean and free of disease. So yeah, and then, you could talk about Walter Kempner and the rice diet. And then there were a number of other studies, from decades ago where they were giving people with diabetes, simple sugars and seeing massive improvements.

[00:26:48] Yeah, I think you guys nailed it. I think it's a lot different of a story when you're talking about isolated fructose or when you're talking about overfeeding or when you're talking about giving it to people that are already unhealthy. Because another thing that upregulates your de cortisol, which is like basically uniformly elevated in people with diabetes or obesity.

[00:27:08] So obviously you're going to see a worse outcome there.

[00:27:11] Mike Fave: So yeah. And that's not even to say that I think most people when you're making dietary recommendations for carbohydrates inside the bioenergetics here, it's not like just load up on granulated sugar. So it's like you, there's even like a, it's even a another degree separate.

[00:27:27] It's get your carbs from if you tolerate dairy, some good dairy products and then some high quality fruit and like high quality juices and things along those lines. And then it's now you have tons of modifying factors, right? You have the polyphenol compounds, you have some of the fibers, if you have fruit, and it's not because it's inhibiting absorption and you all have the vitamins and minerals that are coming with those juices and those fruits.

[00:27:49] So it's this is massively different. I have, I would love to see a study where they take rats and the carbohydrate sources, like fruit and juice, like we just don't see that. It's always some granulated sugar. Or even in the caloric restriction studies where they gave the rats like the healthy diet, it was like soybean meal and corn meal and fish meal and like things that this wasn't even rats.

[00:28:14] This was monkeys that monkeys don't even eat. Like it's not even a monkey's diet. And it's still some type of like lab diet with these structured components that, these animals would never have eaten. So it's just funny. Like where people are like splitting hairs about, about, Oh, it's fructose.

[00:28:30] And then without even understanding the metabolism and then like the argument becomes, Oh sugar is bad. And it's even if you want it to say sugar is bad, even lusting, he cannot sit there and say, okay sugar is bad, but there's fruits are okay, but we're just going to wax some reason as why fruits are okay.

[00:28:45] And it's probably because they're, you're not absorbing the sugar. It has nothing to do with the fact that the sugar isn't inherently a problem and the fruits are actually healthy. It's just, Oh, it's just the fiber. So it's that's where you see that. It's that is a level 10 rationalization.

[00:28:58] Yeah. And that, like that type of thing is just, I don't know. Like I look at that, I'm just like, come on, man, try to figure out why you have a paradox instead of just wax fiber. Like it's such a lazy way out. If you like,

[00:29:11] Jay Feldman: do you want to mention anything

[00:29:13] Jack: or should we head on to serotonin? Yeah. That's like you said, it's a big rationalization.

[00:29:17] That's a problem with getting stuck in a framework and then you got to. Rationalize all these different things. And then it starts to not make sense. Instead of just looking at it all from a big perspective and seeing what's actually going on, which I think, people in this space do probably better than anyone.

[00:29:33] Danny Roddy: Jack, that's a perfect segue to our next clip. Perfect. You guys talk a lot about fructose and I hear what you're saying, but I'm still unfortunately have to think that it's the devil, but here's Jordan Peterson talking about serotonin and hierarchy. So here we go.

[00:29:48] Jordan Peterson: You have a system, the serotonin system, base of your neurophysiology.

[00:29:54] It also sets your brain up during embryonic development. So it's, it really is the master control system in many ways. And it counts where you are in your hierarchy. And then it decides how much positive emotion and how much negative emotion you should feel on average because of your position.

[00:30:14] That's it. And so if you're, let's say number one is at the top and number ten is at the bottom, so you're number ten, you're barely clinging to the bottom of reality, your brain says, look, it's dangerous where you are at the bottom of the hierarchy, you don't have a lot of friends, it's it's precarious down there.

[00:30:30] And so that means any little thing that goes wrong, any little error you make, that might be the end of you, and so you better be on guard and alert, and if something small happens it better hurt, because It might be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

[00:30:48] Danny Roddy: What is Jordan right about? What is he wrong about?

[00:30:52] Anybody can make

[00:30:53] Mike Fave: my

[00:30:54] Dalton: bed

[00:30:54] Mike Fave: in the morning.

[00:30:57] Dalton: I would say, I think he's right. I think he's right in saying that it is a master controller in a sense, because I'm sure you guys have seen this a ton, but. Yeah, you can do a lot of things that are pro metabolic, if you will, with people, and it's not going to matter unless they fix their gut.

[00:31:14] Because I think serotonin is such that it really is a master regulator. In that sense where dietary changes or vitamin D or grounding or whatever the case may be, light environment, those can all be so insignificant if you have chronic irritation or or something going on in the gut that's producing a lot of serotonin.

[00:31:33] So I definitely agree that it's a master controller in that sense. In terms of the hierarchical stuff again it's hard to, it's hard to it's hard for me to say. Like precisely where his referencing of whatever research is wrong, because I'm not really familiar with what he is referencing.

[00:31:51] But from what I understand about serotonin and I've done probably too much reading on this topic because it seems to be very illuminating for a lot of people. is that it is very closely involved in something called learn helplessness. So in experiments where you are taking animals and you're subjecting them to stresses that they eventually learn they can't escape from no matter what they try.

[00:32:18] Basically that will turn up the serotonergic system in the brain. And then that they develop this behavior where they just give up. And that is something that, really resonates with a lot of people because. a lot of people feel like they have no answers in their life. They have no way of getting out of a certain routine or situation that they're in their life.

[00:32:38] So that's something that really seems to resonate with a lot of people. And then the other thing is that if you administer either serotonin antagonists or dopaminergic drugs, you can completely reverse that. You can, create an animal that is going to keep trying to escape no matter basically what the odds are which is pretty awesome.

[00:32:55] And then one of the other things about serotonin that I was reading about relatively recently is that it is often involved in like risk aversion and in circumstances where you're trying to appraise like the value of something. So essentially there were a number of different human and animal studies where they were in like, a game situation.

[00:33:19] And the people that, would take SSRIs and, it's obviously not a perfect way of going about it, but, people that would take SSRIs, they would be in this game and they would spend less time making decisions. They would value the outcome of their decisions less. They would be, they would take less risk.

[00:33:39] And ultimately, they would just care less about the whole situation. Whereas people that, did not have that. they ended up carrying more and they were more willing to take risks and think about the outcomes. Whereas the people on the serotonergic drugs were more just yeah, sure. Like whatever, like I'll do this.

[00:33:56] Like I'll just do whatever is going to get me through this. And they don't think about it. They don't value it nearly as much. And that was true in some animal studies where they looked at basically like foraging. If you were to upregulate the serotonergic system in certain animals, they.

[00:34:12] Would basically if they found like a foraging patch that gave them, you know what they wanted, they would never deviate from that patch. Like they would only stay in that patch and they would continue to exploit it. No matter what, and the interpretation of that was that, yeah because it has this sort of anti metabolic effect, they're basically exploiting whatever is right in front of them.

[00:34:36] So those are just some of the things that I've been reading about recently as it pertains to serotonin. And the thing is, it's like sugar in the sense that. everyone already, like the prevailing wisdom is really that we already know that serotonin is good or we already know that sugar is bad.

[00:34:53] So we're really just trying to figure out what the mechanism is behind why it's good or it's bad. And then you read, I read one of these studies and they were like they were going through this whole thing about why serotonin made you less willing to sample information, made you care less about your decisions, made you more risk or sorry, less.

[00:35:13] willing to take risks. And then the conclusion they're like, yeah, like in a world of so much information and so many decisions to make, like serotonin is like this valuable chemical that allows us to make decisions and stop looking for answers. Just like that, but that really like sums it all up right there.

[00:35:29] Because No matter what the study is showing, it's going to paint serotonin and in a positive light. And I guess that's what's going on there, but, for anyone that has struggled with, learned helplessness or anhedonia is another big thing where you're basically unmotivated to do things.

[00:35:47] You don't really feel like you have a purpose or maybe you like lose your appetite or your sex drive. And basically you just don't really want to do things. And it's obviously associated with a lack of dopamine, but the lack of dopamine tends to be driven by high, higher serotonin.

[00:36:01] So I think that there, what he's trying to lay out there. There are roles of serotonin in those systems. But in terms of it being this thing where you have high serotonin and then you're like the God amongst men, and then you have low serotonin and you're about to fall off the cliff.

[00:36:21] My estimation, it would be pretty much be the opposite. Yeah, as far as I can tell.

[00:36:27] Mike Fave: Yeah. And it's quite a mixed bag to the serotonin stuff as well, right? Because there's some studies in the primates and we were talking about this before, but they had primates where they had achieved like a high social status.

[00:36:40] And then they get induced a serotonergic state in them. They made them more serotonergic and then they lost their status. And then in some of the animals that were at the absolute bottom. Yeah. Of the hierarchy, they would induce serotonin in them and it made them like more amenable to work with the group and slightly improve status.

[00:36:58] But this is again, like the results with the serotonin components are not super clear. And I think the research, like they're having a difficult time trying to parse out what the principle is. Behind serotonin overall. And I think part of the problem when you touched on this is that it's hard to delineate what's going on.

[00:37:15] If you're using serotonergic drugs to drive the States that you want to see with serotonin, cause you have such a mixed bag effect from all these different drugs and some of the antagonists that they test. And even inside the Pete sphere, there's been talk around like some of the benefits that people feel from things like SSRIs and some of these drugs that get promoted.

[00:37:35] for their pro serotonergic effects is possibly not related to the actual serotonergic effects. It could be related to some other pleiotropic or like off target mechanisms. I think the one that people often discuss in the sphere is the effects on neurosteroids of some of the serotonin based drugs.

[00:37:52] And so there could be other mechanisms. It's like the same thing with statins. There's other mechanisms of statins that can have some benefits that aren't related to nuking your cholesterol levels. So it's important to understand Are, like, are we really fully driving serotonin and then we're seeing these effects because of serotonin alone?

[00:38:10] Or is there other pieces at play? The other thing that I think is really important is, like, when Jordan is talking about, oh, you're down and you're at the bottom and you're on, you're, like, you're defeated and you're under all this stress that's not just serotonin. That's cortisol, that's prolactin, that's the catecholamines.

[00:38:26] He's saying that's

[00:38:26] Jay Feldman: low serotonin, by the way.

[00:38:29] Mike Fave: Okay. Okay. Yeah. So either way he's seeing, you're seeing like a variety of stress hormones in that state as well. That are, that's hugely problematic. Like in that, if you're in that state, you're also probably going to nuke out your sex steroids like testosterone and progesterone and whatnot through prolactin lowering it.

[00:38:46] So it's You can look at serotonin, but you, this is important of looking at the whole picture in context and trying to understand how are these things moving together? What is the relationship to these components and what drives the context? And so it's not just like a serotonergic state or a non serotonergic state.

[00:39:04] It's you have a serotonergic component going on in conjunction with a hypothyroid state in conjunction with hypogonadism and an upregulation of the adrenals. There's this whole picture I think is important to see with how people are functioning because they don't move independent of each other.

[00:39:19] It's like when you move into that stress state, you will downregulate thyroid and androgens and progestogens and like the sex steroids in general and raise the adrenal state. And then that will also start to push some of the serotonergic effects and whatnot. You start to dig into that, right? And or as you were saying, if you have gut issues and this is something I think that's, there's a discrepancy here inside.

[00:39:41] inside the research and like versus the mainstream perspective. Peripheral serotonin in the research is a problem. Like they already say it causes all these issues. And then it's just like central serotonin is this happy hormone, but peripherally, like God forbid, if you are obese or you get diabetes or whatnot.

[00:39:57] So it's there's these like weird paradoxes. So it's You know, there's that piece going on. And it's like the serotonin from the gut will cause tons of issues. It's you can have people have gut issues and no matter how much progesterone and thyroid and all these things that you take, you're like still seriously having that go on a lot of people don't respond or they get weird responses.

[00:40:16] And it's Oh, progesterone is just not for me. And it's maybe you like the, maybe there's things that you can, you have to adjust that you like respond to it much better. It's also, I guess the last point here is it's weird. Cause it's like the. All these years, even the alternative spheres, like pro serotonin, pro catecholamines, pro growth hormone, pro estrogen.

[00:40:35] And we're going to talk about all that's literally like pushing the worst things, like the stress things, the things that cause all of these problems. And that's why when you guys make these videos and like this documentary style, it's super digestible for people. And you're like giving them perspective that they would never get to have to see like this, like these hormones that people are optimizing for, this is not good.

[00:40:58] Like maybe you feel good in the short term, maybe, but then downstream, it's why are people falling off carnivore? Why are they falling off keto? Why are they falling out of the biohacking sphere? It's cause they are literally optimizing for these stress things. They're driving themselves into these terrible states.

[00:41:14] Jay Feldman: Yeah, totally. And you have Jordan here purveying the same. Serotonin is a happy hormone, and then adding in serotonin is the dominance hormone, and that when you're low in serotonin, you're high in anxiety and alertness, and when you're high in serotonin, you're high in this positive emotion, and you're at the top of the chain, and it's the complete opposite of the reality.

[00:41:36] It's again, like we see this in the primate studies, you guys cited a really great one in your documentary showing that adding serotonin or increasing serotonergic activity actually reversed dominance, like it reduced dominance. And it did at the same time, increase aggression, which is the other thing that Jordan Peterson is conflating here is aggression with dominance.

[00:41:58] And I think that's, One of the, like another really harmful notion to be putting forth. And it's true that serotonin does increase aggression and violence. And that you guys pointed this out, all like this connection with all the school shootings and these people being on SSRIs, and it's starting to be put out in the literature finally, that it's not as simple as serotonin being the happy hormone.

[00:42:21] It's been in there for decades, but it's starting to gain a little bit of publicity there. But yeah it's the opposite, right? You guys mentioned serotonin is a hormone of learned helplessness. It's a hormone of hibernation. It increases weight gain. It decreases libido. It suppresses appetite.

[00:42:35] It increases anhedonia. This is not something that we want to be. orienting our life toward increasing, we'd want to do the exact opposite.

[00:42:45] Danny Roddy: Speaking of, I think what you said earlier, Dalton, is really important that people that seem the most out of touch with their body seem like they have the most either extreme constipation or really bad diarrhea.

[00:42:57] And so if all the purpose of all this stuff is to try to get in touch with yourself and what your body is telling you, that's really important. I thought I had never heard this before what you guys had said. In where did you guys first say this on Twitter? The I'm sorry, you can't see sugar cravings are actually excellent sign of youth and health.

[00:43:15] Dalton: Oh yeah. Yeah. And then and then Dr. Baker, that's what I have. That's what I

[00:43:19] Danny Roddy: have up here. So Hong Kong, do you guys just want to explain this? Cause I think it's worth highlighting. Cause I'd never heard it before.

[00:43:26] Dalton: Oh, the the sugar cravings being being, being a sign of like health and youth. Yeah.

[00:43:30] Yeah. It's used in it's literally called like the sucrose preference test, but it's one of these tests they use in research to gauge whether animals are undergoing like a chronic stress or an adonia really. And I guess you can argue about the the validity of any, rodent test, whether you're looking at.

[00:43:49] How fast they go through a maze or, whether they're in the open field or whether they're swimming, it's, it can be hard to parse out the behavioral effects in animals in comparison to humans, but that's why I included another study that basically, showed what everyone already knows, which is that younger children and young adults have a much higher preference for sugar than older people do.

[00:44:13] And I was trying to put those together and say Hey, as we age, our metabolic rates decline, people inevitably get, crabby and they start acting less youthful but their sugar cravings go down alongside that and I was trying to, I was trying to make the case that, not having a craving for sugar is not a good thing which seems to be, a big target behind, Pretty much any health paradigm is, how do I reduce my sugar cravings?

[00:44:40] I think that there are cases where, you can identify if something is pathological. Maybe you have a yeast overgrowth or something or you parasites where, you have these like insane cravings. Yeah, that should be highlighted. It's not normal, for people to like, want to lose their appetite.

[00:44:58] It's not normal for people to try to lose their intuitive cravings which seems to be, again, one of these things that a lot of these health paradigms are pushing is to basically put your body in a situation where it's not in touch with its cravings which, is not, it's not exactly a good thing.

[00:45:16] Yeah. And then, it's the same story, Dr. Baker. Basically I think he quoted it and he just called me a clown in whatever way. And then, I just get barraged with all of this with all of this, all this stuff. They're

[00:45:29] Danny Roddy: all soon to be Ray Pete people. So it's just, you just got to give them some more time.

[00:45:33] I think

[00:45:35] Mike Fave: the comments, they were bad. The comments under your thread were like. They were laughable overall. It was ridiculous.

[00:45:41] Dalton: Yeah. I just started, I think I saw that I woke up one morning and then I saw that Baker had quoted it and I was like, I'm just going to mute this tweet and I'm just going to go about my day.

[00:45:52] Danny Roddy: But seriously, how many longstanding carnivores are left? The, since 2018. I would say 90 percent of the major ones are all not doing it anymore. Baker is literally one of the last standing long term carnivores.

[00:46:06] Dalton: Yeah, he is. And Peterson as well. But,

[00:46:09] Danny Roddy: if you count his benzos as part of his diet.

[00:46:12] Peterson's not even long

[00:46:13] Mike Fave: standing, right? Peterson's only been doing this for a couple of years, the carnivore stuff. Yeah. He's only I don't think he's Baker and some of the other carnivores go back. I think further. I think Peterson is like Relatively new because his daughter had hopped on at first and then she got him into it like in the late 2000 teens and or early 2020s.

[00:46:35] I don't so I think like they're still newer on it

[00:46:38] Danny Roddy: I don't even think baker has been doing it for that long because he was framing it on joe rogan like it was an experiment that he was doing and I thought that was in like 2016 so it hasn't correct me if i'm wrong, but I didn't think it was that long

[00:46:50] Mike Fave: Yeah, I think, I don't know.

[00:46:51] Dalton: I feel like that. Yeah. But I feel like that is a really long time. You're talking about six or seven years because the classic story that gets presented to me is Oh, I was on this for six months to a year and everything was great until every like shit just completely hit the fan at six to 12 months.

[00:47:11] So when I hear about people being on it for three, four, five, six years, I'm like,

[00:47:16] Mike Fave: that kind of is yeah, usually I, with people that I work with, it's usually like I was on carnivore. I was doing good. And then I got some like really bad GI infection. Or something like that. And then it's all downhill after that.

[00:47:28] And so I think that is like the body's breaking point for multiple reasons with the carnivore piece. And it's it's just not the same. And the worst thing too, is like people then jump ship to whatever their diet, vegan, bioenergetic, whatever the deal is. And then it's not organized appropriately because you just go from like super caloric restriction, one meal a day, like only protein and some fat and things like that.

[00:47:52] And then now it's like carbs galore and all this like unlimited food, all this type of stuff. Don't worry about intake, all these things. And then they gain a little bit of weight and then they jump back, try to jump back into carnivore or keto and then it doesn't work anymore. And that's that is such a classic presentation I see over and over again.

[00:48:12] So there's something goes on there. Like I have some hypothesis about what goes on at that point. I don't know if we want to extend that out in this section here, but

[00:48:20] Dalton: I have some theories about that as well. So one thing I've been reading about. And I guess I'm, I guess I'm, I guess I'm answering that question with a yes.

[00:48:30] I do want to talk about that. I was just reading about, I was reading about intestinal immunity over the last couple of weeks. And one thing that doesn't get talked about is that you actually produce antimicrobial peptides endogenously in your intestine. And what is interesting is that your enterocytes, so your small intestinal cells.

[00:48:50] They run primarily on glucose. So I thought that was interesting. You have the production of these antimicrobial peptides. So I'm sure you you guys are familiar with cathelicedon, which is producing vitamin D. But you also have other ones. I think they're called like alpha and beta defensins.

[00:49:07] They're basically these proteins that your intestine produces in order to stave off a certain bacterial load. further up in the digestive tract so that you're not like basically overwhelmed with bacteria in the colon. And what I thought was interesting was that the enterocytes as well as these cells called paneth cells, I believe they're called, but they basically their sole role is to produce these antimicrobial peptides.

[00:49:31] And those cells are also highly glycolytic. So they depend a lot on glucose. And then you all obviously have the issues with elevated cortisol and that potentially suppressing immunity as well. And I think it really can set you up in a situation where your intestinal immunity is very compromised over a given period of time without carbohydrates and things.

[00:49:55] And then, that's pretty much further confirmed by the fact that we know that intestinal serotonin. Tends to go up with starvation or fasting. You can see this in people that practice fasting during Ramadan. And then also in animal studies, they actually call it like a an adaptive mechanism to fasting because it basically, it acts as a stress hormone.

[00:50:16] It suppresses the appetite. It allows for more lipolysis and more gluconeogenesis and it's an energy conservation mechanism. I think and then going off of that one another interesting point, something that I've been reading about a little bit more as it pertains to the gut is something called quorum sensing and quorum sensing is basically this bacterial communication mechanism that, if you have a bunch of microbes in your gut, they will be communicating using these various molecules and then they can create biofilms.

[00:50:47] And then these biofilms can really set you up for a lot of problems. That's where you can get a lot of antibiotic resistance because this biofilm is essentially imagine, having 10 people outside in the middle of the field, that would be like a bacteria without a biofilm versus like those 10 people, like building a house and like building a fire and having all these resources that obviously makes it much more difficult.

[00:51:12] are, to kill basically. So that's essentially what's going on there. And serotonin is actually one of the primary drivers of quorum sensing in the intestine. So yeah, you can really have the perfect storm where you're doing lots of fasts and you're doing the carbohydrate restriction, you're elevating cortisol, you're elevating serotonin, which is independently probably driving the HPA axis as well.

[00:51:36] That's suppressing immunity. You have, an impaired ability to clear out the microbes. And then because there's all this serotonin production going on, you have, it's basically becomes a self reinforcing mechanism where the bacteria are using the serotonin. That's already being produced to continue to spread and become more virulent.

[00:51:56] So that is probably my best take on the whole thing. And it is, Mike, you definitely nailed it. The amount of times that people will say dude, what happened to you exactly happened to me. It was like, I was on keto and carnivore and it was going great. It's doing lots of fasting. And then, bam, I got destroyed.

[00:52:14] I got the coated tongue at the bloating. I couldn't, I had zero appetite, all these things. Yeah. And yeah, at a certain point, you need to recognize that this is a consistent pattern and try to come up with some answers.

[00:52:23] Jack: Yeah, we can just eat

[00:52:24] Mike Fave: more steak

[00:52:25] Jack: and

[00:52:25] Mike Fave: more salt.

[00:52:25] Jack: That's what I, exactly.

[00:52:27] Mike Fave: I literally had

[00:52:28] Danny Roddy: this. Go ahead. Go ahead, Danny. I was going to say, go ahead. I was just going to mention the paper I think maybe it's a science daily article. It's called like an aspirin a day keeps the biofilm away away. But I just thought of that when you were talking.

[00:52:40] Go ahead Mike.

[00:52:41] Mike Fave: There's the carnivore stuff. I, it's, I had like similar ideas, but I came about it at a different angle. So there's a couple of things. When you have protein going into the colon, you don't really form as much like short chain fatty acids. So that doesn't feed the colon to the colonocytes.

[00:53:00] And then what you wind up getting is branch chain fatty acids and some toxic metabolites, ammonia hydrogen sulfide and whatnot. So carnivores literally build that up in the colon. And if you ever look at a carnivore stool profile, you tend to see like a bunch of gram negative bacteria. And elevations in SIGA, secretory IGA and and then zonulin tends to be elevated, which is a marker of permeability.

[00:53:22] So you start to see that. And I, I think, so you create that dysbiosis inside the colon from all the meat, even though you don't have the fermentation going on in the small intestine. And I think because the carb intake is so low mucus production in the colon can start to get impaired as well. And so then you have the bacteria able to like, Reach the colonic epithelium instead of sit on that mucus layer and that triggers immune responses in all these problems I think it's only a matter of time until that starts to hit the other thing that happens is And it's along the biofilm line is that the catecholamines actually drive biofilm formation as well.

[00:53:59] And they also tend to drive bacterial growth, like they worsen infection because they have a bit of an immunosuppressive effect as well. So it's like the stress hormones plus the effect of the bile acids, which also induces serotonergic release inside the colon because they irritate them, plus the amino acid metabolites.

[00:54:17] And then this like toxic microbiome that forms, I think at a certain point, like the body's that's it's done. Plus you have all the hormonal aberrations that come with that long term. So yeah, it's, I was thinking along the same lines, but like just through different mechanisms because it always starts with that gut situation, right?

[00:54:35] You get jacked up gut and then boom, it's like I can't do carnivore or keto or whatever anymore.

[00:54:40] Jay Feldman: No, it's not that it's insomnia. It's the libido and testosterone tanking and the low T3, which is a clear effect of this situation, not only is going to cause us those issues, but also is going to predispose you to bacterial overgrowth.

[00:54:53] Reduce motility, reduce stomach acid. It's a recipe for gut issues there. In addition to, as you said, high stress hormones, which reduces the immune activity, reduces blood flow to the intestines and also plus the excess protein leading to colonic fermentation and a shift in, into some pretty harmful.

[00:55:12] Microbes producing things like hydrogen sulfide and other toxic. Products. So yeah, and circling back to the original post here, these are all things that are going to reduce appetite and reduce carb cravings and things that do that are things that tend you to tend to make you less alive, right?

[00:55:30] Tend towards starvation, tend toward conservation. Where your body is hybridating very similar to the high serotonin state we were talking about before. And so obviously the response here is, Oh you guys are shills for sugar and whatnot. But yeah, if you're forcing yourself into that state, a low cal, like where you're comfortable on a low calorie, low carb diet, that's a pretty severely.

[00:55:52] Hypometabolic state to be in. Yeah.

[00:55:54] Mike Fave: The other thing that people don't know is that in infants in the NICU, so neonatal intensive care unit, they give children sucrose as a, as an analgesic, as a pain reliever. So they literally give them a swab. That's because it's a drugs. No.

[00:56:08] It's there it is. You got me, but there's that. And then in studies, so there's like all These, the neuropsychology, psychological studies, what they do is they will look at people's cortisol levels in response to different stressors, like putting their hands in really cold water, or like a person, like they may give them these dumb tests that stress them out.

[00:56:28] These memory tests. And if you preload them with carbohydrate, sucrose, they actually have lower glucocorticoid responses, lower cortisol responses. And then if you stress them out and then give them carbohydrate after, you lower their glucocorticoid response. And it's known from the endocrinology research that people, when they are under stress, automatically start to crave hyperpalatable foods, which is essentially just carbs and fats.

[00:56:55] Okay. But it makes sense that you're craving this because the stress are liberating that substrate and your body is trying to intelligently make a decision and say, I could either break down all of my structure and then down regulate my metabolism or I could just go out and have a chocolate chip cookie and it's like chocolate chip cookie it is and it's like how can you blame people for trying to cope with their stress in as intelligent a way as possible and I feel like the idea Of like your cravings are inherently wrong.

[00:57:27] It's like original sin. apply to nutrition. It's like what you like your inclinations are inherently wrong. Don't follow them. You have to completely ignore them. And then, they will get you into trouble. It's or instead of going for the chocolate chip cookie, you could just go get, a piece of fruit or some chocolate or something along those lines that maybe isn't loaded with polyunsaturated fats and like reduced iron and whatever additives.

[00:57:51] And still manage the cravings and not gain the weight and have all these problems because the thing is, and we're going to get to the, I think we'll get to this at some point today, but the people back in the day, like this obesity thing didn't exist to any significant extent before the 1950s or so, like it was such a small percentage of people and it's exploded afterwards and it's yeah, people were trying to cope with stress. I'm sure with carbohydrate and different foods for centuries. I don't think that has changed. It's just now the options to meet those things have changed. And that seems more of the problem than just, it's sugar or whatever the deal is. Cause again, as you were saying, doll, and previously there's access to sugar back in the 1950s at a hundred, what, a hundred pounds per year or something you're saying, or a hundred equivalent to a hundred grams a day, something along those lines.

[00:58:37] So it's yeah, it's not like sugar And that's

[00:58:39] Dalton: just and that was just white sugar, right? So they were eating, potatoes and they were eating lots of bread. They would have plenty of fruits and well cooked vegetables on top of that and juices. So yeah, I had calculated it out and it was pretty, the diet that I had come up with was basically that they were eating.

[00:58:56] actually very remarkably similar to what Ray had recommended, which was like 100 grams of protein around 300 to 400 grams of carbohydrate. And then the fat could be anywhere from around 70 to, it was mostly saturated cause you're talking about cream and butter and milk and things. But it was 70 to 120 grams.

[00:59:14] And yeah, it was it was PD if you will. I was like, what the, that's what they were eating. And yeah. And I just, I think it was really interesting because. They a lot of these like primal. Carnivore or paleo, whatever the case may be, they love to talk about ancestors, but you, they don't look at the ancestors that we have the best, like actual available data on, which is the ancestors from like a hundred years ago.

[00:59:36] Instead, we're talking about ancestors from a million years ago, where you're pretty much completely in fantasy land at that point. But if you just look at a hundred years ago, we were recording a lot of things and we have a lot of information about that era. And it was pretty clear, what we were eating and how healthy we were.

[00:59:53] So

[00:59:54] Danny Roddy: I get all my nutrition data from the Atlanteans. And so that's how I structure all my thoughts about nutrition and stuff. So you've had a problem pre flood nutrition or post flood nutrition? Pre flood only. Yeah.

[01:00:08] You guys are making some good points about all this stuff, but I'm going to continue avoiding fructose, taking my SSRI and keeping on with the carnivore diet. But and any other points about this stuff before we move on?

[01:00:19] Mike Fave: I think you should tell us about birth control, Danny. I think you need to add that to your regimen.

[01:00:23] Danny Roddy: Got it. So I'm still cursed Jay for sending me this clip, but we'll have to listen to it. And I

[01:00:27] Jay Feldman: love Brian Johnson. Yeah.

[01:00:29] Danny Roddy: I'll just have to mute my mute my audio. So I don't have to listen to her. Oh, okay. Here we go.

[01:00:35] Gynecologist: They then go on to throw in a description of the Women's Health Institute.

[01:00:39] Actually,

[01:00:40] Danny Roddy: before this, Jay, do you want to set this clip up really quickly before

[01:00:42] Jay Feldman: I just launch into it? Sure, yeah. She's debunking birth control lies. And actually, this is talking about one of Carnivore Aurelius posts. And the biggest thing that The biggest reason we wanted to include this clip is because of this conflation between progestins and progesterone among a couple other kind of claims she makes.

[01:01:01] And you guys just recently had a video, like a big documentary on birth control and talked about some of those issues there. So thank you, sir. Oh, here we go.

[01:01:10] Gynecologist: Study, which they then go on to throw in a description of the Women's Health Institute study. Which is a study on estrogen and progesterone in post menopausal hormonal replacement therapy.

[01:01:23] And they say that it had to be halted because of the increased incidence of breast cancer. They throw this in randomly and I thought, why would they do this? And then I realized it's because they're trying to draw in this idea that combined hormonal contraceptives are dangerous and cause cancer. But this finding from the Women's Health Initiative is a completely different discussion.

[01:01:43] This is post menopausal women who are on hormonal replacement therapy. And the breast cancer they're discussing is actually related to the progestin side of that study. This is, it is a truth. That truth about the study is true, but it is absolutely not applicable to hormonal contraceptive pills in pre menopausal people because these are post menopausal people on hormone replacement.

[01:02:08] And it's absolutely not applicable to estrogen as the cause because the finding was that progestin was the concern.

[01:02:16] Danny Roddy: Classic medical mind. What do you guys think?

[01:02:19] Mike Fave: Oh, man, that was so painful.

[01:02:21] Jay Feldman: If something causes cancer in one particular group of people, we can never extrapolate that to other human physiology.

[01:02:28] I agree. I agree.

[01:02:29] Dalton: I had a great one of my buddies on Twitter said something hilarious. He was like, everyone is different. Some, sometimes estrogen can cause cancer in some people, but it doesn't cause cancer in other people. We're all just individual. Is where the history is very valuable because if this lady understood the history, she would know that the progestin component of menopausal HRT got introduced.

[01:02:53] because the estrogen alone was causing cancer and they added in the progestins to circumvent that and it actually did to a certain degree but it just, ended up causing other problems as well. So that was, yeah, that was one of the big things was that they were causing lots of blood clots and they were causing endometrial cancer because estrogen has this proliferative effect on the, especially on the breast and in the endometrium of the uterus.

[01:03:20] And then they added in the synthetic progestins that they were already using for birth control to circumvent that in HRT. So that is pretty much the whole argument. And then I don't know anything about this woman who is speaking, but I would assume that she probably puts some stock into what the WHO has to say.

[01:03:41] And they actually have put hormonal birth control in their class one carcinogen list. This isn't even something that, is a crazy conspiracy theory. I guess it is because that's just the the terminology that we go with. But but even the WHO has acknowledged that point.

[01:03:58] And then yeah, and then conflating progesterone with progestins is very important because they have completely different actions. So the synthetic progestins work on a variety of different receptors at different orders of magnitude that progesterone does. And more importantly, they have some like non receptor.

[01:04:19] effects that I don't, I still don't think are like really fully understood. But for instance, medroxy progesterone acid yeah. Medroxy progesterone acetate, one of these synthetic progestins that is used in birth control. So if a girl has ever gotten and gotten like the shot, which is like an injection, a bolus injection of progestin, it's medroxy progesterone acetate.

[01:04:39] And they found out through cell culture studies and unfortunately in the women's health initiative that it would potentiate the proliferative effect of. estrogen even without acting on any of the estrogen receptors. So that was known, they did that in vitro that they did that in monkeys.

[01:04:56] And then unfortunately they did it on women. So you really have all levels of evidence showing that the synthetic progestins had that effect. They basically could potentiate a lot of the estrogenic effects. And then there's the other part, which is that, progesterone has. These other metabolites that are very important, one that we could talk about is allopregnenolone and allopregnenolone is very important for all different types of cognitive function and then progesterone obviously gets converted into DHEA.

[01:05:25] Etc. And down the line. And it's obviously it goes back and forth with pregnant alone, and it tends to inhibit the HPA access. Whereas the synthetic progestins tend to promote it. Yeah, that was a mouthful, but it's sometimes I feel like these people don't even look into the issue themselves.

[01:05:41] They just hear a dissenting viewpoint and they're like, Oh no, you're not going to do that. And then come back. I'm sitting next to the teacher basically. That's like how these things seem to operate because, anyone who is dove into the history and the actual literature about progestins versus progesterone in the history, why the synthetic progestins were made, why they were, became a part of HRT, because remember it used to just be estrogen and they found out that was causing massive amounts of harm and they added in these synthetic progestins.

[01:06:13] That's. Pretty open and shut case in my opinion, but there are people are interested. There's there's one narrative review it's called in defensive progesterone because in the literature, in the research literature they, even people that are in the field. Will conflate.

[01:06:30] the terminology of progestin and progesterone. A lot of these studies become very confusing because you'll read, oh wow, progesterone doubles my risk for stroke, but then you actually look at the methods and you'll see that no, it was norothinodryl, which is synthetic progestin, or it was medroxyprogesterone acetate, and they just called it progesterone because there's this underlying assumption that they are the same when in reality they're not.

[01:06:53] And this narrative review, they basically went through and they said, people need to stop referring to these things as the same. They're clearly different pharmacologically and they're clearly have different actions on people and animals. So we need to stop conflating these two. And then they actually looked at the studies where progesterone bioidentical progesterone was added.

[01:07:15] And what do they find? They found either no increased risk of any type of cancer or protective effect, which is obviously in line with what we would expect. So yeah, lots to unpack there, but I guess those would be my thoughts.

[01:07:29] Mike Fave: Yeah. It's The thing too, I would add to that is that there are studies showing that birth control does increase the risk of breast cancer.

[01:07:38] So whether or not it was even in the population of premenopausal or postmenopausal, like in postmenopausal, there's problems. And then in premenopausal with women who are taking birth control, there is problems. So it's there's, I don't even know, like you can make, she can make that argument, but then it's like, there's still research to support the other side as well.

[01:07:59] So that's the. For me, it's did she even do, did she even look like you could just go into PubMed and you can just type in effect of birth control on breast cancer. And you'll come with a, I have, I pulled up three studies went through. And then the other thing they directly say in the studies is for some of the studies, the estrogen only and some of the higher dose estrogen therapies were even worse.

[01:08:24] and had a higher risk of breast cancer than the progesterone or the combination stuff, or, and even the newer combined stuff that they put out, the lower dose progestogen and the mini pills and whatever else, they still increased risk. There's still some studies showing associations with increased risk of breast cancer.

[01:08:42] So it's like her whole argument there is useless because this research is still supporting the side. And the other thing to tag along is Some of the progestogens, actually, when they added the progestogens to the estrogen therapy, compared to the bioidentical progesterone, they worsened outcomes. They worse, so estrogen is supposedly cardioprotective, right?

[01:09:06] So they, because it adjusts the lipid profile. But some of the progestins, the synthetic ones, worsened lipid pro, lipid profile overall. They had estrogenic effects. They had other stimulatory effects on breast tissue and other tissues. outside of the outside of like just having estrogenic effects like affecting the cell checkpoints and things like that involved in cell replication and they worsen insulin resistance and then some of them actually have glucocorticoid like activity whereas progesterone has anti glucocorticoid activity and anti mineral corticoid activity so it's like it's not even close to the same drug.

[01:09:43] They're not even close to the same thing. A lot of them are a testosterone structure that they modified. And then they call them progestins. What is the bioidentical progesterone is different. The other thing is, God forbid you talk to a doctor about bioidentical progesterone. There's papers in PubMed.

[01:10:01] They're like, this stuff is useless. Like it's not better. The outcomes aren't better than the synthetics. And it's just then you go and look at the research what are you guys just writing opinion pieces? What is this? The New York times. Come on guys. This isn't supposed to be research. We're not here to hear about your opinion about something and what you learned in med school.

[01:10:19] And so you, those types of things is it's like questionable when you look at mechanisms and you see the association studies and you see these different components and you have some authority saying, Oh it's actually this. It's are you reading the research? Cause it's clear. It's very it's very clear.

[01:10:34] And in some of these instances that some of these things are harmful.

[01:10:38] Jay Feldman: Yeah. It's like talking to a typical T3 as well. It's looked at as poison, like fructose, but yeah, just to highlight a couple. Things coming back to this clip, the women's health initiative study, again, not only showed increased risk of certain types of cancer, but also heart attacks, stroke, blood clots, like a lot of really concerning outcomes there.

[01:10:59] And yeah, as again, just to highlight again, progestin is, Almost, it has more opposite effects of progesterone, the synthetic progestins do, then they do the same effects, estrogenic activity, mineralocorticoid activity, glucocorticoid activity. So equating them is something that you see all the time.

[01:11:16] And as we're highlighting has led to a lot of fear around progesterone itself and is obviously an incredible disservice. To the human population in an effort, or as a, a just coincidental by product, a lot of synthetic progestins gets sold along with estrogen. So anyway, here's

[01:11:37] Dalton: one of the interesting things is that they actually realize that the mineralocorticoid promoting effect of.

[01:11:46] The synthetic progestins was a problem. So then they tried to create one that had the anti mineral corticoid effects. So if you are familiar with the drug spironolactone, they came up with a derivative of spironolactone. I think it's called drosperinone. And then that was packaged with ethanol estradiol in the birth control, Yaz or Yasmin.

[01:12:10] And then I think it was like 20 years later, it soared literally to number one selling birth control throughout the two thousands. And then I think. They had a condensed litigation in 2019 where Bayer had to pay out 2 billion in settlements for blood clots blood clots and strokes and heart attacks that these women were having.

[01:12:30] And that was with the progestin that was specifically designed to be an anti mineralic work way more similar to progesterone. But even that in unison with the with the estrogen was probably the worst thing that they ever developed. That is that's something else to consider, but the what is important to understand is that, there's a reason that women have these cycles of higher estrogen and then higher progesterone.

[01:12:57] And that's because estrogen is primary role in the body. Is to be a proliferative hormone. So it's not any surprise. that yeah, if you are trying to grow the endometrium in preparation for a fetus to be, to inhabit it essentially, and then to grow the breasts for lactation and to grow the actual fetus, yeah, you need a lot of this growth hormone, this estrogen, that's its role.

[01:13:22] So it should not really come as a surprise that if you're just going to be administering tons of estrogen that you're going to have the quintessential growth, like excess growth disease, which is cancer.

[01:13:35] Mike Fave: And the other thing to add to that too is the progesterone is the differentiating hormone. So you grow the tissue and then the progesterone directs it into proper development.

[01:13:46] And so it's like just giving estrogen is okay. We're just going to stimulate growth now all the time and we're not going to differentiate. And then it's okay maybe we need the progesterone. It's so we're going to develop these derivatives. that don't have the progest, progestogenic effect that we're looking for.

[01:14:02] We have some synthetic projections and they are they worsen the effects of estrogen to some extent. And they shut down your natural progesterone production on top of that. So it's just a complete shit. And I would wonder too, if the synthetic progestins are a, I w I actually would doubt that they are able to have the effect of neuro steroids.

[01:14:27] In terms of creating the proper neurosteroid balance, because again, like you are, if you are shutting down that whole pathway, this is some of the problems with like TRT. Those are some of the like hypothesized problems with TRT and then also obviously the 5 which these are a little bit different, but shutting down the whole hormonal production pathway may have some negative effects on neurosteroid synthesis and birth control is essentially castration and replacement.

[01:14:53] So it's, you're just shutting down the whole hypothalamic pituitary gonadal axis so that you won't get pregnant, you're not going to have your cycle to any large extent. And then it's it's funny too. Cause it's oh, there's no problem with this. And then on the flip side with guys, it's God forbid you go on TRT and you're trying to come off.

[01:15:09] It's like this whole thing, but women, no, just hop off. Burst control will be completely fine. We just, it's not like your hormonal system is more delicate than a man's cause you have to cycle every single month to get pregnant. It's completely, there's no damage,

[01:15:21] Jay Feldman: completely normal. A lot of you look at the history, the number of times that different estrogen or progestin derivatives.

[01:15:30] have been sold for all sorts of different potential benefits. And then decades later have been taken off the market for really horrible effects. Quote unquote side effects is astounding. Like looking at that history should make anybody extremely hesitant to recommend anything here. And it's, It just keeps happening, right?

[01:15:49] At the time, all the doctors recommend it, a couple decades later, it's off the market, there's all these lawsuits and everything, but they're already promoting the next one. It just doesn't, it just doesn't end.

[01:15:57] Danny Roddy: I can think of a current example of that, but we can move on. Yeah,

[01:16:01] Mike Fave: we can talk about that one here, Danny.

[01:16:03] Danny Roddy: The last thing I was going to say is maybe if estrogen was called adipin I know there are a few other names that were thrown out where you wouldn't be in this entire mess, but maybe we would, who knows?

[01:16:14] Dalton: Actually serotonin used to be called entyramine and it also used to be called thrombodinin.

[01:16:24] Jay Feldman: Oh, boy. Yeah. Although even serotonin itself is still talking about vasoconstriction and that still doesn't scare anyone from it.

[01:16:32] Mike Fave: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think people realize that they, that it means that though, like that you're causing an increase in tone in the vasculature.

[01:16:42] Danny Roddy: Yeah. Okay. So anyway, we'll move on here to why is the right so obsessed with seed oils?

[01:16:49] And did anybody give this. article read, it's really bad.

[01:16:54] Mike Fave: I would actually would not even recommend anybody read it. Yeah, it's an absolutely useless article.

[01:16:58] Danny Roddy: They really don't get into any so they're referencing, I think, Carnivore Aurelius again, but they're not getting into any of the actual substance of any debate that's going on.

[01:17:08] And so they're just immediately asking experts to expand on what, The carnivore really is Instagram posts are saying and it's a kind of a nothing burger, but I don't know. Do you guys have any other thoughts on this? It

[01:17:20] Jay Feldman: even appeal to Authority does. Yeah. Yeah. Good. I was gonna say, I think it might have been written by the woman who did the birth control videos.

[01:17:27] Mike Fave: That's the thing, right? It's look at the Appeal to authority. It's look at, you have this example. We're just showing you this authority. And then like now we have an article with appeal to authority. And then I think this article outside of the seed oil stuff is just a good example. of how the media machine just tries to take anything down, right?

[01:17:44] It's associate with a bunch of things that have some type of negative. So right wing crypto bros like all of these types of things. And then even in the article, like at one point for the value of the seed oils, they literally cite health line. It's just it's such a trash article.

[01:18:02] It the fact that somebody's even on staff to write this garbage. It was probably, AI is hilarious.

[01:18:07] Danny Roddy: Let's be real here. It's probably an AI article. ,

[01:18:10] Dalton: maybe? Yeah. It was similar. It is similar. I think Vice did an article on the whole thing. Maybe it was like a year or two ago. But yeah, it's just you just wonder what the initiative is there because nobody that is convinced by the anti pufa or anti seed oil arguments is going to then be convinced by some random doctor in an article saying, Oh no, the experts agree because the whole thing about being.

[01:18:35] anti seed oil or, questioning the validity of the narrative around vegetable oils or polyunsaturated fats or any of this is because you distrust those authorities. So I don't know why they would think that bringing in some doctor or some RD It and saying and having them say, Oh, now the experts agree.

[01:18:56] Like it's actually good. Is that really intended to convince anyone that thinks otherwise?

[01:19:02] Danny Roddy: Yeah. I'm so sorry to interrupt, Dalton. You know how I think this plays out in real life, since most people only read the headlines, like you'll be this anti seed oil guy or whatever. And then one of your friends or something that violently disagrees with you, we'll just like gloss past this headline.

[01:19:19] And then that will confirm their suspicions or something that you're incorrect. But I felt like I had come across that type of situation many times. And so this is just to keep people in line, not to fall out of ranks. And I don't know, that's my hypothesis.

[01:19:34] Mike Fave: I also think it forces people to like, can conflate any types of these ideas with things that are, they should like normal people, normies, however you want to, whatever you want to call them that automatically assume that these things are bad. So it's if you, if somebody starts talking to you and says there's problems with the mega six and seed oils, it's Oh, they're a Nazi.

[01:19:54] That's it. It's a Nazi. It's a right winger. It's a, he's a crypto bro. Like he's anti government just throw it. He's all these terms. He's anti, Black Lives Matters movement, all this stuff. So you just get, you associate everybody in this one group. And then, so if they're, if you're exposed to any of these ideas.

[01:20:12] You automatically think, Oh, this person is this

[01:20:14] Danny Roddy: now, this podcast, like meanwhile, it's like

[01:20:17] Mike Fave: none of these belief systems have anything to do with right wing or anything like that. It's like choosing not to have vegetables has nothing to do with your political affiliation.

[01:20:29] Danny Roddy: Yeah, man, just separating people into perverse pseudo families to separate everybody over absolutely everything.

[01:20:35] Jay, what do you think?

[01:20:37] Jay Feldman: Yeah, totally. It's a the same divide and conquer tactic, that's used with every opinion. It's here's your opinion because the, the evil people think the opposite of this or think the evil people think this thing. So you have to think the opposite. It's Obviously it's an article with no substance and reading through it is, yeah, they just, they throw it all out there, right?

[01:20:58] Conspiracy theories. And, in new age conspiracy theories become a health threat. Talking about Paul Celadino, talking about how this is the same as anti sunscreen movements. It's the same as anti feminism movements and they just, they conflate it all. And, Obviously, I have no their substances is citing a doctor who said that vegetables are better for heart disease and balance is key, but right, right balance is key.

[01:21:21] Butter is high in saturated fat. So don't eat butter. Yeah, what is this? Hey,

[01:21:25] Mike Fave: he's from Harvard though. So clearly he knows what he's doing. I

[01:21:30] Dalton: thought Harvard said that ice cream was good.

[01:21:36] Danny Roddy: What is it, 13 miles away from the Pfizer headquarters or something? It's like they're like right next to each other, something ridiculous.

[01:21:43] Go ahead, Jack.

[01:21:44] Jack: And they're saying that the one the one quote, say, if you consume too much too much fried food, then it's bad. But then, but it's not bad by itself. It's just because people are having too much of it. None of it makes any sense.

[01:21:58] Danny Roddy: It's supposed to just garble your brain. It's exactly that.

[01:22:03] That's I know I've said this before, but the you know how, if you go to the guardian, it's like strawberries are the best food ever. And then the next month, it's like strawberries are the most toxic food ever that just must be a coordinated effort to make people second guess, like every thought that they possibly have.

[01:22:18] It's like psychological warfare of confusion. And there, there's actually even a paper in or even in the OSS before the CIA, they were talking about making people confused as a way to just disorient them. And so we're just living in the era of an extreme version of that. But before I even get this podcast even more demonetized, we should probably move on.

[01:22:36] So this next clip is our, all of our favorites, Dave Asprey and and Paul Saladino. And as a lot of people know, Paul has moved closer and closer to what Ray Peat was saying over the last few years. And he bumps heads with Asprey over orange juice and supplementation. So let's listen to this and we'll tell you what we think.

[01:22:56] Paul Saladino: Hey, Peat Community, I had Jordan think about

[01:22:57] Danny Roddy: this one. Let me slow this down. This was on J speed. So we got to slow it down for the average brain people.

[01:23:06] Paul Saladino: Podcast a couple of times. The Ray Peat Community is actually quite excited about Quiktoast and

[01:23:09] Dave Asprey: Yeah, I love those guys even back 20 years ago when I ran the anti aging nonprofit group in in Silicon Valley we talked about Ray Pete, but this is a guy that will tell you cottage cheese and a can of Coke is a great breakfast.

[01:23:22] It's there's interesting thinking and then there's what the hell? And it, if you try that stuff, I see people go down the rattle there. It feels like a little bit orthorexic, but his idea of mitochondria being important is absolutely true. I just, their idea of I have to make sure I get enough fructose every day to be healthy.

[01:23:40] Man, I have a hard time with that.

[01:23:41] Paul Saladino: They think that they just, there's, Georgie's pointed out some interesting stuff to me about benefits of fructose involving, helping to balance phosphate in the human diet. They pointed out the importance of the calcium phosphorus ratio, which is something that I don't think a lot of people think about reading meat, not getting enough calcium milk that appears to affect things negatively.

[01:23:58] You can check your parathyroid hormone. If you're not sure if you're getting enough. Calcium, but I'll talk more in the next podcast next week, guys, with Georgie about the calcium phosphorus ratio, but fructose does seem to have benefits from a phosphorus perspective in the human diet. But I think that's a cool, I'll just say that's a coin.

[01:24:14] Yeah. Yeah. I'll just say this when Ray recommends Coke and powdered cheese, I think I'm not going to drink Coke, but he's recommending like a Mexican Coke that has sucrose and not high fructose corn syrup. I don't think Coke is great because of, you A caramel color and Ray, the repeat folks have also pointed out, the importance of being aware of caramel color.

[01:24:31] But I think that they're one of the things that I think that they would say that this is something that anyone could do anywhere in the world. And that. They are not afraid of sucrose, which is something that, again, I've talked with Georgie about and I don't see the point in consuming sucrose because then you're getting calories with no micronutrients I'd rather

[01:24:48] Dave Asprey: get.

[01:24:48] Oh, come on. You just dropped into the Andy world right there. It doesn't matter. You're not getting micronutrients from brown sugar or from honey. There's not meaningful amounts of them in there, Paul. You're getting sugar. It's for fuel. If you want micronutrients, take a fucking vitamin or eat some liver.

[01:25:03] Come on.

[01:25:04] Paul Saladino: I'm thinking like fruit juice, Dave, like orange juice, right? I'm going to get so much vitamin C

[01:25:08] Dave Asprey: in there.

[01:25:10] Paul Saladino: There's a good amount of thiamine in orange juice. Compared

[01:25:12] Dave Asprey: to the thiamine that I took, in fact, the benfo thiamine that I took this morning, the fast soluble form that works way better.

[01:25:18] It had hundreds of times more than your stupid orange juice. Yeah, Paul. Why not get some food, Dave? I'm just trolling you right now. I know you

[01:25:27] Danny Roddy: are, you're super trolling me. Okay, we'll cut it off right there. That's about as much as I can take. Okay so much to unpack there. So one, kudos to Paul for actually laying out valuable talking points, but Dave seems like he's irritated that somebody's interrupting him speaking and he likes the sound of his own voice.

[01:25:45] So what do you guys think about that whole thing? I don't

[01:25:50] Mike Fave: know, I was just, That was just like really rude, like really uncomfortable, like Paul had to like just let Dave dig at him and then be polite about it.

[01:26:00] Danny Roddy: The thing that is really striking to me is that when I, so I went to Ancestral Hall Symposium in 2011 and my buddy had drove me there and he was like, don't you know who the Bulletproof executive is?

[01:26:11] And I was like, I have no clue who that is. And that was Dave. And he was talking about his coffee pretty early on. And but then I remember becoming aware of his blog and him writing lots about fructose and maybe circa 2012, people were commenting saying, Hey, you're wrong about fructose. Does a repeat has this point of view?

[01:26:29] And he so he's had a very long time to get acquainted with at least like the bare bones of what Ray is. It's been saying for all this time, and it really doesn't seem like Davis even remotely familiar with it. And so again, as a health person, I guess that is extremely popular. It's probably good to do your due diligence about.

[01:26:49] Other perspectives and to at least steal me on them before torpedoing them down or saying that you're like supplements are better than the natural foods. And I don't even think that's a legit comparison. It makes, it's absolutely laughable that you could compare a supplement to a natural food in my estimation.

[01:27:08] But I don't know. What else do you guys think?

[01:27:10] Dalton: I read a tweet a couple months ago and the guy said, Ray Pete essentially has a trucker diet. It's aspirin, cigarettes and Pepsi.

[01:27:24] And I was laughing. I was like, I am, is that how far that this has gone where people don't even attempt to read or listen to anything that he actually said?

[01:27:38] Danny Roddy: That's easier than trying to figure it out,

[01:27:39] Dalton: yeah, that was that was something that I had said.

[01:27:41] It was like, people say that, being to rate Pete is this huge trend, but what the real trend is criticizing what he had to say without actually reading it. Because, if if Dave is, first of all, yeah, I don't think that you can even compare like a supplement to a food.

[01:27:59] And if that is the, if that's your, barometer that oh yeah, taking 200 milligrams of Benfo time and is better than is a better source of diamond than drinking orange juice. It's okay. So then why do you even eat food at all? Like you should literally just have a purified diet of specific amino acid blends and specific bioavailable micronutrients and you'll have a better diet than all of us, or if you can even call it a diet at that point.

[01:28:25] But yeah, the thing is that I actually agree when I'm, when he's saying yeah, like honey and like sugar, like they don't have any like real nutritional value. I agree with him in the sense that yeah, that's not like a reason to say that like honey is better than sugar or whatever the case may be.

[01:28:41] But then I would flip it around its head and be like sugar is the nutrient because that is, you can have all of the thiamine in the world, but it doesn't matter how much pyruvate dehydrogenase activity you have. If you don't have any glucose to fuel that enzyme to do what it's supposed to do, they're called macro nutrients for a reason as well.

[01:29:00] You don't just need vitamins and minerals as important as they are. And no one is saying that you want to not eat liver or not eat oysters or not eat eggs or not even eat meat. To say that it's better to take vitamins than to get it in food. It's just not even like a comparable.

[01:29:17] argument. It would be like saying I it, it's good to I like to listen to music more than I like to tie my shoes. And it's I don't even, what kind of comparison is that? You're just talking about two completely different things. And yeah, props to Paul for sure.

[01:29:32] He's really good at keeping his head level. But the one thing I do want to say is that when he says this stuff borders on orthorexia, I think it's really interesting because the whole thing about, what Pete was writing about was to get you outside of the restriction box and to understand why your body does the things that it does or reacts to.

[01:29:53] The way that it does to certain situations or certain foods. And that is literally the subtitle of his most famous book. It's called generative energy. The subtitle is restoring the wholeness of life, right? It's not cutting around the edges of life and staying in this one box of life. It is about, giving your body the opportunity.

[01:30:14] To live in this state of abundance where you can have different foods, where you can do different things and you're liberated from, the metabolic energy essentially to be able to do those things. So in my view, it's the complete opposite of orthorexia. It's literally trying to get all of these ideas about, what is healthy and what is not out of your head and start actually living your life properly.

[01:30:39] Danny Roddy: I I don't know if I've said this before. I have a personal beef with people that say orthorexia, because when I was real ill, Like it seemed like the paradigm that I was using was not actually getting me to where I wanted to be and so therefore I try harder like I'd become more low carb and then when people would say, Oh, you're being too orthorexic.

[01:30:58] It was like this is my life. Like these are the health problems I'm having and I'm trying to overcome them. And I'm using this paradigm at the time I didn't understand this, but it was flawed, and so I thought if I was more aggressive with it, that I'd have a better outcome, and so I don't, it's I don't know, orthorexia is like a gaslighting term to me, it's doesn't, it's not, for anybody who's truly been sick, It's almost like a term I think only somebody who doesn't know they're sick or has never actually been ill would use because I don't know.

[01:31:27] I think it's just not a valuable term. Like again, like calling somebody a Nazi or something, just absolute meaningless these days.

[01:31:33] Dalton: It's I think the saying is a healthy person has a hundred problems, but a sick person only has one. Yeah. It's, but it, I completely agree, and that's why people turn to these type of things because when you're in the state of, constant anxiety or constant lethargy or not being able to eat or not being able to do the things that you want to be able to do yeah, like you are going to become obsessive over it because it's your life that's if you're not going to obsess about getting a better quality of life, then what should you be obsessing about?

[01:32:01] Danny Roddy: The new marvel movie people

[01:32:02] Dalton: that they have it, so I guess I guess it all comes full circle there but yeah, I completely agree.

[01:32:08] Jay Feldman: Yeah.

[01:32:09] Dalton: I don't.

[01:32:10] Jay Feldman: Gotcha. I was going to come back to Dave's incredibly weak argument about the nutrients here and just come back to the idea that it, as you said, it's true that honey and sugar don't have many nutrients, but also what is biggest source of Dave's calories?

[01:32:28] Let's talk Bulletproof coffee, like how many nutrients are in there, right? Like in your MCT oil and coffee, and butter, which yeah, it has like a tiny bit of vitamin a. And also if you're going to be taking supplements to get all your nutrients, then it's fine to have pure, cane sugar versus MCT oil.

[01:32:46] Both are nutrient poor. There's no issue with either of those. It's, you're not going to get your thiamine from meat either. His whole premise here is. Obviously ridiculous, which is why he has to do it under this guise of trolling because he doesn't actually have any legitimate argument and, looks at the repeat diet as the trucker diet.

[01:33:02] And yeah, what there's, yeah it's just weak. And yeah,

[01:33:07] Mike Fave: he's the only thing is that he's just and this is the problem with all these types of arguments online is Paul is saying one thing and then. And then Dave is just changing the frame of the argument. And so Paul is saying you want to have some carbohydrate and these sources are good.

[01:33:21] And then Dave is making it about nutrients. And then it's if the frame then becomes most important thing is nutrients. Then like from that context, yeah, sure. Benfotiamine has a thiamine source is going to give you a higher amount and maybe more bioavailable than food. Fine. But again, like there's no argument being made that You can't use supplements and there's no argument being made that you, you have to only eat oranges to get your thiamine intake, like the argument from the entire Pete perspective.

[01:33:49] It's about having a a nutrient dense diet with the correct amount of macronutrients and things that work for your body and whatnot. And then go from there. It's not to like only have sugar at the expense of everything else. And the arguments always devolve into this garbage context of you either have to have this or that.

[01:34:07] Instead of understanding, like this is an entire context that's being built out. And it's about figuring out how to create these things and work with them for yourself, use your own knowledge. And I think that ties in with the orthorexia stuff, because I remember I had, there's a lot of people who would get on me like family members about how I was eating and what I was doing and all this type of stuff.

[01:34:26] And it's what is more intelligent than trying to figure out through your own personal experiences and knowledges? What knowledge, what works for you? Like, why would you not want to do that? If that, if you find out that this particular food is giving you this series of symptoms and problems, and you eliminate it, and it drastically solves that, and now your quality of life is better, what is the argument against that?

[01:34:48] Please, somebody give me a strong, logical argument against taking things into your own hands and solving your own problems. And then strategically figuring out ways around that problem. For example, for me, I don't tolerate dairy very well, but I do understand the importance of calcium and phosphorus.

[01:35:02] Am I orthorexic because I don't have that much dairy in my diet? Am I at risk of these micronutrient problems, according to the Rolling Stones article? Because I, minimize polyunsaturated fats because of the known problems that they discuss in the literature. It's to make an argument against that is foolish.

[01:35:18] The idea here is to find things, use principles to guide your decisions and your personal experiences, your perceived thing act to create a system or to create a lifestyle. Or some type of setup that works for you so you can overcome your challenges, your problems, or whatever the deal is. And all of these other counter arguments to this type of stuff or strawmanning it or talking about orthorexia or everything in moderation garbage is, it's like almost inactivating for people.

[01:35:46] I'm not going to give you any tools to solve your problem. I'm just going to tell you that what you're doing is dumb or doesn't work, or you have a psychological problem or this or that. And it, yeah, for me, it's like one of the things that actually triggers me the worst. Because when I was in my worst state and I hear, Oh, everything in moderation, it's what's moderation?

[01:36:03] Is what's a moderate amount of polyunsaturated fats? Is it less than four grams for 2000 calories? Or is it 20 grams per day of a mega six? There's, it's such an arbitrary thing to discuss. So the question is not everything in moderation or orthorexia is what is your outcome? What is your goal?

[01:36:19] What are the principles? How are things working? How are you thinking about things? And then within those contexts, what makes sense? Thanks. Like how, if you want to live a long time, minimize chronic disease and improve your ability to oxidize glucose and whatnot, number one, you're going to have glucose, you're going to have glucose, you're going to have thiamine, and you're probably not going to have a high amount of polyunsaturated fatty acids.

[01:36:40] It's like that. This is not orthorexia. This is intelligent, strategic thinking. This is this is what you want to be doing instead of just, taking your SSRI and yeah, whatever. I'll just have this. I'll just have these my Chipotle cooked in rice bran oil. I'm fine with that.

[01:36:54] Don't worry about it. It's probably completely fine. That guy at Harvard said it was cool.

[01:37:00] Jack: And then the people, they still brought so many people I don't know, normies that'll say You are reic, or why are you doing all this stuff? And they're like, yeah, I just wish I could lose weight. Or I wish I wasn't so tired throughout the day. It's I don't know how to help you.

[01:37:12] Danny Roddy: Yeah. They have like suicidal fatigue and that, that's cla that's the trope of people not wanting you to change. You're, you were saying, Hey, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna do that. And if they feel stuck or something, that must be a serotonergic type of behavior or something of not wanting people to get better than you or someone.

[01:37:28] Mike Fave: Yeah, it's literally I feel like the way society structures things for people is you don't, it like completely inactivates people's ability to rely, number one, rely on their own experiences. It's God forbid you don't use the hierarchy of evidence and you, it's every decision you make.

[01:37:45] Like I'm going to, if I want to tie my shoe, like the best way to do it, I need a meta analysis. That's exactly what I need to do this instead of let me take my own personal experience and let me work with that. Yeah. But no, we just need this. So it sets people up. They have, they don't have self responsibility.

[01:38:00] They don't have self reliability. And inside the health journey, if you don't take responsibility for yourself, you will, you are very unlikely to get better. There's not, somebody else is not going to be able to tell you how this food or this supplement or this thing that you're doing affects you. Only you can tell you that.

[01:38:17] By experiencing and being aware of yourself. And this is not isn't a tangent and I don't want to go too far down it, but it's that's the whole problem with some of the precision medicine stuff as well. It's you need all these external markers to tell you how you're doing. You need a stool test every day and you need your HRV and you need your CGM and all this type of stuff.

[01:38:36] And don't listen to how you feel like these things will tell you this expert will interpret that and tell you what's going on. And then that's where you get in these weird things, like I think in that video, Dave and Paul were going back and forth about their, about lab values and stuff.

[01:38:51] And so it's that type of stuff, it's just. Yeah, there's a multiple components there that I see is highly problematic in activating to people and taking away their own guidance. And I think those things are, you need your own guidance, you need your self responsibility and you need to figure things out and you can have somebody work with you or help you or you can read somebody else's research, but it's still, it's going to come down to you.

[01:39:13] Dalton: Yeah. A hundred percent. All that stuff and to just tie it all together. That's why when I hear people. Basically shit on Ray or whatever. It's one thing to disagree with the specific principles, but at the end of the day, his whole thing is about generating energy, lowering stress and listening to your body and trying to trying to figure these things out for yourself and letting that be your.

[01:39:40] Your ultimate guidance, perceive, think, act. And it's I don't know how you can argue against those principles. So you would have to say that. I think being more stressed is good. I think having less energy is good. And I think that not listening to my body is better, but you look around and that's the paradigm that most people are stuck in.

[01:39:59] So

[01:40:01] Mike Fave: yeah, with actually stress is good is the paradigm that people are stuck in. That's yeah. That is this

[01:40:07] Jay Feldman: plus, as you said, don't listen to your own body. Only the meta analyses and evidence based medicine. That's all we got. Also, work it and grind. Grind

[01:40:15] Danny Roddy: as hard as you possibly can. No pain, no gain.

[01:40:19] Exactly. With that, anything before I wrap up the show here?

[01:40:24] Mike Fave: No, it was a pleasure having you guys on. We had a great time. This is, I think, a great chat.

[01:40:28] Danny Roddy: Yeah. What a super fun episode. Hey, thank you so much, Dalton. Thank you so much, Jack. We had tons of tech issues before this show is actually amazing. It even happened.

[01:40:37] So Dalton, Jack, you guys are geniuses. Thank you so much for your contribution to everything. Really appreciate it. And yeah. Where can we find more of your work on the internet this week? Dalton and Jack.

[01:40:48] Dalton: First of all, thank you guys. Obviously generative energy and then later the helpline and all of your guys work over the years has been so instrumental to everything that we've done in my personal life.

[01:40:59] So can't thank you guys enough. And it's pretty cool how it's come full circle and now it's Oh, wow. Like we're on their show. That's cool. Really appreciate all of that kind words. And yeah, like I said we're just getting started at A and O, this is this is, we really want this to be like our legacy and we're going to keep trying to put out information and put out services and pointing people in the, what we believe to be a positive direction and continue to grow.

[01:41:22] Best places to find us always YouTube, analyze and optimize. Twitter at outdoctrination. So like indoctrination, but with an out and then Instagram is at analyze and optimize and and Danny, I can send you I can send you like our little like link tree style thing where you can find all of our stuff, but those would be the big ones.

[01:41:42] Hey, Dalton, Jeff, guys

[01:41:44] Danny Roddy: so much. Really appreciate it. Fantastic episodes. Super fun chatting with you guys.