undeather

I am a big fan of integrative/holistic medicine and in fact, thats what I practice for a living... However...please take the advice of those online "experts" always with a grain of salt. If I have learned anything in the last decade of active participation in this field, its that the more you go away from the mainstream, the more obscure the whole situation becomes. Quackery and real genius are very close together but the latter is actually a rare find, while the former is ubiquitous.I recognize some of the names on this website and...lets just say be careful who you entrust your health with. A good rule of thumb: If someone completely rejects the mainstream narrative without going into nuance (i.e "Cholesterol has nothing to do with heart disease") then its always a bad sign. The real holistic genius is someone who grounds his practice on evidence based medicine and builds from there.

The emerging picture of nutritional epidemiology is difficult to reconcile with good scientific principles. Beyond food studies, results of single-nutrient studies have largely failed to be corroborated in randomized trials. Reform has long been due. The data you provided is at best medium to low quality. I think its definitely legit to focus some future reserach capacities on exactly this topic. Causal corroborations of nutritional associations are rare, but they do happen. However, I wouldnt be too worried about it

When it comes to hairloss, here is the deal.... 1) First of all.... .... you need to determine how you would do as a bald guy! -> Could you rock a bald look? (Maybe with a better frame?) -> Does your face look weird without hair? -> How about your beard situation? -> Is there strong attachement to your hair? You need to be brutally honest with yourself. Also, your own insecurities will influence your opinion on this - thats why its important to get input from honest outsiders. If you have a nice head-shape, good beard situation, then any hairloss prevention is NOT worth it. Some faces just look weird without hair. Period. "But you shouldnt care about what others think" "Just work on your confidence bro" "Its all about inner game" -> Those comments are redundant platitudes. Yes, there is truth in it, but its just not that easy. Sometimes the quick fix is the best fix. 2) Evaluate your hairloss (using the norwood scale) 3) Interventions Gold-standard: Finasteride -> 1mg per day, its possible to cycle the intake (for example every second day) or lower the dosage down to 0,5mg depending on your genetics -> Will hold your hair-situation as it + regrowth/thickening in recently shed area -> Side effects are RARE, but happen. Internet search will give you a strong negativity bias -> Side effects usually go away as you stop taking the drug (Those who prevail are propably with a strong psychophysiolgoical component) -> A metabolically/endocrinologically healthy body faces a lower chance for side effects -> If you want to do it, do it the smart way: Blood lab/androgenic-profile before and 6-12 months after you started the drug Topical Finasetride: -> Available in some countries, seems almost as good as the oral drug with lesser side effects! -> its a bit more annoying to deal with because its easier to just swallow a pill BUT it wont infleunce your Blood-DHT-levels as much Minoxidil + (Microneedling): -> Slows the process and regrows hair (especially when combined with needling) -> Combine with microneedling (1,5mm) to get max results (its WAY superior) -> Side effects are very rare and usually mild -> Applied 2 times a day, on your scalp Microneedling: -> Its possible to do just that but it wont stop your hair loss indefinitely -> There seems to be a certain subgroup of hairloss cases who suffer from sclerosis/fibrosis of the scalp. In such cases, dermarolling/microneedling seems to be effective! However, most people need it in combination with Minoxidil! Keto-shampoo: -> No good evidence that it actually works -> I have tried it and I notice "some" hair thickening effects but cant tell for sure If you really want to max your results, combine all 3 treatments! Most people notice zero side effects even after years of treatment. There is just one way to find out -> TRY it! If your hairloss is at a very early stage, Finasteride on its own should be enough! If you are at around Norwood IV, no intervention will really help you to get a good result. At that point, you can think about hair-transplantation. No one can tell you beforehand if you will experience side effects. You are welcome

There is nothing wrong with nature and I never said otherwise. However, its just a truism that there is a certain amount of indifference in natures essence when it comes to "your" survival or wellbeing. People are dying from horrible bacterial infections every day and all around the world. Your backyard is, on a microscopic level, a bloodbath. Thats not paranoid, thats how it is Thats nature as well! Trusting in the "intelligence of nature" is just such a stage green thing to say. I mean, it just means nothing - because first of all, you ARE part of nature and you can never be "out" of its intelligence. Not washing your food is a bit like saying that "Its better to not get the vaccine because its unnatural". Well, thats just a really stupid statement on so many levels - you get that? Now of course there is nuance to everything I just said, but I hope you get what I wanted to convey.

Ok, then let me give you a different perspective. Outdoor dust is usually made up of soil particles, pollen, vehicular matter (like exhaust or tire particles), or even insect follicles or parts. Depending on where you live, you could add a solid portion of different man-made pollutants to that mix. That ranges from heavy metals to different volatile organic compounds and fertilizer remnants. You are not going to die if you eat an unwashed fruit. Its propably not going to be a huge problem, even if you do it in the long run. On the one hand it IS paranoid to think so. However, just going by what we actually know about air-quality and pollution-indices, washing your fruit/vegetables is always a good idea. Just to be safe. If we would live in a pre-industrial era, my answer would be a different one.

Does nature look particulary peaceful to you? Nature is insanely brutal und doesnt care about your survival. You do. Thats why you should wash your vegetables.

Once you collapse the duality between relative and absolute, the subtle notion of the infinite and finite disappears. The relative is as real as the absolute. The ego is as real as infinity. Red is as red as nothingness. Free will is as real as determinism. "You" are both real and a illusion. Reality is permanently co-creating itself, through itself, with itself.

Multiple clinical trials, hundreds of epidemiological analyses (comparing vaccinated/unvaccinated cohorts), the fact that we know how immunity works down to the tiniest detail, the fact that we have experience with vaccines and how they work against infectious diseases for at least 70 years, the fact that we can measure the antibody response and see a 1:1 causal link with fewer deaths....and so on.... Also: My personal, direct experience as a MD working in a hospital, as well as everyone who works in the intensive care unit who sees that approx. 80% of our patients with severe covid there did not get the vaccine, as well as basically 99% of doctors, nurses and health workers around the world who deal with patients every day. Either all of us are lying and deceiving, a huge conspiracy with millions of actors ...or....maybe the anti-vaxx clowns are just wrong.

Interesting. Nutritional epidemiology is sadly one of the weakest forms of scientific evidence but its still a conspicuous finding.

Its just bad sensemaking. What the fuck. "High sugar diets do not increase inflammatory markers when controlled for calories - therfore, sugar is not pro-inflammatory" Okay, so we are not going to talk about: - mid to long term outcomes due to second order effects like increasing the relative abundance of Proteobacteria in the gut, while simultaneously decreasing the abundance of Bacteroidetes -> which serves as a playing ground for inflammation! - Correlation between high sugar intake and SIBO/IBD prevalence - The worsening of mainly chronic inflammatory conditions during periods of hightened sugar intake - Overclocking PKB/M-TOR through spiking insulin (aging process) - Disadvantagious changes in patterns of DNA methylation and gene expression - Potential impacts on long term HbA1c - Correlation between high sugar diets and mental health outcomes like anxiety & depression - Interindividual differences in the ability to process short chain carbohydrates - the chosen sample of pro-inflammatory markers are highly problematic and reductionistic - we dont eat sugar in its raw form since its usually mixed up in a highly processed piece of garbage with many other ingredients ..... and so on. It's just bro science with a PhD.

Sounds like muscular eye strain to me. However, any philoshophising about what this could be is unfruitful, do the smart thing and visit an ophthamologist asap. Takes 10-15 minutes the check the most important structures and then you know if everythins is alright.

During my medical studies, a highly distinguished professor showed us this video to "teach us" about life. Its sweet, innocent and easy to digest - but I highly doubt that anyone has ever changed his ways because of it. And yes, we cringed too.

You are right. At this point of time, most chronic diseases are deemed "incurable" from a modern medicine standpoint. However, in my estimate - this will change in the next 10-50 years. If you find yourself with such condition at this moment, find a doctor who thinks integrally, acts couragiously, has deep understanding of both evidence based & alternative medicine models (or at least the best one available) and is willing to put in the work. Also, become an expert of your disease. Read everything about it, experiment with yoruself, look what makes your symtpoms worse/better - thats the primary trait I can see in people who are able to reverse their chronic ailments.

Scientifically, this is nonsense of course ....but ..even if its "just" a placebo and not some higher spiritual rite (which is unfalsifiable) - if it works it works. 100% agree with Roy on this

You are 18. With 18 I could eat processed food all day, sleep 4 hours a night and still run a marathon the next day. (not that you should!) Dont overcomplicate eating. Avoiding all the impurities in our food is (as you said) a thing of sheer impossibility. A golden rule that works for most people and will automatically minimize your toxin intake: Eat real food (as unprocessed as possible), mostly plants, grown locally & in season You will be fine. Sounds like a perfect recipe for heart disease and poor cardiovascular health.

Yes

Well, as I said in my first post, very low IQ (which is below 70) is a valid prediction tool for mental retardation. But thats not because the IQ-test itself is specifically designed to measure that - its more a general loss of mental capacity that would show in any other function. At some point, you will reach a point where being mentally challenged will make it impossible to follow easiest intructions or executive directions. However, to draw a simple line where this would happen is impossible because, again -the IQ-measurement sucks, is only marginally correlative and leaves out all the complexity of our reality. I mean, there are algorytims who already kinda do this in (for example) dating apps but I highly doubt that implementing such ideas in the business sector (at a large scale) will have any meaningful benefits. Quiet the contrairy, I think it might put the focus on shitty parameters like IQ & EQ, which could make business outcomes worse. However, this doesnt mean that we cant have better metrics in the future, certainly connected with AI-technology - so iam defintely open to that! I also think that the job market kinda auto-selects the right people for certain job. There is a proposed metric, and I forgot where I read this, that predicts out of the box thinkers with a pretty decent accuracy. One of the qualities those thinkers usually have is the ability to actively seek out alternative viewpoints without getting sucked into them while coming up with some sort of sythesis between them.

The "worth" of a tool is entirely based on it's utilization. IQ is at the bottom an immoral measure that, while not working, can put people (and, worse, groups) in boxes for the rest of their lives. However, that doesnt mean its completely stupid all the time. IQ measures your ability to manage a predefined set of patterns in a finite amount of time. Those patterns obviously correlate, at least to a certain degree in certain fields, with real life problem solving capacities. So sure, if you are looking to hire someone for a Job which requires this sort of processing (i.e theoretical physics for example), then IQ might be one metric to look at. On the other side, I can almost guarantee you that some of the brightest geniuses in our history books did not have a super high IQ. If you actually look at the data, you will find a lot of black-swan cases in almost any correlative category, meaning that there is much more to intelligence in ANY field than just this ambiguous number. The best metric you can use is the one which is required for the specific job. No automation process to date will be able to deal with this kind of complexity. If I had to hire someone I would base my decision on first impression, intuition and a well defined period of observing the learning curve.

Most nihilistacally coated IQ-arguments are based on a basic misunderstanding of what "it" actually is. An IQ-test definitely measures some-"thing" which is seemingly correlated with all sorts of outcomes we deem preferable from a societal standpoint - but if you actually look at the data with some statistical knowledge, you will recognize that its not at all that black & white. There is no significant statistical association between IQ and hard measures such as wealth. Most “achievements” linked to IQ are measured in circular stuff s.a. bureaucratic or academic success, things for test takers and salary earners in structured jobs that resemble the tests. If you want to detect how someone fares at a task, say loan sharking, tennis playing, or random matrix theory, make him/her do that task; we don’t need theoretical exams for a real world function by probability-challenged psychologists. As you can see in the graph below, there is little information about IQ/Net-worth if you get rid of the noise and fat tails (probability distributions with relatively high probability of extreme outcomes). There is absolutely no visibible effect over 40k. If IQ-distribution is Gaussian by construction (well, almost) and if real world performance were fat tailed (which they are), then either the covariance between IQ and performance doesn’t exist or it is uninformational. It will show a finite number in sample but doesn’t exist statistically. Intelligence in IQ is determined by academic psychologists via statistical constructs s.a. correlation that they patently don’t understand. It does correlate to very negative performance (as it was initially designed to detect learning special needs) but then any measure would work there. It is a false comparison to claim that IQ “measures the hardware” rather than the software. It can measure some arbitrarily selected mental abilities (in a testing environment) believed to be useful. To do well in life you need depth and ability to select your own problems and to think independently. And one has to be a lunatic to believe that a standardized test will reveal independent thinking. IQ & Jobs There is this argument that if you fall into a certain subgroup of IQ-distrubution - certain jobs will be off the table. This is again, stupidity at work. Notice the noise: The top 25% of janitors have higher IQ than the bottom 25% of college professors, even counting the circularity. The circularity bias shows most strikingly with MDs as medical schools require a higher SAT score. Realize that the concept has huge variance, enough to be deemed uninformative. Unlike measurements of height or wealth, which carry a tiny relative error, many people get yuugely different results for the same IQ test (I mean the same person!), up to 2 standard deviations as measured across people, higher than the sampling error in the population itself! This additional source of sampling error weakens the effect by propagation of uncertainty way beyond its predictability when applied to the evaluation of a single individual. It also tells you that you as an individual are vastly more diverse than the crowd, at least with respect to that measure! If, as psychologists show MDs and academics tend to have a higher “IQ” that is slightly informative (higher, but on a noisy average), it is largely because to get into schools you need to score on a test similar to “IQ”. The mere presence of such a filter increases the visible mean and lower the visible variance. Probability and statistics confuse fools. Most of this was inspired/taken over by Nassim Talebs work about IQ!

1 hour in - actually a really great episode

Yes, its definitely possible to heal (some) autoimmune conditions. Lets assume an autoimmune disease is like a civil war. The approach of conventional medicine would be disarmament (targeted suppression of certain kinds of immune function). The obvious solution however, would be to find out why the conflict started in the first place. This is the regime of complexity medicine. The nature of autoimmunity is that the underlying cause is usually highly individual, multifactorial (many factors come into play) and combinatorial (risk factors combine and create new emergent properties). This is a big problem because the best tools we have to find out "what causes what", namely epidemiological analysis and clinical trials, get exponentially worse to the degree of complexity that is involved in the studied phenomenon. Thats why we are really good at treating acute, monocausal things like bacterial infections or heart attacks - but we kinda suck at finding out why the body of a person with Lupus oder Crohn's disease basically starts killing itself. I got involved in this couple of years ago when I met a guy who reversed his neurodegenerative condition with a complexity approach. He suffered from a pretty nasty case of MS (Multiple sclerosis), which would have destroyed his quality of life & cognitive abilites in a matter of months. His neurologists told him that they basically cant do anything to stop it, that this is his fate and he should learn to deal with it. Long story short - he became an expert in MS, read everything there is to read about it, did some complexitiy medicine testing - supplemented with high doses of certain drugs & vitamins, got rid of the mold exposure in his house and some other toxins - and COMPLETELY reversed his condition. There are a lot of cases like these. Now, that said, - there are a lot of charlatans working in this field. So if you suffer from an autoimmune condition, be careful. Go out there and look for alternative approaches, but dont be naive about it. There are some doctors who specialize in complexity medicine (like me), but we are extremely rare. If you can find one who is willing to work with you, then this is like a golden ticket. Also, lets not badmouth the mainstream approach. Immune-modulating therapies can be a life saver and such a wonderful tool for some patients. If you come to me with an accute Crohn's disease-episode and you have been basically shitting blood for the last 5 days, everything hurts and your life is pure hell - trust me, you want that Cortisone-shot.

Some people really profit from microneedling + topical minoxidil for beard growth. Look into it.

Around 8 - 12 weeks. Johanneskraut seems to work in some patients but the effect is in my experience non optimal. Exactly, never mix up psychodelics with SSRI's or other psychiatric drugs. I am all for the use of psychodelics in battleing depression, but do it safely! The elimination half-life of escitalopram is about 27-33 hours. The reason why you need to go slow/taper it is the so called rebound effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect

Please provide evidence for such outrageous claims. Thank you

Most antidepressants start to take effect after about 2 weeks. Sometimes it can take up to 8 weeks to get to their full spectrum. Regarding the tapering, it depends on the physcian doing it and the drug used. Escitalopram usually comes with a 5mg reduction every 2-4 weeks. Some physicians will go faster than that. Dont stop yet. Give it time and then decide again. Have patience!