undeather

Yes, only grass fed fish though. No, but seriously - what happened to the good old virtue of self-sufficiency? How about just testing it out and see for yourself? There is no right or wrong in this - use your body as an experimental labratory, try adding different animal products to your diet and observe if there are any changes to your symptoms. If it does get better, great. If not, you have tried and you need to look further.

If you eat an omnivorous diet, you will most likely get enough iodine. Ocean-caught or ocean-farmed fish and shellfish tend to be naturally rich in iodine. Other good sources include milk, cheese, yogurt, eggs, and vegetables grown in iodine-rich soil. Multivitamin pills that also contain minerals usually provide 150 micrograms of iodine. If you don't eat animal products, fortified salt usually covers you need completely. It only takes about half a teaspoon of salt, which is around 1,5g.

The Andrew Tate saga is the archetypical story of the seeker who falls in the hands of the charismatic narcissists. Seekers being in this case mostly young, in some way underprivileged men who find themselves amidst a meaning crisis with epochal proportions and an underlying societal architecture which is increasingly incapable to meet their needs on a more fundamental level.

Let me share my perspective as a MD who has worked in this field for the last 10 years. Like in any other occupational category, you will find dieticians/nutritionists all across the competence-spectrum. I have worked with almost genius level individuals who managed to change peoples diets to a lifechanging degree and with a success/repition-rate almost unheard of in the medical field. I have also witnessed blatant incompetence, lackluster cookie-cutter diet plans completely unfit for the specific needs of the patient and especially in the online communities, dangerously off-evidence approaches that will shorten someones lifespan in the long run. I think that outstanding performances in the medical field or in general, humanistic sciences boil down to a few, very distinct common denominators. Above all stands the validity of your treatment approach. As Hippocrates said 2500 years ago - "Primum non nocere" - which translates to "first, do no harm"! Is the thing you are doing (the new diet, the drug..) actually improving the patients life, or are you doing him worse? It's really bioethics 101. The next question that naturally follows: How do I know? And right here we to enter into the domain of science & scientific evidence. If you want to be an outstanding practitioner, then you need to be up to date with the best available evidence to the problem you are trying to solve. This also includes where science falls short. I have so many colleagues that just blindly trust everything that stands in a scientific paper, without critically evaluating the data at hand. In fact, a shitload of doctors are just algorhytmically following treatment guidelines without ever reading first hand evidence at all - which is good, because it brings everything to a pretty high quality baseline - but lack's nuance when nuance is called for. The other extreme is what you see in the dietician-influencer sphere. The carnivore-nutritionist who tells people to not give a shit about their LDL-cholesterol is doing harm. Their approach is not based on a legit heuristic and it takes quite a lot of cognitive dissonance and avoidance mechanisms to keep up a completely ludicrous worldview. If you want to become a more heterodox dietician, then at least stay honest and engange with the arguments - have a strong "Why" for what you are doing. Now my next point speaks to compliance. If you want to reach your patient/the person you are working with - if you want him to follow through with a new diet plan, then there are ways to influence that which are inside of your control. We have known for years that the exact same drug will increase/decrease in effect depending on the person prescribing it. Placebo effects are an often ignored part of todays medical practice - but it's everywhere and all the time (almost like conciousness is fundamental ... ). The way you engange with your patient, the words you use, your vibe, the way you carry yourself, the motivational aspects you build into the conversation - all that and much, much more infleunces the outcome on the other side of the equation. The best nutrionists I have worked with have one very succinct feature: They care! They give a shit! They listen - and they actually try to find the best way forward for the individual sitting across them. This is the art of medicine. This is where the good and the great practitioners part ways. This explains why one nutritionist might have an 80% compliance rate, while others are at 20%. This explains why some dieticians are highly respected by colleagues, doctors and patients, while others are deemed delusional or supbar. Alright, and lastly - because you mentioned it. I don't know where this myth of doctors and pharmaceutical companies comes from. Very, very few doctors actually make money from selling big pharma drugs. You don't get money from that - at least not where I live. I have not recieved a single euro in my life from a pharma company. In fact, most of my colleagues are highly annoyed by pharmaceutical representatives who constantly come to the hospital and you need to sit through their boring presentation about their "!new wonder drug!". But hey, at least I can stock up on ballpens that way. Drugs just work. They do. It's fine to criticise our current medical paradigm that too often relies on drugs where real changes could be achieved through simple lifestyle changes - but then do that without enganging with conspiratorial arguments.

What you are looking for is not a particular diet, but healthy & sustainable diet patterns. Judging by your replies, you seem to be almost anxious about this stuff - but this is exactly the first pitfall when it comes to eating healthy. Don't stress yourself out about reaching some "ideal" - sustainability takes root in slow progress & thoughtful interaction. You don't want to force yourself on a diet which isn't palatable to your specific needs - you need to find out what works for you and not copy someone's else diet plan. When it comes to "what to eat" - there is an easy rule to follow: Eat real food, mostly plants & not too much. Notice that this is not a particular diet, but a pattern - from a health perspective, most of your diet should be focused around plant-products but could and in my opinion should involve some amount of animal products. Use extra virgin olive oil instead of butter. Prefer healthy snacking (nuts, berries, dates...) over that Mars-bar. Focus on eating real food - meaning cut out all the processed garbage - most people suck at cooking and therefore have to rely on precooked stuff or fast-food suppliers. Not too much - meaning that you eat according to your specific caloric needs. The one goal you should try to hit every day from a macronutrient point of view is around 1-1,5mg/kg of protein intake. If you are physically active/lift weights, then try to get closer to the 1,5mg/kg point. If you just follow this simple but effective pattern, you will be fine health wise. You don't need to be perfect when it comes to dieting - I personally follow a 80/20 approach, where I eat a mediterranian style diet for 80+% of the time and induldge in garbage food once or twice a week. It works because it's sustainable - sometimes I just crave a pizza or a fatty burger with fries - and there is nothing wrong with it. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Okay - very interesting! Thanks for sharing! Here is what I would recommend: - Don't stress out about this! You are young, live an above average lifestyle and your previous blood test (2022) shows that you propably do not suffer from an inherited lipid-disorder (hypercholesterinemia). - From a medical perspective, I want you to do a checkup at an internal medicine doctor (if that is possible under your current circumstances). He should do an ultrasound of your carotid arteries and the heart. - I also want you keep an eye on your LDL! Defintitely do another screening in 3-6 months and see if it changed! There are plenty of potential reasons why your LDL almost went up 100 points in the span of that short period of time. While stress plays a role in LDL-synthesis, I agree with your doctor that this is unlikely only due to increased stress. I would put my money on a mixture of causes (increased stress, circadian changes, foods that screw with fasting mechanisms and lipids in the short term..) - As for your diet, you hinted that you don't enough vegetables. This immediatly makes me think about you not getting not enough fiber, which is important because you might be a so called "cholesterol/fat hyperabsorber" and fiber blocks this absorption process to some degree! You don't have to go crazy on this, you can still enjoy your meats - but I recommend adding some fiber-containing foods to your diet (vegetables, beans, lentils, fruit, nuts..). You could also start adding "Psyllium Husk" to your protein shakes if you take them. - If you eat a lot of saturated fat (butter, ghee, fatty meats..), you could start experimenting with replacing it with better fats like olive oil or leaner cuts! Again, don't go crazy on it! - The big red flag is your stress level & sleep though! Stress, especially long term stressors and through activating the cortisol axis, can definitely elevate your LDL-C. Poor sleep quality is also known for scewing with your lipid-metabolism! Often, as well I think in your case, bad sleep is triggered by a stressful life. You should think about implementing some sort of techniques that help you dealing with the work-stress. This is a complex topic and might contain anything from a simple meditation-technique to breathwork you regularly do during worktime (alternate-nose breathing) or some form of active recovery like Yoga/Tai Chi or Qigong. There are also some supplements you can look into, which could improve your sleep (Melatonin 300mcg, Magnesium Threonate (300–400 mg), Apigenin (50 mg)) - Medications: I personally would not perscribe you a drug right now. This could be a temporary increase that will get better with time! Cheers

"one of the worst" - Some parts of Croatia show one of the worst cardiovascular risk outcomes across the whole european continent. One big factor is an increased consupmtion of high claoric, high saturated fat, high salt food plus a good amount of alcohol intake (especially beer!). This made Croatia the most overweight country in the european union. The healthcare system is also lacking in many different regards. It's really a shame, because the traditional croatian cuisine also involves many classic mediterranian influences (fish, olive oil, beans..), which is among the healthiest diet patterns you can find. That said, croatia is insanely beautiful and the people are pretty chill- I visit as often as possible because I also live only a few hours drive away. Enjoy your trip!

A LDL-Cholestrol of above 200 puts you in the 99th percentile - meaning that you are in the top 1% of people with high "bad"-cholesterol. This directly translates to an high amount of Apo-B particles in your blood, which are the atherogenic (atherosclerosis causing) parts of the LDL-molecule. This is a significant risk factor you should deal with, but it's not a cause for concern in the short run. Cardiovascular risk factors like cholesterol are functions of time and magnitude - meaning that they increase your risk of a stroke/heart attack to the extent of how long and strong (higher/lower numbers) they exert influence on your body. Also very important to consider is that there are many risk factors that go into that equation. If your blood pressure is normal, you don't have diabetes, are not obese, don't smoke - then your risk of getting into serious problems in the next 10 or 20 years is very low (I am assuming you are in your 20s/30s). That said, I am sure that it is in your interest to live a long and healthy life - therefore it's important to start working on this right now! The first and most important step towards better blood lipids/cholesterol is lifestyle modification! How does your diet look like? Are you overweight? Are you sedentary or is there some form of exercise routine in your life? I have seen that you are from Croatia, which is known for having one of the worst cardiovascular dietary patterns in central Europe. Also, are there any early age heart attacks/strokes in yoru family history? Especially before the age of 60?

The pernicious anemia is a specific form of a vitamin B12 deficiency anemia, triggered by a lack of intrinsic factor (a protein your body needs to absorp B12) within the context of atrophic autoimmune gastritis. I highly doubt you suffer from this condition. Even though you are on the lower end of the recommended B12-range, there is no way you get anemia from that. I am sure the doctor you visited did a blood-test? A manifested B12-deficiecny anemia is easy to diagnose through a normal blood-lab with high MCV (mean cell volume) & MCH (mean corpuscular hemoglobin), high LDH, high Bilirubin & low hemoglobin. Now something important: Serum B12 is not the best measurement in that case. A significant portion of Vitamin B12 is bound to haptocorrin and therefore biochemically inactive. A better indicator is Holo-Transcobalamin (Holo-TC), also referred to as "active B12". You would also want to measure your methylmalonic acid (MMA) & homocysteine-levels - which indicate a so called functional B12-deficiency. If you really want to evaluate your B12- metabolism, then you need to go that extra mile. _____________________ That said, now let's talk about your symptoms. There are dozens of pontential explanations for your complaints. This could range from micro or macronutrient deficiencies, some more or less serious medical conditions or simply a psychosomatic maladaptation. I know how dismissive most doctors can get when it comes to "weird and complex" symptoms which aren't easily explained through cookie-cutter diagnoses. It's crucual for you to find someone who takes you seriously and wants to work with you through that. This could be another doctor or a knowledegeable health-coach like @Michael569. It's really difficult to give you an over the internet perscription of what to do next because I don't know you, nor your medical history. Maybe the best thing you can do on your own is to change up your lifestyle habits a bit. Maybe change your dietary patterns, see how your body reacts if you put some form of animal product back into your diet. Maybe try eating some salmon for example. Observe what happens and maybe you can resolve it on your own.

At some point you just gotta respond with memes because the arguments made are stupid to the degree it hurts. I also work a shitload, you know, like with real people and also their diets - so I just can't respond to everything in detail. But hey, if you want to debate this one day on Discord, than I would happily do that. You are smart but young and caught up in some terminally online epistemology. I will guarantee you that in 10 years, you will think differently about those topics.

Please post your total blood report. Ferritin is a strongly fluctuating value and the considered safe-range is pretty large. If you want me to take interpret your lab, I need more than that.

A well balanced, whole food vegan diet does not have a problem with any of these nutrients. That's nonsense. You can make the argument that you need to be more concious about that sort of staff, but that's it. The exact same strawman can be made about eating meat. Shitty dietary patterns exist everywhere but are not defined by leaving out animal products. If you found a diet that works for you, than that's great. But let's stop generalizing anecdotes and personal preferences to the point of total absurdity. The vegan propaganda machine has those stories as well and you know that.

The phenomenon that some individuals on a vegan diet go back to eating meat due to perceived health issues is well known. And in almost all cases it boils down to either inadequate calorie/macronutrient intake, weird dietary patterns (frutarians, paleo-vegan...) or an insufficient supplementation protocol. I also believe that we tend look for associations when new, often transient and psychophysically triggered health symptoms show up - and diet being one of the primary go to's in that case - despite there being no clear causation under the guise. But then, and this is often left out, you definitely have people like Peterson who for whatever reason just come along well with plant-based diets. That said, in my 10+ years working in the medical field and taking care of many vegan patients in my private practice, I have seen many more cases of drastic health improvements than people getting worse after switching to vegan (which they did in their own interest because I don't advice people to go vegan!).

Do you consume seed oils?

Show me one diet that meets all nutritional requirements and I will kiss your feet. It doesnt exist. I am not even advocating for veganism because it's a boring as fuck elimination diet - but the premise is the case. If I take yours or Jasons's blood - I am going to find deficiancies! From an integral health perspective, supplementation is part of the game! Outside of internet echochambers, most nutrient-concious vegans who supplement B12 will just do fine in the long run. But thats very hard to accept for most people. Also, the reason vegans have to supplement B12 are well understood and has nothing to do with an "inherent" lack of nutrients. Stop making people afraid of going vegan! It really is a nonsense argument based on gibberish. And you guys are smart enough to know that!

That's very reasonable -I do the same!

Look, skin cleansing is not an exact science. There have been more than enough suggestions in this thread already - go pick one and try it out for yourself - experiment a bit, see how your skin responds. If you are worried about potentially harmful chemicals, then Princess Arabia & Jason have provided reasonable alternatives. The reason why I use Cerave products is because I use them and it greatly improved my skin. While I also think that we need to be cautious in the face of ubiquitous, potentially harmful & endocrine disrubting compound exposure - the dosages and pharmakokinetics used in skin care products like Cerave (especially those you wash of instantly like a cleanser) seem to be pretty benign. People fear about miniscule compound exposure in beauty-products, which for the most part can't even penetrate the skin barrier - but then go out and eat their beef or salmon which provably contain a mixture of dozens contaminations in much, much higher concentrations. When it comes to sunscreen - don't fuck around. Oils and other, alternative sun protectors show inadequate proteaction. Skin cancer has become the most frequent neoplastic disease among the Caucasian population in Europe, North America and Australia, and its incidence has reached epidemic proportions. I advice sun screens containing mineral compounds like zinc or titanium oxide - everything we know so far is that those compounds don't seem to get absorbed systemically and show very good UV-protection.

While it's true that the skincare industry is a billion dollar, profit maximizing enterprise we better do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think most people would agree that a small selection of high quality products, build into a regular skincare-routine, definitely improves skin health & general appearance. We also have some interesting scientifc studies of supplements that evidently improve your skin. When my patient ask me about which products they should use, I usually point them towards Cerave. It's usually affordable, high quality stuff and most importantly just the ingredients you want without the nonsense. It usually goes well for individuals with sensible skin. Cleansing: CeraVe Gel/Foam Moisture: CeraVe Moisturising Cream Sunscreen: I would also advice to regularly apply suncreen! Supplements that improve skin-appearence: - Collagen (15g/d) - Hyaluronic Acid (200mg/d) - Creatine (5g/d) The most potent skin-care product we know of are retinoids (Trentinoin) -> It's a perscription only product (for treating acne), and might come with side effects (excssively dry skin among others) -> If people want to try it, I usually reccommend starting with 0,025% and slowly increasing towards 0,1% As @Jason Actualization already mentioned - A skin care routine should act as an add-on - on top of an already healthy lifestyle. Your nutrition-patterns and exercise routines are by far the biggest influence on how your skin looks. Sun exposure and avoiding any type of smoke are up there as well.

Yes - in fact, every thursday after a full moon, me and the other doctors meet up and discuss how we can keep people as sick as possible, while indulging on adrenochrome Martinis and pledging allegiance to Moloch the owl-god.

I mean, it's a great lipid panel from a metabolically very healthy, young man. What more can I say? No signs of any genetic lipid disorders, propably a good draw of ApoE4 alleles, low cardiovascular risk across the board.. I dont really get the point of this post

I have neither watched the recent Professor Dave video, nor the exchange with Cronin at Harvard. But I did watch the initial debate and the videos that led up to it in the first place. It remains a highly frustrating topic. On the one hand you have "Professor" Dave, a guy clearly trapped by a stage orange/oversecularized paradigm and who lacks the epistemological framework/self-reflectory modalities to see beyond it. He is obviously smart and well educated, but his videos on the origin of conciousness, religion and most of his philosophy takes are cringeworthingly bad. He is basically the secret love child of Christopher Hichens and Patricia Churchland. On the other hand - James Tour. A boomer-christian chemistry professor who asserts that his bis believe in god does not influence his scientifc heuristic - despite the obvious fact that this happens all the time. The debate was a shitshow. Dave being really aggressive and going for ad hominens all the time. Tour putting up difficult to understand arguments that require deeper understanding of chemistry to validate the signficance. Personally, despite having a background in medicine which makes me familiar with the scientific concepts at hand, I have not taken out the time to look at the evidence myself. From what I understand is that we make strong progress in the field of biogenesis, but we still lack the certain puzzle piece that makes it all click together. I think Dave's argument boils down to that we kind of do have a trail of evidence worth following because it looks promising - and Tour's argument is that since we haven't found that piece yet, it's all a big scam. I think this was a fair analysis of the debate:

There are dozens of influences that impact stool consistency. If you want us to help you properly, you need do provide more information! What's your weight/height, how does your diet genreally look like, has it always been this way?, when did the problems start?, Do you experience a lot of stress in your personal life?, do you take medications or supplements?, how many bowel movements per day?, What does your stool look like (color, consistency, any smells?)

Dr. P.L. Acebo had an amazing experience with it

Hey, I wanted to share a super interesting study which just got published today in JAMA. They took 22 healthy, adult twin-pairs (share the exact same genes) and randomized them into following one of two diets: One twin would go on a healthy vegan and the other on a healthy omnivorous diet - both emphasized minimally processed foods, vegetables, fruits, meats (omnivorous diets) and whole grains while limiting added sugars and refined grains. Participants were told to eat until they were satiated throughout the study. Here is what blood-markers & weight looked like after 8 weeks of following the diet: LDL-C = LDL-Cholesterol: Lower is better (statistically significant) HDL-C = HDL- Cholesterol: Higher is better Tryclycerides: Lower is better Glucose: Lower is better Fasting Insulin: Lower is better (statistically significant) Vitamin B12: Higher is better -> Would become statistically significant in longer follow-up period! Weight: (statistically significant) -> Depends if lost mass is fat or lean muscle! TMAO: Is associated with cardiovascular disease - so lower is better! (based on weak evidence!) Precursors of TMAO are found in meat products - however, the difference came out as not significant and only showed up as that after controlling for outliers! Dietary satisfaction: Vegan diet had a significantly lower dietary satisfaction!