PsychedelicEagle

@Sugarcoat Yes, very likely. My LDL went from 110-120 down (2023-24) to 60; most recently 70 mg/dL (2025-26) I would estimate I was eating this greek yogurt, about 250-300g/day: https://www.migros.ch/en/product/205003000000 If you look at the nutritional values: 6.2 g sat fat / 100g -> 18.6g/day ONLY from the yogurt. My current TOTAL average intake for the last 6 months is 12.3g/day.

4 eggs/day and a significant amount of greek yogurt - can't remember exactly how much. And sometimes meat (on weekends, back then, before I cut most animal sources). It could be my personal metabolism.

Mostly, tho I do take collagen and sporadically eat fish (depending on the quality — seafood nowadays seems risk as far as pollutants such as PFAS AFAIA)

That is correct. Generally processed foods are bad, but some are healthy. The key is to compare it against what you'd be eating instead. So comparing cow milk vs soy milk is the right question. As I posted above: PS: What I personally do is to make my own soy milk at home, with a machine that does it automatically. I then preserve much more fiber than store-bought alternatives, while using no additives whatsoever.

Nice that you were open about it. If you had tried to conceal it, she would likely have sensed something was off. Not at all. Actually, if she truly enjoyed seeing you, it can have even a positive twist in that she may think: "ok, let's see if I manage to get this guy hard next time"

It's not up to us, it's up to you.

The phone is for setting dates. ~ Corey Wayne There is no "game" taking place on the phone. It's just a logistics mechanism for you to meet up with her. Be direct and set definite dates.

I have no idea. But if you decide to give it shot, could you perhaps do it under professional assistance? Countries like Switzerland allow for such types of therapies to be conducted in clinics and hospitals. Of course that also has cons (e.g., not sure what setting would be), but if your case is critical that could give you some assurance.

At the end of the day, reality is made out of nothing. If you approach that which you fear close enough you will see there is no substance to it whatsoever. The key, however, is to expose your emotional, subconscious mind to these types of experiences often enough. Perspective change must happen at the deeper layers of your psyche, which are not rational. Excited for you and your new journey!

You would still probably be below the populational average, but if you want to optimize for LDL (which to me, personally, makes sense), then yes, you can avoid the extra saturated fat just because why not. And yes, if you can get it tested then it's the best approach.

Nice reframe indeed. Thanks.

Yes, but you still need to sell them somewhere. Imagine having such condition and not having access to the medication that could drastically simplify your life and prevent diseases.

Yes, most animal fat tends to be saturated. In my case m, I was eating only eggs and greek yogurt at some point, from animal sources, and that was enough to raise my ldl significantly. but it depends on the person. You could test it and experiment if you have budget

Great! Enjoy the adrenaline rush I've done a milder approach — 2 per day at least five days of the week. It worked wonders, I met so many attractive girls. The beginning was brutal tho, and it took me months to start having results. Bare in mind I did that in my 30s when I already had significant experience. Each person is at a different stage of their life and may need more/less time — also the place they live in may affect the outcomes, etc.

Good. The essential fats are Omega-3 and Omega-6s. I would thus ensure most of your fat falls within the polyunsaturated category, or even track the absolute amounts directly, especially if you're eating very-low fat overall, to ensure you're not getting too little of these essential fatty acids. It depends on your goal — what is it? For CVD risk, saturated fat is clearly bad — thinking of long-term health. If you just want to increase caloric intake, then (any) type of fat would work, yes. This video is quite good, and unbiased:

Found the medicine Mr. Johnson is missing. PS: forgive the horrible fidelity of gpt

The fact that LDL (or, better said, Apo-B-containing lipoproteins) are causally related to atherosclerosis doesn't mean you need to inject yourself with a gene-altering drug. Diet alone is able to reduce it. If you have familial hypercholesterolemia, however, as the OP wrote, it seems like a promising alternative compared to the other options. For sure better than having a stroke in your 30s.

👏👏👏👏 PS: I found the insight of "#328 - Don't Waste The Next 10 Years" very valuable. I've been contemplating it for the last several days.

@Hojo, what proper science models is, e.g., based on the evidence given a target population & set of circumstances, there is strong/weak evidence for [blank], or the likelihood of X increases 20% with Y given Z. I.e., science points at statistical and scope-bounded correlations, sometime possible causations. It's up to the reader to resist generalizing these beyond their scope of application, or treating them as absolute. Most people are unable to do so, but some are — in which case science is valuable. This connects to meta-rationality. It's the same thing when playing poker. Most people are unable to model the game as a distribution over a range of cards — if you ask them what a given player has, they'll say a single or couple possible starting hands. Ask a good player and they'll give you a range like in the image, with probabilities associated to each hand. The proper application of science in poker could easily make someone rich in the 2000's. In the same way, the proper application of science in nutrition can make one healthier (or, much better said, increase their likelihood of a good health outcomes).

You can make the distinction that the media reporting scientific findings is what make absolute claims. (Good) nutrition scientists will give you nuanced and non-absolute perspectives. Also, the fact that the pyramid changes doesn't mean it's useless. Someone starting from ground zero is better off following it than not. Only after you add personalization the odds of good health outcomes may increase with deviation from what's recommended for the average. Without personalization, a random person is better off following it than random eating.

Yes, and I would add that one should complement their subjective assessment with "objective" biomarkers such as blood, urine, stool, etc., types of tests. Some of these are cheap and can catch things that one may be oblivious to. Speaking from personal experience. Part of the scientific literature addresses populational averages (e.g., nutritional guidelines for an entire country), but there is also a lot of useful information about references and causal relationships of biomarkers that one can leverage to understand their particular nutritional status.

https://www.rwapob.com/

Get the HPV vaccines, even if you're a man. Gardasil was the one I took. Good for preventing oral cancer down the road. Alternatives is using condoms for oral sex as well, but then you expose yourself to microplastics 😂

What do you guys have against BJ? Haha yea, he's unfortunately caught in 🔶 Orange paradigms: reductionism, self-maximization. He has traces of 🟢 Green tho: psychedelics & veganism. Also a good example of how psychedelics use without proper spiritual/ontological/epistemological work gets you nowhere, or even more trapped in one's own worldview.

lol