Michael569

@Tyler Robinson yes I still stand by those but unfortunately none of us can do that. Those are changes only Leo can make. Also, the job of mods is not to protect the users but the forum. This is not a public safety service. The main role here is to ban and repell spammers, bots and users who are trying to splinter this community. The intra-user conflicts would require 30 more people around to take care of and have this a full time job As a user on here you are (unofficially) agreeing to take the risk of being trolled, stalked and becoming a target of criticism. Everyone on here is aware of this risk. Everytime you post something personal consider this: 1. Hundreds of mentally unstable people could be reading this 2. Hundreds of psychopaths could be reading this 3. Hundreds of pedophiles, freaks, and potentially dangerous people could be reading this. 4. Hundreds of people who simply enjoy drama and suffering of others could be reading this. 5. People who might be trying to track you on real life might be reading this. As others said, personal journal might work better otherwise it seems as if you somehow desire the attention both negative and positive.

You don't see a lot of the behind the scenes stuff but trust me this forum can have a vicious underground that you don't see because we do our best to keep it clean and protect people who don't deal well with mean comments. Ofcourse we mess up often and and much goes under our radar, this is an unpaid work. Most of us have jobs, some of us multiple jobs and other engagements and there is only so much mental power one can dedicate to reading stuff that some people write which often borderlines with insanity, and then decide who is right or wrong. I agree with Roy that a lot of your suffering would be alleviated if you took a break from this place. That applies for many users. Because you post the most often of all users, statistically your comments are likely to be read by the most people and friction is inevitable because people ALWAYS disagree with each other online. That's just how it is. Internet is a vicious place. You can't change it but you can leave it for a bit.

Why don't you buy a budget multivitamin? This stuff costs nothing and even the cheapest of them are still relatively well absorbable. Obviously go for as few excipients as possible

Definitely case by case basis. Personally, I would never be comfortable making major suggestions to someone for whom I have not done 3-hour case taking on their entire health, lifestyle & diet. Basically, find someone who either specialises in autoimmunity or even the particular one you're looking at or get in touch with someone who seems to know what they are talking about. Anecdotally, I've seen a modified Mediterranean diet work very well for a guy with MS and a lady with chronic psoriasis alongside stress reduction techniques. But someone else might not respond to it at all, in fact some people actually get worse on a high-fibre diet and you need to support their gut before even attempting to do anything else. Also, you want to avoid anyone who makes grandiose claims, makes guarantees, offers money back, already telling you what the approach will be (e.g. making claims such as "heal all disease with keto/paleo/vegan") and all sorts of shady bullshit. A proper evidence-based health practitioner will actually, in advance, tell you that odds of healing might not be as high and you might simply be looking for a lifelong management of the condition (although it can still happen). This is, in fact, the case for many people with autoimmunity, allergic diseases, cancer etc even those treated by their masters in the field of various health modalities. Health can be complicated, and full healing is not always possible. Hope that helps

@tezk I'm not a huge fan of Paleo diet in general because they are master cherry pickers and demonize large group categories like legumes and wholegrains and spew out all sorts of weird nonsense like plant toxins and LDL denialism. But anecdotally they seem to help some people minimize symptoms which is great.My only concern is that it might be short sighted. In my opinion any diet that "fixes" the issue by avoiding high fibre produce is just hiding the real problem that is probably residing in the gut.

@RendHeaven thanks for clarifying. I'll drop any further counter-arguments at this point, I think we are at a point where it doesn't make sense and none of us are changing our opinions ? Glad you found a direction that works best for you, I'm genuinely happy for you as what you do is important and you need to mental clarity to do that properly. Perhaps all I'd say is you monitor your blood lipids annually to be sure you're all good. I do the same for myself, I get my lipid panel, A1C and anthropometrics measured about once in 12-16 months so that I can take early calibration steps if something is off Personally I seem to function best at around 85% plants with occasional fish, chicken and egg in the mix. For me mild bloating is not a big deal, I see that as a microbiome effect and a trade off for being able to consume high fibre diet and am not particularly concerned about it. I like pooping 3 times a day ??

@RendHeaven i think i finally understand your perspective. I was looking at it through different lense. And while i don't agree with it, I understand it and it makes sense now. Thanks for taking the time to dissect ?

Autoimmunity can be tricky and full remission hard to achieve but anecdotally a lot of people have been able to feel much better and even reduce the biomarkers of inflammation and discomfort for themselves. While there is unlikely to be one driver, with any autoimmunity you basically want to address everything: your diet your anthropometrics - mainly your BMI and body fat content your sleep, relaxation and recovery physical activity environmental exposure - toxins, pollution, microplastics, living in are with high usage of pesticides/herbidices any unresolved traumas or negative beliefs learned in childhood gut health & microbiome disruption can often be a contributor in autoimmunity toxic relationships, unfulfilled passions, lack of purpose etc Hard to tell what your driver is without more thorough assessment but I'd probably start with: polishing your diet, (if necessary) getting into a healthy bodyweight and getting on top of your stress levels. From there, other alleys can be taken, depending on what is the most pressing concern.

ohh, you need to be extremely careful here. A random GUY on the internet claiming to build a brand in 2 years? In exchange for sales commissions? There are several red flags there. Sounds pretty dodgy actually. You don't want a leeching burden on your business of someone who will probably sell you a cooki-cutter plan and then ask you to sign an agreement that will be impossible or expensive to navigate out off. A stable and profitable business in 21st century takes years to build. 2 years is just enough to get all shit together, test waters and get a few clients. If at that stage you will already end up with a leech sucking up 20% if your net profit, you may seriously screw yourself over, They might be legit but be aware. Ask a lot of questions and get lawyer to review anything you sign. Be smart and don't look for shortcuts. Being an entrepreneur is a 10 years + initial commitment before real income starts flooding in. It is tempting to take those shortcuts. But in reality the way the market is setup today with the amount of competition, you just need to grind and keep working on your thing every day slowly building a name and brand. Shortcuts will cost you shit ton of money and may have questionable results.

@thisintegrated this account is not associated with her

yes, I also think this is the future along with genetic medicine.

adaptations for reproductive survival, yes but not post-reproductive survival. Yes, but only for reproductive fitness. Are you familiar with the theory of antagonistic pleiotropy? What it hypothesised is that when genetic adaptation happens, that improves the odds of reproductive fitness and production of offspring, that adaptation leads to detriment later in life. This is part of Darwinism and evolutionary biology. So for example, in men who have high levels of testosterone in youth, reproductive fitness is increased due to increased muscularity, increased libido, increased sperm motility, often longer penis etc all of which improve their odds of producing offspring. But men with high levels of testosterone are also at increased risk of prostate cancer later in life (antagonistically pleiotropic adaptation causing exchange of favourable and less favourable genetic traits) https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/88/16/1118/886395?login=true Another example: Women with higher levels of oestrogens throughout life are more likely to be more fertile, have higher ovarian reserve, better blood supply to the uterus and are less likely to miscarry. They are also more likely to have more prominent sexual characteristics (hips, breasts,) which makes them more attractive to males and more likely to deliver living offspring (wider pelvis allows for larger separation of the pelvic cavity and undisturbed passing of the newborn...but....women with higher oestrogens are more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer and ovarian cancer in their lifetime and might be more likely to reach earlier menopause (antagonistic pleiotropy) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC314432/ Final example: male babies who consume more dairy products tend to grow well and have fewer developmental problems and lower incidence of rickets and yet in later adolescence higher consumption od dairy, especially higher fat dairy has been associated with higher risk of prostate cancer in men. (antagonistically pleiotropic genetic adaptation) Who's to say that this does not happen with food everywhere? If we are genetically adapted to a particular food (e.g. meat and dairy) it perpetuates early life survival, reduces risk of death early in life and causes increased odds of survival success between the age of 12-35 but then as more and more genetic adaptations are added up, antagonistic pleiotropy kicks in and you start paying for it in the later part of life by having higher risk of chronic disease although maybe at the same time you are sacrificing some horniness and a few plates on your benchpress. You gotta ask, what is worth it and what itsn't? This is basically a common wear & tear of the organism and telomere shortening. We all have finite amount of energy and the more you deeply your energetic currency in one way, the more you lose in another. This might explain higher cardiovascular incidence in red meat consumers despite anecdotal evidence that it makes you stronger, leaner and hornier. Diet that we are highly adapted to might be causing a reduction in longevity and increased risk of chronic disease in exchange for increasing your attractiveness, strength and odds of being on the top of the male hierarchy. What if being actually a little bit weaker, little bit less muscular a little bit less sexually driven and eating a less genetically adapted diet (e.g. high plant diet) prevents from stacking up antagonistically pleiotropic genes and hence prolongs longevity? And if we look at nutritional epidemiology, then higher fibre diets (grains, legumes) tend to lead to reduced risk and reduced rate of major chronic diseases (obesity, cancer, type 2 diabetes) Also, if you look at it from another perspective, it is likely that the fact that plants have poorer digestibility and bioavailability might be one of the reasons why they lead to a reduction in things like colorectal cancer due to fibre leftovers and lower caloric intake overall. Higher plant eaters tend to be leaner, lighter and have healthier lipid panels compared to their counterparts who eat higher diet in saturated fats. Yes, they have higher rates of bone breaks but weight-bearing exercise can fix that. whatever rocks your boat I have reviewed a chunk of the antinutrient evidence and let me tell you there isn't anything there that infers any harm to humans, in fact it appears that antinutrients might actually be beneficial to us. For example: Lectins and phytates appear to reduce the risk of cancer for example but the research is , so far, of low quality. Oxalates are not problematic in healthy individuals with healthy kidneys and healthy microbiome balance. There is a genus called oxalobacter formigenes commonly found in people who have not been exposed to high amounts of antibiotics and these people have lower incidence of oxalic stones in kidneys. Goitrogens have only been shown to show some weird effects in rats, and foods that contain them (such as brassica vegetables and beet roots) are associated with reduced all-cause mortality and hormone-driven cancers. Of course, don't eat raw legumes and don't go chugging a pound of spinach per day if you have kidney disease. Lignans in flax seeds seems to be beneficial for prostate health in men and breast health in women but the research quality is poor here. The thing is many of these arguments in books like Plant Paradox and Carnivore Code are nice and persuasive when you listen to them the first time. They sound cool, modern and they speak the language of young men who are trying to find their identity and have problem embracing their feminine side. I speak from personal experience, in my early 20s I suffered from macho complex and carnivore diet would have been very attractive to me. But once you start digging yourself then you realise a lot of carnivore "experts" are absolute quacks. You start pulling apart the studies in these books one by one and you see they are full of shit. Misrepresent the evidence, cherry-pick studies, misinterpret findings, being unable to interpret forest plots and confidence intervals, not understanding statistics, exaggerating findings and omitting what doesn't suit the audience.

it pays his bills to say the things he does, what do you expect Look, I get his arguments on processed junk, and toxins in the environment as well as the general decline in physical activity and rise of obesity in people. All of that is very concerning but once he starts saying that fibre is actually harmful and that low fibre diets cure constipation because one study said so and that all of problems are caused by "toxic plants" and toxic seed oils and we all need to step worrying about our cholesterol levels, he is spitting in the face of everything we've known and walking very thin ice because he could literally be (indirectly) killing people with that sort of advice. Can you unpack what you mean by this for me? this is mostly irrelevant. We are not our ancestors anymore. We don't hunt animals nor live in caves. Society has moved on. There is a reason we started farming because it helped us to move societies forward. I don't see any need to keep appealing to hunter gatherer tribal life anymore. I'd urge you to pay visit to Thailand and visit the Lahu villages in North West region of Pang Mapha at the edge of Burmese mountains. These people die of tuberculosis, opium overdose, malnutrition and infectious diseases. They eat bugs, bats, dogs, rats, cats they shoot on the moon during eclipse and they kill poorly developed children in the belief that they are cursed. Lahu also mostly rely on rice and vegetables, eating meat rarely when they can actually kill a wild boar or deer. When they eat red meat, it is in small amounts, from wild animal, not fat locally farmed cow and probably less than 150 grams per week, not 1 pound a week. Or at least they did 20 years ago before the modernisation of the country, nowadays they own cell phones and motorbikes and eat fried wings when they can. Lahu people are what you would call descendants of tribal cultures in southeast Asia. Would you say they somehow have a manual for health? In my opinion they lived purely survival-based lifestyles and their life improved with the advancement of technology, medicine and more dietary variety. Same for many other once tribal societies. These people (including tribes in south America and other regions of south east Asia) are stage purple groups and the idea that we should follow their lead is a bit naive. I'm gonna need you to unpack this for me as well if you don't mind. you are a young man in your prime years. It is to be expected. You should be at your peak strength and mental performance. Eating a lot of red meat is going to make you stronger in this age but probably introduce detriment later on. It is up to you to decide whether you want to play that roulette. Also one month is not long enough to see any detriment, you could be eating kiwi only diet and feel fine after a month

@RendHeaven the sympathy is mutual ? so nothing I'll say here is any form of personal dislike or disagreement (other than the content of this topic) BUT You have been misled and misinformed by people who either do not know how to interpret longitudinal data (that's no shame, it's extremely difficult and I don't claim proficiency either) or they don't care (more likely and more common - this defines quackery) or they know and deliberately misinterpret it due to existing commercial interest (also very common and in my opinion the worst of it) Would I be off if I hopothesised that Paul Saladino, Shawn Baker and Liver King are your go-to study sources? The LDL denialism is fairly new thing and these people are at a forefront of this new movement, mostly propagating carnivore diets. Let me point you to a few fundamental claims: * "epidemiology is not to be trusted" - not entirely true, while epidemiology cannot show causal relationship, that's true, the internal validity of prospective cohort studies is about 95% identical to randomised controlled studies. Majority of nutritional studies are of epidemiological nature (mostly prospective cohorts, some case control and some cross sectional) because it cannot be otherwise. It would be impossible to create the type of controlled environment we would require to see changes in blood lipids and their effects on heart health for example simply because it takes decades so we need to rely on epidemiology. Otherwise you would need to lock people in metabolic wards for 40 years and let's face it, that wouldn't somehow feel right ? and who says metabolic ward is not a confounder. * "LDL is no predictor of a disease" - my oh my this is a BIG one. You're basically taking decades of data worth millions of human lifes and showing them down the drain. LDL reduction therapies reduce the risk of all cause mortality, stroke and heart attacks. Regardless of particle size LDL is a robust marker of chronic disease risk. Secondly LDL is a proxy for ApoB containing lipoproteins (a small protein on the LDL molecule) that is the real issue. So technically it's not LDL per se but the fact that LDL is ApoB carrier in many cases and ApoB is the problem. * "Tracking HDL and triglycerides is more meaningful predictor" - they are important for sure but for example HDL modification does not lead to risk reduction the same way LDL does. HDL is like homocysteine - you want to keep it low but once it gets high, lowering it again, offers little value compared to reducing LDL and HBA1C at least on terms of cardiovascular disease risk. * "Keeping LDL higher might even be beneficial" - this is a type of claim that will, one day probably get a lot of people who propagate it on the internet to jail due to premature loss of human life. Keeping your LDL low offers a significant protection against all cause mortality and heart disease. At this point, this is so robustly proven that saying otherwise in the absence of newer evidence is just not right. I'd highly suggest you review those studies one more time to be sure. This is the most barbed wire topic in nutrition and we cannot afford to listen to quacks with strong commercial interest selling pills in topics that are si essential. Also be sure to review those trials yourself and not to rely on others to do that. You always want to look at highest levels of hierarchy of evidence when doing so and not rely on one or two papers that support your hypothesis. I'm currently doing that and have been for a few months for my own research and the benefit of my clients with blood lipid issues so i take this topic extremely seriously. Again, nothing personal here. Just defending the position ?‍♂️ I believe @undeather being on the forefront of patient care has actually investigated this topic very deeply and wrote some papers himself so would be cool to get his take. All I'm saying is, of someone suddenly claims that everything we know is wrong, be aware and be cautious. Just because someone is a good marketer and looks fit does not mean they know what they are talking about all the time. In fact, I'd encourage you to look up the real nerds who do the digging and the type of evaluating that nobody else does, at least not that I've seen such as The Nutrivore, Avi Bitterman, Gil Carvalho, Tom Dayspring, Allan Fllanagan and potentially even Layne Norton has lately been changing mamy of his past opinions. They may help with showing you the other side of the story) But in the end we all do our best most of the time and I don't believe most of these people mean any harm. They are just complacent because they achieved major success and most of their audience are not nutritionally savy to the point that they could do the research themselves so they conform. Take care and thanks for your comments! Great work on your YT channel by the way.

@Javfly33 maybe it is demagogical but who cares. Why not learn from the experience of people who have gone before us? We use similar thinking in all sorts of other domains. By the way you can control for all those things in studies (and they do that) such as controlling for fruits, bodyweight, meat intake and still see the effect of a particular exposure (coffee in this case). A well controlled and stratified study will be sure to separate the benefits of one thing against another so that you can see the true effect of an exposure (whatever that is) I'm not here advocating some crazy caffeine overdosing, I'm just sharing the interpretation of the data as that's my main thing. Obviously, You should not rely on caffeine for energy that your body can't otherwise make. I totally agree with that. It shouldn't be a crutch. OFCOURSE if your diet and lifestyle is shit coffee won't help you. We don't even need to talk about that. But what if alongside those it can actually give you one-up (and it looks like it does) so why can't people cash out on that? Also, let's be honest. How many people need to realistically be worried about not attaining the highest levels of spiritual teachings compared to 1 in 8 men getting prostate cancer. If coffee can slightly impair one while benefiting the other, it is a trade of worth making every single time. And who says a cup a day can't actually help you with your spiritual practice? Your personal experience and that of another person might differ. Anecdotally caffeine might help you sustain longer meditation and keep you more awake during long sessions. Who says that's not helpful Let's be open minded and inquisitive about things and not demonize anything out of habit.

Coffee consumption is associated with REDUCED occurrence of Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, Prostate Cancer, Lung Cancer, liver cancer, Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease in general across human epidemiological data. However very high consumption might elevate cholesterol levels (this effect disappears with filtered coffee tho and there is a potential link to french press coffee here) Mechanisms and acute effects do not matter if the long term outcome data points to general benefit. That being said pregnant & breastfeeding women need to avoid it du and those who know coffee does not sit well with them should probably avoid it too. ( E.g. anxiety disorder and those sensitive to caffeine effects) Sensitivity of some does not mean that nobody should touch it. Use it intuitively and choose black when you can

Some shit jobs can be a good transition while you work on your own thing. It's important to use the earned money strategically. The trick is to do the bare minimum and appear busy. Don't ask ask too many questions, don't try to outshine others and don't drag too much attention from the management. Also, don't ask for a raise if your basic salary can support your goals already. Salary questions will shine a spotlight on your ass This way you'll still have time and energy to build a biz on the side. Once you are out and on your own, that's when you want to be the best and attract a lot of attention to yourself and your product

Well said, Once controlled for weigh loss, low carb diets compared to high carb diets have no better long term outcomes and usually lead to decline in compliance as do most fad diets above 12 month threshold. Carbs are not the problem (all things being equal)

Once they see the GDP cut year by year due to decline in tourism, they might reconsider ?

@Leo Gura fair. Yes, you are right. Although in my experience such people are quite rare. Maybe I'm in the wrong circles being a corporate rat

Mercury content of small herbivorous fish is mostly negligible and any levels however bad are truncated by the benefits of their fatty acid content. Fatty Fish at small and medium size remains one of the foods where benefits for chronic disease risk reduction drastically outweigh potential costs such as HM , PCB and microplastic content. Maybe 100 years from now this will no longer be the case as the oceans become ever more polluted. That's if you don't have ethical or ecological issues with eating fish which is a reason solid enough not to consume seafood and meat altogether. It's a personal choice but where health only is concerned, sardines are health promoting

You can't make sure. There are no guarantees. If you want a guarantee you go down the 9-5 rat race (I'm still part of that as well while building a small business on the side). 9-5 gives you guarantees and safety but drains your soul and makes you hate your life. But it is still 100 times easier than building your own thing. Once you choose to go solo that's when things get really hard. Like every dollar earned is a struggle and if you are not prepared to go through months without income and going through stages of doubting everything you once believed in and waking up in the middle of the night unhappy & frustrated with your lack of progress then this journey is not for you. You need to have a high tolerance for uncertainty and lack of achievement. But when it works it's the most fulfilling and beautiful thing there is. Second only to the birth of your child. But if you are passionate about something deep enough that you are willing to go all out and risk it anyway, it might work (or it might not). You need to find a strong motivation and desire within and return to that place regularly especially when things don't go well for you. Speaking from personal experience, trying to build a business and getting clients has been the most challenging (and often frustrating) thing in my life.

The reason your doctor won't test for this because doing so would deny the funding to someone who needs it more such as cardiac patient. Health Services around the world are notoriously underfunded and doctors need to be strict with what tests to order. If you present your suspicion based on something you read on the internet and hearsay i can guarantee they won't test you. Also most heavy metal tests are notoriously unreliable, ranges aren't defined and anything that isn't biopsy can lead to false positives so NHS won't waste insurance claims on unreliable measurements. It sucks but that's the reality of medicine. I understand why they do that. Lack of finances is systemic problem that medicine faces (one of many) Being conventional is not a bad thing, they are following the evidential guidelines and prioritize tests that can lead to diagnosis and subsequent medical treatment. You might be best off going private but no harm in trying the conventional route first just be prepared for a potential NO

No biggie, some time off serves us well. You should shut it down every now and then on purpose ?

I think a little bit of phone user experience optimisation when tagging users. That function misbehaves often on a phone and tagged names usually cannot be deleted. Maybe quick tips section for new users including some key navigation points. Or maybe a short intro video for new users made by you? A button "Privatise" in journal section that will lock the journal from ability to comment but can still be modded if the user shit talks about other members. OR The ability for journal owner to delete comments from other users.