I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.

DiscussionLet's talk about it: The science of it10% trap: why Ray Peat was wrong

Please to create posts and topics.

10% trap: why Ray Peat was wrong

#1 · December 29, 2025, 11:46 pm

Quote from Даниил on December 29, 2025, 11:46 pm
I understand that this is not exactly the topic of the forum, but I wrote a short article where I expressed a number of my thoughts against Ray Peat, which I have recently. I know there are people here from Ray Peat's forum, which has now been renamed, and they might be interested in this. I cannot pay for my participation in lowtoxinforum from my country, so I decided to post the article here, but I would be grateful if someone would transfer it there for discussion. Please forgive me in advance for my poor English.

10% trap: why Ray Peat was wrong

I had been taking Ray Peat's diet for a long time. Now I already know more, so I decided to write this article.

Modern science recognizes that we understand why only 8-30% of DNA is needed. We also described only 1-5% of the substances that consists of our food (i.e., in fact, we do not know anything about it). [1.2] According to different estimates, there are thousands of enzymes in the human body, whose functions are still unknown or studied only partially. We see that they are, but we don't understand what substance they influence.

Ray's theories are beautiful and logical at first glance, but the approach to medicine Ray Peat has serious flaws. The fact is that Ray Peat rarely refers to large placebo-controlled research of people (gold standard of official medicine). Usually his evidence is experiments in a tube, rats and biochemical logic. But we still know too little to draw conclusions on this basis. For example, if Ray Peat claims that the Z substance is useful for cell breathing based on experience in the tube – this does not mean that it will be useful for the body as a whole, because, for example, this Z substance can block some important, still unknown enzyme in liver (metabolizing, for example, aldegids) or compete for assimilation with some vitamin. Or when Ray Pete says: the product X is useful - it can easily not guess about some still not described by science toxin in it.

The only thing we can do in this situation is to believe a major placebo-controlled research in people because then we learn in practice that, for example, apples are useful because people who often eat healthier than people on average population. Medical science does. She believes evidence on animals less weight than in humans, and in a tube even less weight. And nuance is that large human research is generally showing the wrongness of Ray Peat.

For example:

Study: Propective Urban Rural Research: progressive Urban Journal Epidemiology (PURE) study. [3]
Data 2023-2025: more than 135,000 people from 18 countries participated in the study. The results showed that the highest consumption of vegetables, fruits and beans (rich in the most "dangerous" on the Peat fiber) is associated with the least risk of death from all causes and cardiovascular events, although the schedule of use is nonlinein and after 40-50 grams per day is almost not growing.

Study: VITAL [4]
The study involved 25,800 people. Data: vital analysis showed that Omega-3 reception in 5.3 years reduces the risk of autoimmune diseases development by 18%. The threshold of importance was the decrease in mortality from cardiovascular diseases. If the PUFA were toxin, the mortality should have increased for such a long period of time. It is important to note that this study was conducted with government money.

Study: NHANES [5]
Data: participants who received 25% or more of their daily calories from added sugar, the risk of death from CSS was 2.75 times higher compared to those whose consumption was less than 10%. The study was also conducted with government money.

In general,this list we can continue and continue.

Ray Peat blames people's bad health capitalist conspiracy of seed oils. But then there is a question: why did the USSR not expose this plot? Why didn't they recognize the PUFA as a toxin? I myself Russian, but I did not live at that time, but I heard stories about how Soviet children in children's homes and schools forced to take a dining spoon of fish fat every day.

It is interesting that 90% of drugs [6] successfully tested in the test tube and animals are cut off at the stage of research in humans. Usually because they are either toxic to humans or simply ineffective. 90% is a huge percentage. What does that say? About how much human biochemistry differs from rat or from biochemistry cells in the tube. So, as in general, on the basis of only research not on people can we make any conclusions for man? Rhetoric question.

Also, in my opinion, Ray's manner of dividing «molecules» into «bad» and «good» is strange. Such as estrogen or serotonin. These are hormones that our body produces. If it produces them, then we probably need them. Why have our own hormones suddenly become bad for us? Unclear. And it would be fine if there was one such molecule, it could be attributed to some kind of genetic malfunction, but according to Ray, there are a lot of them – besides estrogen and serotonin, prolactin, cortisol, TSH, histamine, and so on. What is going on in our body? Why does it produce «bad» molecules on a massive scale and every second? Even the body of a healthy person? Maybe Ray is just wrong? It is important to note that science has already proven that serotonin is essential for intestinal function and blood clotting, while estrogen is critically important for bone density and brain function.

Ray Peat believed that ascorbic acid easily produces free radicals (based on in vitro experience) and therefore it is better not to consume it (in the form of additives). But many people actually experience the benefits of ascorbic acid supplements! So it doesn't produce free radicals the way Ray said it would. Maybe PUFA in the body is also not so strongly oxidized?

It is worth noting that Ray Pete ignored the issues of insulin resistance (when he recommended eating sugar and potatoes), the risks of fatty liver (which, as proven by science, is caused by fructose), autophagy (mTor suppresses it), and the fact that taking antibiotics leads to the growth of fungi. These facts are easily Googled, so I will not analyze them in detail.

Science has proven that human intestinal bacteria produce a bunch of useful substances: butyrate, B vitamins, K2, GABA, and so on. Ray Peat himself considered the last three useful. This contradicts Ray's own position on the sterile intestine (I have already cited the fiber study above).

Why did Ray Peat seem like a prophet?

Many people believe Ray because he «guessed» things that medicine confirmed only decades later.
How did he do it?
Denial strategy: Arguments in science are often binary in nature: useful or harmful. If you keep saying «no» to official medicine, you will inevitably be right when science corrects its dogmas. This is the effect of a «broken clock» that shows the correct time twice a day.

Mechanism or chance? Analysis of «prophecies».

Ray often guessed the result, but he was completely wrong about the mechanisms.

1) When people were prescribed only T4, Ray recommended the hormone T3, blaming its deficiency on the fact that the liver was not working properly due to «improper nutrition» Modern research shows that the cause is usually due to genetic mutations (the DIO2 enzyme). Ray suggested the right pill, but the mechanism was wrong, forcing people to look for years for blame in their diet where genes are to blame.
2) Ray defended coconut oil for decades when medicine considered it a «poison» due to saturated fats. Now (in 2025) it is recognized as a useful source of energy: Ray thought it was useful because it «doesn't oxidize like PUFA». Reality: It is useful because of the medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs), which go straight to the liver to produce ketones, bypassing the complex digestive cycle. This is the biochemistry of fat transport, not «protection from oxidation»
3) Ray argued that CO2 is not just a «waste product», but a protective factor. Modern medicine confirms the role of carbon dioxide in the effect of Phosphorus (without CO2, oxygen is not released from hemoglobin in the tissue).Where was the wrong (mechanism): He considered CO2 almost an «antidote» to estrogen and serotonin, arguing that high levels of carbon dioxide physically prevent these «evil» hormones from destroying the cell. The reality of 2025 is pure biochemistry and gas physics. CO2 regulates pH and dilates blood vessels. Pete turned the gas into a «philosopher's stone», which supposedly magically neutralizes his personal «demons». Modern science considers lactate to be a valuable fuel.
4) The harm of excess Omega-6. Ray had been at war with vegetable oils for decades, when nutritionists recommended them to everyone. Today (in 2025), science recognizes that the modern bias towards Omega-6 causes chronic inflammation. Where was the wrong (mechanism): He claimed that Omega-6 instantly turns into spontaneous toxins and suppresses the thyroid gland directly. Reality: Omega-6 is the building block for prostaglandins. The problem is not with the molecule itself, but with the imbalance of Omega-3/Omega-6. Ray declared the molecule a "poison", although it is indispensable for the body.
5) Epigenetics: Modern science recognizes that environmental influences can "turn genes on and off." Ray, recognizing the influence of the environment on genes, declared DNA methylation itself — the most important regulatory process of life — to be an absolute "evil", allegedly depriving the cell of flexibility, which from the point of view of modern science is absurd. When Ray argued for epigenetics, he was not talking in biological terms, but philosophizing.

Thus, we see that I decided to analyze Ray's 5 prophecies and they all turned out to be just guessing, when Ray guessed the result with the possible answers, but only harmful / useful, without knowing the real mechanisms.

Links:
1.https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/10/06/nutritional-dark-matter-the-hidden-chemistry-reshaping-food-and-health/2. https://nautil.us/the-dark-matter-of-food-1255448/
3.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319363444_Fruit_vegetable_and_legume_intake_and_cardiovascular_disease_and_deaths_in_18_countries_PURE_A_prospective_cohort_study
4. https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2021-066452#:~:text=What%20this%20study%20adds%20*%20This%20trial,the%20incidence%20of%20autoimmune%20diseases%20are%20lacking.
5. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1819573
6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36883244/

I understand that this is not exactly the topic of the forum, but I wrote a short article where I expressed a number of my thoughts against Ray Peat, which I have recently. I know there are people here from Ray Peat's forum, which has now been renamed, and they might be interested in this. I cannot pay for my participation in lowtoxinforum from my country, so I decided to post the article here, but I would be grateful if someone would transfer it there for discussion. Please forgive me in advance for my poor English.

I had been taking Ray Peat's diet for a long time. Now I already know more, so I decided to write this article.

Modern science recognizes that we understand why only 8-30% of DNA is needed. We also described only 1-5% of the substances that consists of our food (i.e., in fact, we do not know anything about it). [1.2] According to different estimates, there are thousands of enzymes in the human body, whose functions are still unknown or studied only partially. We see that they are, but we don't understand what substance they influence.

Ray's theories are beautiful and logical at first glance, but the approach to medicine Ray Peat has serious flaws. The fact is that Ray Peat rarely refers to large placebo-controlled research of people (gold standard of official medicine). Usually his evidence is experiments in a tube, rats and biochemical logic. But we still know too little to draw conclusions on this basis. For example, if Ray Peat claims that the Z substance is useful for cell breathing based on experience in the tube – this does not mean that it will be useful for the body as a whole, because, for example, this Z substance can block some important, still unknown enzyme in liver (metabolizing, for example, aldegids) or compete for assimilation with some vitamin. Or when Ray Pete says: the product X is useful - it can easily not guess about some still not described by science toxin in it.

The only thing we can do in this situation is to believe a major placebo-controlled research in people because then we learn in practice that, for example, apples are useful because people who often eat healthier than people on average population. Medical science does. She believes evidence on animals less weight than in humans, and in a tube even less weight. And nuance is that large human research is generally showing the wrongness of Ray Peat.

For example:

Study: Propective Urban Rural Research: progressive Urban Journal Epidemiology (PURE) study. [3]
Data 2023-2025: more than 135,000 people from 18 countries participated in the study. The results showed that the highest consumption of vegetables, fruits and beans (rich in the most "dangerous" on the Peat fiber) is associated with the least risk of death from all causes and cardiovascular events, although the schedule of use is nonlinein and after 40-50 grams per day is almost not growing.

Study: VITAL [4]
The study involved 25,800 people. Data: vital analysis showed that Omega-3 reception in 5.3 years reduces the risk of autoimmune diseases development by 18%. The threshold of importance was the decrease in mortality from cardiovascular diseases. If the PUFA were toxin, the mortality should have increased for such a long period of time. It is important to note that this study was conducted with government money.

Study: NHANES [5]
Data: participants who received 25% or more of their daily calories from added sugar, the risk of death from CSS was 2.75 times higher compared to those whose consumption was less than 10%. The study was also conducted with government money.

In general,this list we can continue and continue.

Ray Peat blames people's bad health capitalist conspiracy of seed oils. But then there is a question: why did the USSR not expose this plot? Why didn't they recognize the PUFA as a toxin? I myself Russian, but I did not live at that time, but I heard stories about how Soviet children in children's homes and schools forced to take a dining spoon of fish fat every day.

It is interesting that 90% of drugs [6] successfully tested in the test tube and animals are cut off at the stage of research in humans. Usually because they are either toxic to humans or simply ineffective. 90% is a huge percentage. What does that say? About how much human biochemistry differs from rat or from biochemistry cells in the tube. So, as in general, on the basis of only research not on people can we make any conclusions for man? Rhetoric question.

Also, in my opinion, Ray's manner of dividing «molecules» into «bad» and «good» is strange. Such as estrogen or serotonin. These are hormones that our body produces. If it produces them, then we probably need them. Why have our own hormones suddenly become bad for us? Unclear. And it would be fine if there was one such molecule, it could be attributed to some kind of genetic malfunction, but according to Ray, there are a lot of them – besides estrogen and serotonin, prolactin, cortisol, TSH, histamine, and so on. What is going on in our body? Why does it produce «bad» molecules on a massive scale and every second? Even the body of a healthy person? Maybe Ray is just wrong? It is important to note that science has already proven that serotonin is essential for intestinal function and blood clotting, while estrogen is critically important for bone density and brain function.

Ray Peat believed that ascorbic acid easily produces free radicals (based on in vitro experience) and therefore it is better not to consume it (in the form of additives). But many people actually experience the benefits of ascorbic acid supplements! So it doesn't produce free radicals the way Ray said it would. Maybe PUFA in the body is also not so strongly oxidized?

It is worth noting that Ray Pete ignored the issues of insulin resistance (when he recommended eating sugar and potatoes), the risks of fatty liver (which, as proven by science, is caused by fructose), autophagy (mTor suppresses it), and the fact that taking antibiotics leads to the growth of fungi. These facts are easily Googled, so I will not analyze them in detail.

Science has proven that human intestinal bacteria produce a bunch of useful substances: butyrate, B vitamins, K2, GABA, and so on. Ray Peat himself considered the last three useful. This contradicts Ray's own position on the sterile intestine (I have already cited the fiber study above).

Why did Ray Peat seem like a prophet?

Many people believe Ray because he «guessed» things that medicine confirmed only decades later.
How did he do it?
Denial strategy: Arguments in science are often binary in nature: useful or harmful. If you keep saying «no» to official medicine, you will inevitably be right when science corrects its dogmas. This is the effect of a «broken clock» that shows the correct time twice a day.

Mechanism or chance? Analysis of «prophecies».

Ray often guessed the result, but he was completely wrong about the mechanisms.

1) When people were prescribed only T4, Ray recommended the hormone T3, blaming its deficiency on the fact that the liver was not working properly due to «improper nutrition» Modern research shows that the cause is usually due to genetic mutations (the DIO2 enzyme). Ray suggested the right pill, but the mechanism was wrong, forcing people to look for years for blame in their diet where genes are to blame.
2) Ray defended coconut oil for decades when medicine considered it a «poison» due to saturated fats. Now (in 2025) it is recognized as a useful source of energy: Ray thought it was useful because it «doesn't oxidize like PUFA». Reality: It is useful because of the medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs), which go straight to the liver to produce ketones, bypassing the complex digestive cycle. This is the biochemistry of fat transport, not «protection from oxidation»
3) Ray argued that CO2 is not just a «waste product», but a protective factor. Modern medicine confirms the role of carbon dioxide in the effect of Phosphorus (without CO2, oxygen is not released from hemoglobin in the tissue).Where was the wrong (mechanism): He considered CO2 almost an «antidote» to estrogen and serotonin, arguing that high levels of carbon dioxide physically prevent these «evil» hormones from destroying the cell. The reality of 2025 is pure biochemistry and gas physics. CO2 regulates pH and dilates blood vessels. Pete turned the gas into a «philosopher's stone», which supposedly magically neutralizes his personal «demons». Modern science considers lactate to be a valuable fuel.
4) The harm of excess Omega-6. Ray had been at war with vegetable oils for decades, when nutritionists recommended them to everyone. Today (in 2025), science recognizes that the modern bias towards Omega-6 causes chronic inflammation. Where was the wrong (mechanism): He claimed that Omega-6 instantly turns into spontaneous toxins and suppresses the thyroid gland directly. Reality: Omega-6 is the building block for prostaglandins. The problem is not with the molecule itself, but with the imbalance of Omega-3/Omega-6. Ray declared the molecule a "poison", although it is indispensable for the body.
5) Epigenetics: Modern science recognizes that environmental influences can "turn genes on and off." Ray, recognizing the influence of the environment on genes, declared DNA methylation itself — the most important regulatory process of life — to be an absolute "evil", allegedly depriving the cell of flexibility, which from the point of view of modern science is absurd. When Ray argued for epigenetics, he was not talking in biological terms, but philosophizing.

Thus, we see that I decided to analyze Ray's 5 prophecies and they all turned out to be just guessing, when Ray guessed the result with the possible answers, but only harmful / useful, without knowing the real mechanisms.

Links:
1.https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/10/06/nutritional-dark-matter-the-hidden-chemistry-reshaping-food-and-health/2. https://nautil.us/the-dark-matter-of-food-1255448/
3.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319363444_Fruit_vegetable_and_legume_intake_and_cardiovascular_disease_and_deaths_in_18_countries_PURE_A_prospective_cohort_study
4. https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2021-066452#:~:text=What%20this%20study%20adds%20*%20This%20trial,the%20incidence%20of%20autoimmune%20diseases%20are%20lacking.
5. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1819573
6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36883244/

Janelle525, Donald and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

#2 · December 30, 2025, 8:52 am

I agree with most of your analysis of Ray Peat. It nearly destroyed my life.

#3 · December 30, 2025, 2:57 pm

Good post. Reminds me of the religious truth vs real truth when it comes to the Bible. Where the reasoning is wrong, but the lesson being taught is not.

Don't misinterpret me, thinking I'm saying Ray Peat taught good lessons.

#4 · January 1, 2026, 1:54 am

Quote from Janelle525 on December 30, 2025, 8:52 am

I agree with most of your analysis of Ray Peat. It nearly destroyed my life.

Same for me. Unfortunately I was not one of those people who could just read Ray Peat stuff and use logic and inteligence and knowledge and just make notes and implement what makes sense(like lowering PUFA fats, watching iron intake and making sure that I am not eating keto/low carb) I was in very bad health, not able to think clearly. Had very limited knowledge so I did what most people did. Started doing the "Ray Peat diet" of dairy, sugar, liver, coffee. Basically it is a diet of the most problematic stuff that most unhealthy people should avoid and that was just diet. I am not even talking about hormones..

Just thinking about that time period gives me anxiety.. How I was running around drinking coffee, eating gummy bears and chocolate. Burning my already destroyed adrenals. Killing my liver with all that fructose, no soluble fiber, a lot of saturated fat from dairy, chocolate and coconut oil..

I think I am right when I say that it is the best diet to induce NAFLD the fastest in people who already have metabolic issues and for sure can't handle fructose and fat and vit A and copper etc..

Janelle525, Livy and Ginny have reacted to this post.

#5 · January 1, 2026, 3:21 am

I remember one guy on the Ray Peat forum took an aromatase inhibitor and he got so sick that he said he wouldn't take a million dollars if he was offered to do it again for that money. This is about the question of good and bad molecules according to Ray.

Another reference to the 90% figure:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303404287_Trends_in_clinical_success_rates

#6 · January 1, 2026, 3:53 am

@daniil another thing there is not such thing as "bad hormone". The idea that stress hormones are "bad" and you lower them as much as possible is crazy.. It is all about balance. I experienced both chronic high and low cortisol, estrogen and I realized how important those hormones are to keep the body in balance and healthy.. If I have to choose what state is worse I would say chronically low estrogen and cortisol for sure.. YOu are basically walking death in that moment.. All you want is to lay down and die basically.. You have no emotions, no desire to do anything. Your body is breaking down because without estrogen you don't have collagen production etc..

ломаю has reacted to this post.

10% trap: why Ray Peat was wrong

Share this:

Like this: