I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.
Daniil log
I agree with the old quote of Hippocrates that disease is an accumulation of sins against nature. I don't think a study is needed to prove it. In my own case, I smoke too much tobacco and one day it may well kill me, or I'll get hit by a bus. Anyway.
I take this quote and applied to "vitamin" a I see it as a sin against nature to eat colorful fruits and vegetables all year long (which are sprayed with chemicals), or dairy for that matter (fortified with chemicals, from animals which lactate their entire lives). I don't think there's anybody who could take accutane for years on end without consequences. I recall that scientists were warning way back in the 80s that chronic hypervitaminosis a was far more prevalent than realized. Those without this condition by the time they're in their 40s are probably exceptional nowadays. The growth industry of chronic illness points to an environmental cause and "vitamin" a fits the bill pretty darned well as Grant pointed out.
I also like the biblical quote that he who loves his life will lose it. We in the west are many of us fretted about our health and terrified of death, which the latter is not a thing we can hope to avoid.
I like elimination diets in general because I see the poisoning of our food (and water) supplies as a 100% deliberate and profitable culling program by a dominant minority. I prefer to make my own choices, pick my poisons and not be a trash compactor.
I agree about the absurdity of demonizing whole classes of foods, like was mentioned with phytates, oxylates, etc. I also have no doubt that some have severe problems with them (or with the chemicals sprayed on them, and the root cause is thereby muddled..)
How little we really know about food is a point well made, and I've been pondering it ever since I read it here. I also believe that everything has its season, and next year I'm going to eat my fresh figs and not give them to the birds as I did this year (I'll still avoid white figs and I'll peel the skins, but leaving them to the birds is passing up a good thing and life is too short).
@grapes I think there is definitely a problem of a "crisis of trust". We cannot trust research in rats or in vitro for the reasons mentioned above. But human studies do raise questions, too. And it's not even the problem you mentioned that bothers me so much as the corruption in medicine. As for the problem you mentioned, science is trying to solve it. I don't think that among human studies, the percentage of erroneous studies reaches 90%, as is the case with in vitro and animal studies. It's not perfect, but now I realize that it's better than animal and in vitro research. How Ray Peat and others with their medical knowledge ignore this facts, I don't understand. As for perfect research, I gave an example of 3 not perfect but good studies in the "10% trap: Why Ray Peat was wrong" thread.
Quote from Даниил on January 3, 2026, 8:45 pmI don't think that among human studies, the percentage of erroneous studies reaches 90%, as is the case with in vitro and animal studies. It's not perfect, but now I realize that it's better than animal and in vitro research.
Or maybe it's not that one is better than the other, but they are consequential steps of a research? Researchers test their hypothesis in vitro (if possible), then on animals and finally on humans.
This goes without saying, but problems begin when there is a test-tube study that is quoted by, say, Ray Peat or Stephen Gundry or someone else, and a study on people who are quoted by official science. Previously, I also doubted who to believe in this contradiction, now I understand that official medicine was not mistaken when it puts the evidence of human research above the rest.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-century-of-evidence-vaccines
The Century of Evidence Vaccines Cause Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
One example of official science carefully avoiding evidence in human research?
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1647245/?page=1
There is a controversial large human study for this article.
When I wrote that I would not eat oxalates or vitamin A or something else it was if you find me large human studies that do not contradict others (or at least it will be clear that there are an overwhelming majority of such studies).
Close family with careers going back to the 1950's in health care, social work, health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. I was also an investor in those industries with access to their quarterly and annual reports.
I trust that "controversial" study by Group Health Cooperative as much as I trust Fauci and Gates.
A good starting point for access to other studies funded by someone other than the parties with conflicts of interest. Interesting that Anthony Mawson's studies are sited here.
Thanks for the links. There is certainly something to think about here. I understand that medicine can be corrupt, otherwise I would not be writing on this forum. However, I would be more grateful if you would provide links to research on vitamin A or PUFA (this is what is more relevant to me). In the meantime, I'm more inclined to trust official medicine, and in particular Dan Buettner, because what they're doing is studying humans, not rats.
Suggest you look at old Mercola articles on PUFA's - from before he was debanked and started selling Peat ideas. As to vitamin A, Grant did an excellent job in his books. So did Anthony Mawson in his papers. You can use the link to his paper above to find his others.
Glad the links gave you something to think about. Glad you grok that anything can be corrupt. What I am positing is that the vast majority of medical science is corrupt.
Cochrane Science Reviews Tainted by Financial COI — e.g., Gates Foundation
I do not know who Dan Buettner is. I have spent more than enough time evaluating all the "adjustments" pharma funded research does to reach the conclusions they desire in their peer reviewed research.
Am old enough to remember when Gates Foundation and WHO drove covid fraud through every government on the planet based on fraudulent PCR tests. Drosten rammed a peer reviewed paper through to publishing in less than 3 days. A process that normally requires 6 to 18 months. Ironic given that he ran the peer reviewed journal who reviewed his paper that outlined the gene sequences needed to run the test for sarscov-2. A gene sequence that he did not have access to at the time he wrote the paper. A gene sequence that was generated out of thin air on a computer in China daus after. Ironic given that his paper gave him the royalties and profits to the tests that established that every country on the planet was suddenly over run with a virulent disease who's more common symptoms was........ wait for it.............. "NO SYMPTOMS."
Am also old enough to remember one of my family employers: Merck when they rammed Vioxx through FDA approval and then blackmailed and bribed their way to dominate their market even as 10 years of use proved out that they were killing hundreds of thousands of customers by destroying their hearts. If memory serves, Merck internal documents revealed in court proceedings that Merck drove non compliant doctors out of business in Australia, they bought up peer reviewed journals and published fraudulent science papers en masse and they made on the order of 18 BILLION USD on the product. It cost them a few billion to develop and market the product. It cost them something like 5.5 BILLION in fines when they were caught intentionally like 160,000 customers. They apologized, pulled the product and paid the fines and settlements. Zero Merck employees suffered any consequences. And the company was left with a an overall profit of like 11 or 12 BILLION.
How does that old Russian saying go? Crime that pays is crime that stays?
These are just 2 examples. These are not exceptions. They are more than common practice. They are the routine. Why else would any manufacturer of any product anywhere be guaranteed a profit by government mandated use and protected completely from all possible liabilities of the damage that product routinely inflicts? If official medicine and science were so good why would it be so routinely forced on us? Why would the pharmaceutical companies worry about liability protection if the product were the 100% safe and effective that we have been uniformly told that it is? Why would Pfizer refuse to sell their covid vaccine to India after India refused to grant them 100% liability protection? Why would Pfizer require Brazil to give their banks and military bases to Pfizer in order to get the vaccines?
Is it possible that you are giving the benefit of the doubt to a monster who routinely and frequently eats men and has for generations?
To see the universal fraud that is so close to our faces, we need to step back and look at their processes in real time. It is hard to do with out the help of facts outlined as they are below by folk like Nick Hudson at PANDATA.
==================
There were many stand-out moments during our conversation but one stood out more than others. Nick takes me through the timeline of the early days of COVID. I call it the timeline of bullshit and premeditation. Because once you have heard it, that is the only logical conclusion you can draw regarding the COVID “pandemic”.
Here is the timeline -
December 30, 2019: Unusual Pneumonia Case in China
An eye doctor in Wuhan, China identifies a “peculiar” case of atypical pneumonia. What was unusual about this case of pneumonia in a city of over 8 million remains a mystery.
January 5, 2020: WHO Identifies 44 Cases
The World Health Organization (WHO) identifies 44 cases of atypical pneumonia within five days of the initial observation, sparking the official recognition of a new and unknown threat.
January 7, 2020: Declaration of a New SARS-Like Virus
Within two days, health authorities declare the cause to be a new SARS-like virus. The number of identified cases jumps to 65 within three days.
January 10-13 2020: PCR Kits Shipped
Mr Drosten together with the owner of TIB Molbiol (a Berlin based manufacturer for PCR tests) develop the perfect test for a new virus the world has never seen, wow. The manufacturing of the first PCR kits for testing begins, and astonishingly, they are shipped just 11 days after the identification of the first patient!
January 10, 2020: First Gene Sequence Published
Simultaneously, on the same day the kits are shipped, the first gene sequence is published.
January 13, 2020: WHO Adopts Drosten's PCR Protocol
Within two days, the WHO adopts Christian Drosten's PCR protocol as the gold standard for testing the new disease.
January 22-23, 2020: Corman-Drosten Protocol Published
The now renowned Corman-Drosten protocol is published just 24 days after the initial identification of the mysterious pneumonia cases, going through peer review in an astonishing 27 hours.
January 24, 2020: Chinese Study on Clinical Symptoms
A study about specific clinical symptoms supposedly related to COVID is published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
January 30, 2020: Study on Asymptomatic Transmission
Just five days later, the first study on asymptomatic transmission is published in the NEJM.
Nick contends that each step in this 31-day timeline was not only questionable but also premeditated, challenging the authenticity and transparency of the narrative surrounding the early days of COVID-19.