I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.
Grant has NOT proven that vitamin A is non-essential
Quote from Tommy on August 19, 2024, 3:49 amI don’t see how the RDA is relevant.
What is the RDA based on?
SURVIVAL Tommy. Survival. That is why is is called the MINIMUM DAILY REQUIREMENT OR THE required daily amount.
Tommy. Why are you here? Why are you ignoring everything that Grant has written? Why are you pretending to be an honest well intended broker of knowledge and an analyst? How is this not troll behavior?
Please note. I did not call and will not label Tommy a troll.
Thank you.
Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 6:21 am"Carotenoids harvest light energy" says the google machine
Interesting that VA might be (or IS, I suppose that IS fact) used in eyes. Perhaps in the same way that carotenes are involved in photo-synthesis, (I added the hyphen there) perhaps the eyes use the VA's to convert the light that is seen into electric impulses that the brain can turn into a picture?
Perhaps the process of vision is somewhat like photo-synthesis. (what a great word, by the way, what I'm trying to explain is right there in the word)
So, if we could invent a planet without VA, our eyes might just not be able to see. However, I assume that the daily need for more is quite small.
A necessary micro-nutrient, perhaps. This might help explain why the body doesn't outright toss it out in a stronger, faster way. Or why foods with it can have an intriguing flavor. (buttery?)
Lots of perhaps. Zero evidence for your claims and zero science. Just like Tommy, why are you here making wild claims with zero evidence?
As with Tommy, the onus is on you to provide evidence for your extreme claims.
Perhaps it is needed in smaller amounts? Like 1000 time smaller than the RDA? Like Grant said, that is not a small error. That is being completely wrong. So wrong in fact one would have to be fraudulent, have bad intent and not be an honest person of good faith.
How is this entire thread not trolling.
Thank you for not calling me any names here and for recognizing that I called no one any names other than their own names.
Quote from Andrew B on August 19, 2024, 6:28 am@lil-chick Margo's experiment seemed to suggest that reintroducing vitamin A foods resolved her night vision issues. And it looked like she may have earned her low serum retinol value by taking a lot of wheat bran. And she did try taurine and selenium to try to resolve the night vision other ways. Margo's Log - Page 2 - Discussion | Ideas, Concepts, and Observations (ggenereux.blog)
Yes. Reintroducing a toxin will stop a liver from dumping it out into the blood and tissues. That will stave off the re-poisoning effect of mishandled toxic bile.
This is far from being evidence that indicates retinols are nutrients.
Quote from Andrew B on August 19, 2024, 7:05 am@janelle525 yes, it's possible. Margo also stopped the zinc supplements and Bryan who has had night vision issues also may have taken too much zinc. Sometimes too much zinc doesnt help night vision. Zinc at high doses can destroy retinal cells according to the study mentioned here. Retinal cells not reacting to light correctly is one possible reason for night vision issues. Is Zinc Good For Your Eyes? | Prevention
Again, these all look like examples of mishandled toxic bile. Re-poisoning by dosing supplements that kick out copper and retinoids faster than the GI tract can pull the toxic bile out of the body. So as Garrett repeatedly declares and proves on client after client, work on repairing and speeding up the excretory system instead of trying to stop the liver from detoxing.
@joe, um, it is general knowledge that the retina is named that for retinoids being used there
it's general knowledge that photosynthesis happens because of retinoids (in plants)
put two and two together
I don't think this is a huge leap.
it's right there in the words
Personally i think all of science needs more trolling or it wouldn't be so lost.
Ideas NEED to be able to stand up to SCRUTINY
Not only that, by looking at things from lots of angles we might learn more about the basic idea. Where the limits of the new idea start and end. How far the new idea can be pushed. Why the new idea was so hard to figure out.
Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 11:05 am@joe, um, it is general knowledge that the retina is named that for retinoids being used there
it's general knowledge that photosynthesis happens because of retinoids (in plants)
put two and two together
I don't think this is a huge leap.
it's right there in the words
So you point out an etymology based on fraudulent science and I am supposed to stick with that? Did you ever read Grant's books?
If I call my dog Daisy does that make him a female?
Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 11:06 amPersonally i think all of science needs more trolling or it wouldn't be so lost.
Ideas NEED to be able to stand up to SCRUTINY
Are you saying that Grant's science has not stood up to scrutiny? Why are you not applying that trolling scrutiny to Rockefeller liars and frauds?
Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 11:08 amNot only that, by looking at things from lots of angles we might learn more about the basic idea. Where the limits of the new idea start and end. How far the new idea can be pushed. Why the new idea was so hard to figure out.
If you would stop calling Garrett names and listen to him you would know that Garrett and his group are doing exactly that. Everything you question about cases where people try to follow Grant's example and get hurt is due to people going too hard too fast without guidance in detoxing retinols and copper. Garrett and company have a growing list of people who have and are sorting these problems out. We get the GI tract up and running better (as K Hurd does) and keep it running fast enough to keep up with whatever the liver kicks out. We minimize the re-poisoning without taking in more toxins intentionally.
This is why I am repeatedly asking you why you are here. I am not calling you a name. I am asking you to demonstrate that you are acting in good faith and questioning science fairly. So far I have seen no examples of that.
So yeh, please do not bother describing me or any other ad hominem tactics regardless how much you sugar coat it and sound like you think I am a great person but........ I am obviously deluded cult following "unhinged" or "confused" or whatever. Please note that I called you nothing here and I never complained about all your ad hominem attacks on me or Garrett to anyone. I simply noted them and let you know how pointless they are.