Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 6:28 pm

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)

Bringing in Margo's "experiment" to support a claim that vA is a nutrient is lame at best.  Margo did many things that were shown to be a bad idea a long time ago on the Love Your Liver Network by many people.  She also tried an array of radical changes to diet and supplements that makes it impossible to get a clue what reduction or addition of any of those ideas caused what improvement or deterioration of health.  

Taking 105mg zinc for an extended time, especially without at least a hair mineral analysis and without other supporting supplements and guidance from an experienced outside party is ridiculous.  And wheat bran?  It has been shown repeatedly that celiac happens with retinols to irritate the gut and almost does not happen without retinols.  Slamming wheat bran is probably the single worst fiber someone could take.  

This whole case study falls under the heading of "I tried the detox and it did not work for me so it must not work" heading.  Unless of course the whole goal of the person in the case study is to be able to eat vitamin A foods again. 

Is that how you are defining success Andrew?  If someone is able to eat the Standard American Diet without acute toxicity symptoms, then they are now healthy?  

I think you might reread Grant's ten year update.  In ten years he went from a terminal patient days away from hospice to a man in the top 1% of health in his age group.  You might profit from learning from his example and testing it.  Instead you throw up smoke and prattle about how you can not see how Grant's results are possible.  Or you just ignore them.  

Please stick to Tommy's claims on this thread and Grant's measured careful reply.  Tommy's claims are ridiculous.

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:15 pm

Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 1:25 pm

There may be other people here who have opinions about Garrett, I'm certainly not one of them.   I'm glad other people on the web are into the low VA idea.   I've never been a part of Garrett's group.    I'm also not in the facebook group (where Andrew hangs out) ... for that matter.   I'm glad there *are* groups.   I am hopeful to see important stuff come out of these groups.     I think it's amazing what Grant is doing and has done, but I have no desire to live like he does.  I have no reason to join either group.

What you seem to keep overlooking is that I'm not looking for a guru, I'm not looking for special cures.   I'm happy with my diet and the progress I have made simply swerving around vitamin A.  I take zero supplements.   I eat a diet that is pretty darn normal.  

I'm divorced from the mind set that getting safely nourished is challenging.    It took me 40 years.   Life is good.   Grant's idea has helped me and I'm grateful to him.   His idea helped me scrutinize all the other ideas I've been exposed to through my long life of food experimentation.   His idea filled in important holes and gaps in the knowledge.   For instance, why are bland foods like denuded grains so important in so many cultures.   (bread, rice)

Are you actually saying you believe there is NO use of retinoids in the retina?   

I think it's perfectly plausible that the same substance used to photosynthesize could be used to turn light into pictures in the brain.   Synthesizing things from light.   If so, that is a special molecule.

 

Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 1:25 pm

There may be other people here who have opinions about Garrett, I'm certainly not one of them.   I'm glad other people on the web are into the low VA idea.   I've never been a part of Garrett's group.    I'm also not in the facebook group (where Andrew hangs out) ... for that matter.   I'm glad there *are* groups.   I am hopeful to see important stuff come out of these groups.     I think it's amazing what Grant is doing and has done, but I have no desire to live like he does.  I have no reason to join either group.

What you seem to keep overlooking is that I'm not looking for a guru, I'm not looking for special cures.   I'm happy with my diet and the progress I have made simply swerving around vitamin A.  I take zero supplements.   I eat a diet that is pretty darn normal.  

I'm divorced from the mind set that getting safely nourished is challenging.    It took me 40 years.   Life is good.   Grant's idea has helped me and I'm grateful to him.   His idea helped me scrutinize all the other ideas I've been exposed to through my long life of food experimentation.   His idea filled in important holes and gaps in the knowledge.   For instance, why are bland foods like denuded grains so important in so many cultures.   (bread, rice)

Are you actually saying you believe there is NO use of retinoids in the retina?   

I think it's perfectly plausible that the same substance used to photosynthesize could be used to turn light into pictures in the brain.   Synthesizing things from light.   If so, that is a special molecule.

Classic tactic.  Because I look at the best results of radical experiments and work to use those results on myself, that makes me a guru follower?  Hillarious.  

Please define your normal diet that is so nourishing.  Please define your good health in a manner that makes me want to have that kind of health.  

Please find where I am actually saying anything about the retina other than that you are using linguistic choices from scientists who were deluded and or fraudulent from decades if not centuries ago and pretending that this somehow provides proof to your wild speculations.  And then top if all off with the declaration that "if this is true then that is something real special..........."   As if that is some kind of argument in logic and reason establishing that something anything is in fact good and not at its core bad.  

Please stop ignoring the extreme evidence that Grant and Garrett repeatedly present that makes their extreme claims seem understated.  Results matter.  The only results I am consistently seeing out of the "moderate" vitamin A crowd right now is the claim that their clients are healthy as defined by being able to eat a vitamin A food without noticing anything bad right away.  

Even Margo's claim in how much better she is highlighted how helpful some kind of alternative ice cream was to her improvement.  Wow so sciencey.  

Quote from Sarabeth on August 22, 2024, 7:24 pm

@lil-chick, I am flattered by your kind words, but I have zero opinions I feel confident in at the moment! 🙂 I'll see if I come up with any in time that seem lucid enough to post and I'll check back later. xoxo

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:35 pm

Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 2:02 pm

The title of this thread might seem like it was dreamed up to piss off people, but in reality it is true

There is the old saw:  you can't prove a negative.   

Grant was (very probably) extremely full-up with vitamin A and may not ever run out for his lifetime.   For all we know he could have 3 lifetimes worth stored up.

You'd have to go to some other planet to prove that vitamin A is non-essential.   Really... It's so integral to life here on Earth that you can't know.

That is only true when you take it as a given that vitamin A is an essential nutrient and require proof that it is not.  Please present some evidence - that is not a fraudulent study nor some etymology that assumes it is a nutrient - that retinols are a nutrient.  

Trolling science as it appears that Grant's blog is being trolled by an overwhelming small group of people is not how science improves.   Semmelweis was trolled into an insane asylum and beaten to an early painful death for his insights into surgical hygiene.  

What you describe here is prototypical of consensus science.  That is an oxymoronic term.  Because you and a few friends can overwhelm a man's blog with your speculations and baseless opinions, you declare a majority and credibility and some kind of win while pretending to science.  Some wildly wise man has stated repeatedly that science is not done by debate.  

Hence I am not debating Grant's claims here.  I am questioning whether or not you "moderate" and "pro" vitamin A folk are acting in good or bad faith.  Again, please do not claim I am calling you derogatory names or trolls.  I am simply asking the question that repeatedly gets avoided here:  Why are you here on this blog if you feel that vitamin A is a nutrient?  Why are you here ignoring and trivializing Grant's results while lavishing hollow praise on all he says and does?

 

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:40 pm

Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 11:08 am

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.

If that were your intent you would be all over Garrett's livestreams and twitter account learning from a clinician who is getting excellent results and years ahead of you on all the angles, basics of the idea, limits and making it so much easier for all of us to figure it out.  

Instead you dance around and talk about it and avoid the crucial facts that prove out that vitamin A is a toxin not a nutrient.  So is copper.  Getting them out and reducing their intake is vital to life.  Being able to tolerate them is the worst way possible to define health.  

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:43 pm

Quote from lil chick on August 19, 2024, 2:05 pm

Personally I suspect that vitamin A is also used as a weapon and I worry that someday Grant will run out of weapons.    That might be another way that vitamin A is essential (besides eyes)

I think that is why people who are vitamin A overloaded seem to have an immune system that has run amok.

Grant might run out of weapons?  As if Grant is in a fight or conflict?  With who?  Or what?  

Is it possible that auto-immune diseases are all toxic reactions to toxins?  Not just too much toxins, but just toxins?  

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:50 pm

Quote from Hermes on August 19, 2024, 3:26 pm

 

I'm divorced from the mind set that getting safely nourished is challenging.    It took me 40 years.   Life is good.   Grant's idea has helped me and I'm grateful to him.   His idea helped me scrutinize all the other ideas I've been exposed to through my long life of food experimentation.   His idea filled in important holes and gaps in the knowledge.   For instance, why are bland foods like denuded grains so important in so many cultures.   (bread, rice)

This post makes me feel really warm inside and say sappy things to a chicken handle (like totally inappropriate words like "I love you"). It's full of hard-earned wisdom. People here have this idea that if they abstain from certain foods long enough, they can turn themselves into supermen. But let's not forget the price you pay for eating only three foods for a decade. It's boring. Without any pleasure. Food is the easiest source of pleasure that anyone has access to. Tomatoes smell appetizing, yogurt is refreshing, bacon is crispy. Andy Bourdain traveled the world to experience and share the richness of food with his audience. Do you want to miss that? It's a personal choice. It takes a mature mind to balance pleasure without succumbing to it or denying it altogether.

And yes, I understand the impulse to tweak and improve a diet to achieve higher more noble goals than just being fed. One imagines a glorious future of great endurance and health. One dreams of a physique like Michelangelo's David. But there is also something to be said for being content and appreciating things as they are: not perfect, but perhaps good enough. No one achieves perfection in this world, that's reserved for the afterlife. In the meantime, many struggle, hoping to change things for the better. But at what cost? Perhaps part of the struggle is this deep-rooted desire for more, for better. Letting go of that is a relief. For now I want to be content. Inspired by the chick.

I hope you enjoy the mediocrity you aspire to.   Bourdain is a great example to bring up.   He clearly did not aspire to that mediocrity in the end or he would not have been suicided so obviously when he went off the reservation just a bit.  Would have loved to see his reaction to Grant's experiment. 

And as ever, why are you here (asking long term users why they are here is not appropriate - moderator)?   If you live to eat then why are you here blogging trivialities that minimize the import of what Grant has proven out.   Why do you pretend that Grant aspired to being a superman or immortal?  All the guy wanted at the start was relief from an horrific symptom - eczema.  Have you never been sick and willing to give something up to stop the pain?  Have you never successfully found the previously unsuspected cause of a problem, solved that problem and resolved to find other such unsuspected causes? 

Good luck with your mediocrity and your wonderfully adventurous culinary adventures.  Please let us all know how it turns out.  And most importantly why you ever posted on this blog.

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 7:53 pm

Quote from Tommy on August 19, 2024, 7:17 pm

Not sure why the thread has been derailed…

In the works of Weston Price, the consumption of vitamin a is emphasised for 3 groups of mammals:

1. Pregnant mothers

2. Nursing mothers

3. Growing Infants

When vitamin A is absent in the diet, it seems that issues don’t necessarily manifest in the adult, but in the infant/future infant.

Thus I would like to add 2 further points:

4. Grant is a fully grown man.

5. (Assumption) Grant has no plans to have more kids.

Have you failed to notice the recommendations and guidelines on vitamin A intake for pregnant and or nursing mothers?  

Why are you posting such insanely dangerous ideas? 

Quote from Deleted user on August 22, 2024, 8:06 pm

Quote from Jessica2 on August 20, 2024, 4:55 am

The animal studies showing the need of VA and carotenes for domestic stock like cows I think is pretty compelling. Can you imagine telling a farmer that the grass that the cows eat has a poison in them? I think they'd laugh at you.

I think little chicks idea of carotene's being protection against the sun is kind of interesting to think about too. Not to derail the threat on this point but maybe carotene's just aren't needed when you aren't in the Sun as much like we are these days shut up indoors?

I also think that we should be wondering whether Grant's experiment is reproducible or not. He is an N=1 but that doesn't prove VA is unnecessary or unneeded; the study needs to be reproducible on a large level. You might scoff and say it's very unlikely but perhaps Grant is allergic to carotenes or some other Factor going on in his health such as amount stored in the liver. We just don't know. Grant says there's a growing body of people who are proving this. It's very informal though; there does need to be a study of some sort to control other factors. As far as I know there are no animal studies proving animals don't need it.

Apparently you know no farmers nor ranchers.  There are limits to everything.  Animals do get sick and die when allowed too much on pasture or any number of foods they eat.  When I was sixteen my boss let me feed his horses for a week.   I liked his horses and gave each a quarter cup more here and an eighth cup more there.  The results in his barn were so striking he never let me feed them again.  He had their optimal feed down to the tablespoon.  Imagine a few extra tablespoons a day of oats making an 800 or 900 pound athlete underperform and show symptoms.  Yes ranchers have to care for their livestock  They can and frequently do limit their access to fresh green grass.  It would serve us all well to drill down and study the ideas Joel Salatin, Greg Judy and a growing number of farmers are using to vastly improve pastures and their livestock with intense rotational grazing.  

All these baseless wild speculations with no basis in experience or facts keep me asking how is this not all trolling?  How are you ignoring and trivializing Grant's and Garrett's results.  It is not just a guess that a growing number of people are getting wildly good results with Grant's diet anymore.  If you would stop mocking and attacking Garrett and get on his twitter threads and talk with the rest of us from LYL you would find a group growing faster than keto and carnivore did in their early days.   And getting better results.  And resolving issues from those paradigms as well.  

By all means though, keep working at overwhelming this work with speculations.   Your examples present more and more argument for making this a public blog that open to anyone to read and requiring a paid subscription to comment on.   Unlike Andrew's private group on Facebook that is visible only to those that Andrew allows into his club.