I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.
Jenny Jones from the "it is a metabolic issue" group
Quote from Jessica2 on August 28, 2024, 9:50 am@r-2 he >never< said "take vitamin a". He posted a study which posited a theory that retinoids might help regulate microbiome health in the gut. Nowhere did he ever post advice saying you should take supplemental vitamin A to achieve this.
It's tough for some people to grasp this, but the theory that vitamin A is a poison is still just a theory. There also, theoretically, could be a use for it in the body and this is the vein in which Andrew posted that study.
Skads of clinical evidence and Grant's experience to the contrary. The moon might be made of cheese too. Low vitamin A cheese. Enough to feed the entire Earth. Is that a useful theory to look at on this blog?
Quote from Jessica2 on August 28, 2024, 11:30 am@r-2 LOL whatever dude, I've been living for 20 years eating little to no added sugar or sweets, no white flour or gluten or processed seed oils for about 8 years, and I regularly intermittently fast. I can run circles around anyone when it comes to food abstention.
But I only do it if I get results. And I didn't get results abstaining from vitamin a. Unlike abstaining from sugar and gluten which had real positive effects for me, that did nothing.
I wonder what would happen if you tried low vitamin A again. What would happen if you did it and actually used the experience and advice that over a thousand of us are using on LYL? I wonder if you would improve.
Quote from Jalee on August 28, 2024, 5:34 pm@joe Garrett is a sleaze ball and anyone who defends him is in the same boat. This thread is an ad hominem and should be deleted, but while its up, I'm going to add. Garrett had no problem hijacking Ray Peat's forum and blog even delighted in Charlie being a low vitamin A moderator who kicked anybody out who disagreed. Ray Peat didn't subscribe to the low vitamin A stuff and there are people on his blog who are stunned at what happened.
It was only when he felt Charlie was hurting his bottom $money$ line by giving out info kept behind a paywall that there was trouble in Paradise and now, Charlie is Enemy Number One to Garrett and he wants nothing to do with him anymore.
Cry harder, both of you.
I saw first hand what Charlie did. He took screen shots from another private nutrition site - Not LYL - without permission and posted the work of a biochemist without attribution. Then he claimed it as his own. Told his followers that he came up with those numbers. That chart was and is a valuable set of instructions on how to properly figure dosages.
Charlie flat out stole and lied about it.
And here we are calling people names. Always seems to come to that. With no better argument than that. Curious in your logic, how is this whole thread an ad hominem attack? Where in this thread have I avoided the pertinent issues at hand? Where have I called anyone a name? How does this thread not highlight the bogus science pretenses that carefully avoid the entire point of this blog?
Quote from Jalee on August 29, 2024, 6:15 pm@joe
So Garrett's mad that what he thinks is vital health giving information that could help people was given out on another blog and he couldn't profit off of it, thanks for clearing that up.
I also know that the story you told above is not the full and complete set of events. Charlie did more than post the chart, he gave credit just not the way GS wanted him to, and yes other stuff is what GS is mad about.
Wow. Jumping to wrong conclusions and making inferences so false that the false inferences must be intentional. How close to trolling behavior do you want to get Jess?
Nope. Like I wrote. He caught Charlie stealing from someone else's blog and from their work and claiming it as Charlies' own work. Is that clearly enough stated for you?
Why are you so determined to claim fault in Garrett where you have found none. It is not that hard to find fault in him. We do it all the time on his own blog. And he has to own it. Unlike what you do here on Grant's own blog to Grant and Garrett.
Imagine declaring an idea a complete failure and unlikely to be useful or an accurate version of reality simply based on the fact that Grant's health improvements were not replicable in 100% of the people who did a mediocre job of replicating his idea. And then claiming that the 30 or 35% of the people who did get amazing health improvements did not improve 100%. And then claiming that since those people did not improve 100% in less than a year that the idea is a failure.
Curious. I have seen you and Andrew offer services as well as free advice to people here. How many have you helped? What is your "moderate vitamin A intake" success rate? How many have you seen with 100% improvement? Ever? Where are your glowing testimonials. Have not seen one here. Care to link it here?
Grant's and Garrett's list of testimonials is growing daily on twitter and LYL blogs. Seems like they are growing here too lately, in spite of the fact (as stated by Andrew) that the "top 10 commentators" on Grant's blog disagree with Grant. Did Grant invite a group of ten people to come on to his blog and flood his posts with comments denigrating the idea he made this blog to provide a record of? Or did that group come in and push all other commenters out with derisions and accusations.
For writing like this I have been called a bully. Are you reading this? Are you reading this as bullying?