I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.
Testosterone and Vitamin D lab results .
@tim-2 I've been on Garrett Smith's site for the past 9 months, read everything he had in his Basic and Advanced Courses, watched as many of his videos as I could stand to watch. I started reading Grant's work, but I don't have the time to make my way through all of his extensive writing. I've read Mawson's work that's been cited by Smith. I don't know what Ray Peat has to do with this, sounds like a lot of people with Vitamin A toxicity got messed up by following him. I even bothered to look at your YouTube channel when you first started spouting off on my posts.
Mawson has some interesting ideas, and even though he's published in very obscure journals that suggest his research may not meet typical peer-review standards, at least they were actually published. Grant has generated some good hypotheses and contributed a good deal with his n=1 diet experiment. Garrett seems to have connected a lot of the dots and done a decent job of drawing up a flexible dietary framework.
However, it sounds like hardly anybody has fully cured their Vitamin A toxicity around here, if that's what they actually have. Considering that published case reports indicate the resolution of chronic Vitamin A toxicity within months, simply by removing most Vitamin A from the diet, you've got to wonder what the discrepancy is. Are the people here that much more toxic with Vitamin A? Probably not. I'm guessing it's more to do with liver and gut problems that are not being addressed by any of the dietary strategies. One common thread I see is that most people are going high fiber, moderate carb, low fat. Garrett Smith practically demonizes fat, especially animal fat. Considering the many success stories resolving all kinds of disparate diseases using a version of the carnivore diet (see the Paleolithic Ketogenic Diet / Paleomedicina case reports for published examples), it seems to me that higher fat, moderately high protein, low fiber, low carb might be the answer that everybody here is eschewing...we won't really know until people try it.
Or maybe we're just not chain smoking enough...
You can claim you've read a bunch of studies, and you can cite all the minute details you want from this and that study on Vitamin A, but you might be falling into the same reductionist trappings that led to our ridiculous RDA's and plant-based diet recommendations. It's also important to understand how the methodology of the studies affects their relevance to live humans. Is it an animal model? Is it in vitro? How much replication is there in the study, and have other studies confirmed the results? How much control is there for confounding variables? Is it observational or interventional? Etc., etc.
I would very much like to understand all of the mechanisms underlying Vitamin A metabolism, but I'd much rather have a functional solution that isn't completely understood. We may not understand all the mechanisms for a carnivore diet working so well for so many people, but there are a lot of big picture physiological and evolutionary explanations for why it makes sense. Grant seems to think that carnivore dieters avoid a detox setback.
@kiero I'm not positive about my interpretation, but it sounds as though that text you quoted supports what I had said previously, which is that certain drugs, plant compounds, and oxidative stress can push various forms of Vitamin A out of storage in the peripheral tissues and the organs, but it just winds up in the blood rather than getting it out of the body.
Yes @wavygravygadzooks, potentially. All I can think of as to a 'functional solution' to effectively remove Vitamin A is to become sick enough for long enough to remove excess stores?
Also the constant bickering is a little childish don't you think? I see you low key flex you're a biologist which is cute but realistically you don't have to be a scientist to connect dots, some people have a better ability at this than others. Heres hoping Tim digs up some new info, which he seems to be doing anyway and progressives this forum for the better. Also please remember Grant is an engineer.
I've specifically said in previous posts that you don't have to be formally trained in the sciences to understand or contribute to scientific conversations, and that many great contributors were not formally trained. I've actually seen numerous examples now of engineers applying themselves to biological questions and coming up with excellent insights, Grant potentially being one of them. On the other hand, you do have to be literate in scientific concepts to form a valid scientific thesis, and those of us who do have formal training in the sciences are sometimes more aware of the nuances of statistics and study methodology that have a large bearing on how applicable a given study is to living humans, which are complex biological systems. It's easy to get lost in the details and to make more of an observation than is warranted (I have been completely guilty of this myself in my own work), and the best scientists know how to zoom in and zoom out to the appropriate scale when interpreting data.
In the end, the best batters are usually trained baseball players, the best cooks are usually trained chefs, and the best scientists are usually trained professionals. I am far from being a top scientist, but I do my best to rigorously apply the concepts of science in which I've been trained.
I'm all for new info, but let's be sure to measure its quality and applicability to real life scenarios when it comes. Like I said before, you can claim to understand a pile of details about Vitamin A metabolism, but if you can't fix toxicity in a timely manner than what do all the details really matter? The proof is in the putting.
BTW, when you say things like "you low key flex you're a biologist, which is cute", or when @tim-2 starts off with a dismissive "Oh mate...", you are both inciting bickering by attempting to slight me.
I mentioned that I'm a biologist because qualifications are important in matters of intellectual discussion. You don't have to be a scientist to discuss science, but it certainly lends a little more credence to your position. I passed a lot of math and physics classes but I don't pretend to be an engineer, and I would in all likelihood defer to an engineer's opinion on matters of engineering.
One more thing (sorry for the serial posting...), "connecting the dots" is what conspiracy theorists do. The difference between conspiracy theorists and scientists is that scientists understand how to incorporate probability and statistics into their decision-making and clearly state the assumptions they're making in reaching their conclusions. Connecting the dots is one of the first steps in the scientific process (hypothesis generation), which is followed by an assessment of the likelihood of the hypothesized model...that second part is really what science is all about and is how you separate fact from fiction.
Garrett Smith "connects the dots" and calls himself the Nutrition Detective (implying he can find patterns that nobody else sees), cites information from the bible as though it held equal weight to modern scientific knowledge, and prescribes to homeopathy which has no grounding in the scientific method (aside from the placebo effect). He also says there's no such thing as coincidence. It's no surprise that he and many of his followers support what are currently considered to be conspiracy theories, because they're all "connecting the dots" without properly weighing statistical probability.
I find Grant's hypotheses to stick much more closely to objective science, and he is trying to move beyond the hypothesis stage by organizing and funding another fundamental study of Vitamin A. He is more careful not to overreach with his conclusions, although he is still relying heavily on correlational data. I may disagree with his hypothesis that Vitamin A is not a nutrient, but I appreciate his objective approach and his being humble about not having it all nailed down, and acknowledging that his diet is most likely less than optimal.
Quote from wavygravygadzooks on May 10, 2021, 2:44 pmBTW, when you say things like "you low key flex you're a biologist, which is cute", or when @tim-2 starts off with a dismissive "Oh mate...", you are both inciting bickering by attempting to slight me.
I mentioned that I'm a biologist because qualifications are important in matters of intellectual discussion. You don't have to be a scientist to discuss science, but it certainly lends a little more credence to your position. I passed a lot of math and physics classes but I don't pretend to be an engineer, and I would in all likelihood defer to an engineer's opinion on matters of engineering.
RE: but if you can't fix toxicity in a timely manner then what do all the details really matter? The proof is in the putting.
Who ever said that it should be fast? We are in completely new territory here with attempting to reduce vA toxicity AND recover from disease via diet alone. Most of the case reports that I’ve read about vA toxicity document recovery from acute toxicity scenarios. We can’t assume that recovering from decades long chronic toxicity should be quick based on those case reports. Additionally, there are case reports of acute toxicity where the person did not quickly recover, rather they died.
Most people here are trying to recover from chronic toxicity or from accutane. And, what’s documented for accutane poisoning is that the damage the drug has caused is often permanent.
Some people here are reporting that their serum vA levels have barely dropped at all (and a few have even increased) after two or more years on a low vA diet. Clearly, the assumption that the liver storage will be depleted in about two years is wrong. The real depletion times are proving to be highly individual, and are going to vary a lot depending on multiple factors.
Since we know that vA is going to accumulate and embedded itself in cell membranes, mitochondrial membranes, bind with DNA etc, and once bound to DNA the the only way to get rid of it is for the affected cells to die off, then this detox / healing process is going to take a long time. Age is a big factor too.
So, in no way is this a quick fix; the real time frames are looking to be more likely in multiple years.
But, I fully agree, if we can’t get better real-world results, or at least make it more predictably, then this entire project is at risk of failure.
I don't have a link, but someone here posted the case study of the small boy, which shows how sticky VA can be. He presented at the hospital with poisoning symptoms (possibly similar to the ones I was getting) and the docs didn't change his diet, except to stop the vitamins he was receiving.
And he ended up back at the hospital again, with another poisoning bout. (I had a few poisoning bouts left in me too even after reigning in my VA levels for a year.)
VA's can be a sticky issue. As I was saying to hubs "Take some pigments, and mix them with flax oil. You now have something you could use to finish a floor. You've got Minwax, LOL".
(Minwax® Wood Finish™ is a penetrating oil-based wood stain, which provides beautiful rich color that enhances the natural wood grain.)
On the topic of the young, it seems to me they bounce back much more readily, for instance, the poster here named Thomas. And I was so encouraged to hear that a set of parents have contacted Grant regarding success with their type-1 diabetic child.
I’m not a fan of Dr Smith bashing. I do not think there is any greater resource than experience with clients going through this detox. I really wouldn’t underestimate that. He is the only naturopath I know of who is doing this work. Theory is great but unless it plays out in practice it means nothing.
I myself have a PhD in human molecular genetics so yes I’m a trained scientist. I also have completed all the academic modules to become a nutritional therapist. However, I am not treating clients and seeing all their test results. Therefore, I don’t consider myself in any way superior to anyone else going through this detox.
The recent work that Dr Smith has been doing is, for me, as life-changing as realising I was vA toxic in 2018 (thank you Grant). I’ve been trying to understand why I get periods of extreme anxiety for the last 22 years. This week I got finally got clarity - a theory that explains everything. If it plays out to be correct I will share my experience.