Ray Peat Rodeo
A picture of Marcus Whybrow, creator of Ray Peat Rodeo From Marcus This is a video interview to do with Ray Peat from 2020.
It's part of my effort to archive and augment Ray's complete works within this website, Ray Peat Rodeo. You can donate to the project on GitHub sponsors, cheers🥰.

Report Card

  • Content added
  • Content unverified
  • Speakers unidentified
  • Mentions incomplete
  • Issues incomplete
  • Notes incomplete
  • Timestamps incomplete

03:36 Okay, and we’re live. Georgi Dinkov, Raymond Pete, thank you guys so much for joining us. Hit the like button, subscribe. Ray, how are you? How are you doing? Very good. And Georgie Dinkov, how are you? Not bad. Can’t complain. There are mobs marauding the streets of DC, but other than that, seems to be okay. With that, we’re going to take some criticism of this show as we’re not talking about nutrition enough. So I did want to, maybe if Ray will humor us, go back to basics and talk about 04:25 the role of progesterone carbon dioxide, the flow of electrons through the cell. And so I probably can’t talk about this enough, because it’s, I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, Ray, but it’s really foundational to the bio-energetic perspective. And so, I don’t know if we could just, I don’t know, maybe paint a picture of what’s happening when you’re eating fats, proteins, and carbohydrate, how they combine with oxygen, what role of thyroid having in that process, going through the mitochondria producing carbon dioxide, and how that’s reciprocating the use of oxygen, and then what exactly is progesterone doing in that whole process? Okay, proteins, the basic substance of life, protein is acidic, and that means it’s electron withdrawing and proton releasing. 05:28 And this creates a pre-existing, once you have a protein substance, a deficit of electrons. So being acidic, it’s already inclined towards oxidation. It’s a high content of oxygen atoms on the polymers that creates the acidity of the proteins. And that, the organization of Jeremy England and MIT is working out the very basic physical principles of simply the crudest sense of the flow of energy, 06:29 shining light on simple molecules and showing that it creates order. And if you, once you come to the existing proteins, if you shine light on it, or in any way have an energy disequilibrium, you get a flow of energy through that gobb of polymerized atoms. And the flow of energy itself, the way Jeremy England shows with simple atoms, once you have a polymer solution, a co-acerate, for example, or just an emulsion, 07:31 the difference, two points that have different electron affinity, it’s going to align these proteins according to where the electrons are flowing. So if you have an oxidant on one end and an exciting electron source on the other, the potential electron donor, there’s going to be a flow of energy that will create order in the polymer. My experiment that convinced me that it’s a very simple process was to stick two electrodes through an egg shell and measure the current flow and resistance 08:34 as the voltage rises and then the current flow and resistance as the voltage falls, just an oscillating change in voltage. You get a very strong hysteresis loop that on the falling voltage, the flow of electrons is out of proportion. They flow very easily with little resistance because as the voltage increased, the proteins created a conductive channel. So walking makes the road basically whenever you have energy flowing, you make the path easier for the next flow of energy. 09:35 So it increases its appetite and capacity to use energy. During the process of development and evolution, you get all sorts of side channels of energy being drained off in creating different substances according to the voltage difference and availability of the atoms and molecules that have arranged themselves aligned in an ordered way. So the more complex it gets, the faster it gets, more complex yet. And Vernadsky early in the 20th century 10:40 worked out the implications of this, that the sun as the source of energy flowing through substance created order and continuing the flow spontaneously leads to a higher and higher metabolic rate, the hysteresis curve. The bigger it gets, the more electrons it can conduct per second. And as a consequence of that faster and faster flow of electrons, you get a more complex system with a bigger brain, for example, which creates and maintains that higher metabolic rate. 11:41 Physically, Vernadsky 100 years ago had described it in detail with all its implications. And almost at the same time, there were two or three people working out the medical, biological and developmental implications of oxygen in a very practical way. Frederick Cook or Koch in the U.S., Otto Warburg and Albert St. Georgie were all seeing the creation of the inspiring organisms as developing and progressing through the use of oxygen. 12:47 And they saw that when you interfere with this flow of electrons by doing something that locks the ability to use oxygen, you revert to basically a slime metabolism very primitive, ancient, under-organized way of using energy. And all three of these, Barbara, Koch and St. Georgie, saw cancer as using a primitive pre-oxidative metabolism. And the more or less overlapping with their studies, there were a couple of people working on the implications 13:51 of carbon dioxide as the product of oxidative metabolism and the extraction of electrons from fuel. And the carbon dioxide, if you think of it in mechanistic terms, the tendency is to not notice that carbon dioxide in itself is acidic. The common theory of acid that’s still taught as the basic thing in science textbooks and courses is the proton donor theory of acidity. 14:52 All of these physical ordering processes caused by oxygen are really the electron retraction theory of acidity. And carbon dioxide doesn’t have any protons, so if you think of proton release as the essence of an acid, you can’t think of CO2 in itself as an acid, but it’s called the Lewis acid. And if it, having two oxygens on one carbon, it’s a very powerful electron binder. So if the instant it sits down on a protein, the protein shifts its electrons to be close to the center of the carbon dioxide molecule. 15:53 So it increases the acidity. You have a preexisting protein with acidity, and when you oxidize something and produce carbon dioxide, that increases, intensifies the acidity, and so that’s part of the sculpting effect of respiration. It intensifies whatever process was creating in the first place. The more you breathe, the more able you are to breathe in effect. I have a question in regards to the solar energy. I mean, given that most of the molecules that compose us and that are flying around in the universe, 16:54 they’re charged molecules, and we have this constant flow of energy, at least in the solar system in the form of the photons from the sun. Doesn’t that automatically imply that randomness more or less will be impossible in such an environment, because there will always be an orientation, which means some kind of an order with which the sun will create? Yeah, just light streaming through gas. It’s creating order. When you look at ionizing radiation, they emphasize the disorder that it creates, but when a cosmic ray particle goes through something, you can see the trail of changes it has introduced, but just the flow of light is to the extent that it’s interacting with the matter at all. It’s giving it an order and direction. 17:58 I was speaking to a physics professor about randomness recently, and he kind of failed to give me a definition of what would be a physical test for randomness. I said, all of your tests are statistical. You get a stream of numbers, and if it satisfies a certain number of statistical tests, you call it random, but in nature, I don’t have a single example that true randomness has been found. It always seems to be subjective, right? Based on the large of the data set, right? It’s a huge religious philosophical assumption. It’s sort of like original sin. You believe it, and then you follow all the consequences of believing it. About 50 years ago, I wrote an article, the assumption of randomness and all of the consequences 19:00 that have come from that very arbitrary assumption. Ray, you mentioned Albert St. Georgie, and I remember you saying this a long time ago, and it was something that I think was fundamental for me to mildly understand where you’re coming from. In his book, The Living State, he said, the ability of unlimited proliferation is an attribute of life. In the simplest living forms, growth is limited only by environmental factors. In multicellular organisms, this potential has to be suppressed in the interest of the organism as a whole. It must be restored when proliferation is needed and again arrested when no longer needed. When the suppression mechanism is out of order and the cell loses its ability to stop proliferation, senseless growth, cancer results. That’s basically exactly what you’re saying. In another article, you talked about sugar and oxygen being maybe brackets for our energy production, 20:03 and when these things are blocked, we revert to this unlimited proliferation blob-like state. Is that kind of the MO of hypothyroidism, the person becoming definitionless and looking more like a blob? Yeah, thyroid is the essence of oxidation for living cells. Have you ever seen the experiment with a tadpole with a thyroid blocker or with an excess of thyroid hormones? Yeah. If you block the thyroid function, you get a giant infantile tadpole. If you give it an overdose of when the tadpole 21:05 is maybe three-quarters of an inch long, an overdose of thyroid, you get a miniature frog about the size of a spider. The foods being reduced into electrons and then going through the cell and the inventory of oxygen being dictated, as I understand it primarily, by carbon dioxide. So what can go wrong in this process? You’ve talked about some pivotal, what I call landmarks in cellular metabolism, such as phosphofructokinase 1. You’ve talked a lot about pyruvate dehydrogenase, and of course, cytochrome c-oxidase. What are some big picture things that are important for understanding the production of energy and then how that process starts to degrade as we age? 22:06 Maybe starting with the phosphofructokinase 1. Is that blocked by things like free fatty acids and stress and such? Yeah. Just the choice between fat and carbohydrate, when you oxidize carbohydrate, you get extra carbon dioxide as a byproduct, and so it’s like insurance that you’re going to reinforce the oxidizing process. But oxidizing fat, even if it’s safe saturated fat, you don’t get such a return of carbon dioxide, and so that increases the risk of falling over into the lactate glycolytic slime metabolism. 23:15 When you’re starving or diabetic or on a ketogenic diet, you’re lowering the oxidative state of the cell, and that is by making you less stable, it’s opening up the opportunities for all of the processes of aging, creating collagen, for example, free radical activities such as nitric oxide, which can degrade your DNA. When you’re perfectly at rest and in good health, it’s okay to sit there letting your muscles have a pure fat diet when everything is very common 24:16 and you aren’t likely to blow out too much carbon dioxide, but as soon as you have any stress activity that makes you at risk of taking in too much oxygen and taking in too much carbon dioxide, then that starts increasing your nitric oxide production, collagen deposition, for example, two ends of the aging carcinogenic process. Shout out to Jay Feldman for making me more aware of this, but he says in one of his articles, and that’s somebody that follows your work rate, he says in one of his articles, glucose oxidation produces about 25%!m(MISSING)ore NADH and half as much FADH2 as fat oxidation, and I hope I don’t screw this up, but he says FADH2 donates electrons at complex 2 25:17 and reduces the amount of uberquinone available to accept electrons at complex 1, and is this the main kind of place where it’s being shifted to the reduced NADH away from the NAD plus in the fat oxidation? Is this backup of electrons in these complexes? It might be most often the biggest factor, but I think everything tends to work together. There are so many places, essentially everywhere a process is working, it tends to get biased when you’re not overproducing carbon dioxide, wasteful energy in the sense of pouring out the carbon dioxide and producing heat 26:18 as your only product, that’s insurance, and it’s acting on many, probably hundreds of identifiable different enzymes and regulators and structural proteins in the mitochondria and cytoplasm. And he also mentions like this is complex 1, primarily where the, or one of the major sources, the superoxide, and then that, hopefully I’m not screwing this up, but the superoxide combines with something to produce the nitric oxide, and so again, the fat metabolism is inherently increasing the function or the production of nitric oxide, is that right? Unless you get the whole stream going, pulling the electrons out at a maximum rate 27:23 at the oxygen end, then that, in effect, is attracting electrons that would make superoxide and other random damaging electrons. The faster you run the apparatus, it creates, again, an electron withdrawing effect from the surrounding cells just as a neighboring atom to atom influence, not a chemical reaction, but an inclination towards a more carbon dioxide-like condition of the structure. 28:24 So I have a question. So I guess something like methylene blue, which is technically an oxidizing agent, it’s also an antioxidant because it enables the flow of these electrons throughout the entire chain the way they’re supposed to be. It prevents the formation of these reactive oxygen species, so it’s an actual functional antioxidant while also being an oxidizing agent, right? Yeah, and I think all of these so-called antioxidants, like ascorbic acid, when it’s really protecting you and working the way it should, it’s a powerful oxidant, hydro ascorbate is the predominant form in a healthy working cell, and that shifts in the direction of the ascorbic acid in cancer and stressed cells. So the whole idea of antioxidant has been skewed heavily 29:29 by denying the role of carbon dioxide and oxidation as a protective effect. The stronger the oxidation in the normal route, the more wasteful and inefficient your energy is. Energy production is the safer you are. And if you put in the reduced form of the so-called antioxidants, those will create destructive oxidation. So overloading vitamin C, for example, in the reduced form will interact randomly with iron, for example, along the way and create toxic, excited oxidative fragments. 30:32 So aren’t reductants like estrogen and lactate also these types of bad antioxidants that destroy the system? Yeah, lactate I think should stand out as a polar opposite of carbon dioxide. I think a basic medical test should be the level of lactate in your blood and of total carbon dioxide and CO2. The higher lactate gets, the closer you are to being dead. So basically the lactate is in the sense just a mere buildup of lactate is enough to derange the oxidative metabolism. Yeah, you can inject lactated ringers, for example, and cause toxic damage by shifting your system away from the oxidative state. 31:38 Do you know why some of the studies, they used to be older studies that show that ringers lactate can cause seizures in susceptible people, but those studies seem to have stopped about 20 years ago. I haven’t seen any new ones. Was there like some kind of a campaign by the pharmaceutical industry to again hide the truth? Yeah, just in the last 20 years or so, there’s been kind of a deification of lactic acid and lactate. I don’t know if I was powering it, but it’s essentially an irrational decriminalization of lactate and lactic acid. Ray, I think a few years ago we did talk about the NAD, the NADH ratio, which reflects the reduction oxidation balance. Maybe I was reading a paper by Veach, and he stated that he thought the NADH should be higher relative to the NAD. 32:41 Is that a more common belief in maybe academia that the reduction should be higher than… So you’re expressing maybe a… It’s like 99 to 1 out of 100. A very confused attitude towards NADH, where it should be 7 or 800 to each NADH. The oxidized form should be extreme. When you’re under stress, it gets down more like 2 or 300 to 1. Since NAD is so popular now with those NAD drips and stuff, are people trying to pretend like they never held those beliefs before? Yeah, a lot of them don’t know about it, but they think they’re raising their NADH, 33:44 and lots of places are selling the reduced form of NADH as being better, because it’s reduced. The same with ubiquinone and ubiquinol. They say the quinol is better because it’s reduced. And Georgie told me this, and I found it in a few papers, but the higher NADH is one of the signals to turn off the pyruvate dehydrogenase, and that’s some, like, ketosis advocates that write papers like one of his names, like Jeff Volek. He talks about how that’s a consequence of ketosis. What’s the problem if pyruvate dehydrogenase has turned off? Does it matter? Oh, yeah, that makes the whole cell shift in that direction. Once it starts with the excess reducing environment, 34:45 that tends to reinforce it and make it get worse and worse. And sometimes… Well, if you turn off pyruvate dehydrogenase, as we just mentioned, you’re starting to immediately build up lactate, because pyruvate will be used as the emergency oxidant, so you’re going to start building up lactate, and we just said that, I don’t know if there’s any circumstance where you would want elevated lactate just because it’s so deranging to the entire cell. Yeah, and to keep the production of lactate going, you need something to get rid of the buildup of the higher and higher levels of NADH. And the intrinsic alternative to oxygen is the synthesis of fat. And so when the cell gets convinced that it isn’t going to get enough oxygen, 35:48 then it starts synthesizing fatty acids like crazy. Estrogen and other stressors will turn on this enzyme system to consume excess NADH in the absence of oxygen. And so it runs glycolysis, lactic acid production, intrinsically changing the cell over to consuming energy at a high rate, but in a destructive, primitivizing direction. So sometimes they’ll say, well, you know, fatty acids bypass glycolysis, and they form through the activation of the acetyl-CoA. And so that’s good to skip glycolysis and go directly to the mitochondria. What’s the faulty thinking with that argument? 36:51 That’s going to deprive you of carbon dioxide production relative to what you could have with oxidizing glucose. And then the oxygen supply is kind of the credit, because we can consume our tissues to produce glucose, the real bottleneck of everything is the oxygen supply, and things like lipid proxidation and the lack of carbon dioxide, those are interfering and estrogen are interfering with our oxygen supply. I also read a paper recently showing that the fatty acid synthase enzyme and the beta-oxidation structure are also often formed complexes with the estrogen receptor. So anytime you’re over oxidizing fat or synthesizing fats, you’re also directly activating the estrogen system, especially the estrogen receptor alpha, which seems to be not the bad one, 37:53 but the one that’s actually driving all of the pro-cancerous effects of estrogen. And just the stress state, if you overheat a cell, that will activate the fatty acid synthase. Maybe a while ago, maybe you’ve said it more recently, I’m not sure, but you talked about using progesterone as your stress hormone. So maybe in an ideal environment, this reduction oxidation process is happening normally. And when does progesterone enter the picture? I don’t know, can you unpack that using it as your stress hormone? Something you said a while ago? And the stress? Cholesterol is on the very primitive level. Cholesterol is the steroid stabilizing 38:54 pro-oxidative equivalent of progesterone. And with higher organization, the progesterone refines the functions of cholesterol on stabilizing and directing the cell in that ability to go down the organization-building pathways. But I guess in an ideal world, if a person is producing lots of progesterone, is that, it sounds kind of stupid, but is that used up before you activate the classical hypothalamus pituitary and adrenal systems? The brain has its intrinsic machinery. The ovaries are just there to reinforce the organism 39:59 so it’s able to safely go through a pregnancy and guarantee the well-being, despite the stress the mother is going through, the ovaries. And then the placenta are very powerful progesterone synthesizers. But for everyone who isn’t pregnant, the brain is our most intense progesterone factory, progesterone and its products. I have a question related to progesterone and prognolone. In some of the older studies, especially the ones that Celia did, he showed that giving people prognolone decreases the excretion of 17 keterosteroids, which Celia thought means that prognolone is giving the adrenals a break, 41:01 but without the negative effects of, let’s say, taking cortisol directly. Would you say that prognolone probably fills in for some of the roles of cortisol? Yeah, an experiment in rats around 1950 gave, with a stomach tube, they gave that, I think, was a 10 gram dose of prognolone filling their stomachs with it. And they had measured their cortisol before the experiment, and a certain proportion of them had above normal level of cortisol, showing that they were having to respond that way to stress of some sort. But all of them, having received this gigantic dose of prognolone, all of them had normal levels of cortisol after that, 42:06 so it bypassed the need to produce cortisol. And people tend to think of a mass action effect, that if you eat a lot of prognolone, won’t you get increased levels of the product? But it’s exactly the opposite. It works like cholesterol and progesterone to stabilize the organism, so you don’t need to resort to the harmful things like aldosterone and cortisol. I remember what I was thinking of. Ray, you mentioned another rat study, and I have it in my notes, but maybe they removed the adrenals, but as long as the rat had, it’s super physiological levels, assault or progesterone, it could survive, but then the progesterone would take it. Yeah, he noticed at first when he had the adrenal glands removed, 43:14 and all of them died very quickly as soon as they were under stress, but the females that were pregnant survived as long as they were pregnant, and then died, and so he decided to try non-pregnant animals, removing their steroids and supplementing progesterone, and they lived out perfectly normal, healthy lifespans without adrenal glands if they were given progesterone. It makes up not only for cortisol, but for aldosterone and all of the other functions of the adrenals. And the progesterone is acting on the oxidation-reduction balance, but you said on a lower level, it’s ordering the water, and that’s how it’s so protective in the cell? 44:15 Yeah, if you think of estrogen as doing everything that tends to excite the cell and move it to a lower, non-oxidizing energy system, progesterone knocks out those effects of estrogen and gets the cell back on the oxidizing pathway. The bioflavonoids that people have sometimes talked about them as antioxidants or other functions, the most important ones are working in the same direction as carbon dioxide and progesterone, shifting the balance slightly, favoring NAD rather than NADH. 45:21 I have a question on that about progesterone. Looking at the structure of the molecule and comparing it to estrogen, I mean, basically progesterone is just four rings with two carbonyl groups. Doesn’t that technically make it a quinone similar to a modine or like methylene blue? Well, that carbonyl group, especially if it resonates with another double bond, that is a very strong electron retractor analogous to the carbon dioxide effect where you have two double bonded oxygens on the activated carbonyl group has that function. So when you see it in a molecule, it means that it’s likely to be protected in some way. 46:24 Jumping back a little bit, Ray, do you remember the arguments of the people saying that the NADH should be higher? What was their thought process? Basically no thought. Just referring to the idea of antioxidants that you need to restore when vitamin E, for example, gets oxidized, vitamin C will replenish the electron and NADH replenishes vitamin C’s electron and so on. And so they extrapolate much too far from the idea of protective antioxidants and forget that what we want is pro-oxidation to protect against those destructive oxidations. 47:30 And this is kind of like, we talked about this a while ago, but if you’re saying like the PUFA are essential, you’re essentially saying some level of lipid-proxidation is desirable when almost in general nobody is saying that lipid-proxidation is some good process. It’s exclusively harmful. Is that right? Yeah. The good oxidation is very focused and antioxidant in the sense of preventing things like chain reactions of polyunsaturated fat breakdown. I think another indication of the badness of lipid-proxidation, one of the major byproducts is something called malone dialdihyde. And I think that’s one of the few endogenous metabolites that are known to be mutagenic or at least strongly suspected to be so. But nothing that glucose oxidation produces ever generates any such dangerous metabolites. 48:39 Right. I think there are probably a lot more of the breakdown aldehydes from polyunsaturated fats. But that has been, malone dialdihyde has been very heavily studied. But the three carbon and six and nine carbon units, I think, are DNA damaging too. Speaking of something you probably can’t say enough, but isn’t it the glycerol from the free fatty acids that is majorly forming the methylglyoxal? And that is essential for the advanced glycation end products that are blamed on glucose? Yeah. And especially in the presence of polyunsaturated fats, the methylglyoxal starts the breakdown and then those fragments of linoleic or arachidonic acid or the higher DHA and EPA, 49:57 those breakdown fragments amplify the so-called glycation. It’s predominantly a poofa deterioration that counts as glycation. And if the person was like hypoxic and the trigger was being converted into lactic acid, that could contribute to the methylglyoxal too, but not nearly as much as the glycerol? I think by shifting the redux in that direction, I think it probably intensifies that methylglyoxal metabolism. And the presence of, once you get that shift towards lactate, you’re shifting against carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide is a direct blocker of the protein glycation or glycosylation. 51:15 In blood physiology, they talk about the formation of carbamino hemoglobin. The carbamino reaction is recognized perfectly well. Higher concentration, the carbon dioxide forms a compound with the amino group of the hemoglobin protein, and that pulls electrons through the protein, increasing the acidity and affecting the affinity of the hemoglobin for oxygen, depending on how much carbon dioxide is competing for the electrons in the system. And what they don’t talk about is that wherever in the body you have similar amino groups on proteins, carbon dioxide, when it reaches those levels, 52:26 is going to form carbamino compounds of whatever protein you’re talking about, which could be insulin itself or the various receptors on cells all the way through a cell, wherever a so-called receptor has an exposed amino group, carbon dioxide is going to form a carbamino compound, shifting electrons. So the process that happens, everyone knows it happens in hemoglobin, but they neglect the physical chemistry that says it has to happen where we have carbon dioxide and amino groups. So that’s part of how the whole system shifts as a unit. 53:32 You can’t talk about individual receptors independently without looking at how they participate in this global shift towards electron withdrawal. I have two questions related to steroids. The first one is about cholesterol and prognolone. As you mentioned, cholesterol is the fundamental, primitive, almost ancient protective mechanism, a structural protector of the cell. But if there’s an environment in the body where there’s a lot of production of reactive oxygen species and metabolism is not working well, cholesterol can get oxidized into these metabolites that are known to have a role in cardiovascular disease. It can also get esterified and the buildup of esterified cholesterol, as you mentioned in several of your newsletters, is one of the hallmarks of aging. But if you look at prognolone, the molecule is structurally almost the same as cholesterol minus this fatty acid side chain that cholesterol has. 54:36 So do you think prognolone can fill in for a lot of the structural protection functions that cholesterol has but without the dangers? Yeah, right in the mitotic apparatus, prognolone has a very central, primitive, essential function for cell division and stabilization, preventing abnormal cell division and chromosomal damage and so on. But the process that makes cholesterol form these esters, it’s the polyunsaturated fatty acid ester of cholesterol which gets stuck in the cells and gets stuck there because of an inflammatory process started by this lactic acid shift towards everything pro-inflammatory. 55:37 So I see lactic acid as starting the inflammatory process, leading to the binding of poofa to cholesterol and blocking the cell’s ability to break it down, oxidize the fatty acid and let cholesterol do its protective work. So do you think the esterification of cholesterol with these poofas is essentially kind of like an emergency protective mechanism to decrease the availability of poofa for producing the inflammatory mediators like prostaglandins and leukotrients? If you don’t have the poofa, you have an on and off of the saturated fatty acid ester so it doesn’t accumulate year after year. 56:38 It can serve its momentary purpose but when it’s polyunsaturated, the level builds up year after year in your blood vessels or brain or other tissues. And my second question is related to the overlap between prognenolone and progesterone as far as the stress system is concerned. I think you mentioned in several of your articles and newsletters that prognenolone is known to lower the release of ACTH by the pituitary sort of form of like a negative feedback similar to cortisol and in this way stop the stress system. But progesterone by being a cortisol antagonist at the receptor level, I’ve seen several studies where it shows cortisol can actually raise ACTH because the body interprets the presence of progesterone, I’m sorry not cortisol, progesterone, interprets the progesterone being an antagonist of the cortisol receptor. 57:39 It’s almost like a cortisol deficiency so you will raise ACTH. Do you think there is a potential for this elevation of ACTH being potentially dangerous if the supply of progesterone is removed? No, I think that progesterone is going to take care of that experimental setup. I think it was a closed system where you couldn’t see progesterone correcting both ends of the process because physiologically progesterone will lower cortisol production directly acting on the adrenal but also lowering the pituitary activity and the brain activity that activates the pituitary. It’s working on at least three levels, anti-stress. And if you isolate the system then you can see a conflict between negative feedback of cortisol and progesterone interfering with that. 58:51 But I think that’s only a poorly arranged experiment. Okay, so to what degree do you think prognome and progesterone overlap in terms of their anti-stress effects of shutting off the excess adrenal activity? I would guess that in a similar quantity progesterone is going to be more active per mole but since it’s more common to take a bigger dose of prognome you don’t get the powerful anesthetic effect from a very big dose of prognome, for example. If you have similar amounts I think progesterone would be the more powerful anti-stress. But the mechanisms of action are largely the same, largely overlapping? 59:52 Yeah. Okay. To wrap up this thought, Ray, why is this important? We’re living in this kind of reducing world and we’re trying to stay oxidized and that’s largely the problem. Everything in our environment is pushing us towards that reduced state and that’s why there’s an uphill battle. Is that right? Yeah, even the excess high pressure oxygen of the atmosphere at sea level by displacing too much carbon dioxide in our lungs, even that higher than desirable level of oxygen ends up putting us into the reducing state by displacing too much carbon dioxide. 01:00:54 What about the ionized air at sea level? Doesn’t that have a little bit of a protective effect by neutralizing serotonin? Oh, yeah. If you keep your metabolism in an anti-inflammatory, pro-thyroid, high metabolic rate, glucose oxidizing condition, then it will keep its serotonin and nitric oxide and those things under control. So you can tolerate a high level of stress if your energy flow is strong enough. Okay. One last question for me in regards to sugars. There’s glucose, then there’s fructose, and then there’s trehalose, the fungus sugar, which you wrote about in one of the newsletters. Of the three, would you say that trehalose is potentially the safest in terms of not generating as much lactate even in compromised individuals? 01:02:01 I haven’t seen enough experiments with mammalian cells, for example, to know how it works for maintaining the energy system. Okay. Thank you. One of the reasons for preferring fructose or sucrose over starch and pure glucose is that ketone function has that biasing effect putting the cell into a more oxidizing state. And one of the effects is to, for example, the fatty liver effect of overdosing on fats or starvation or stress. 01:03:04 Alcohol puts you in a highly reducing state that tends to produce fatty liver. And they do experiments intending to incriminate fructose as producing a fatty liver the same way ethanol or the stresses do. But in fact, when you stay within physiological limits, fructose is an exact antidote to that fatty liver producing effect of ethanol. Ethanol puts the cell in a reducing condition. Fructose at the right level favors the oxidizing condition and will, for example, protect you against the toxic effects. 01:04:08 But even a hangover fructose will get yourselves quickly back into the oxidizing anti-stress condition. Okay. Just one last question. Since sucrose and trehalose are of the kind of so-called non-reducing sugars, wouldn’t just that be like a reason enough to use them over as a fuel, like to prefer them as a fuel to any of the other micronutrients, given that they’re actually they will not put you in a reduced state just by their chemical structure? Yeah, that’s my reason for preferring fructose and sucrose. But I haven’t seen experiments with trehalose in mammal cells. Yeah. The reason I mentioned trehalose is because there’s this really hearty animal, the water bear, that can survive like ridiculously lethal doses of radiation, be exposed, you know, be sent into outer space and sit there and then come back and be relatively unharmed. 01:05:16 And it looks like most of the sugars that it uses inside itself is trehalose. Yeah, I think there it’s having the same effect that inositol does. I think that’s a structural effect on the water, which I just haven’t seen how it works, how mammalian cells can handle that. On simpler organisms, the trehalose and what did I say just now? Inositol? Inositol. Inositol, which isn’t a sugar, but it has a spatial arrangement of the hydroxyl groups that make it more effective than sugar as a stabilizer of proteins. 01:06:21 Have you seen the human studies with inositol that it cures even treatment resistant depression that nothing else can really touch in terms of pharma drugs? No, but I think it will eventually come into use as just a situational defense like pregnenolone or progesterone, something that has an all-purpose protective effect. Studies have been done on various cells with X irradiation, showing that it is a powerful anti-radiation damage factor. So it structurally acts similar to sugar, basically, even though it’s technically not? Yeah, it doesn’t get burned up so fast as fructose or glucose, so it can have a longer lasting stabilizing effect. 01:07:26 So switching gears a little bit, I’ve never received so much email about something than our last talk about Stalin, and so I really want to dig deep into this as possible. Much to the dismay, I’m sure a lot of people are listening to this. Okay, so, Ray, have you heard of, I’m sure you have, but CIA project aerodynamic? No, I never heard of it. So I just kind of accidentally stumbled upon it, but apparently it was a CIA scheme to create anti-Russian propaganda. And then somebody like frequently that’s brought up in like kind of conservative circles is Yuri Besmanov, who is supposed to be like an ex-KGB defector. And he talks about how the Soviets were infiltrating America to impose communism, and basically it turns out he probably worked for the CIA. Anyways, so if we could open this up as much as possible, and the thing that I thought was interesting as I was reading an article by Andrew Gavin Marshall, it’s called Origins of American Empire on Global Research. 01:08:34 And he, again, framed things in an interesting way, and I’d be interested to bounce it off you and see if it was even right. But he talked about kind of the opposition of Stalin to the Rothschilds and also the Rockefellers who wanted to take over the oil fields of Russia. And so I’ll just read a little bit of this. But he says the English Rothschilds were alarmed when the socialist tendencies of the, I don’t know how to say this, emigris, contributed to a massively disruptive Taylor strike in the east end of London in 1888. A young Georgian communist who would become known to the world as Joseph Stalin was already organizing laborers to strike at the Rothschilds’ oil interests in Batum. And let me just get one other critical part here. This spurred protests and riots, and young Stalin himself led the agitation against the Caucasian oil industry in general and the Rothschilds in particular. And so one is, is that lineup with your view of history and what, if a person were to go against the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, what kind of disinformation campaign would be launched against them? 01:09:51 Oh, well, the German system very early got integrated through the Dulles brothers with what became the CIA. And the British and the Germans were early aiming to destroy the Russian Empire because they had other plans for that part of the world. And Stalin was, was aware of these imperialist motives. And from an early age, even though he was a Georgian, he was seeing the Russian Empire was less evil than the British and German empires. So he was essentially a patriot, as well as a labor leader from a very young age. 01:10:58 And the several of the top Bolsheviks, especially, I think Lenin was at one point subsidized by the Germans and probably the British Totski, very definitely by this Dulles faction that included the Germans and the Rothschilds. Totski was a very effective anti-Zarist activist, but he never betrayed the German American British interests. So he went through the whole Bolshevik period as essentially a German saboteur. And at one point in connection with settling the First World War, so Russia could withdraw from the war, Lenin referred to Totski’s behavior as treasonous, but at that time didn’t have the power to replace him. 01:12:27 He was serving Lenin’s and Stalin’s interests, even though they saw him as betraying Russian interests in favor of the Germans. But after Lenin died, Stalin remained an organizer against the British and German interests where Totski continued right up until the time he was murdered to be effectively working with the FBI. So quick question about Totski, do you think his murder had more to do with Stalin or more to do with the Western intelligence agencies? 01:13:38 Such overwhelming evils that he was deeply involved with all of the imperialists and the Dewey commission that went to Mexico to exonerate Totski of the charges that he was working for the Germans. John Dewey really ruined his name for anyone who looks at what happened in that Totski Dewey commission. It was a whitewash job trying to cover up Totski’s involvement with the Germans and the FBI. So, Ray, according to our Spotify analytics, 18 to 34 is our big audience and with the rise of people like Jordan Peterson and people’s push towards conservatism, we’re going to receive hundreds of comments that say, you know, Ray is very smart in nutrition and he has no idea what he’s talking about on a political front. 01:15:01 And so besides the CIA program, you know, that was focused on anti-Russian sentiment, like what else is there, and I don’t care. Well, it’s much, much deeper than the CIA. The CIA is just a surface organization, but they used money from the Marshall Plan. They got billions of dollars to penetrate every place they could. They were already inside most of the democratic governments of the world acting as saboteurs. But if you look at the nature of the U.S. government, the Wall Street push or the business plot against Roosevelt, revealed by Smedley Butler, all they did when Butler exposed their plan, 01:16:20 they just made longer range plans to take effect when the Second World War was over, so they had to wait 12 years. But the Hitler faction, people who had medals awarded by Hitler for service to the Nazi cause, these factions were in control of the democratic big city machines during the war. And they declared their patriotism during the war, but they didn’t change their Nazi sympathies. And these people rigged the 1944 Democratic Convention to install their agent, 01:17:23 and so effectively Hitler, Dulles, Puppet, Harry Truman to take over the government. So it was the same push as they failed at in 1933. They got organized and succeeded. And the Dulles brothers, meanwhile, had deeply integrated themselves even during the war with the Nazi intelligence apparatus. And so what we know of as the CIA, using vast funds such as the Marshall Plan money, they simply continued the German basic purpose of working with the banks to rule the world in favor of the corporations. 01:18:31 And so the whole illusion that they teach in high school and universities, mostly, of what the US has been doing in the 20th century. It’s just as false as the story they created with these, like the Ukrainian and a whole series of so called defectors who were just making up stories that the CIA gave them to publicize. Well, since anybody who likes Trump is now like a Nazi, the problem with the Nazi philosophy is that eugenics supremacy idea. And then that is what we’re all going through right now. Like that it’s an extension of that idea. Is that right? Yep. It was slightly embarrassed at the end of the world war. So they had to change the names of their eugenics journals to human biology or human genetics rather than eugenics. 01:19:48 But the ideas didn’t change. They took a more acceptable form. But there has been steady progress against the more humanistic strains of American civilization. It’s been subplanned by the Dallas Brothers Alliance with the German and Bikers factions. Another question. What do you think is at the core of this? Not even rivalry. It’s just this fundamental opposition between the West and for lack of a better word, the East with Russia being at its center, which seems to have been going since at least the 1850s, long before communism and capitalism kind of formed as ideas. There seems to be something deeper driving this. Do you know what that may be? 01:20:57 The empires made it very obvious what they wanted. The British Empire wanted to absolutely control the world and slave that whole land mass, including Russia and China, adding it to their Indian Empire. And the Germans were envious and thought they could knock out the British Empire and rule all of those resource hoarding Asians and get their resources. And the U.S. and the bankers outsmarted the German nationalists. So they were a faction powering Nazism, but they didn’t have any of the good nationalist impulses that made the German people 01:22:11 hysterically favoring Nazism. It’s simply Nazism without the nationalism, not doing anything favoring common people. Moving straight to the control of all of the world resources and directly by the very limited ruling population. And then because Russia, the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union was powerful enough to say, we’re not going to participate in your plans, or at least we’re not going to give up without a fight. Basically, that automatically made them target public enemy number one in the eyes of the financial powers, because that’s the one thing they can undermine them. Yeah. Yeah. So just to put a bow on this, you can’t really understand the framing of Stalin without understanding his opposition to the banker families, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers. 01:23:18 Do you think that’s accurate statement? Yep. Yep. He was actually defending the interests of the majority of the Russian people, and was an actual patriot. He didn’t make the deals with the imperialists in the first place, like Lenin and Trotsky. Lenin very quickly betrayed the Germans, and Stalin had never bond down that pathway to power. He went straight up from being a labor organizer. And I did receive a few emails from people, Russians, who disagreed with the characterization of Stalin. What would you say to those people specifically? Or they had great grandparents or grandfather, grandmother who passed away? 01:24:23 Well, the Russians, since Stalin died, Khrushchev started it, and then Gorbachev finished it off, acting in conceding a lot of their power to the West and the banks. Khrushchev started the slandering of Stalin, just totally inventing history that never happened, and Gorbachev continued it. So what Russians have been hearing for more than 60 years is also historical lies in line with what the CIA and the Germans were making up. By the way, I’ve never met a single Russian who spoke positively of Gorbachev. They all consider him a sellout. 01:25:27 So the emails you may be getting, they’re not very positive of Stalin, but if you ask those people about their opinion of Gorbachev, my guess is it’s not going to be very positive either. Yes, Gorbachev was a teenager when the Nazis came through the Ukraine, and somehow he survived, and I’ve always suspected that he was owned by the Nazis right from his teen years as a plant waiting to take power. So I think to maybe a young conservative person, they’re fully aware that something we’ve talked about, like the glorious dynom, CIA feminism, is some kind of psychological operation, but they’re not aware that this anti-communism, anti-Stalin is very similar, and they’re conditioned by it. Is that accurate? 01:26:29 Oh, yeah. The even very bright, highly educated history students don’t have a shadow of suspicion of how totally corrupt history writing has been for 130 years or so. And that’s because the spider at the top of this is just completely concealed. You don’t hear about the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the DuPonts, the Morgans, the Vanderbilt, like these families that kind of influence everything are completely hidden from you. Yeah, they are still governing, like Wikipedia calls it the alleged Wall Street plot. Wikipedia is a good agent of these deep state powers. 01:27:43 Well, okay, so extends what we were talking about into modern day and just wrapping that up. Like, again, the Nazism is the eugenics philosophy, and correct me if I’m wrong, but at the moment there are kind of two power factions. One, the liberal, more Soros, Gates, et al. types, or the technocrats. And then Trump is kind of on this other side of religious prophecy, or he’s aligned himself with those people. And in this situation, the Trump people are more pro-life than these kind of genocidal eugenics, maniac people. Yeah, unfortunately, the most humanistic trend has got connected with the craziest groups. 01:28:44 But they have a little bit of things in common in that they do want the mass citizenry in chains in some way, shape, or form. So is that why, again, there’s kind of acquiescence to a lot of these, like Trump isn’t opposing vaccines or opposing the lockdowns, or is that just because he doesn’t have power to do so? Well, you know, he invited, right after he was elected, he invited Robert Kennedy Jr. to come to Washington to talk to him about heading a commission to investigate vaccines. And then Pfizer donated a million dollars, and Trump called Kennedy and told him the deal was off. So again, that’s the self-preservation that you talked about a while ago. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. So no politician is going to save us from this mess? Is that that’s the bottom line? 01:29:49 Yeah. There were so many reasons that JFK was slightly hesitant about doing the most evil things that the CIA Nazi faction had in store. And for that slight hesitancy, he was killed. And everyone since then who has a brain knows that they can’t act without, to the extent that they do anything serious, they won’t live long enough to see it happen. I have a, it’s like a relatable and a side note. Did you know, Ray, that there was a civil lawsuit filed by the surviving relatives of MLK Martin Luther King? And there was a court decision in a civil court which decided that MLK was the victim of a government-led conspiracy. 01:31:04 And that was news to me, too. Yeah. There’s a book written about it, and the evidence is just overwhelmingly clear. I think the same person who wrote JFK the unspeakable about the covered up facts of his assassination, he attended the whole trial of the MLK assassination and made a really convincing case of how clear the evidence was. Have you ever met a person who’s even heard of that trial? To my knowledge, nobody, no American that I’ve ever met has even heard that there was a trial that said MLK was killed by a conspiracy. Yeah, and probably very few people have heard that Robert Kennedy Jr. knows exactly who the agent was that killed his father, the security guard that shot him in the back of the head with his gun in contact with his skull. 01:32:31 He sold the gun and told the buyer that it had been used in a crime, but he told the police that the gun had been sold six months before. But he worked for a Pentagon-financed industry in Los Angeles and just went to the hotel a week before the assassination. So he was clearly put in place by the deep state, and the evidence is available to show that the well-accepted official story that 95%!o(MISSING)f Americans believe that it’s absolutely disproved by many, many bills. 01:33:37 I just wanted to bring this up to you because I thought it was interesting. Ray, I sent you a link to a movie a while ago. I don’t know if you remember it, but it was called Cold Case Hammer Skulled, and there was actually a documentary about Dog Hammer Skulled and who killed him and why. And they came to the conclusion, like you said, that the CIA did it, and they even showed a photograph of the ace playing card in the collar of Dog Hammer Skulled, which is like a calling card of the CIA. But in that movie, they find a kind of key witness, and they’re interviewing him, and they say, you mentioned actively spreading AIDS. And he goes, there was a unit from SIMAR. One of the things that we did was we went into African countries, and the director says, and how has that done exactly? And he goes through inoculation, and the director says, through vaccines. And he goes, yeah, through vaccines. And so, and your estimation is like the delivery of vaccines is just like kind of a diabolical concept in general. 01:34:41 And then, and then I did a little bit more research about the special, I know I’m all over the place, I apologize, but the special cancer, special virus cancer program, and Dr. Boyd Graves, who passed away mysteriously, found a blueprint in an old book in it. I’m not an expert, you know, but it looks like a diagram for the manufacturing of HIV. Have you seen that stuff? No, I haven’t seen that. But the, I think the evidence is indirect, but you can’t look at the contextual situation without knowing that they at least were trying to make something like HIV. People were talking about it. 14 years before the HIV came on the scene, people working at the germ warfare lab were talking about that intent to make a racially specifically lethal virus that has been part of the germ warfare culture for decades. 01:35:59 And then, like, we can only presume that they they kind of failed, right? Because if coronavirus is not assuming that it was created in a lab, like, it’s not that deadly. And so there must have been some kind of change of plan. And the maybe the vaccine is the death, the fast death agent, rather than some kind of slow, slow killing agent. I think they probably have very lethal equivalent vaccines. But I think that the big picture is that they have made a lot of noise going back years that they were working on this sort of thing. And that they were very careless and having hundreds and hundreds of leaks and getting that in the news for years. The Chinese being sensitive to American germ warfare from their experience, they would react very quickly to any virus, even if it was just a harmless cold virus. 01:37:17 Because of that setup, that the germ warfare people had been sloppy. It was like sending a very pointed message to China, getting them to react powerfully and quickly. Stop the virus, however deadly it might be within just a few weeks and go back to business. But the whole purpose, I think, was an excuse. Look, the Chinese did it. We have to shut down our economy and create this great scare about a harmless virus. No evidence has ever come out. In fact, the definition of infection, they haven’t convincingly showed that anyone was hurt by the infection. 01:38:22 Simply the presence of the virus in the sick person was enough to say, here is a deadly virus. But since almost all the people were already sick from something else, the presence of a cold virus, you can’t easily connect any decline in their health to the presence of the virus. The whole story of the virus by replicating causes the sickness, that just isn’t a proper virology. The mechanism of getting sick is something that can be defined very clearly. They haven’t done it. And so there’s really no science whatsoever behind the idea of a pandemic. 01:39:28 Have you seen some of the news coming out of China lately saying that they will not, under any circumstances, use the Western developed vaccine? They didn’t say why. I mean, some people say, oh, because they want to develop their own, improve their grade. But that’s not what the statement said. It’s kind of led to the underlying tone was we simply don’t trust those vials that will be sent to us. And if you think we’re going to be injecting our people with that, you’re just crazy to expect something like this. Ray, when people start going brain dead because they got the vaccine, are Democrats going to blame conservatives and conservatives are going to blame Democrats? How do you think that’s going to play out? Do you think there’ll be some kind of realization of what’s happening or are people so dumbed down that it’d be even difficult to figure it out? They’ll probably say it’s being caused by something else produced by some other enemy, maybe some product coming from Iran, maybe pistachio nuts or something causing brain death. 01:40:49 Is there evidence of things that they’ve done before, like releasing something extremely toxic and then blaming some other import or something like that? Yeah, but mostly the easiest thing is not to notice it unless there’s a very, very easy to make connection to your enemy. If it’s just people dropping dead suddenly, you can’t, if it isn’t easy to connect, then they’re just going to say it isn’t happening. Like the decline in SAT scores, starting around 1980, roughly, they blamed that on more poor people taking the test, but when you look at the absolute scores, it’s the biggest decline within the high ranges of scores. 01:42:01 So something has been happening broadly through the population for 40 years now, affecting the brain, especially the brightest functioning brains. Have you seen some of the recent articles in the press, which I was kind of surprised to see Wall Street Journal, even New York Times are now saying, oh my God, we destroyed the economy, speaking of the US. We made a mistake. This was a horrible decision, but it was unavoidable. We had to do it, but oh God, did we act dumb? So do you think there’s maybe some honesty in that assessment? Now they’re freaking out that, I don’t know, a third of the population in the US will be unemployed, potentially homeless and rioting, or do you think it may be like just another game? 01:43:10 Well, I think there are circumstances laying out that plan over a year ago, 15 months ago, saying that exactly destroying the existing economy is necessary so we can beat China to the automation, artificial intelligence economy. The Pentagon needs it, so we have to destroy this old economy made up of small and medium-sized businesses. Who has Schmidt aligned with? When did he become such a big player in kind of the, I don’t know, the deep state or kind of the banker relationships? Well, the Pentagon was a financer of Google, and so he was in early, I think the likelihood is that he was a Pentagon ally before Google came into existence, even. 01:44:24 Yeah, he was a computer science professor and a famous programmer, and if you look at the history of the grants that he’s been getting, the vast majority of them are DoD. And in the, I know they probably lecture topic, but like the relationship between kind of the power elite and the Pentagon, are they taken cues from the philosophy of those people, or how does that work? The philosophy is so deeply connected to their religion and their racial superiority feelings, meritocracy. If you look at any of these people, they’re going to be subscribers to the idea that we’re in a meritocracy, and that that’s what’s happening. 01:45:25 The power of the Pentagon is pushing the best of everything, even the so-called progressives like Noam Chomsky are committed very deeply to this genetic determinism that fits perfectly with the old eugenics idea and the modern technocratic meritocracy. So I have a question about this genetic geneticism. I mean, there’s been over 100 years of pursuing medical therapies, life extension, you know, eternal youth, et cetera, et cetera, by developing the genetic, nothing has come out of this. Nobody can be that dumb and continue to hope blindly that something will come out of this approach, actually, this scientific approach, considering that nothing has come out yet, not even something that says you on the right path. 01:46:26 Are these people brain damaged, or is it more of a religious thing of blind faith? Yeah, the blind faith thing is a kind of brain damage. The Peter Duisburg got out of the war on cancer at a fairly early stage, simply because his brain was working better. Nothing but brain function is needed to account for it. And people just can’t accept the fact that 95%!o(MISSING)f their science professors are hypnotized by these religious ideas and genetics and meritocracy and so on. A little bit related, but I’ve been struggling with the concept of a person’s like aging, like the rate of aging, and then how healthy they are, because correct me if I’m wrong, but maybe somebody could be at a slower rate of aging, but they could be like extraordinarily sick, like they could be a, I don’t know, they could be into some weird stuff or something. 01:47:41 How do you distinguish the two, and am I even framing it right? I’m not sure what you mean. So maybe somebody looks aesthetically like they’re not aging that quickly, but they’re like a pedophile or something, like that’s an extreme form of sickness. Oh yeah, hypothyroid people often have very, even their bones are late to mature, and the mucopolysaccharides in their skin make their skin look very youthful into their fifties. And then the underlying problems accumulated from hypothyroidism show up and the crash into heart disease or dementia or cancer or something very suddenly. 01:48:42 But they can seem to seem to be very juicy and youthful all the way through their forties. Okay, so they’re like internally rapidly aging, is that right? Yeah, okay. Yeah, yeah, and it’s just keeping the skin stretched. Like when you, when you feed a cow, a lot of estrogen that retains water and looks all shiny and sleek. And the same with, with the middle-aged woman retaining subcutaneous water. When she stops the estrogen, suddenly you’ll see creaky skin where it had been shiny and sleek. Speaking of shiny and sleek, I was just about to say, have you seen Eric Schmidt’s face? It always strikes me because every time he speaks to the camera or he’s in front of some kind of an audience, his forehead and his entire face is always shining. And I always thought he’s always sweating, but he’s not. 01:49:45 They actually asked him several times and he said, no, it’s just how, that’s just how I look because I have a youthful, a youthful appearance. And he claims that he’s not sweating, but his face is always shiny and his skin is always, is always looking like it’s just like he said. There’s like water underneath that’s stretching it out. That’s interesting. Maybe you’ll deflate soon. Oh, that’s the other thing. I’ve also noticed that people that are youthful looking through like various procedures or hormonal treatments with estrogen and especially human growth hormone tend to have this appearance. But then they seem to have a very sudden decline. Do you know what may be triggering this? Is it basically the system is finally giving up systemically? Yeah, the growth hormone is analogous in some ways to estrogen. It increases the deposition of ground substance and can make things plump up and actually have more protein in material, but they’re being degraded structurally. 01:50:56 So that it predisposes to things like kidney disease, age, acceleration. In cancer, right? Yeah. Last question, then I’ll read the super chats, then I’ll let you go. Ray, thank you so much for sharing your time with us. Everybody listening, please give this episode a like, comment and subscribe. Sincerely appreciate it. One last question. So Ray, like a 17 year old or 18 year old that is degenerating structurally, like your structure is breaking down and the 25 year old with the severe kind of mental illness or whatever, but that is not degrading. They’re adapting to stress in a different way, but it’s both our sickness. Is that right? Yeah, sometimes just the amount of protein in the diet, a low protein diet can lead to very high cortisol, androgen ratio, low DHEA and pregnant alone high cortisol. 01:52:07 And that makes your skin look aging even when you’re 17 or 18. And that can be countered by getting your calcium and protein intake increased vitamin D and thyroid correction. And things like the nerve diseases, seizures, schizophrenia, basically brain swelling conditions. Sometimes just antihistamines, antiserotonin, aspirin can alleviate what seems to be a severe psychosis. Okay, thank you for that Ray. Let me just read these really quickly. 01:53:09 One last question. Speaking of the protein, amount of protein in the diet, do you think that the protein requirements may be decreasing with age? Because the reason I’m asking this is that there have been several studies showing a significant extension of lifespan with a low protein but high carbohydrate diet. And there are several tribes in the Amazon that have been noticed to have that diet and they have almost no aging and no cardiovascular disease. Yeah, I think what they’re doing is keeping down the methionine, tryptophanen, and cysteine, which are the pro aging parts of the protein. And like calorie restriction lowers those as well as polyunsaturated fats. And if you just lower those half a dozen specific stress promoting substances, then the higher protein like if you get lots of glycine and gelatin in your diet, 01:54:18 the protein doesn’t have those age-advancing effects. One last question because you reminded me of something. Ray, if you were going to sit down and have some beef and hypothetically you could only choose one, would you balance it with calcium, balance it with gelatin, or would you drink coffee to inhibit the iron absorption? I would drink milk or eat eggshells or something. I think balancing the phosphate would have priority. And then hypothetically the second choice after the calcium? Taking aspirin to limit the iron absorption, coffee and aspirin, part of their benefit is they help to reduce your iron load. I’m so sorry. Ray, it is very popular to talk about iron right now, but one of the things that is not mentioned, and I know you’ve done a lot of work on it, maybe you could just talk about it quickly because I kept you for two hours. 01:55:27 But the estrogen and the hypoxia and the low thyroid increasing the estrogen and promoting the hypoxia, that is what’s making the iron accumulate and displace the copper. It’s not just this random iron overload situation, is that right? Yeah, people have been animals as well as people have been tested. The amount of estrogen present in pregnancy causes an extreme increase in the efficiency of iron absorption and retention. Everything that estrogen does tells your body that something is wrong with your respiration system and so it increases your ability to retain iron as if that’s going to fix the respiratory system. 01:56:28 But in fact, it reaches a point where it starts competing with copper and aging the system, creating stress that subtracts copper from your system. So the iron overload is actually hyperestrogenemia, is that right to say? I think so in most cases. And then if the iron saturation is high, it’s acceptable to give blood, given that’s not a terrifying event, but aspirin and focusing on the dairy, that’s a long term solution. Yeah, it’s going to work pretty quickly though. Your turnover of cells, if your metabolic rate is high, you’re sloughing off a lot of skin and hair and intestinal lining that takes iron out every day. 01:57:31 So if you keep your milk to meat ratio high and have some aspirin and coffee to restrict the absorption of any iron that is in your food, you’ll steadily get rid of the iron. What about people that have donated like many, many, many times throughout the year? Like what is wrong with them? Like a hemochromatosis, I’ve read about people that give like blood every week for like a year. Like how is that possible? If they’re absorbing it very efficiently, or if their liver and marrow were really stuffed with iron, it can take a lot of elimination to get the level down. So maybe their estrogen was just off the charts in childhood or something like that? Yeah, you can carry around a lot of iron without any symptoms, as long as you’re in a good oxidizing state that doesn’t activate it and start the free radical process. 01:58:49 Awesome. Okay. Here are some super chats. Michael, for $100, he says, thank you, Dr. Pete. Thank you, Michael. Sincerely appreciate it. Linda Bell for $5. She says, thank you. PJ Martinez for $4.99. Thank you, PJ. Sincerely appreciate it. Stefan Gomez for $4.99. Ray would be here all day if we asked him questions of the super chats, but we appreciate it. Stefan, all for that today. Christina Tomage for $19.99. Thank you, Dr. Pete. Thank you, Christina. Priya, $100 for $100. God bless you, Dr. Pete. Thank you, Priya. Harry Burgos, many longtime supporters of the show. Thank you guys for $25. Thank you, Harry. Michelle, I won’t even try your last name for $50. Thank you so much, Michelle. Appreciate it. Primitive Initiative for $24.99. Thank you all for taking the time to share your knowledge and insights. Thank you, Primitive Initiative. And I received an email from Kana, who was $20 and that was just a donation via email. So I will forward these all to Ray. Ray, just to confirm you are receiving the PayPal things I’m sending you, correct? 01:59:54 Oh, yeah. Thank you. That’s from all these people that watched the show. So, Ray, parting words. You know, I can’t thank you enough for joining us today. Georgie and I really feel honored to have you on, but parting words. And I’m not sure when we’ll meet again because I’ll be going back to Mexico. So that might be a little sticky to find an internet situation, but parting words for everybody, Ray. No, nothing special. Georgie Dinkov. I guess not much as well, except question for Ray’s newsletter. I thought it was a little bit, I don’t want to say darker than usual, but at least I read it this way. Do you think things are getting worse or at this point stabilized at least, socially, politically, etc? I think it’s at the point of getting extremely bad very fast if people don’t rouse themselves to start acting intelligently, like tomorrow in Berlin, there will be a big demonstration for civil rights, even though the Berlin 02:01:07 government, as said, was organized by virus deniers. The next worst thing to holocaust deniers, I guess. Well, let’s hope they succeed, right? Because a lot is at stake. Yeah, hope a million people turn out. One last thing before we leave, Ray, how can people subscribe to your newsletters? Oh, Ray Pete’s newsletter at gmail.com. And then same question with your books, how do they obtain those? You can ask about them at that same address. And same with old copies of your newsletters? Yeah, there’s a list of digitized things that are ready to send out. We’re still working on digitizing the rest of the 40 years. 02:02:11 That was my next question. You have a list of the, like I was going through my collection of your newsletters and I came across one I had never seen before. And so, I mean, that’s funny because I go through that all the time. So, but you have like a list of the names of all the newsletters searching. I don’t think other people understand how many newsletters you have. It’s 360 something like that. Amazing. Awesome. Ray, thank you so much. Sincerely appreciate it, Georgie. Thanks a lot. I mean, it’s always an honor to have you. I recommend maybe publishing these as a bundle and putting them in the Library of Congress. I think just making them searchable through an institution like LOC Library of Congress. I think you’ll increase the audience tremendously. Yeah, I’m hoping we can do that. It’s a long job getting these old typed manuscripts in digital form without lots of mistakes. Right. Awesome. I think we’ll be worth it. 02:03:14 Awesome. Guys, listeners, thank you guys so much, future listeners. Thank you so much, Ray. Thank you. Amazing to have you on. Georgie Dinkoff, thank you guys so much and we’ll see you soon. And everybody have a safe weekend and thanks again. Bye everybody. Okay. Thank you all very much.

More Interviews