Paused at 23:11.
[ Control Room ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] And go live. Okay, we are live. We were talking about, I was asking Ray about Florida and Texas. And so maybe we can start there and then go into the question Georgie just asked,
because I think all this stuff is super important. So Ray, your take on Florida and Texas being these places in the U.S. that are resistant to, I don't know, they're backing down from the COVID hysteria. Yeah, that's great. And Texas has lots of places with really good climate up in the hills. It's a higher altitude, very livable. I don't know any place in Florida that I would consider livable because of the humidity and heat. And do you think humans are just not designed to live in a climate like that? What's the exact problem you described?
You have to turn down your metabolic rate tremendously. Because of the humidity specifically? Yeah, high temperature, humidity. Does that mean that people with low metabolism would feel better if they moved forward? Super hypothyroid people just love it. It's making up entirely for their cold metabolism. Is that one reason why all the retirees are moving to those places? I think so. But you're saying, okay, so you have a naturally high rate of metabolism and so going to Florida would be problematic because that would kind of be like a too high. Is that what you're saying?
Yeah, one of the things that happened to me, even though I adjusted my heat production somewhat downward, the humidity and my high metabolism caused me to grow molds like a fungus sprouting out of me. And when I got back to Oregon under moderate temperature and humidity, they shriveled and fell off. Wow. I would have guessed that. And so, okay, so if those places don't get... Okay, and then, Georgie, sorry to redo this whole thing again, but what was your question, Georgie?
Well, I mean, just based on what I've seen, even over mainstream media, it looks like even in the bastions of COVID hysteria, I think the measures are kind of falling apart. The population is not buying it. Even CNN ran an article that there is now a plateau of vaccination. About 38% have been vaccinated. And now there's these huge surpluses of vaccines left unused because apparently the other 60% just don't want to be vaccinated, at least at this point.
I think that's a very natural, sane reaction. And the way the climate change doctrine was promoting change gradually, but it had a time frame of something like 10 or 20 years. They jumped on the pandemic idea and realized that the time frame for complete takeover would be reduced to two or three years. But with resistance, there's talk that they're going to have a so-called cyber attack justifying takeover by the governments of the banks. To save everyone's money by confiscating it basically and turning to a cyber currency and rationing out your own money to you.
Jake, Anika, and I were theorizing about when something like that would happen. And I think James Corbett just released a video and he said something like they would need, that would be an ideal situation to transition to the new digital currency. And so if you listen to them right now, aren't they saying that the digital currency is a little bit, maybe a few years away or they don't want to be first? And so I know it's impossible to tell, but would you expect a cyber attack maybe later than rather than sooner?
I think it depends on how sane the population is. If half the population gets fully aware of the horrors planned for them, then the ruling class is going to have to do something desperate like war or confiscation of the banks. I'm betting on war. I think that it's their favorite tool to start with. They're the most experienced with it.
And if they start a major war like with Iran or God forbid China or Russia, even the same population will be kind of forced to get on board and support it because it'll be a matter of survival. Yeah, and they have a situation all set up designed to have no exit except a defeat of Russia in the development of what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin has made it clear that he isn't going to give up his sovereignty and Biden, I think, has slightly backed off, postponed the world war a little bit.
So I have that article, I don't know if you saw it, Ray, I sent it to you, it's called "Flashpoint Ukraine Don't Poke the Bear." Can you explain that? Because a layman like myself, what would be in it for... War keeps the capitalist machine going, but if they want to do societal change, what's the benefit of starting war with Russia? What's that going to do for them? Well, their goal is to have Russia and China completely subdued because Russia has such a tremendous area of natural resources.
Everyone wants to control their resources and so the Russian government has been a nuisance now for hundreds and hundreds of years. And the West is still trying to think of ways to take total control of their resources. And meanwhile, keeping a mild war hysteria going is necessary to keep Western Europe and especially American economies running. And what's the deal? What are they trying to do right now? They're trying to make Russia go to war with the Ukraine, is that right?
Well, yeah, they're hoping that Putin will just give up if England and the US, if they give the impression that they will totally back whatever the Ukraine does. Turkey is getting into it, training Ukrainian soldiers and urging them on to invade Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, which has declared its independence. And so the surface pressure looks like they're dedicated to having the Ukraine start those invasions and assuming that Putin is just going to let them take the Ukraine, Crimea and the East of the Ukraine under the control of Kiev.
And Putin has said he won't allow that and has already lots of landing craft available for coastal support of those regions. And so the Kiev government has withdrawn its forces from the Russian border, recognizing that Russia isn't going to invade the Ukraine and is putting them along the boundary between East and West Ukraine, hoping that threatening to invade Crimea and Eastern Ukraine will get full support from the West and that will force Putin to back down.
But I think Biden realizes that Putin isn't going to back down and that's why he telephoned him and proposed a summit meeting somewhere, but with no definite date. So I think Biden just hopes to prolong it so he won't be embarrassed, but he doesn't want to see Russia exercise its existing potential to totally knock out the Kiev government. It sounds kind of dark, but if we were to go to war or something, you'd almost hope that they won, right? That would be like a better situation for humanity.
Yeah, because the present bunch in Kiev, they honor Bandera who was the leader under the Nazi invasion, so they are literally neo-Nazis who are in control. And no one really wants them in control. It's only because they create the war threat. I have seen a few quotes, and we can move on after this, but Putin kind of knows what's going on, you know, the central banks and things like that. Is there anything interesting to mine there about Putin and his understanding of Rothschild network and things like that?
Yeah, under the Minsk agreements, part of the UN Security Council agreement, which the West signed on to, Putin has the power to enforce the Minsk agreements, and that could involve protecting the Russian-speaking population of the East from the Kiev people who outlawed Russian-speaking. And so he could evacuate all four or five million population of the Eastern Ukraine movement to Russia and just leave that half of the Ukraine as a vacant territory as long as the Kiev people want to keep up their threat.
Anything else here, Georgie or Ray? I was going to move on. Ray, I sent you a Notion document, and so if there's anything else left to say there, I was going to move on. I remember, I think I emailed you in our first episode. I was like, oh man, I'd love to talk about something other than nutrition, maybe philosophy or history, but I think I've come full circle.
And I was thinking if we could do an episode about anti-stress nutrition for 2021. So I've said it a few times, but I think you're getting more popular, and I think as you grow more popular, some people find your nutritional ideas esoteric, and I don't think that's true, but I thought maybe we could try our hand at encapsulating some of the core ideas in an episode. So I don't know where to go. They found them so esoteric that they blatantly plagiarized them and presented them as their own. Yeah, that does happen.
Ray, you'd be amazed at just how many "famous" podcasters are essentially reading off of your website and never mentioning your name even once. No kidding. What do they quote? They actually verbatim pick up paragraphs from your website, and the way you can check it out is if you – I have to find the exact sentence, but you can search Google for a full sentence you put into quotation marks, and then it gives you all the websites that contain this exact sentence.
You'll be surprised how many other websites are just directly copying your stuff. Not entire articles, but full paragraphs are routinely taken from your website and posted as their own. For years I've been running across things that are obviously my sentences in strange places. Well, it's becoming mainstream. Some of the more famous podcasters, some of them former low-carbers and paleo advocates, are now fully getting on board of the metabolic diet and gaslighting their former clients by pretending that they're still low-carb but writing about your ideas.
I'd be a hypocrite if I criticized. Ray, isn't maybe for a directionless young man or something, copying what they want to be, isn't there some philosophical angle, like copying before you can develop into the person that you're going to be rather than what you want to be? Like having models to imitate, to try out? I couldn't guess for you, but maybe like an Albert St. Georgio or Heraclitus. I'm sure you're your own person from the beginning, but for a culture that tells people that there's no meaning or whatever.
What I'm trying to say is if somebody copies something that I've written, I really try not to take it so personally because I know that I did it to you. Oh, yeah, it makes me feel good actually that someone likes my sentences. What is it, the plagiarism is the highest form of flattery? Is that how the expression goes? Yeah, it's nice to see someone liking the same phrases.
But maybe in Wilhelm Reich's Listen, Little Man, he says something towards the middle of that book. He says like if you just copy and you're not trying to add anything to it, that's when you're kind of... Exactly. That's where I think we have direct empirical knowledge of continuous creation. For the astronomers, it's the color of the galaxies and such things. But in our own experience, it's the experience of communication as producing something new. Every time we talk, words don't directly transmit anything.
A computer symbol does transmit anything, but no intelligence is transmitted in a computable sort of language which isn't language. But natural language, each word is an ambiguity and the receiver has to do a creative invention to understand it. So every time someone is talking and really understanding what the other person is saying, the receiver is doing a creative act, creating new structures that never existed before in the universe. And so talking is an example of continuous creation.
And that's why when somebody passes away, using their phrases or the things you've learned from them, you're kind of keeping them... I don't know what's the right way of saying it. They're alive in the conversation or the act of creation even when they're gone. Yeah. As soon as you understand what they're saying, you have given them existence abroad in the world. I love it. That was great. So tagging on that philosophical conversation, you had quoted... I forgot where you said this, but it was maybe like a high level view of nutrition.
I think in the diet world, eating nutrition is like doing something you don't want to do. And you really want to go to McDonald's and eat that every day. But unfortunately, to solve the problem the person's having, you have to eat the carrot and drink orange juice or something.
So there was that quote, and I think Karen first mentioned it to me, but you were talking about Pavlov and eating is our closest interaction with the world. So maybe, I don't know, just your general view of what is the meaning to the organism? What is nutrition's meaning to the organism in that kind of way? Yeah. For many years, I've seen talking about food and understanding what food is doing as an extension of discussing philosophy and politics. It's a very powerful way of getting at the nature of existence and working on improving existence.
Could expanding consciousness be another way for improving existence? Can you go into that a little bit more? Yeah. Raising your body temperature makes it easier to create new levels of being. And when you have expanded your understanding, that makes everything you do easier. Things that you don't understand, like opening a door that's latched, if you don't understand the latch, you can't open the door. But once you understand it, then you can open all the doors with a similar latch.
And so it makes your range of meaningful activity much greater every time you have a general increase in meaningful understanding. Well, that's one of the reasons I wanted to do this. I think you have another quote somewhere. It's like, "Things should make no sense until they make the right sense." And that 100 grams of protein is meaningless until it's the most important thing ever.
I feel like I've come, talking to you and incorporating a lot of things that you've written about, I feel like I've come, maybe I have a cyclical process of thinking something is not important until thinking it's the most important thing on the planet. So again, we talked about the high-level view of nutrition, and maybe before we get into dietary things, maybe you could speak about appetite in general, because I think that dietary things are almost useless in the face of somebody having a really suppressed appetite. So what is your general view of appetite?
I think it comes down to the question of our relationship to our cells and our molecules that make us up. I think eventually we have to start thinking of our cells as having appetite and judgment and purpose. And that has been demonstrated in unicellular organisms all the way down to bacteria, that they have planning and judgment and purpose. And if we deny that to our own internal cells, that just seems silly when you can demonstrate it in free-living single cells that don't have nervous systems.
But our nervous systems are intimately connected to our cells, and we get our motives essentially by listening to our cells, the unconditioned reflexes. It's a message, sort of a voting of the intelligent population of cells that we listen to and then execute with things like appetite. Do you think appetite can be equated with desire for life, more or less? Basically, the better your appetite, the more you want to live, more or less? Because you're in touch with and listening to your life process all the way down to molecules.
Right. And on a related note, let's say you have a great appetite, but different days you desire different foods. Do you think there's something more than just beyond the organism sensing that they need certain nutrients, maybe certain foods create certain different meanings, depending on what your mind and soul need? Yeah, I think so. Variety is a real thing. You're wanting to discover more about the nature of the universe and the desire for variety is, I think, part of that natural curiosity of our cells.
Are you familiar with the customs of the Native American Indians? They believe that whatever food you eat, and they did eat a lot of animal protein, it kind of gives you a piece of that animal spirit. And they believe that eating the meat of only one animal, except for bison, was not a very good practice because it sort of crystallizes you and makes you very rigid and unable to fully explore life. So they very much supported variety in their diet.
Have you read the experiments of McConnell in the 1950s? The Worm Runner's Digest was one version of his publication. He describes first training planarians to respond in a certain way to light or dark, and then chopping the trained planarian up and feeding it to an untrained planarian. And they gained the knowledge that was intended by the first planarian. So basically memories, I remember a study that came out about three or four years ago that said that the memories are actually stored throughout the entire organism. They're not located in the brain.
Right. The different parts of the worm contain the energy. George Unger followed up McConnell's work with different organisms. He found that the nucleic acid, especially RNA composition of a catfish, for example, was changed according to what it was smelling in the water. So the sensed material or the learned material causes molecular changes, and those molecular changes extracted from that organism can produce the same knowledge and patterned reactions to an ignorant organism that had been created in the first experiment. So this is similar to Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenic resonance but applied to food? Yeah.
Again, I'm not an expert on that idea. Isn't that the idea that the memories are stored non-locally? So aren't these ideas incompatible? No, since he was extracting the brain, but the whole organism is affected by what happens in the brain, and you get similar metabolic changes in all parts of the organism.
So when a person wakes up in the morning and all the way till noon and they have no appetite for food, you're saying that it's like the cumulative cells vote, maybe under the influence of serotonin or something, to decrease the rate of metabolism. Is that right? Yeah, but something is going wrong and they have to sit back. Like when bacteria in James Shapiro's experiments, when he gives them an unmetabolizable sugar, they just sit back and wait for two days and then institute a gene change.
They don't want to do anything prematurely that isn't necessary. So they sit back and judge the coming future before they change themselves. How do the cells achieve quorum? Is it done strictly through chemical signals or electromagnetic as well? I think both. One of the things that turned out with experiments by Beatrice Gelber, for example, in the 50s and 60s, was that the planarian can see what's happening. They have purposive behavior and looking at the source, they can do some things when light is present for interpreting chemical signals that they can't do in the dark.
They're looking around, taking things into account. The anatomy of a single-celled organism for a long time has been known to include the equivalent of a focusing eyeball and brain. A professor of mine described meeting a specialist in amoebas who showed him some photographs and asked him to identify the organism he thought they came from. My professor judged a primitive chordate organism and said that's clearly a chordate eyeball and nerve fibers and so on.
It turned out that his size scale was off about 100 fold and the pictures were actually of the photosensitive spot of an amoeba. What people thought was just a reflex reaction when light hit that spot was actually shining a light in the eyeball of the amoeba. The fibers from that eyeball connected to a coordination center are also grossly recognized. In the case of the planarian, they were studied for a long time to look at epigenetics or the inheritance of acquired learned characteristics.
They were discarded as an experimental organism by about 1950 because it was too clear that they were totally knocking out all of the genetic doctrines and the idea that learning is nothing but an unconscious chemical reflex. Their purpose and judgment and evaluation of the situation was becoming clear and the mechanistic idea of how a gene controls mechanistic reflexes just wouldn't work. Do you think that since we modern humans are now being bathed 24/7 in these electromagnetic frequencies,
are they capable at least at some frequency of interfering with the cells' ability to form a quorum and have purposeful meaningful development? I've been thinking about the interactions of our normal internal infrared wavelength emissions such as with an infrared sensitive camera you can see warm organisms as luminous areas in the dark. That tremendous emission of energy in the more or less infrared wavelengths calculations and experiments have shown that about three quarters of our metabolic energy is going out in that form of radiant energy.
The temperature maintained that makes that emission possible is also governing the rate of energy metabolism and the whole signaling system is very responsive to the emissions from other wavelengths. The emission from other warm parts of the organism, for example, if you grow a layer of fibroblasts, they tend to line up parallel to each other.
When the experimenter grew another on the opposite side of the glass, they plated another bunch of the same kind of cells and found that they tended to align themselves perpendicularly to what was on the other side of the cell of the glass. So they were receiving obvious signals transmitted through the glass that told them what the orientation that they should take would be. The person doing this, Gunther Albrecht Buehler, did many things clearly showing that cells, with regard to infrared energy at least,
they have a directional eye equivalent that can see what direction the infrared is coming from. This is just a simple component cell of an organism such as a fibroblast or an epithelial cell, something that cultures easily. He showed that under the microscope, focusing a very narrow beam of infrared light, he could get these human cells to chase it, to move with reference to a spot of infrared emissions. So definitely the infrared spectrum is part of our internal maintenance of organization.
So you don't want to mess with beaming those frequencies through the organism because they'll be taken as a signal for reorganization. Part of it involves decompacting the compacted nucleic acids of the nucleus and increasing the expression of RNA and proteins. So you can disrupt basically every level of cell organization just with electromagnetic energy. So basically, depending on the frequency, a specific electromagnetic radiation will probably randomly heat an organ whose cells are of the right size so that they start acting like an antenna.
You don't want that because you're randomly heating up a portion of the body and you don't know how those cells and the other cells that are communicating with them, how they would react to this random warming up that doesn't seem to be coming from a coherent activity inside of the organism. Right. When they were studying the damage done by radar beam exposure, they had experienced a few sailors having their brains cooked when they walked in front of a certain wavelength of radar antenna, but other wavelengths didn't mess up their brains.
So they experimented and found that the size of the organ resonates with the wavelength so that a monkey with a small brain could be killed by a higher frequency that wouldn't severely damage a human with a big brain. So the higher the frequency, not only are we getting closer to ionizing radiation, but there's a higher chance that some cells in the organism would be of the "right size" and then react negatively. A cell or part of the cell.
Part of the cell. Okay. So if it's part of the cell, is it possible that even non-ionizing radiation, if it's of the right frequency, can cause DNA damage even though it's non-ionizing? Yeah. Blue light, for example, does damage DNA. Okay. Wow. So there's no safe electromagnetic frequency, I mean long-term exposure. It's not possible to completely avoid it, but it's certainly not a good idea to sit there for long periods of time. Yeah. Daylight, I think, is perfectly safe if you don't overexpose the ultraviolet and blue part of the spectrum.
Okay. I don't know if you've seen these papers, which got immediately retracted. They were published in around May of 2020. I think it was a team of Italian researchers which said that 5G is now of the right frequency to cause holes inside of the cell and then the cell reacts by plugging these holes by producing endogenous viral particles that just happen to match almost perfectly the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Do you think that there's any truth to that?
Probably if they had the data that led them to submit it for publication, I would suspect that the editors just didn't like it. Yeah, it was sitting published for about a month and then there was this huge outcry on social media, of course, where else would it be coming from, the cancel culture, and then they forced the National Library of Medicine, the PubMed people, to retract it. It's still there, but it just has this big retraction notice written all over it.
Well, speaking of EMF, isn't part of the problem, I mean, I've read this, you could correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it placing calcium where it's not supposed to be? It's loading the cell up with calcium, and so therefore eating a high calcium diet would be, and taking vitamin D, would be two things to help mitigate the effects of our ultra-saturated environment with all these different types of EMF. Is that right?
Yeah, one of the things that vitamin D and calcium in the diet accomplish is to reduce parathyroid hormone, and parathyroid hormone, under the influence of any kind of inflammation promoting signal, turns down energy production, reduces oxidative phosphorylation. And so eating calcium and vitamin D will tend to restore mitochondrial energy production, helping the cell to keep calcium out of the cells.
So let me, okay, so this is kind of my, please correct me at any point if you do not agree with this, but these are some of the points that I thought I've gathered from listening to you and reading you over the years. And so if some, like basic requirements for a human living in 2021, obviously gathering pulse and temperature, like it's a loss without those things. Like if you don't know where you're going, if you don't know where you are, I think that's a quote from you.
And then you've said many times, maybe a hundred grams of protein and quoted a military studies. And then maybe two to three times the amount of carbohydrate, obviously favoring sugars over starches, 1500 to 2000 milligrams or more of calcium, and obviously favoring calcium over phosphorus.
And it's very easy to get an abundance of phosphorus, which like you just talked about, will turn on the parathyroid hormone among other things. I don't know specifically your thoughts on fat. And so maybe we could dive in like a fat gram amount per se for, for again, a basic requirements for a person living in 2021. If we had a source of pure palmitic and stearic acid, especially stearic acid or higher saturated fats, I think they would be safe.
We could produce our own N minus nine polyunsaturated fats, which are the ones that normally produced extensively in the brain and were substituted through time and eating by the N minus six and N minus three unstable polyunsaturated fats. So with oleic acid, palmitic and stearic acid fats are pretty safe and a compact form of energy availability and storage. And some experiments show that, like Han Selye showed that cocoa butter rich in stearic acid protected heart against the damage caused by linoleic dietary PUFA. Just adding the extra stearic acid had a protective anti-heart necrosis action.
And more recent experiments show that the visceral fat percentage can be reduced by increasing stearic acid in the diet. And to some extent, an excess of stearic acid tends to support subcutaneous fat, which is the appearance that a very healthy child has, for example, giving their skin smoothness and shapeliness and so on. Is the gaunt look of older, very sick people due to the fact that they're rapidly losing subcutaneous fat but gaining visceral one?
Yeah, it decreases under the skin where it has actual purpose, insulation and elasticity and so on. And it creates the organ defending internal abdominal sort of fat. Assuming you could get a good source of saturated fat, would you feel comfortable putting a gram number or a range that you felt comfortable, maybe for a hypo-metabolic person or is it purely based on experimentation? Yeah, it would just be since I've never had the opportunity to have a pleasant tasting pure saturated fat, but I would guess you could eat a lot of it.
What about in the case that you could not get that? Like, is there, okay, so maybe I'll rephrase this question. What about non-activating the Randle cycle or being as efficient with your energy as possible? Like, would you feel comfortable making a suggestion for that? Yeah, sugar is my current understanding of what is most protective. Stress tends to increase your circulating free fatty acids, activating the Randle effect, blocking the ability to use sugar for energy and increasing the sugar in your diet.
It tends to lower the lipolytic activity, keeps the fat where it belongs and prevents the Randle shift to fat oxidation and so it maximizes your carbon dioxide production which keeps your stress producing lactic acid inhibited.
Those vegan and vegetarian authors for diabetes, sometimes they'll say, you know, if your blood sugar is out of control or something, you're eating too much fat and then they'll recommend ridiculously low amounts like 10 or 20 grams. Obviously, they're probably onto something with that, but do you think there's a middle ground for longevity and taste in general? Maybe around, I don't know, sub 100 or something? Would you feel comfortable with that? With how much? Like sub 100 grams or so?
Yeah. If you include oleic acid and stearic and palmitic, I think something around an ounce would probably be ideal, but I don't think there would be any harm up to that. I think it's up to even a thousand calories per day. Do you have something to say?
Correct me if I'm wrong, Ray, but isn't the problem with most type 2 diabetics and obese people in general, it's not the amount of fat they consume after already getting obese, but the fact that they're under chronically elevated lipolytic state under the influence of cortisol and estrogen and in that case, eating more saturated fat would actually help because it would increase the ratio of the saturated fat to PUFA in the bloodstream and will mitigate a lot of these effects of lipolysis which mostly liberates PUFA from the stores, right?
Yeah, and PUFA is a promoter of estrogenic effects in many different ways. It activates the estrogen process. Quick question about androgens. As you probably know, bodybuilders are notoriously averse to dieting or the various caloric restriction and they abuse steroids in order to lose weight and gain lean mass. Considering the fact that both testosterone and DHT and progesterone are anti-lipolytic, under what mechanism do you think they are capable of causing rapid fat loss without really increasing the amount of fat they consume? There must be some other mechanism going on there.
Yeah, the liver, when it's well nourished and activated by thyroid rather than estrogen effects, the liver can harmlessly excrete PUFA. Any PUFA that appears in your bloodstream can be recognized by the liver as a toxin and inactivated by attaching glucuronic acid to it, for example, and causing it to be excreted in the urine. So, the androgens are basically protecting the liver and allowing it to be able to excrete more and more PUFA? Yeah, and thyroid and progesterone and aspirin, such things, work in that direction.
Have you seen the human studies from the 1960s from Italy showing that this group there was capable of curing even advanced cases of cirrhosis by injecting testosterone and vitamin B1? Seems reasonable. I've known a couple of people who, one had a very big belly that, as the doctor said, was totally cirrhotic, hard liver from 50 years of using heroin and alcohol constantly every day.
A period of about 5 or 6 months of using T3 and progesterone every day in fairly large amounts. As the doctor said, he couldn't find any sign of cirrhosis at the end of about 5 or 6 months. Was he using the progesterone and vitamin E as per your formulation or was this another one? Yeah, he came to my house on Christmas Eve and brought a few quarts of wine and beer with him in case we didn't have enough.
So he finished that by bedtime. As he went to bed, I gave him a bottle of progesterone and told him to use whatever felt right. In the morning I came out, he was already in the kitchen sitting at the table smiling, said he never came off a drunk without a hangover in 50 years or 40 years of being addicted. Wow. Do you know how much he used on an average daily basis? Half a bottle the first time. Oh, half a bottle the first time.
Yeah. And he went on using about two bottles a week during that period of a few months and I asked him if he wasn't having any suppressive effects on his libido and he said no, none at all. Didn't you say he was also using maybe 50 micrograms of T3 in the morning and then again at night? So he was using progesterone and T3? Yeah, and he was also having his doctor inject magnesium.
That's the biological addiction imbalance newsletter. I remember that so well because I think like, so I don't want to go into a rat hole here. Were you going to say something, Jordi? No, I was going to ask about the polycosinols because I've seen some similar studies that showing that they can completely prevent the obesity from a high fat diet where the calories from fat were basically 60 to 70%.
It was almost all of it PUFA and they fed the animals the human equivalent of about half a gram, which is pretty high of polycosinols and those animals actually got leaner than even the ones eating the regular food. And I was wondering what the mechanism might be but I suspect it's probably again, it's protecting the liver from peroxidation. Yeah, I think it's the same effect as the stearic acid, only more concentrated, super saturated, longer chain, super saturated long chain alcohol in that case, which is converted to a fatty acid.
Yep, you just answered my other question. There's an older study from the 50s which didn't directly say that but hinted that fully saturated fats, the longer the chain, the more potent they are. So instead of eating say 50 grams of stearic acid, you could probably get similar effects from like, I don't know, 50 milligrams of polycosinol. Something like that, yeah. Okay. What about, isn't hypothyroidism associated with a gallbladder disease? What if somebody has a bad gallbladder? They should probably eat less fat, right? Yeah, taking thyroid clears it up very quickly and predictably.
And that's, you would know that if you were passing kind of lightly clay colored stool, is that right? Would that indicate a specific problem with the gallbladder? Yeah, a very serious deep problem which goes with high estrogen very often. But getting liver back to metabolizing properly, the gallbladder responds quickly and you can, within just a few days, you can start tolerating fats in your diet and lose all of the gallbladder.
Interesting. Okay. So fat, this would obviously take a lot of experimentation. So something maybe you are more suggestive of or I don't know what the right phrasing would be, the 100 grams of protein. What happens, you've said a few times that eating less than that makes the liver think you're starving. Is that right? So what have you figured out or what is your hypothesis of the significance of around that number for liver health?
It probably depends on the balance of amino acids. When your body senses a protein deficiency, it turns on the proteolytic enzymes so that it takes down your thymus gland, lymph nodes, muscles, skin, all of the expendable momentarily expendable proteins. And those proteins are converted to the essential amino acids which your brain and essential organs, lung and heart, need to keep working. So the sense of protein deficiency is essentially a proteolytic state which takes your whole body down. And maybe in a… Doesn't the liver also need dietary protein specifically to produce sufficient amounts of albumin?
Oh sure, but combined with thyroid function. Right, right. Because some people would say like, "Hey, well what's the problem with not eating enough protein?" Obviously, you can, because since you have protein on yourself, the body can use it to shred it and then convert it into albumin. But human studies have shown that if you, that in starving people, despite their blood levels of amino acids going really high from the high cortisol, cortisol actually suppresses the synthesis of albumin.
So all these amino acids end up getting, oxidizes fuel which is really bad because it generates all this ammonia. Yeah, and estrogen is another suppressor of albumin. It goes with high cortisol. Would you revise this upwards or do you still feel comfortable with 100? Is that like a good base amount or what do you think? In the military study that was for even little people working at a desk job, that was required for efficiency. And they didn't say what a better, that was just a minimum for work efficiency.
Would it depend on weight though? Like a bulkier, heavier person with more muscle mass, they probably wouldn't… Okay. And maybe age too, right? I think in the old newsletter with Lee Daly, you said maybe 120, 150 was even more appropriate for an older person. Yeah, I think so. The 100 was just the minimum for efficiency. Is there a point at which this dietary protein can cause kidney issues in a hypothyroid person? Broda Barnes experimented eating a lot more meat in his diet. He found he had to double his thyroid dose.
So it's very easy to overdo the protein, displacing carbohydrate I imagine is what was happening and liberating the thyroid suppressing tryptophan. Cysteine and methionine. So as far as I know, experiments using natural gelatin as a protein lacking those antithyroid amino acids, they could tolerate a fairly higher dose of protein. So speaking of the gelatin, since it's deficient on those inflammatory amino acids, is there like a ratio of the gelatin to the rest of the protein as part of the total that you think is more beneficial?
Let's say 70% of protein may come from gelatin and then the other 30 from a complete protein that contains all of the essential amino acids. Probably and I think that changes with age and activity level. A young person who is growing at a very high metabolic rate needs more of the methionine, cysteine, tryptophan type protein. So for an adult, is there any role physiologically needed for tryptophan aside from producing niacin which people can take as a supplement? A little bit for tissue replacement. So there is a minimum amount of tryptophan that everybody needs?
Yeah, making hair and skin and gut cells that have to be shed. For methionine, the human studies found out that most people don't need more than 2 mg per kg of body weight daily. Of course, we all ingest a lot more than that which shows you that we can do a lot better. Is there any guideline you can do for tryptophan? Have you seen any studies on that? It's pretty much the same. When you reduce any of those 3 amino acids to a minimum, life expectancy in the animal experiments goes up tremendously.
Is there any way for somebody to gauge if they're becoming too deficient on tryptophan? Let's say they're abusing the gelatin and they're eating too much of it? Digestion is usually the first thing to go wrong. They'll start getting gas or some digestive symptom which could be that they're not replacing the lining of the intestine fast enough to make digestion work smoothly. A gelatin abuse. Gelatin junkie. Moving on from protein, I don't know where I got this number from. Correct me if this is not even something you've ever said before.
Maybe you talked about the 250 in the monkey experiments where their cortisol would increase. Again, I know this is painting a huge broad statement for thousands of different people experiencing different intensities of stress, having different generational backgrounds and transgenerational histories of stress and things. But is there maybe a base amount of carbohydrate you think a person needs to function again living in our PUFA-laden, stress-laden, EMF-laden culture?
I've experimented on people with a 100 gram carbohydrate diet and I don't think that was even close to a good health level. It helped them lose weight but it was partly protein weight. I think it's probably around that range of 200 or 300 that's minimum. Now what does it mean when a person needs way more than that, like 400 or 500? Does that mean their liver isn't efficient at storing glycogen or they're under chronic stress or what?
Or they just have a very intense metabolic rate. If you're consuming oxygen at twice the rate of normal, then it would be reasonable to expect that you need closer to a pound of carbohydrate per day. And then similar to protein, would you expect, so say somebody is as healthy as they possibly could be in our current situation, say like moving forward, would you expect them to increase the carbohydrate content getting into older age or would you expect them to decrease the carbohydrate content? I think increasing it is helpful.
Interesting. Okay, do you have any specific carbohydrate or sugar questions, Georgie? Yes, I do. What is your view of some of the sugar alcohols that are present in some fruits that are being used as a relief from constipation, let's say prune juice? I think it contains sorbitol. Is there any problem with people using that for relieving occasional constipation instead of or on top of the carrot salad?
If it works as a laxative, you're going to absorb very little of it, but it does have some potential harmful effects. So I think unless you need it as a regular laxative, I think it's better to use just the cellulose fibers.
I'm asking specifically as a laxative. Some people are saying it's very convenient to carry around a bottle of prune juice and you can find it in almost any store if you're traveling or something like that. And most of the sorbitol is not getting absorbed, is from what I understand. So would there be a problem using that as a natural laxative remedy?
Yes, as long as it's having the effect of emptying your bowel, that means it's mostly not being absorbed. But if it doesn't work as a laxative, then it would tend to get pushed into your tissues. Okay. So using it as a laxative, do you see any problem with that? No. Do you know of any other fruits that may have this laxative effect but not being due to the fiber? Maybe by decreasing inflammation or something similar? None that I'm aware of, but it's a definite possibility.
Okay. So I guess things like cascara are known because they contain the emodins. I read something about rhubarb juice, from like rhubarb root may be able to do the same? I think the main activity is an emodin-like substance. That it also contains. Is that why it's red? Because it maybe contains emodin? Probably. I'm not sure what the main red pigment is, but it could be that the emodin is part of the color. The root, which contains a lot of emodin-like chemical, I don't know what the color is.
Okay. And another question about potential antibacterial effects of some of the sugar alcohols like xylitol. Since it's not absorbed, people are using it as a mouthwash to kill the oral bacteria. Would there be a potential beneficial effect on using it as an over-the-counter antibiotic? Because it does seem to kill a pretty broad spectrum of bacteria. Some people react badly to it, and I don't know whether it's the xylitol itself or impurities from its manufacturing origin.
Okay. Say, Ray, you can't get sweet oranges, what are the other carbohydrate sources that you can eat in abundance that you feel comfortable with? Nixtamalized corn is my favorite safe starch or carbohydrate equivalent because the lime process or lime treatment degrades so many of the toxic factors. What about frying the starchy foods in saturated fat like butter or coconut oil? Would that decrease their propensity to cause issues?
Yeah, the uncooked or undercooked starch grains, presorption is one of the risks, and having it with fat decreases the ability of it to cross the lining of the intestine. What about the status of orange juice concentrate? Do you think that's safe to consume right now? Yeah, especially if it's from sweet oranges. Yeah, okay, so I've never seen that here in Mexico. Did you ever see it when you were here? No. There's many good oranges, that would be silly.
Well, it's hard to find, maybe it's just San Miguel, but right now all the oranges are just super sour. And so I'm hoping in June and July things change up. But again, it could be gringo central San Miguel where that's happening. Yeah, maybe they think sour oranges are preferred by gringos. Or gringos are the only ones not smart enough to buy them. Very possible, very possible.
I've been thinking about the meaning of ingesting citric acid. We make it ourselves, but it stays within the mitochondrion. But when you eat it as a chelator, it can drag all sorts of toxic metals into your bloodstream and all the way through your cells. And then being oxidized in the mitochondrion, it would be leaving behind whatever junk it dragged in with it. I'm really glad you mentioned that. So the sour orange juice is higher in citric acid and that is why it causes irritation? Is that why? Yeah. Okay, and... Go ahead.
People say that we produce citric acid normally, but it's a compartment thing. It's very, very isolated and in the wrong place. It has very bad effects.
And I hate to be redundant, but maybe we can emphasize how critical that is, maybe, especially for somebody with bad digestion. I think people kind of laugh at that idea that it's that important. But some of the emails that I get that are like, "Oh my God, this changed my life," are not drinking sour or tart orange juice. And so maybe, I don't know, your thoughts on if that's important to emphasize or not?
I don't know. More study would bring out more dangers of eating it. But many of the medical calcium supplements were taken in the form of calcium citrate. And I think those were doing more harm than good, even though they were getting extra calcium.
Oh, you know what? One last question. Random, but related to sugars. Do you know if they changed the Mexican Coke recipe? Somebody asked that and I thought I didn't think so. And then somebody else who lives here told me that they thought they had. And then upon tasting it now, it kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And so now I kind of think they did. Do you know anything about that? Nope, I haven't heard anything about it.
So I noticed something similar in the United States. There's a local Latin American store and they're the only ones that are carrying it. Now actually CVS also carries the Mexican Coke, but it's very short on supply. But this local Latin American store has it in cases and I would go there and buy several cases.
I think I was the only one buying it because after a few weeks they ran out and then they replaced it with Guatemalan Coke, which had these paper labels in English pasted on top of the original label. And then that Coke tastes horrifically. It tastes like there's some kind of a metal. It leaves a very strong metallic taste, even though the ingredients listed on the label are the same. Is it a possibility that it has a heavy metal contamination?
Sure. For years, the corn syrup was made with a metal catalyst. Some of it was left in the syrup and so people were being heavy metal poisoned. Wow, that's terrible. Quick question about the acids. Would other acids that give tart taste such as malic acid or even acidic acid, so malic acid present in unripe apples or grapes, would it also have a potential detrimental chelating effect similar to what you said about citric acid because those are also metabolized in the mitochondria?
Yeah, the ones that have two or three acid groups, citric acid is the most effective chelator, but the double acid molecules can have a chelating action, succinic for example. But acidic acid is toxic in its own right in excess. So, does succinic acid, are some countries using it as a drug? I think former Soviet countries sell it as an anti-hangover remedy or something like that. Anti-what? Anti-hangover remedy for being able to basically increase the speed of the Krebs cycle.
Oh, I hadn't heard about that, but I've often seen people promoting it for one reason or another, but it is a potentially disruptive, toxic, short-chain, saturated fatty acid. Yeah, to finish that thought, the Coke tastes more effervescent and there's less of a botanical bite to it. So, what I loved about Coke doesn't seem to be there anymore. So, it's a huge loss. 1939 or 40, when I first tasted Coke, the impression was very herbal. And that was decreased sometime in the late 40s, I think.
Do you think some of the colas, which many other brands are now promoting, and they're trying to mimic the taste and probably even the formula of Coke, because let's face it, rich companies can do a full analysis of the Coke product and probably can come up with a counterfeit product close enough with a bootleg version of it. Do you know of any other drink that has similar taste/effects to the Mexican Coke that could be obtained from a store? No, I haven't tried any of the alternatives. Okay.
Okay, so moving on a little bit to wrap up this dietary stuff. Maybe another part of your, I don't know, nutrition philosophy, I don't know what you want to call it, but is regular consumption of, I'm using air quotes here, but supplemental foods like liver, oysters, and eggs. The general idea being when you increase the rate of metabolism, not only could that solve nutritional deficiencies, but also you might need more nutrition. Is that right?
Certain things you do need more, but the higher energy metabolism makes you need less of anything. For example, when your thyroid level is proper and your vitamin D, your cells are able to hang on to magnesium. So a low thyroid person, even supplementing large amounts of magnesium, they will quickly in a week or so become deficient in magnesium on a normal average diet.
But when your thyroid is up, your cells need very little replenishment of magnesium because it's stuck in the cells. But other things, the turnover of carbohydrate and protein have to go up directly with your metabolic rate. So liver, a rundown of that is the vitamin A, the selenium, the copper, the B vitamins, and then oysters is the zinc, the selenium, the copper, and together those foods fortify a person's nutrition, ameliorating possibly many different dietary deficiencies in two foods. Is that right?
Yes. The idea basically is that it's too complicated to calculate in terms of individual things. It's very satisfying and sort of spectacular when you can bring someone out of a dying state with one nutritional supplement, but most of the time, you don't have that much luck. So the shotgun effect of eggs and liver and shellfish, it's very important to fill in what you don't know.
I want to talk about liver a little bit more, but is there something about oysters or liver that make them more difficult to digest? Maybe it's the iron content or do you think that's even true? Yeah, I think it's the low fat content of the liver especially. The high protein gives you strong signals and requires a lot of extra sugar and preferably some saturated fat to go with it to slow down the absorption and make the digestion happen without stress.
And a random question, would you consider liver without gelatin to be risky or is that, you think that's relatively safe? I just make sure to have lots of butter or other fat and sugar. Ice cream, for example, after eating some liver. Otherwise, I've noticed it disturbs my sleep with hypoglycemia or something. In terms of oysters, what do you think is a good rule of thumb for how often and how much does a person need to get sufficient amounts of copper and maybe selenium? For copper and selenium, once a week is enough.
And how much would you eat, like a dozen? Just probably two or three ounces once a week is enough for those. Okay. So maybe that's a little bit less than, that's a downward revision maybe, two or three ounces? Well, it wouldn't hurt to have a big bowl of them, but that's the minimal. Is there any risk to eating once a week, like having a full meal of nothing but oysters and I don't know, excluding the carbs, would it be a problem to have most of your protein at a dinner meal coming from oysters?
No, considering that the iron content is also very high. You just have to take that into account. So oysters are high on iron too? Mm-hmm. Okay. Super random question, but do you use the Crown Prince ones in olive oil for your oysters? Yeah, that's what I'm eating the last two or three years. How do you, or do you, get rid of the olive oil in those? I would just open the can of crack and drain it thoroughly. And then super random, but do you have some preparation that you enjoy with the oysters?
Oh, just having it with cheese, cheese and orange juice, makes a really nice meal. Do you heat them up or do you just kind of eat them out of the can? Out of the can, cold. Would heating them actually be a bad idea because of the olive oil? No. Good to know. Okay, just wrapping up a bunch of boats on...
I do mine, I use the same brand. I drain the olive oil the same way Ray does, but I basically throw a tablespoon of salt on top of them and then fill up the can with vinegar and then I just eat them like a salad. Oh, very nice. Yeah, I tend to salt mine or eat them with extremely salty cheese.
Yeah, I found out that if I eat a lot of oysters without enough salt for some reason, just like for you Ray, the liver gave you insomnia, same thing happened to me with the oysters, but if I put enough salt, that doesn't happen, I sleep deeply. So, just a... go ahead Ray. Salt and gelatin are both very helpful for good sleep. Do you have a... keeping with the theme of the show, do you have an amount of salt that you think is maybe necessary for minimal functioning of a person?
No, you can adapt, you can adapt very well. When I worked in the woods, our cook was obsessed with the fact that sweating people needed extra salt because of what they lost and so he put a heaping spoonful in our porridge every morning and then wouldn't give us our ham and eggs and pancakes if we didn't finish our porridge.
And that was... I found that I was... had so much salt in my sweat that it was crystallizing on my glasses during my vision and making my arm hairs crystalline and white and that seemed, besides the awful taste, I decided over one weekend to tell him that my doctor had put me on a low salt diet, so after that I was the only one who got good porridge in the morning.
And immediately just over the weekend, I had been having to eat salt tablets in the afternoon. After pouring out such concentrated salt water, I would start fainting if I didn't eat salt tablets. And just over the weekend, I didn't need salt tablets in the afternoon. And my sweat was like distilled water. In 2021, Bill Gates is going to give you vaccines in your porridge instead of the salt. Okay, so wrapping up a few other things here.
One question about salt. There's some recent human studies that claim that anything less than five grams of elemental sodium daily activates chronically the Iranian angiotensin aldosterone system. Would you agree with that? Oh, for sure. That tiny amount brings up your anxiety and inflammation. So salt is definitely anxiolytic and anti-inflammatory. And a population in Mongolia, for example, the people don't have any problem with hypertension and they eat an average of about 30 grams of salt per day. Is it one teaspoon, four grams? Is that right? Four or five.
So at least one teaspoon, basic. So what I said earlier about the 1500 to 2000 milligrams, I know you think even more would be good. Like, what do you think, I don't know, for a specific health problem or the general aging process or anti-stress in 2021, what would you think there's, I don't know, 2500 or 3000? Is that even better? Yeah, I always get at least 2500 and sometimes 5000 of calcium. So that'd be like three quarts of milk. Like a Maasai warrior. Right, they often get more than that.
That'd be, what, a gallon of milk and then some cheese as well? Yeah. And the benefit of getting even more, not only suppressing parathyroid hormone, prolactin, aldosterone, et cetera, but is, what is it, activating those uncoupling mitochondrial proteins? Yeah, it works with sodium to do that. Good stuff. Okay, just scanning through to kind of—
Speaking of sodium, because I told Danny I'm going to ask you this question, since all of these electrolytes can sort of partially fill in for each other, do you think lithium can do a lot of these things at much lower amounts that sodium and calcium can do? I used to call it super sodium from some of its effects, that the body senses a smaller amount of that as a larger amount of sodium. But its effects on serotonin, I think, are a drawback to having much of it in your diet.
Does it decrease the uptake of serotonin or does it increase its production? Its effects, I think, partly from affecting the retention of it in platelets. Okay. I'm reading the comments here on this episode right now and somebody's asking about magnesium and the suppression of parathyroid—or I'm actually kind of adding onto their question—but magnesium suppressing the parathyroid hormone versus calcium.
Isn't the magnesium the basic calcium channel blocker? So maybe the calcium going into the cell is part of turning on the parathyroid hormone, but just eating more calcium would be maybe the more straightforward way of lowering parathyroid hormone? Yeah, that's what has been studied most. Calcium in the diet tending to offset the effect of phosphate. And magnesium has very parallel effects. I think the combination of a moderate amount of magnesium with calcium, assuming your thyroid is responding properly, is the most effective. But you wouldn't consider magnesium as like the par excellence PTH inhibitor, would you?
It could be, but I haven't seen enough evidence of that. But it's also the question of absorption and retention, right? It's calcium that even in a hypothyroid person can be easily absorbed and retained and used to lower PTH, while if you're hypothyroid, you may load up on magnesium all you want, but other than getting diarrhea, you're not going to achieve much, right? Yeah, and you lose it. Whatever gets in your cells stays there a very short time and is lost quickly.
So there's a reason so many different dietary camps agree on supplementing calcium. They're probably hypometabolic, they're supplementing calcium, and they're losing it and they just have to continuously supplement it. You mean magnesium? Magnesium, yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, and to some extent calcium goes out as your stress hormones go up.
So some people have reported, especially on various online places, that their blood calcium is at the upper end of the normal range or slightly above, and their doctor is basically telling them, "Oh, we don't know what it's causing. If it's too high, the doctor starts worrying that it's some kind of a tumor, but if it's like slightly elevated, the doctor says, 'I don't know what's causing it, but I wouldn't worry about it.'" What's your take on that? That you should worry about it. That you should worry about it, okay.
Yeah, because it's probably decreasing in your bones and increasing in your brain and arteries. So what do you think may be causing this mild hypercalcemia? Not enough calcium and vitamin D in your diet, mostly. Okay. What about high estrogen and cortisol, since they shed the bone as well? Mm-hmm. And prolactin probably too, right? Yeah.
Okay, we'll wrap this up really soon. Unless, Georgia, you have something other to talk about. I just wanted to just quickly reference this. I was reading one of your references, Ray. I can't read the title. It's like too small on my page. It's a paper talking about inflammaging.
And anyways, I thought this was kind of like a breakdown, like a really easy to understand breakdown of all the things we talk about. You say in one of your newsletters, "The weak oxy metabolism and hypothyroidism makes it easy to enter a state of reductive stress with a shift towards a higher concentration of NADH and lactate, dot, dot, dot. And prostaglandins, cytokines, estrogen, and nitric oxide are produced in coordinated ways, and cellular behaviors are changed defensively."
And I looked that up after reading this paper, because the whole point of the paper was saying that, oh man, can I even remember what it was about? The cytokines, I think you've called them a secondary immune system. But the weak oxy metabolism, the shift towards NADH and lactate, and the production of the cytokines in response, this paper was arguing that those are the things that are chronically activating the hypothalamus pituitary adrenals.
The endotoxin is another thing activator. But that, maybe that was, I thought that was great because it kind of clarified things in my brain of how inflammation and stress are these synonymous concepts, and the cytokines are basically activating the stress centers. Yeah, but the basic thing is the failure of energy or the shift from oxidative to glycolytic energy, and that predisposes you to all of the cytokine problems. And those are just messengers, like the TNF-alpha and the NFKB, what is it called? Nuclear factor Kappa B.
Yeah, did the, I mean, I know there's like a thousand of them, but what's your interpretation? They're just sending signals? Yeah, they're like an amplifying system. It's saying that the cells are in a bad state. Yeah. And evoking emergency measures. Awesome. Okay, Ray, we'll let you go in a second here. What are you working on right now? I'm still working on the adaptation based on cell learning, epigenetics as learning, not as a euphemism for non-genetic, but epigenetics as a continuous process of learning and adaptation.
And following that, I think it's going to be how the estrogen system works, especially in breast and prostate cancer, and so what can be done to intervene in those deteriorating inflammatory estrogenic processes. Man, that was such a good conversation. I'm embarrassed I didn't mention Progest-E by Keenogen. So email Catherine to purchase Progest-E, [email protected]. Each bottle contains, Progest-E contains 3,400 milligrams of progesterone. And usually, Ray, I ask you about a story of progesterone, but I have one this week.
Somebody I've talked to for a long period of time that's tried many, many, many, many different things. They on their own started taking, and they're a male, obviously, they started taking 200 milligrams of progesterone. And I talked to them and they said one of the things that was chronically haunting them was their milk allergy, and then it went away when they were taking the 200 milligrams of progesterone. So obviously, you've mentioned that before, and so I thought that was in like miracle territory, because this person has tried so many different things. Very good to hear.
Well, the progesterone is inducing the lactase enzyme, is that right? It does what? It's inducing the lactase, among other things. Yeah, like thyroid. It helps to bring up the digestive enzymes. Awesome, and then you can email [email protected] to get Ray's books that I have here. And then you can also email [email protected] for $28 for a bi-monthly newsletter by Ray. And so with that, let me read these donations, which I will send directly to Ray. And let me just try to mess with my screen here. This is a chronic problem every single time.
Okay, the first donation I can't read. This is embarrassing. Okay, Kyle Mamounis for $199. Thank you so much, Kyle. Michelle for $50. Thank you so much, Michelle. I think there are more donations. This is very embarrassing, guys. I can't read the donations. Anyways, I guess we'll have to read them next time. So with that, Georgie, any parting words? Not really. Like I said, unplug and live your life. The system depends entirely on your computer to manipulate you. Ray, same with you. Parting words? Yeah, start learning Spanish. You'll have more fun.
But just to touch on that for a second, didn't you say something like you could go work out or you could go learn a language and that would activate a different part of the nervous system? And so that was something constructive a person could do? Yeah, I think it's more constructive to learn another language. Awesome. Ray, thank you so much. These are always really fun to do. Georgie Dinkov, thank you for being my partner in crime. I sincerely appreciate it. And thank you, everybody watching this. Thank you for watching in the future.
We're on Odyssey, BitChute, Spotify for as long as those venues will have us. And so subscribe to those other ones or the Telegram or whatever. Thank you, Ray Peat. Thank you, Georgie Dinkov. Thank you to our great audience. We'll see you guys next week. I think, Georgie, I haven't even told you, but we're going to do a show next week, I think. Okay. Okay. Everybody take care. Have a safe weekend. We'll talk to you guys soon. Bye, everybody. Thanks. Bye. Bye. Bye. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] [Music] [BLANK_AUDIO]