[Music]
Well, welcome to this month's Ask Your Ab Doctor. My name's Andrew Murray.
For those of you who perhaps have never listened to the shows which run every third Friday of the month from 7 to late p.m.,
my wife and I are both licensed medical herbalists who trained in England and graduated there with a master's degree in herbal medicine.
We run a clinic in Garboville where we consult with clients about a wide range of conditions and recommend herbal medicines and dietary advice.
So you're listening to Ask Your Ab Doctor on KMUD Garboville 91.1 FM and from 7.30 until the end of the show at 8 o'clock,
you're invited to call in with any questions either related or unrelated to this month's subject of field biology.
The number here if you live in the area is 923 3911 or if you live outside the area, the toll-free number is 1800 KMUD RAD.
And we can also be reached toll-free on 1-888-WBM-ERB for consultations or further information at the end of the show and Monday through Friday after business.
Okay, so Dr. Peat, thanks so much for joining us again.
I think as always, for people who perhaps have never listened to you or never heard you or this is the first time,
would you just outline your academic and professional background and then we'll start with the show.
I was a biology teacher before I studied biology professionally, actually about 10 years before.
And during those years before I went to graduate school in biology, I had taught English and other subjects,
but I had done a lot of experimenting in, for example, bioelectric subjects.
And that relates to the topic of biological fields. That had been a long-time interest of mine.
Good. Okay, well, I guess I kind of want to pick out a little bit of a loose end from last month.
And I know antioxidants were a subject that we covered.
So with antioxidants in mind, I think it's very important that our listeners clearly understand what they've been led to believe by
nutraceutical companies, et cetera, as beneficial nutrients may in fact not be so and that they should be treated with caution
with reference to their action of blocking a certain antioxidant, reactive oxygen species in the body.
For example, ascorbic acid functions primarily, I think, in the cell as an oxidant, maintaining cell structure
and regulating synthetic processes largely by its oxidative form, dehydroascorbic acid.
And so you don't want an excess of the reduced form.
And vitamin E had a history really starting as an anti-estrogen regulator of the sex hormones.
And after it was discovered that the unsaturated fatty acids were causing sexual derangement,
sterility, especially in males and brain decomposition, then was when vitamin E shifted over to be described as an
antioxidant rather than as an anti-estrogen.
And still it's gradually being recognized as an anti-inflammatory agent,
but it's still stuck in that mold of being called an antioxidant.
Okay, so with reference to cancer and the kind of new understanding we'll get into a little bit later on in terms of
field biology and how cells are actually intelligent and they do communicate and they're not just a product of the
organism, but they drive the organism.
In terms of cancer and antioxidants, I think in particular in relation to suppressing reactive oxygen species as an
antioxidant, do you know what the rationale is behind that?
Yeah, they're thinking that -- there are several interpretations, but one group thinks that if you intensify the
reactive oxygen species, you'll be able to kill the cancer cells because they are defending themselves by their excess
antioxidant capacity.
But others recognize that it's the reactive oxygen species that are causing the de-differentiation and aggressive
destructive processes in the cancer cells.
So reducing the formation of them metabolically is the safe biological organized way to go about preventing cancer
and preventing it really is part of curing the disease.
Some people have said that you can never tell when a cancer is malignant until the patient is dead because the
organism always has the capacity for spontaneous recovery from any kind of tumor.
It's very -- most often seen in melanomas because you can clip off a few bits of the tumor and see that it is
definitely cancerous, but there's spontaneous regression seen so often in melanomas simply because they're near
the surface and visible.
I think that spontaneous regression is probably going on all the time with many kinds of cancer.
Yeah.
Am I right in thinking that you don't particularly advocate topical treatment of melanomas, for example, as a --
Definitely not because so many things will disturb your defensive reactions against them and just annoy them and
make them try to survive more intensely rather than more intelligently.
Interestingly, I come into contact just here and there are several people who have had and/or have skin cancers,
various aberrant moles or darkened patches that are very regular borders and they've been told it's cancer.
I'm only asking you the question about your view on topical treatment of these kind of tumors because blood root is
a very commonly touted treatment for these tumors and I've met people who have showed me patches on their arms or
their legs that they've used blood root with and there's a site that -- it obviously looks a little scarred,
but there's no presence of what was previously a kind of discolored mole and how do you --
What are the active chemicals in that?
Well, it's sanguinaria canadensis is the Latin name, so I'm sure sanguinarine and probably hydrastine or some
other alkaloids are the major, but it also contains tannins, so I know tannins have also traditionally been used
for skin tumors.
One of the old things that derive partly from herbal knowledge going back to the turn of the -- the start of the
20th century was thinking of the molecular structure of these things as catalysts of energy production.
William Frederick Koch was one that first proposed this and it was developed later by Albert Szent
Georgi and particular molecules were explored by each of them and what they had in common was the activated ketone
structure, activated carbonyl group and opposed by, for example, activated amine groups or hydroxyl groups such
as estrogen is in that general irritating category and there are a lot of the tannin category of chemicals that
unbalance or in their most relevant part of the molecule have this oxidative catalytic function that can restore
the oxygen production of energy.
Interesting, because I know that sanguinaria does have very intense red and I know in the past we've talked about
intense red dyes or herbs or compounds that have this kind of free radical quenching activity.
Yeah, that means they're absorbing energy particles.
Okay, but as far as you're concerned you still don't advocate any topical use?
No, I think systemic is better because everything contains impurities and just a little bit of the wrong impurity can
irritate and possibly direct the cells in the wrong direction, but I haven't experimented at all with any of those
older traditional things, but I did experiment on my own things. A couple of doctors at different times were
convinced that I had things that were melanomas from their shape and behavior and probably a total of 15 or 20
times all together I've had things popping up that were black and blue and growing quickly and changing shape
and just by increasing my thyroid systemically and putting some DHEA and/or progesterone on the skin
adjacent to maybe an inch away from the developing spot.
Within two or three days you would see very intense changes happening and for example the color would change from
blue and white to maybe an even brown color and then simply the whole thing would melt away.
So it's kind of like giving the cells what they need to differentiate properly, otherwise they go off exploring
what they want to be to deal with the deficiency that they have and I think the particular areas they choose
seem to be areas that the body is able to provide something that sustains their growth and if you can let the body
provide more of that, increasing its energy, then those cells can go ahead and differentiate.
The reducing or antioxidant direction of a cell is interfering with differentiation.
There are several chemicals known as differentiating agents that some doctors are treating cancer with
and what they have in common is a shift towards the oxidative balance of the cell.
Okay, I guess lastly I just wanted to say that I think from a scientific, if that's the right word, perspective,
irritation has always been known to be cancer causing and any cell gets chronically irritated
and I think that's probably where your hesitancy with topically addressing anything like that comes from.
Yeah, although I know there have been very successful things.
I've seen people with pink spots on their skin where they previously had had a very aggressive tumor.
I know an old woman who I saw when she was I think 91, 92, and 93 and in between my visits I saw what had been a mole
on the side of her forehead evolve into a hole where the bridge of her nose was eaten away by the melanoma.
The next visit there was nothing wrong with her nose, the nose had grown back.
Wow, wow.
Okay, you're listening to Ask Your Herb Doctor on KMED Gallivoo 91.1 FM
and from 7.30 till the end of the show at 8 o'clock you're invited to call in with any questions related
or unrelated to this month's subject of field theory.
We're very fortunate to have Dr. Raymond Peat sharing his experience and his wisdom
with his latest findings on field theory and we'll get into that in a moment.
So Dr. Peat, physiology is clearly a subject where nothing is isolated or reduced per se,
but one where there's clearly an association with a world of interacting mechanisms,
albeit the assumption of one molecule being the prime mover of a direction of shears can be misunderstood
and knowledge can move along blind pathways.
And last month you touched on James Watson as an example of an extreme reductionist
who is now tending to be a little more open-minded in his understanding of biological interactions to some degree.
How is science to be moved in the right direction and allow a paradigm shift in our understanding of disease,
for example, to proceed along constructive and regenerative processes?
Well, those people who were insisting on a kind of straight line causality,
Gregor Mendel, for example, wanted traits to be eternal rather than occasional or accidental or changing.
And so he did these experiments to show that even though the pea plants were changing,
they had traits which were eternal.
And that got adopted by the gene people at the beginning of this century
and that led to people like Watson identifying this eternal gene,
except with the qualification that although it's like Mendel's eternal gene,
it can be changed but only by chance, not by anything intentionally useful to the individual organism.
And at the same time that was going on, other people were showing evidence that the whole organism is influencing
what happens to those traits, that the traits actually can be blended and changed
rather than being discrete, absolute, causal units.
And the other kind of causality is recognizing that at every level you have a new kind of causality working.
Aristotle had a complex view of causality, the substance and the intention and so on.
And with the development of cybernetics, this Aristotelian view of causality rather than Plato's fixed, rigid view of the nature of things,
the cybernetics people saw that each level of organization has its own laws and causal processes.
And there were particular ulterior motives driving each of these greater views of causality and of biology.
It happened that there were business interests that promoted the idea of genetic-based medicine.
Each drug could identify a causal action on one of these causal genes.
And so all through the 20th century, there were these profit motives of selling drugs for diseases,
supporting that idea of genetic causality.
But then the cloning and stem cell businesses started to be seen as viable.
And those were things that the reductionists had said absolutely shouldn't exist.
You can't have stem cells. You can't clone an animal from a body cell.
So now that they saw that those could be good business, they changed the history.
And Barbara McClintock, who in the '40s and '50s had been treated rudely when she would deliver a paper,
in the '80s and '90s, she was pulled out of obscurity while she was still alive
and given the MacArthur Grant and Nobel Prize to create a new history that would justify cloning
and genetic engineering, changing the genes as something like a natural process.
So science is really being driven not by what's plausible or really ultimately helpful,
but by what these powerful institutions see as something in their interest.
Profit-driven, turned into a business that can be used to generate income to further the business.
I think that's a fairly common world game that's played in most businesses.
Okay. So I know you've mentioned people in the '20s and '30s who were prominent in their time
and coming forward with some pretty novel and pretty groundbreaking tenets surrounding things like field theory
and cell intelligence, but that was pretty quickly squashed by the evolving gene people
who suddenly became the dominant influence because things could be sequenced and money could be made
and it could be driven in a very orderly fashion, one profit-laden product after another.
So the classic embryology is where the field thinking really had its practical influence
and there were great implications for health in their experiments.
For example, someone demonstrated that knowing that you could take part of an early embryo out of the embryo
and the embryo would replace it, the cells weren't fixed, they could fill in for each other,
and you could move a cell from one place to another and its fate would be changed by where you put it
so that it could be developing along the line to become a foot and putting it in another place it could become a face.
And knowing that kind of field effect, one researcher took a tumor and cut off a tadpole's tail
and grafted the tumor on where the tail had been and the tumor was converted by the developmental field
of the tadpole into a new tail.
So it's potentially a very useful way of looking at the organism that cells are shaped by their environment
as well as modifying the environment.
And not strictly, so far as the scientists are concerned, governed by the genes, immutable and unchangeable.
Yeah.
Okay, I think that probably brings me on to something I was pointed towards earlier on this afternoon
was some work done by Gunther Albrecht Bühler in a paper that is called Cell Intelligence
and he'd been working for about 30 years now and suddenly became very interested in some of the dogma and mistakes
that were being touted in the genetic world and started looking at cells and was very interested to find
that a lot of what he had been told as kind of unchangeable cell biology was actually quite mobile, quite flexible
and cells was certainly in his lab displaying intelligence as it were in terms of, I think it was the infrared light
that they were subjected to.
They would gravitate towards it, they would move towards it and make kind of informed choices about directional,
you know, the direction that they would go in.
Yeah, light has been, there's quite a bit of evidence that light produced by the dividing cells and metabolizing cells
is a signal.
He's arguing for infrared as a very important signal.
The Gervaches in the 1930s provided good evidence that there's ultraviolet frequency.
They demonstrated that it could transmit mitogenic signals through a quartz glass but not through ordinary glass
that would filter out ultraviolet.
But still, that's just something that's hardly been scratched.
Eric Buehler is currently probably one of the leading people, Fritz Popp in Germany has been another more recent one.
Okay.
Alright, so in terms of, I guess we'll get a little bit more specific now and we'll start talking about some disease processes
perhaps which have been consigned to the genetic bin.
You know, your parents have it and you're genetically predisposed to it so there's not much we can do
especially with things like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease which have become very big news, I think,
along with diabetes in the last 20 years.
Suddenly becoming as much of a plague as cancer has been for the last 30 or 40 years
and probably will have as little attention given to it in terms of successful treatment.
So in terms of field theory then, how do you think this can be applied to the process
within which we kind of currently understand Parkinson's and Alzheimer's and diabetes or the science people do?
But how can it be applied to those conditions the way you understand it?
Well, Albert Buehler sees fields as working both inside and outside the cell.
So the cell has to have a very organized meaning interpretation system
for knowing which set of genes to turn on and off in certain environments.
And cells have to sort of reach out and manipulate the environment around them,
conditioning their surroundings to fit their needs.
And so any change in the surroundings that they can manage will help them follow the course that is best for the organism.
The organism as a whole running into stresses and problems can change that territory around the individual cells
as well as the metabolism available to that cell.
And so you're changing the surrounding structure and the metabolism.
And those function as a single system.
The metabolism is creating the, for example, collagen to restore and renew its environment.
And collagen is produced under, more of it is produced under stress when lactic acid is present because there's not enough oxygen.
And lactic acid turns on many of these reactive defensive processes that as a signal to the organism
will tell the organism to deliver more oxygen, more sugar, more nutrients to the cells.
But if the cell doesn't get that what it needs from the rest of the organism,
or if the field disrupting it is too intense, for example, just a very intense electromagnetic field, for example,
almost any kind of disruptive field, ultraviolet, ionizing radiation, or intense radio frequency can shift the cell or hold it,
keep it from maturing properly.
But if the organism can get the necessary materials to the cell, the cell can recover.
And in this recovery condition, part of the recovery will allow it to communicate so that if it's in the wrong place,
it might simply allow itself to collapse and be used as material for adjoining cells in the apoptosis process.
But ordinarily, even very deranged cells can begin functioning and participating constructively if they get the right materials.
But lactic acid is one of the basic disrupting signals if it continues too long.
And it turns out that one of the basic features of diabetes is that they can't oxidize sugar all the way to carbon dioxide.
Instead, they produce lactic acid.
And if that continues too long, lactic acidosis is very often what diabetics used to die from.
But any of these stresses will interfere with the ability to oxidize glucose in the brain or blood vessels.
And the organ that's under too much stress and not getting repair materials will shift over to producing lactic acid.
And the lactic acid is a stress signal and an immune signal for the rest of the organism.
That kind of reminds me, and I know we've discussed this previously on shows at various parts through various shows,
but lactic acid, now this is something that I think most people can identify with.
Well, there's two forms of it perhaps that most people will probably quite commonly associate it with.
One, I would think, would be in yogurt, lactic acid formed during the fermentation process.
But I think probably more commonly still during exercise, when people exercise their muscles,
when either running or aerobically exercising, the lactic acid that builds up in the muscles is often felt as a cramp.
And this is the same lactic acid that you're saying is completely a destabilizer of the cell and quite disruptive to the field.
Yeah, a very well-developed athlete will not produce lactic acid too easily.
A sedentary person who is forced to exercise will be flooded with lactic acid
because they haven't developed the system for delivering oxygen and fuel to the tissues.
So a really good athlete is resistant to producing lactic acid.
And carbon dioxide produced by healthy metabolism directly participates in suppressing lactic acid
and in maintaining and promoting oxidative energy production.
And a place where you can see this is people who live at high altitudes
where the balance between oxygen and carbon dioxide leaves their bodies having a higher residual carbon dioxide level.
They can work very intensely without producing lactic acid.
That's called the lactate paradox sometimes because ordinarily oxygen deficiency is what turns on lactic acid.
But once you get adapted and are able to produce a lot of carbon dioxide or hold it in your tissues,
then that in itself prevents this toxic formation of lactic acid.
Interesting. So is this adaptation a different type of adaptation to the red blood cell increasing adaptation
with exposure to altitude that mountaineers train for and that kind of thing? Is this different?
Yeah, it's part of it.
It's part of it.
The tissues in themselves, they develop more mitochondria
and the enzymes that regulate carbon dioxide shift and the red blood cell itself
doesn't deliver all of its carbon dioxide when it gets to the lungs.
It picks up as much oxygen as it can, but at a lower oxygen pressure,
that means the blood is still retaining a slightly higher amount of CO2.
Okay. I had another question for you and that was regarding lactate.
How feasible, I know we work with people who regularly get blood work done
and depending on what their blood work looks like,
there's various reasons for suggesting changes to their diet or lifestyle.
What do you think of lactate testing as a means to ascertain whether somebody truly is under stress
and what would be the best way to do it?
I mean, at what time of the day or would that have a bearing on how much lactate was present in a blood sample?
Yeah, probably the time that you're feeling the stress would be the best time to measure it.
If you do it when you're fasting, you're going to get a different measurement.
You just have to know what time of day and what the circumstances are.
But it's increasingly being used, for example, to diagnose cancer and monitor the progress.
When the cancer is being regressed, the lactic acid in the serum goes down.
Do you have any idea what kind of state of development of a tumor that lactic acid would be increased?
It starts showing up in the blood at a very early stage.
At a certain point, I don't remember the exact concentration,
but it in itself causes an inactivation of the immune system that should be helping to correct the cancer.
Even before that, it can be seen as a product of cancer.
I expect somebody would probably have to have not just one spot check, but several over a period of weeks,
just to see whether or not the level of lactic acid in the body was holding fairly stable,
it was stably high, or whether a high reading may be just an aberration due to something.
Since everyone over the age of 50 has cells that can be diagnosed as cancer,
it's a good idea not to be panicked by any measurement that could indicate cancer.
It's simply a sign.
For example, if you ate something very disagreeable,
your lactic acid would go up just from the general inflammation.
So you want to take everything in context.
Even if it's being produced by a cancer, most cancers don't kill people.
In adults, if you look carefully enough, you can find cancer-like cells everywhere in everyone of middle age or more.
So it's something that's naturally being cured spontaneously.
And this is in the same vein that cells are constantly communicating with each other.
They're not blind or dumb.
They're completely autonomous and are actually able to communicate with each other
and change the environment in which that particular area is subject to.
I think that same thing applies to the degenerative nerve diseases and all of the age-related, stress-related diseases.
I think there's not an all-or-nothing definition of the disease.
If you notice a trend starting that doesn't look favorable, then it's time to change the way you live.
Okay. So if carbon dioxide is analogous to an antilactate, as you've mentioned,
what would be the best method to raise this and how long does that effect last?
Everything that keeps your free fatty acids from being released,
and those are released by too much adrenaline, for example, many of the hormones,
pituitary hormones in general help to increase the toxic free fatty acids.
And everything you can do to lower the stress hormones,
aspirin, for example, is a good anti-inflammatory, anti-stress agent.
Vitamin E is another protective ascorbic acid.
Ordinary foods provide abundant amounts of ascorbic acid,
so I don't recommend that as a supplement in general.
This is why you're so big on orange juice.
Yeah, and meat, eggs, milk, everything, vegetables of all sorts contain ascorbic acid,
but meat contains it in the dehydroascorbate form where people measuring the reduced form overlook it.
Okay. All right. I think we have a couple of callers who are kind of flashing up the lights in the studios here.
So let me just get the word from the engineer here.
Okay. So our first caller is from Northern Australia.
Okay. So let's call you on the air.
Hello. Hello.
Yeah. You're from Northern Australia, you say?
No, no. I'm from Melbourne, Australia.
Oh, okay. Melbourne. Sorry. Southern Australia. South, South East Australia.
Victoria, rather.
Oh, Victoria. Okay.
Good. Well, glad to have you on the show. What's your question?
Hi, Dr. Tate. How are you?
My question is in relation to electromedicine and where George Lapskoski and Royal Wright had produced certain wavelength tequila pathogens
and also Dr. Rob Beck and Hilda Clark had come up with a machine where they call it DAPAs,
where you place them in your palm on your arteries, on your wrist, tequila pathogens.
I just want to know whether or not those machines are viable, whether it's true, does it really work?
And also, drinking ozonated water, is there any health benefits to it?
Okay. All right. Well, Dr. Peat, I know the first question about electromedicine and Royal Wright.
The first one was I missed.
The caller was asking about Wright and the Wright machines that were used.
Oh, yeah.
And the viability of it.
There definitely is something to the principle, but I've never seen evidence that it is as specific as many of the people claim it to be.
I know people who use apparatus of that sort and I think it's acting probably as a stimulus rather than having that specific action that the Wrightians claim for it.
Okay. His other question was ozonated water. Do you have any thoughts on ozonated water?
I think he's using it for health benefits.
I think ozone is too toxic in itself.
The superoxide radical, which is produced by ionized air and some ionized water, that can be beneficial as part of a detox system in the lungs, for example, from ionized air.
But I would be very careful with either ozone or peroxide containing water.
Okay. Thank you very much, Dr. Tate.
Thank you for your call, caller.
Okay. So, engineer, was there another call on the air?
Okay. So let's take the next caller and see what we think here.
Hi, you're on the air?
Hi, I had a question about an herbological protocol for Lyme disease.
Okay. Dr. Peat, I know you've got a fairly specific view of Lyme disease. The caller is asking about Lyme disease protocol.
Oh, well, there's a lot on the Internet suggesting that it's a lifetime project, but there's also quite a bit of information that says that two or three weeks with the right combination of antibiotics almost always cures it.
So I think it's good to look widely, get a second, third, and fourth opinion before you commit yourself to a very, very prolonged protocol.
How do you feel about the pathogen itself in terms of what the scientists or the doctors identify as the organism that causes it?
Oh, that class of bacteria, the spirochetes in general, some of them can be very harmful.
Does what really exist?
The what?
Okay, carry on. I'm sorry.
Oh, I was just saying that some of the spirochetes are very toxic and harmful and long-lasting.
So it's good to, if you have any symptoms, it's good to check it and if necessary, have the proper antibiotic treatment.
But there's a lot of selling services. Some doctors want to make it a many-year project of treatment and recovery.
Okay. All right. Well, you're listening to Ask Your Herb Doctor on KMUD Garberville for 91.1 FM.
And from now till the end of the show, you are welcome to call in with any questions related or unrelated to this month's subject of field biology and things around that nature.
So the number if you live in the area is 923 3911.
Or if you're outside the area, like the chap from Melbourne or Victoria, there's an 800 number, 1-800-KMUD-RAD.
Okay. So I'm always getting asked questions about nutrition and this is from people also who've been quite fastidious in following your recommendations.
Dr. Peat, I've got a question regarding newborns.
Okay. So the World Health Organization actually advocates a four-year breastfeeding for newborn babies.
And I think that's awesome.
I think current trends, unfortunately, not in all populations, but current trends, certainly in city dwellers who are just too busy to have children,
are wean them as quick as possible and feed them as soon as possible just so that they are kind of independent.
I know that you definitely don't advocate that and for very good reasons.
What do you think would be the best possible start for a newborn in terms of nutrition?
Well, breastfeeding naturally, but with the mother well-fed and happy and unstressed.
Because when the mother is under stress or not properly nourished, the composition of the milk shows it.
And the milk, good milk, contains a lot of blood sugar converted into the lactose of the milk and hormones, some thyroid and progesterone and a lot of immune factors.
So even if a baby has an endocrine problem, as long as it's getting good milk, something like hypothyroidism often doesn't show up just because the milk is so rich in these protective factors.
Okay. All right.
We have a couple more callers, so let me just…
Okay, well let's take this next caller. It's actually about a very similar subject, but Dr. Peat, the caller, you're on the air.
Hello?
Hi, you're on the air and where are you from?
Yeah, I'm from San Diego, kind of local.
I had a question, something about you said about Lyme disease. I believe you said it takes three months protocol on antibiotics and it cures it. Is that what you said?
Yeah, sometimes it disappears in just two or three weeks.
I know a lot of people on Lyme disease and I've never seen that work ever that quickly. Is there some special protocol you're speaking of?
You can find several articles on PubMed that are very good and I think part of the problem that makes it seem so incurable is that it often is misdiagnosed.
They recognize evidence of an infection, but they don't recognize any clear signs of improvement because in many cases the person just isn't eating right or has other pathogens in their environment.
Okay, I just know like groups of people that are diagnosed with Lyme disease and are tested positive with Lyme disease and have been seeing a doctor for usually a couple of years taking antibiotics and they don't have the improvement that you're talking about. So, I'm extremely curious.
I think the other thing just to interject, Cora, is that more often than not when people may well test positive, I think a lot of the population would actually test positive on an ELISA test for Borrelia antibodies, etc. or whatever is now used to currently diagnose Lyme.
They have a lot of other metabolic defects and I think that in particular is what causes people to be so sick as it were and especially with the protocols that are used for not just antibiotics but other fairly heavy drugs.
I think these can really play into someone's downfall and like we spoke about earlier, Dr. Peat mentioned, the kind of energetics in the body that gets, once someone's exposed to so many drugs and so many chemicals to try and supposedly cure something, it's very difficult for the organism to respond appropriately and it's more of a kind of failure of the organism under the barrage of drugs and chemicals to treat that. That's the problem.
Okay, so where in PubMed would I find this protocol you speak of? Is it pretty obscure?
No, just look for Borrelia or Lyme disease and antibiotic treatment.
Okay. I know a bunch of people that have Lyme disease and they definitely have it. They have all the symptoms and they're positive and they remember to take bite and everything and have all the, you know, and it would definitely help them to get rid of it.
Yeah.
Well, I think the other thing again just to add to that question, Cora, is that in terms of metabolic energy that we as, you know, organized living beings have a need in order to survive, everything, I always say to people that every transaction that we ever make in this world with our bodies costs something and in terms of metabolic energy to fight disease or to digest your food, it all costs energy and that ATP has to be used.
Yeah.
It has to be derived from something and so nutrition is extremely important and I know Dr. Peat does a lot of advocating nutrition as a way to restore health rather than drugs or, you know, chemicals.
That's why I think of controversy. It seems like everybody has their own take on nutrition. Some people are low carbs, some people are high carbs, some people are vegan, which I don't.
Yeah. There's a lot of science behind it. It's not just hearsay and Dr. Peat spent a long time researching this and so, as I said before, most people can be chronically malnourished, not maybe to skin and bones, but chronically malnourished or assaulted if you like by the kind of foods they're eating that are blocking thyroid function and if that's the case, then it's very difficult to generate enough metabolic energy to do it.
Right, right. That does make sense. Where's the information where the right kind of diet for a person to uptake, have the right kind of metabolic energy and take the right kind of medication together? Is there any information on that?
Well, if you want, you can email me any time Monday through Friday and I can point you to the right direction of all those kind of things at Dr. Peat.
And your email is?
It's Andrew@westernbotanicalmedicine.com.
I'm sorry, at what?
Western.
Western?
Botanical.
Medicine.
Medicine.com, yeah.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, you're welcome.
Okay, thank you much.
Yeah.
Bye.
I think we have another call on the air. Yep. Okay, caller, you're on the air and where are you from? Hello?
Hello?
Hi, you're on the air.
Yes, hello? Am I on?
Yes.
Okay, yes, I think one of the things about Lyme disease that hasn't been addressed is that you mentioned that it's from a spirochete, which means it's similar to syphilis.
And syphilis has a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage.
And I've always heard that Lyme disease did also.
And if you catch it in the first or second stages, it can be cured with antibiotics just like syphilis.
But if it goes into the third stage before it's treated, that's when it's really difficult and takes a long time and a complicated protocol to try to deal with it.
And I think a lot of people don't know they have it until it enters the third stage.
But you haven't mentioned anything about the first, second, and third stage.
Well, Dr. Peat, what have you got to say about primary, secondary, and tertiary syphilis in relation to Borrelia?
I think it's probably analogous.
And the right antibiotic is needed to treat tertiary syphilis.
Something that gets into the brain and nervous system will do it.
Right.
I know you're a very strong advocate of antibiotics, and I understand the rationale behind it completely.
So, again, it's unfortunate a lot of people associate antibiotics with something that's bad and they shouldn't take.
But it's actually a very valid part of medicine.
Okay.
So, I don't know, were there any other callers?
No.
Okay.
Well, I know we've got a few more minutes, Dr. Peat.
And I just wanted to just talk about a few of the many, many names and the many authors that you've mentioned in the past.
Just so that people are listening to the show or would download this show later on in their own time and re-listen to it,
they'll have a chance to look up some of the people that you commonly mention.
So, I know you talked about, we've mentioned him in the past too, Mikhail Polanyi.
So, he's been pretty dominant in field theory.
And then I know you mentioned earlier on a Hungarian astrophysicist, Attila Grandpieri, was it?
Grandpieri, yes.
Yeah, Grandpieri.
Okay.
And his ideas, there's a video by Michael Persinger called "No More Secrets" that talks about some of the field interactions that Grandpieri is writing about.
They're very interesting.
But the details are in so many fields, I'm not sure how practical either of them are.
Okay.
I know you've mentioned also in the past P.K. Anakin as somebody who was studying CO2 and looking at the acceptor of action, as it were,
conditioning reflexes and their responses.
Yeah, that was an antecedent for cybernetics.
He was a colleague and student of Pavlov, and he devised this cybernetic interpretation of reflexes,
which sees the model of the world that we have in our consciousness as determining how the reflex works.
And it's our purpose reflex, actually.
So it's a very interesting concept, but it makes a very simple way of interpreting other fields, such as Hans Selye's stress process.
If you see it in terms of P.K. Anakin's acceptor of action and how the meaning of a particular stress and how the body is responding governs the field all the way down to the cell
and the chemistry of the cell is responsive to the meaning of the stress.
Okay, and then there was Noam Chomsky.
I know you have quite an affection towards William Blake as well as part of your earlier exploits.
Yeah, Blake saw things in a very holistic, cosmic way as well as very biological, soundly based in the organism.
And then there was Dostoevsky's Diary of a Strange Fellow, wasn't it?
Yeah, various translations of that.
Some of them are easier to understand than others about the essential meaningfulness of experience and reality.
Okay, well I guess we're getting to the top of the hour and I just wanted to mention a few of those authors just so people could recapitulate and perhaps look them up, Google them, search out what they did
and find out that a lot of brilliant scientists have done lots of pioneering work in the past and unfortunately with the advent of science and the money that was being produced by the science and the patenting of and etc.
that these people have been pushed into the background but had some very interesting direction that they were going in and fortunately with the internet and people being disillusioned with the way medicine is going
these things are becoming more common again as post-docs etc. take up these previously relegated concepts and are bringing them back to life again by their own work.
So I really appreciate all those people that you mentioned on the show and just want to make sure that we've put them out on the air again so people can find out that these are not just quacks, they're actually very brilliant people who had most of them Nobel Prize winners too.
So thank you so much for joining us again Dr. Peat, we really appreciate your time.
Okay, thanks.
Okay so for people who have joined in, Dr. Peat's website full of articles, fully referenced, everything that he says can be traced back, you know can trace his citations on the web and all of his newsletters are fully referenced.
So www.raypeat.com, an excellent resource, he's a very altruistic man, very humble, I'm sure you probably pick that up when you hear him.
Brilliant that he shares his knowledge the way he does, I so appreciate his time.
For those of you who've listened to the show, the third Friday of every month, we can be reached at www.westernbotanicalmedicine.com and/or email me andrew@westernbotanicalmedicine.com Monday through Friday or the weekend, doesn't really matter, 9 to 5.
And thanks so much for your time.
[Music]
Alright, that was "Ask Your Herb Doctor".
We got support for K-MUD comes from In of the Lost Coast and Shelter Cove.
Fireplace Spa and Sauna Spa.