WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.000 Well, welcome to this month's Ask Your Ab Doctor. My name is Andrew Murray. 00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:19.000 Every third Friday of the month from 7 to 8 p.m. I do a health-related topic and we are very pleased to have Dr. Raymond Peat join us and has been a very long-term guest of the show. 00:00:19.000 --> 00:00:30.000 Very briefly, we are definitely changing the seasons going from late summer, fall and the colors are beautiful and hey, we are going to get some rain at some point soon but no hurry. 00:00:30.000 --> 00:00:44.000 Okay, so for the past 10 years, as I say, we have been blessed to have Dr. Ray Peat on this show to give his scientific perspective on what we are told is good for us medically. 00:00:44.000 --> 00:01:04.000 And from his research, we have sought to educate and light the way for others to show the many misleading claims drug manufacturers make and to expose the truth concerning many prevalent drugs prescribed without full knowledge of the science which clearly shows harm in using them. 00:01:04.000 --> 00:01:22.000 And last month, we covered the harmful effects of serotonin which a lot of people believe is good for them and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors which are commonly prescribed using the false justification that they are beneficial for mood, depression, anxiety, etc. 00:01:22.000 --> 00:01:38.000 Prior to that, we discussed the ongoing war on words or the ideologies concerning estrogen and progesterone with a huge amount of data showing estrogen's pro-carcinogenic activity whilst demonstrating progesterone's protective anti-cancer benefits. 00:01:38.000 --> 00:02:01.000 And this month, amongst other things, I wanted to cover the misleading, dangerous and widespread collusion and cover-ups surrounding nitric oxide's propaganda in endothelial health and the heart attack risks associated with the infamous drug Viagra and how cholesterol once again is so important in the maintenance of good health from so many angles and that the use of statins is so dangerous. 00:02:01.000 --> 00:02:17.000 So Dr. Peat, are you with us? Yes. Thanks so much for giving your time again this month and as usual, just tell people about your background Dr. Peat, where you came from and what you spent your last four decades doing. 00:02:17.000 --> 00:02:40.000 In the 50s, I was mostly studying humanities. In the 60s, I got involved in experimental education and then in 1968-72, I did graduate school in biology for a PhD in physiology. 00:02:40.000 --> 00:02:59.000 Okay, and you spent the last 30-40 years that I know of basically gaining information and finding out that what you were taught or what your professors wanted you to believe was inaccurate and was not scientifically valid. 00:02:59.000 --> 00:03:11.000 When you looked at actual scientific research, you found lots of conflicting information about things that were given or tenets that were held as the truth at the time. 00:03:11.000 --> 00:03:29.000 Over the years, I spent a lot of time in the university science library and in all those years, there were only two professors that I saw repeatedly in the library looking things up out of several dozen. 00:03:29.000 --> 00:03:31.000 Because you were there a lot. 00:03:31.000 --> 00:03:35.000 I was there a lot and they weren't. It was rare to see. 00:03:35.000 --> 00:03:52.000 Okay, I wanted to carry on the kind of discourse here about the commonly prescribed drugs that a lot of people will be very familiar with and how there really isn't any good information supporting their use. 00:03:52.000 --> 00:04:21.000 And now, as you've mentioned in the past, the political weight behind making decisions in FDA approving drugs and the huge lobbying, financial lobbying that goes on from drug companies and right through to the indoctrination and education within the medical teaching establishments to further reinforce the ideology that they have. 00:04:21.000 --> 00:04:35.000 The ideology that they want to keep in place to support both drug manufacturing profits and, dare I say it, sick patients that don't actually get better but are just kind of hanging on. 00:04:35.000 --> 00:04:52.000 The industry has promoted the idea that the only valid science to support a medical approach is the randomized blinded study in humans. 00:04:52.000 --> 00:05:05.000 But that requires a huge amount of financing. Not only the drug companies want to put that much money into that sort of thing. 00:05:05.000 --> 00:05:28.000 The average typical scientist actually looking for things to explain how the organism works, they do their experiments on animals at a moderate expense, maybe several thousand dollars rather than dozens of millions of dollars. 00:05:28.000 --> 00:05:43.000 So the drug companies say that animal research isn't valid for basing medical decisions except when they don't have any valid human information. 00:05:43.000 --> 00:06:01.000 In addition, the drug companies will base everything on animal studies. For example, with estrogen, they first tested estrogen on dogs and killed them in various ways so they shifted to rats. 00:06:01.000 --> 00:06:19.000 The whole science of preventing osteoporosis by using estrogen, for example, is based on rats because they gave the right kind of result where dogs gave the opposite result. 00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:29.000 So by selecting their animal experiments, they can gather up information to support selling their product. 00:06:29.000 --> 00:06:42.000 But if it's anything critical of their product, then it can't be accepted as to be these huge double-blinded controlled human trials. 00:06:42.000 --> 00:06:56.000 I mean in terms of getting objective results, really people are probably the only truly accurate representation of a drug's effects and the safety and efficacy of any products. 00:06:56.000 --> 00:07:11.000 I know that the animal models are kind of called akin to or they have a similar physiology. I know when they first started working with primates, obviously there was a big backlash against that after a decade or two. 00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:21.000 And then they used, I say, beagles and things in the 70s for smoking experiments and then kind of worked their way down to smaller, cheaper animals. 00:07:21.000 --> 00:07:26.000 I think the expense of it all sometimes is probably relevant too. 00:07:26.000 --> 00:07:38.000 But in terms of trials, the trials that are done now with people, those we would hope would present the best possible documented evidence for a drug's effect. 00:07:38.000 --> 00:07:57.000 But as you've pointed out repeatedly, when you actually look at the paper that's written to supply the evidence base for that use, sometimes there's fairly glaring mistakes in the setup of the trial or the inference that they get from the results. 00:07:57.000 --> 00:08:05.000 And sometimes it's just there in plain sight that what they're dealing with is something that's really not that well-known and isn't that significant. 00:08:05.000 --> 00:08:28.000 And actually, as you've mentioned before, in the 40s and 50s, when I don't think there was such a lot of pressure financially from medical people to produce things and drugs to get manufactured and the whole circle, the whole wheel of profit, that there's plenty of evidence that they have found. 00:08:28.000 --> 00:08:52.000 And I wanted to mention the antiserotonin drugs. I think last month when we were talking about this, I don't know if I got to the article which was published in the 40s about the effects of cyproheptadine as an antiserotonin agent and antihistamine on cutaneous allergy. 00:08:52.000 --> 00:09:04.000 And so, I mentioned the things like the SSRIs, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which would block the uptake of serotonin, making it more available, more prevalent. 00:09:04.000 --> 00:09:26.000 But yet here in the 40s and 50s, there was clear evidence that they were using antiserotonin drugs to benefit people and how that just gets twisted when there's a mode and a way of manufacturing and spinning a product and putting it out to millions and millions of people at great profit. 00:09:26.000 --> 00:09:46.000 In my recent newsletter on cholesterol, I mentioned that for decades it's been known that if you lower cholesterol, you create depression, suicidal tendency, cognitive impairment, 00:09:46.000 --> 00:10:06.000 all kinds of physical ailments that are demonstrably damaging cell structure leading to these disease increases. 00:10:06.000 --> 00:10:26.000 But just a couple of months ago, a new trial was started to supposedly treat atherosclerosis and heart disease by removing cholesterol from the arteries using exactly the chemical, 00:10:26.000 --> 00:10:38.000 the cyclodextrins that for decades has been shown to damage the organism and the specific cells by removing cholesterol from them. 00:10:38.000 --> 00:11:00.000 So, for example, one trial years ago found that just a short exposure to the cyclodextrin removed, first it removed cholesterol from the fibers of the hearing apparatus, the cochlear hair cells, causing deafness in the people. 00:11:00.000 --> 00:11:13.000 And animal studies made it clear that these things are very dangerous, damaging brain cells, muscle cells, hearing apparatus and so on. 00:11:13.000 --> 00:11:31.000 But the trial is going ahead on the really sort of crazy idea that taking cholesterol out of the blood vessels is going to improve the health and prevent heart disease. 00:11:31.000 --> 00:11:41.000 About 30 or 40 years ago, I talked to a person who is now a well-known physiology professor. 00:11:41.000 --> 00:11:56.000 He at that time was proposing to inject very fine powdered ground glass intravenously to grind out the cholesterol from the atheroma. 00:11:56.000 --> 00:12:06.000 That really probably isn't as harmful as this current human trial using the cyclodextrins. 00:12:06.000 --> 00:12:08.000 Let me just hold you there for a second. 00:12:08.000 --> 00:12:15.000 You're listening to Ask Your Op Dr. KMU DeGarbo, 91.1 FM and from 7.30 to the end of the show. 00:12:15.000 --> 00:12:23.000 You're invited to call in, hopefully with questions related to this month's continuing subject of collusion in the medical industry. 00:12:23.000 --> 00:12:28.000 And this month I'm going to be asking Dr. Peat a little more about nitric oxide. 00:12:28.000 --> 00:12:39.000 And then we'll get into some of the other drugs that have got lots of information about them that would have you not use them if you really knew what it was about. 00:12:39.000 --> 00:12:49.000 The number if you're in the area or even if you're outside the area or even if you're in Sweden or Hong Kong, 707-923-3911. 00:12:49.000 --> 00:12:51.000 So we'll take callers from 7.30 on. 00:12:51.000 --> 00:13:03.000 Dr. Peat, I wanted to ask you a little bit more about and it's something that you mentioned in that last paragraph when you were talking about flexibility. 00:13:03.000 --> 00:13:17.000 You've mentioned before that cholesterol and I think I was probably correctly told this when I was studying that cholesterol introduces fluidity and flexibility into a molecule. 00:13:17.000 --> 00:13:26.000 And that when cells become rigid, they rupture and they are not able, I mean red blood cells, etc., etc. in the cell membrane. 00:13:26.000 --> 00:13:38.000 And this is probably another example here of the kind of nonsensical cholesterol train of thought that wants to lower cholesterol artificially. 00:13:38.000 --> 00:13:51.000 And you mentioned that low cholesterol has been positively correlated with things like dementia, negative neurodegenerative effects of low cholesterol because it's such an important molecule. 00:13:51.000 --> 00:14:00.000 What do you say about the flexibility that's conferred to cells with adequate cholesterol? 00:14:00.000 --> 00:14:15.000 The best known model of that kind of flexibility is the red blood cell which has to fold up to go through the capillaries which are narrower than the diameter of the cell. 00:14:15.000 --> 00:14:30.000 So if they are stiffened by removal of cholesterol, they just won't go through the capillaries and when they are put under pressure, they tend to disintegrate because of the brittleness. 00:14:30.000 --> 00:14:45.000 But that same stiffness has been identified in essentially every type of cell. 00:14:45.000 --> 00:15:07.000 The lubricating quality of cholesterol is something that really the foundation of what it means goes back 90 or 100 years to the work of Bungenberg de Jong, 00:15:07.000 --> 00:15:19.000 a Dutch chemist who studied emulsions and he called the complex emulsion a coacervate or a complex coacervate, 00:15:19.000 --> 00:15:29.000 meaning a clustering together of different phases of different types of molecule. 00:15:29.000 --> 00:15:45.000 For example, a starch and a protein don't just mix, they find stability of containing different proportions of the two polymers and different proportions of water. 00:15:45.000 --> 00:16:06.000 So you get several phases with just those three substances and those phases have become stable and each phase has its way of relating to small molecules so they will segregate ions, sodium and potassium, 00:16:06.000 --> 00:16:12.000 and other molecules, sugar and urea and so on, in very complex ways. 00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:21.000 That led to many people followed up with the implication for what it means for the cell, 00:16:21.000 --> 00:16:31.000 having these different types of polymers, nucleic acid, starches, proteins, complex fats interacting in the system. 00:16:31.000 --> 00:16:46.000 And Gilbert Ling, for example, was working directly out of Bungenberg de Jong's basic research on the physics of solutions. 00:16:46.000 --> 00:17:09.000 And in this context of the actual physical approach to biology, the current work on how cholesterol relates to the various health problems, 00:17:09.000 --> 00:17:25.000 the cholesterol has a lubricating, limbering effect on these coacervate, complex mixtures of polymers and small molecules. 00:17:25.000 --> 00:17:41.000 The cholesterol, the people who ignore that physical basis of biology talk about cholesterol as existing in cell membranes, 00:17:41.000 --> 00:17:56.000 but every protein in the cell is associated in particular ways with cholesterol. 00:17:56.000 --> 00:18:14.000 The matrix that regulates and holds the DNA in the proper arrangement, preventing certain regions of the DNA from replicating, 00:18:14.000 --> 00:18:26.000 allowing other parts to be reproduced so that the cell can express only those proteins and RNA. 00:18:26.000 --> 00:18:42.000 All of this involves intimate lubricating or relaxing effect of cholesterol on these large polymer molecules. 00:18:42.000 --> 00:18:51.000 The people who talk about cholesterol as simply a membrane substance, 00:18:51.000 --> 00:19:01.000 some of them say that 97 percent of the cholesterol in the cell is in the cytoplasmic membrane. 00:19:01.000 --> 00:19:17.000 But that would ignore 97 percent of its real functions, which are to control the entire physiology of the cell. 00:19:17.000 --> 00:19:37.000 So that explains how these studies can be, they can seem to be sane if they ignore the actual science behind what a cell is doing. 00:19:37.000 --> 00:19:43.000 Okay, so I know we were going to talk a little bit later on about statins, 00:19:43.000 --> 00:19:52.000 but what you've just mentioned here is in relation to statins in terms of the very damaging effect of statins. 00:19:52.000 --> 00:19:59.000 And I know that they've been associated with cancers and several of them have been pulled off the market 00:19:59.000 --> 00:20:05.000 and they're always trying to find new ways to lower cholesterol with things that they perhaps are not calling statins anymore, 00:20:05.000 --> 00:20:07.000 but by some other mechanism they'll do it. 00:20:07.000 --> 00:20:16.000 But time and time again it's shown that cholesterol is so important and actually a positive indicator of longevity 00:20:16.000 --> 00:20:20.000 when as you've mentioned over the age of 50 for example, 00:20:20.000 --> 00:20:28.000 you're actually better off in long-term studies with a cholesterol that's right on the edge of the upper limit of the reference range or slightly over. 00:20:28.000 --> 00:20:29.000 Around 250. 00:20:29.000 --> 00:20:31.000 250 even, there you go. 00:20:31.000 --> 00:20:35.000 I mean 200 is what they call the cut-off point, but 250 is more protective for you. 00:20:35.000 --> 00:20:43.000 Okay, I wanted to talk to you, I wanted to ask you rather about nitrous and nitric oxide. 00:20:43.000 --> 00:20:50.000 And this came up and kind of jolted me in terms of asking you about it, 00:20:50.000 --> 00:20:55.000 because I know that around here and probably elsewhere people will understand what I'm about to say 00:20:55.000 --> 00:20:58.000 because they'll probably have seen it on the side of the road, 00:20:58.000 --> 00:21:02.000 which is commonly where you see it, little collections of gas canisters 00:21:02.000 --> 00:21:09.000 and then there will be, you know, beer cans and cigarette packets and other evidence of people hanging together 00:21:09.000 --> 00:21:13.000 and "having a good time". 00:21:13.000 --> 00:21:22.000 The nitrous oxide that's used in these little cylinders is a propellant for, oh I know, whipped cream, 00:21:22.000 --> 00:21:29.000 so it kind of, you know, gets whipped out of the nozzle under pressure and you can do things with it. 00:21:29.000 --> 00:21:34.000 And it's also used in some dental practices, but I think it's fairly old. 00:21:34.000 --> 00:21:40.000 I remember it when I was a child in England and they called it laughing gas and some people were sedated with it. 00:21:40.000 --> 00:21:46.000 It's not the same as nitric oxide, although they're both very similar, 00:21:46.000 --> 00:21:51.000 nitrogen-containing compounds, one with one nitrogen and the other with two, 00:21:51.000 --> 00:21:54.000 but very different in their physiology. 00:21:54.000 --> 00:22:03.000 They do both produce as a by-product of their metabolism in the body nitrate and nitrite, which are very harmful. 00:22:03.000 --> 00:22:08.000 Do you know anything about nitrous oxide? Can I start with nitrous oxide first? 00:22:08.000 --> 00:22:21.000 Yeah, it can be metabolized into the others, so the immediate effect isn't as harmful as the nitric oxide, 00:22:21.000 --> 00:22:33.000 but since the body can metabolize it into nitrate, nitrate and nitric oxide, you don't want to expose yourself to it very many times. 00:22:33.000 --> 00:22:39.000 Yeah, because you see collections on the side of the road with 20 or 30 canisters and, you know, God knows what's going on. 00:22:39.000 --> 00:22:45.000 So people just don't understand how these things that they think are just harmless or just a bit of fun, 00:22:45.000 --> 00:22:52.000 actually have a very negative impact in their health physiologically because of the products that they metabolize into. 00:22:52.000 --> 00:22:57.000 And then let's just talk about nitric oxide. I know you've done several newsletters on it in the past, 00:22:57.000 --> 00:23:02.000 and you've mentioned it previously as being a very negative product. 00:23:02.000 --> 00:23:10.000 I know that I wanted to ask you about Viagra, and it's obviously based on nitric oxide 00:23:10.000 --> 00:23:21.000 and how the drug companies basically managed to turn this basic poison into a medical product that they could market to a very targeted audience. 00:23:21.000 --> 00:23:29.000 And I think they've got a huge response from it in terms of sales because of its targeted use in erectile dysfunction 00:23:29.000 --> 00:23:43.000 and how its negative physiological effects far outweigh any short-term effect that might be gained from, you know, solving impotence temporarily 00:23:43.000 --> 00:23:51.000 when testosterone has another very similar effect but without the deleterious effects. 00:23:51.000 --> 00:24:02.000 So would you speak to nitric oxide and also the people that discovered nitric oxide and got the 1998 Nobel Prize for it? 00:24:02.000 --> 00:24:09.000 From them and their research, they're obviously purporting this product to be very beneficial. 00:24:09.000 --> 00:24:17.000 You know, we can't do without it. It's used for killing infections off from, you know, white blood cells. 00:24:17.000 --> 00:24:32.000 They obviously mention it for impotence and in atherosclerosis, they're saying that it can be avoided because it's typically a symptom of low nitric oxide. 00:24:32.000 --> 00:24:42.000 In the early part of the 20th century, several gases were known and studied for their toxic effects. 00:24:42.000 --> 00:25:01.000 Cyanide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide, and nitric oxide were in various ways found to kill cells or impair their energy production, 00:25:01.000 --> 00:25:03.000 blocking respiration. 00:25:03.000 --> 00:25:10.000 And these have over the years found to be produced inside the body. 00:25:10.000 --> 00:25:17.000 And some people say that if the body produces them, they must be beneficial. 00:25:17.000 --> 00:25:33.000 But until about 1980, when nitric oxide was shown to be produced in the body, it was mostly known as the toxic component of smog. 00:25:33.000 --> 00:25:51.000 But as it came to be studied through the 80s, several people were showing that that toxic effect contributes to diseases such as diabetes by knocking out oxidative energy production. 00:25:51.000 --> 00:26:03.000 But in the late 80s, someone noticed that estrogen acts by way of increasing nitric oxide. 00:26:03.000 --> 00:26:18.000 For example, when uterus is exposed to either estrogen or nitric oxide, it swells up, takes on water, and goes through its oxygen resisting type of metabolism. 00:26:18.000 --> 00:26:24.000 And that sort of thing happens everywhere under the influence of estrogen. 00:26:24.000 --> 00:26:36.000 And so the estrogen industry has created a great myth about the benefit of estrogen. 00:26:36.000 --> 00:26:47.000 And so the nitric oxide people attached themselves to the estrogen nitric oxide interactions. 00:26:47.000 --> 00:26:51.000 And then the Viagra came on the market. 00:26:51.000 --> 00:26:59.000 It was shown to intensify the effects of the endogenous nitric oxide. 00:26:59.000 --> 00:27:24.000 And that combined with the estrogen myth created a great surge of positive thinking about nitric oxide and suppressed all of those 10 years of research showing that it contributed to various diseases, 00:27:24.000 --> 00:27:29.000 brain damage, heart damage, vascular damage, and so on. 00:27:29.000 --> 00:27:31.000 And all of that was reversed. 00:27:31.000 --> 00:27:43.000 And then for the next 10 years, 20 years, it has been highly promoted as a wonder substance. 00:27:43.000 --> 00:28:06.000 For example, women with pulmonary arterial hypertension, impairing their circulation, creating heart stress, the blood vessels were failing to open. 00:28:06.000 --> 00:28:13.000 And so they said, "Nitric oxide opens blood vessels. Let's have them breathe nitric oxide." 00:28:13.000 --> 00:28:25.000 But one of the functions of interfering with oxidative metabolism is that that causes cells to turn on collagen production. 00:28:25.000 --> 00:28:32.000 And breathing nitric oxide creates fibrosis of the lungs. 00:28:32.000 --> 00:28:49.000 And I've known people, older women, who were being given Viagra because of that mystique of nitric oxide in the lungs. 00:28:49.000 --> 00:29:05.000 And the whole history of nitric oxide and its toxicity was reversed to the extent that in the '80s, people started saying, "Smog is good for you." 00:29:05.000 --> 00:29:18.000 In Mexico City, they found that kids who went to the beach at low altitude and got away from the smog, that they developed asthma. 00:29:18.000 --> 00:29:27.000 And they said that's because nitric oxide from the smog is curing their asthma when they're at home breathing it in the city. 00:29:27.000 --> 00:29:40.000 There really is no limit to the type of advertising phony science that we all do. 00:29:40.000 --> 00:29:51.000 Okay, so just to let people know, 7.30 now, from now until 8 o'clock, if you'd like to call in with any questions related or unrelated to medical misinformation, 00:29:51.000 --> 00:30:02.000 poor advertising, phony advertising, drug culture that we're all subjected to in advertising, etc., numbers 707-923-3911. 00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:23.000 You mentioned also this feature, and we've talked about DNA methylation in the past, and that there is a kind of a conjoining of estrogen, nitric oxide, and increased DNA methylation, 00:30:23.000 --> 00:30:35.000 which is heritable, and it can be passed down. So it's not just the immediate effects. It's actually something that affects the DNA and can be heritable to the next generation. 00:30:35.000 --> 00:30:58.000 Yeah, for example, it shuts down your energy producing systems, and that shuts down your expensive organs and tissues such as brain. And so you can turn off the best functions of the organism, not only in the individual, but pass it on to the next generations. 00:30:58.000 --> 00:31:18.000 Okay, because it's basically something that's going to physically change protein transcription or other factors which are fairly defined and locked in, as it were, until such a time as the DNA is methylated. 00:31:18.000 --> 00:31:37.000 Yeah, I think anything that blocks energy production, high energy, oxidative metabolism is going to do that same transgenerational damage, shutting down the expensive but valuable organs. 00:31:37.000 --> 00:31:56.000 And you said that nitric oxide also kind of shuts down the beneficial oxidative metabolism of glucose, and that's something that gives a very energy expensive process of any energy wasteful way of producing energy. 00:31:56.000 --> 00:32:11.000 Yeah, and in the heart, when the parasympathetic system, which is activated to an extreme in shock, that slows down your heart. 00:32:11.000 --> 00:32:23.000 And the parasympathetic acetylcholine stimulation activates nitric oxide production, and that reduces the heart's ability to use oxygen. 00:32:23.000 --> 00:32:37.000 So it's in effect creating a hibernation state. Animals in the fall increase their production of nitric oxide if they're going to go into the hibernating state. 00:32:37.000 --> 00:32:53.000 But in the heart, the stress and shock reaction can shut down the energy production and need for oxygen. 00:32:53.000 --> 00:33:03.000 Within limits, it has its benefit because if you can't use oxygen, you don't suffer in the same way from oxygen deprivation. 00:33:03.000 --> 00:33:14.000 But what happens is that the function of the heart is restricted by that reduced ability to use oxygen. 00:33:14.000 --> 00:33:22.000 The heart becomes unable to relax. Relaxation is a high energy function. 00:33:22.000 --> 00:33:35.000 If you turn off energy availability, contractile cells such as the heart or other muscles won't be able to relax. 00:33:35.000 --> 00:33:41.000 In the heart, that will raise the diastolic pressure. 00:33:41.000 --> 00:33:54.000 Usually, the whole circulatory system fails to relax in between beats. And having not relaxed fully, then it can't beat fully. 00:33:54.000 --> 00:33:59.000 So it creates a progressive tendency to heart failure. 00:33:59.000 --> 00:34:06.000 That's an interesting concept that relaxation is dependent on energy. We tend to think that relaxation is a passive event. 00:34:06.000 --> 00:34:20.000 Hypoglycemia or suffocation will lead to constriction of blood vessels and even seizures. 00:34:20.000 --> 00:34:32.000 The brain goes through a total activation when it's deprived of either or both glucose and oxygen. 00:34:32.000 --> 00:34:44.000 Nitrates and nitrites are basically byproducts of nitric oxide oxidation. 00:34:44.000 --> 00:34:53.000 Nitrates have a metabolic rate shutting down activity by themselves. 00:34:53.000 --> 00:35:00.000 I know they've been advertised now, probably through some of this information coming to light. 00:35:00.000 --> 00:35:06.000 But the meats, sausages and things that they now call nitrate-free, 00:35:06.000 --> 00:35:16.000 and when they've tried to preserve these meats also to say that these nitrates are part of a preservation process, 00:35:16.000 --> 00:35:22.000 but that these are in themselves metabolic regulators that they shut down metabolism. 00:35:22.000 --> 00:35:26.000 So in that way, they had been linked to cancers too. 00:35:26.000 --> 00:35:35.000 In 1970, they were definitely identified as cancer carcinogen formers in the stomach. 00:35:35.000 --> 00:35:45.000 And now that nitric oxide has been promoted, the nitrates have lost their carcinogenicity apparently. 00:35:45.000 --> 00:36:01.000 Okay. And then there's also another causal link to Alzheimer's that's been shown in relation to the content of nitric oxide in a patient's body when they are suffering Alzheimer's. 00:36:01.000 --> 00:36:15.000 Yes, starting at about the age of 40, nitric oxide synthesis increases generally even in healthy people, but it's intensified in the demented brain. 00:36:15.000 --> 00:36:20.000 Okay. Now you're listening to Ask Your Doctor, K.M.D. Gabor 91.1. 00:36:20.000 --> 00:36:26.000 From now until 8 o'clock at the end of the show, you're invited to call in the questions related or unrelated to this month's subject. 00:36:26.000 --> 00:36:31.000 The number is 707-923-3911. 00:36:31.000 --> 00:36:35.000 So I'll ask a question. My name is Michael. I'm from Redway. 00:36:35.000 --> 00:36:40.000 What is the amyl nitrate? There was poppers. I think athletes used to do them. 00:36:40.000 --> 00:36:42.000 How does that fit into all of this? 00:36:42.000 --> 00:36:45.000 Probably the same nitrogen releasing compound. 00:36:45.000 --> 00:36:49.000 Amyl nitrate used by the gay industry, actually. 00:36:49.000 --> 00:36:52.000 I think I was pretty fond of amyl nitrate. 00:36:52.000 --> 00:36:54.000 Do you know anything about amyl nitrate? 00:36:54.000 --> 00:37:03.000 No, just the legend, basically, that for a while they thought it was the cause of AIDS. 00:37:03.000 --> 00:37:15.000 And I think it's still considered to be an immune destructive chemical. 00:37:15.000 --> 00:37:25.000 An interesting thing I saw recently was that nitric oxide stops the hair follicle renewal. 00:37:25.000 --> 00:37:39.000 So if people start thinking about baldness, they might be more interested in investigating the dangers of nitric oxide than just heart disease or dementia. 00:37:39.000 --> 00:37:45.000 Between that and neurovegetative processes. 00:37:45.000 --> 00:37:52.000 I guess we'll move on to the things like, we've mentioned the statins and lipid lowering drugs. 00:37:52.000 --> 00:38:01.000 We've mentioned estrogen and progesterone in the various trials that have been done that are showing negative effects of estrogen. 00:38:01.000 --> 00:38:04.000 Now we've mentioned nitric oxide. 00:38:04.000 --> 00:38:14.000 I've got a few others here that are the AIDS, because it's such a, it's so vogue, but the ADD and ADHD drugs. 00:38:14.000 --> 00:38:15.000 But we'll take a caller. 00:38:15.000 --> 00:38:17.000 We've got a caller. 00:38:17.000 --> 00:38:18.000 Let's take this caller. 00:38:18.000 --> 00:38:19.000 Caller, you're on the air. 00:38:19.000 --> 00:38:20.000 What's your question? 00:38:20.000 --> 00:38:22.000 And where are you from? 00:38:22.000 --> 00:38:23.000 Mike from Connecticut. 00:38:23.000 --> 00:38:25.000 I have a quick question to Dr. Rapita. 00:38:25.000 --> 00:38:33.000 I wanted to find out what causes faces and necks of aging men to turn red, more so than women. 00:38:33.000 --> 00:38:35.000 Is there any tips to avoid that? 00:38:35.000 --> 00:38:38.000 Did you get that Dr. Peat? 00:38:38.000 --> 00:38:39.000 No, not clearly. 00:38:39.000 --> 00:38:41.000 Well, ask the question again, caller. 00:38:41.000 --> 00:38:43.000 I wasn't too sure of what you were trying to. 00:38:43.000 --> 00:38:51.000 Yeah, just wanted to know, I noticed that aging men, their faces and necks turn redder versus women more so. 00:38:51.000 --> 00:38:56.000 I was wondering if there's any root cause and how to avoid that. 00:38:56.000 --> 00:39:07.000 What do you think about that vasodilation or the ruddy cheeks that he was saying that typically affects men or seems to affect men more than women? 00:39:07.000 --> 00:39:21.000 I think it's related to the hot flush that women get at menopause, which is clearly a surge of nitric oxide. 00:39:21.000 --> 00:39:33.000 But I think in men that there are other things, including an actual deficiency of riboflavin. 00:39:33.000 --> 00:39:48.000 I think that's for some reason a consequence of the nitric oxide poisoning, that riboflavin, vitamin B2, is essential for the respiratory energy production. 00:39:48.000 --> 00:40:01.000 And the rosacea, cheeks, and red shiny nose and such, the vitamin B2 is usually a factor in that. 00:40:01.000 --> 00:40:14.000 I've seen almost instantaneous relief when someone got a big dose of vitamin B2, but it doesn't last long. 00:40:14.000 --> 00:40:21.000 Once you've got a deficiency, the tissue doesn't retain the vitamin B2 effectively. 00:40:21.000 --> 00:40:36.000 So it seems to be a chronic problem of getting the diet converted so that you everyday are taking in a little more than the normal amount of vitamin B2. 00:40:36.000 --> 00:40:39.000 Okay, thank you for that. 00:40:39.000 --> 00:40:40.000 Great thing for the answer. 00:40:40.000 --> 00:40:44.000 Okay, we've got two more callers. 00:40:44.000 --> 00:40:46.000 Let's take this next caller away from you. 00:40:46.000 --> 00:40:47.000 What's your question? 00:40:47.000 --> 00:40:51.000 Oh, hi. I'm calling from the Mendocino-Coson Albion. 00:40:51.000 --> 00:41:09.000 I guess my main question is, cardiologists will frequently tell their clients taking statins to take the CoQ10 compound for fatigue. 00:41:09.000 --> 00:41:13.000 And I was wondering how that helps. 00:41:13.000 --> 00:41:24.000 And the other thing they have them carry around with them is the nitroglycerin stuff. 00:41:24.000 --> 00:41:34.000 So I just wanted to know Dr. Peat's feeling on the CoQ10 and how that works. 00:41:34.000 --> 00:41:38.000 And why would the statins mess around with that anyway? 00:41:38.000 --> 00:41:46.000 The statins are poisoning the enzyme that makes cholesterol. 00:41:46.000 --> 00:41:57.000 And that system makes several substances other than cholesterol, including CoQ10. 00:41:57.000 --> 00:42:09.000 And so that's now widely recognized that you're poisoning the whole respiratory system. 00:42:09.000 --> 00:42:11.000 Oh, lovely. 00:42:11.000 --> 00:42:18.000 CoQ10 is one of the other essential factors for oxidative metabolism. 00:42:18.000 --> 00:42:28.000 And when that's deficient, the failure of energy can reach the point that muscle cells are lacking functioning mitochondria. 00:42:28.000 --> 00:42:37.000 If you exercise, where about 7% of the statin users have some muscle pain, 00:42:37.000 --> 00:42:41.000 if you exercise while you're under the influence of the statin, 00:42:41.000 --> 00:42:51.000 you greatly increase the risk of killing the muscle cells because the energy production can't keep up with the energy expenditure. 00:42:51.000 --> 00:43:04.000 And if the muscle breakdown is complete, that can destroy your kidneys by the flow of debris from the disintegrating muscle. 00:43:04.000 --> 00:43:06.000 Yes, thank you very much. 00:43:06.000 --> 00:43:13.000 And so giving a good dose of CoQ10 is very protective. 00:43:13.000 --> 00:43:20.000 And it isn't just protecting the muscles because the statin is doing exactly the same thing to the brain mitochondria, 00:43:20.000 --> 00:43:22.000 the heart mitochondria. 00:43:22.000 --> 00:43:27.000 CoQ10 is protective to all systems. 00:43:27.000 --> 00:43:29.000 Oh, thank you so much. 00:43:29.000 --> 00:43:30.000 Okay, thank you. 00:43:30.000 --> 00:43:31.000 I'm going to hang up. 00:43:31.000 --> 00:43:40.000 Okay, and then what do you think about nitroglycerin very quickly for relief of angina as it was used in terms of what it is? 00:43:40.000 --> 00:43:45.000 It has similar side effects. 00:43:45.000 --> 00:43:54.000 It's something that I think should be limited to relieve the symptoms 00:43:54.000 --> 00:44:03.000 but work on correcting the problem with such things as CoQ10 and normalizing oxidative metabolism. 00:44:03.000 --> 00:44:05.000 Okay, we have another caller. 00:44:05.000 --> 00:44:09.000 So let's take this caller away from -- what's your question? 00:44:09.000 --> 00:44:11.000 I'm from New York. 00:44:11.000 --> 00:44:15.000 And I have two questions. 00:44:15.000 --> 00:44:17.000 But on the CoQ10, you said a good dose. 00:44:17.000 --> 00:44:18.000 What did you mean by a good dose? 00:44:18.000 --> 00:44:21.000 Is that 100 milligrams or is that more? 00:44:21.000 --> 00:44:27.000 I don't think anyone really knows how to schedule the dosing. 00:44:27.000 --> 00:44:36.000 I think just by effect, if you feel your muscles and nerves are functioning properly, 00:44:36.000 --> 00:44:41.000 don't get any muscle soreness or swelling, then the dose is probably enough, I think. 00:44:41.000 --> 00:44:46.000 Okay, so my two questions are, one, as you get older, 00:44:46.000 --> 00:44:51.000 the hydrochloric acid that's produced in your stomach seems to decline, 00:44:51.000 --> 00:44:53.000 maybe varies person to person. 00:44:53.000 --> 00:44:58.000 When it does so, even if you're eating the best food, maybe your diet, 00:44:58.000 --> 00:45:02.000 if you don't get enough HCL, literally you're not going to be able to digest it properly. 00:45:02.000 --> 00:45:07.000 You're not going to be able to actually efficiently metabolize the food in a way that ultimately 00:45:07.000 --> 00:45:11.000 allows all the functions that you talk about to occur. 00:45:11.000 --> 00:45:19.000 What I did more recently is instead of taking a dose of like 800 milligram tablet of Betaine HCL, 00:45:19.000 --> 00:45:23.000 I took a smaller dose, like 150 to 200, just a little few capsules, 00:45:23.000 --> 00:45:28.000 and I take it with the glycine, the gelatin that you recommend, 00:45:28.000 --> 00:45:31.000 so that it doesn't cause any irritation. 00:45:31.000 --> 00:45:37.000 And I think it's improved the ability of my body to digest food. 00:45:37.000 --> 00:45:38.000 Is that possible? 00:45:38.000 --> 00:45:47.000 I'm not sure any acid -- they used to have -- drugstores would dispense a glass of dilute 00:45:47.000 --> 00:45:55.000 hydrochloric acid with a glass straw for people to sip to acidify their stomach during meals. 00:45:55.000 --> 00:46:04.000 But even strong vinegar, acetic acid, helps the enzymes to function, 00:46:04.000 --> 00:46:09.000 and the Betaine hydrochloride definitely acidifies the stomach and works. 00:46:09.000 --> 00:46:20.000 But one long-range concern is that Betaine feeds into the methyl metabolism, 00:46:20.000 --> 00:46:28.000 and you want to look at the long-range effects of increasing methylation. 00:46:28.000 --> 00:46:38.000 Currently it's stylish to supplement methyl groups, but one of the background facts is that if you 00:46:38.000 --> 00:46:44.000 decrease the methionine and cysteine in the diet of animals, 00:46:44.000 --> 00:46:52.000 their lifespan increases 30 or 40 percent just by the absence of those methyl donors. 00:46:52.000 --> 00:47:03.000 So I would suspect that chronic use of Betaine is going to be like increased consumption of the 00:47:03.000 --> 00:47:05.000 methionine and cysteine. 00:47:05.000 --> 00:47:07.000 Can I interrupt you for a second? 00:47:07.000 --> 00:47:08.000 Let me finish at this point. 00:47:08.000 --> 00:47:16.000 So on this point, if you're taking glycine and the gelatin, that sort of is a positive, 00:47:16.000 --> 00:47:21.000 and that's one of the ways that I think you've described to get away from those particular amino 00:47:21.000 --> 00:47:22.000 acids that are problematic. 00:47:22.000 --> 00:47:29.000 So if one is to take not 800 milligrams but maybe a few crystals like 50 to 100 milligrams, 00:47:29.000 --> 00:47:37.000 just a tiny amount wrapped in that gelatin, it seems to me that the long-term concerns you raise 00:47:37.000 --> 00:47:40.000 is still possible. 00:47:40.000 --> 00:47:46.000 That will balance it because the gelatin doesn't have the methyl donors. 00:47:46.000 --> 00:47:51.000 Okay, so my second question relates to if someone wakes up in the middle of the night, 00:47:51.000 --> 00:47:56.000 I guess they could either use the red lamp, they could eat carrots or some milk, 00:47:56.000 --> 00:47:59.000 or they could actually take a CO2 bath. 00:47:59.000 --> 00:48:04.000 And in the night, obviously cortisol raises up to, I guess, 5, 6 a.m. in the morning. 00:48:04.000 --> 00:48:13.000 Which combination of those would be reasonable, rational to use to try to help your body get back 00:48:13.000 --> 00:48:18.000 into a state of repair during that period of time when it's supposed to be repairing? 00:48:18.000 --> 00:48:22.000 You know, even though you might be sort of having a cortisol jump because you need enough protein 00:48:22.000 --> 00:48:25.000 during the day or whatever or you can get the right combination of foods, 00:48:25.000 --> 00:48:30.000 what's a good way during the night to -- which of those methods might be useful 00:48:30.000 --> 00:48:32.000 or is a combination useful? 00:48:32.000 --> 00:48:40.000 Nitric oxide has the same curve rising to a peak around 7 a.m., one with cortisol. 00:48:40.000 --> 00:48:51.000 And so light, penetrating red light helps to free the respiratory apparatus from both carbon monoxide 00:48:51.000 --> 00:48:54.000 and nitric oxide. 00:48:54.000 --> 00:48:59.000 So that is a way of protecting yourself from darkness. 00:48:59.000 --> 00:49:05.000 But sugar and the thyroid function producing carbon dioxide, 00:49:05.000 --> 00:49:12.000 the carbon dioxide is the basic stabilizer against stress. 00:49:12.000 --> 00:49:17.000 What about a dry CO2 bath if you can't sort of produce in your body because it's sort of the middle of the night? 00:49:17.000 --> 00:49:22.000 What about sort of oozing it through your skin? 00:49:22.000 --> 00:49:23.000 Yeah, if you have -- 00:49:23.000 --> 00:49:25.000 Is that another way to do it? 00:49:25.000 --> 00:49:31.000 Yeah, for example, having a big plastic box full of CO2 by your bed. 00:49:31.000 --> 00:49:39.000 If you're having night stress, you can just get out of bed and sit in your box of CO2 00:49:39.000 --> 00:49:43.000 and absorb that for 20 or 30 minutes. 00:49:43.000 --> 00:49:47.000 Without eating that -- so if you don't eat, those are good methods. 00:49:47.000 --> 00:49:50.000 The reason I ask that is I'm doing it and I think it works. 00:49:50.000 --> 00:49:55.000 I'm essentially trying to verify that what you think I'm doing is not crazy, 00:49:55.000 --> 00:49:57.000 and you're telling me, "No, it's not crazy," it sounds like. 00:49:57.000 --> 00:50:04.000 No, it looks silly to sit in a giant plastic bag full of carbon dioxide. 00:50:04.000 --> 00:50:12.000 It's even in Japan they're treating cancer with transdermal carbon dioxide. 00:50:12.000 --> 00:50:14.000 Certainly better than staying up for two or three hours. 00:50:14.000 --> 00:50:15.000 Yeah, my wife looks at me like I have two heads. 00:50:15.000 --> 00:50:18.000 You're right. It does seem odd. 00:50:18.000 --> 00:50:20.000 You know, definitely not conventional. 00:50:20.000 --> 00:50:21.000 Thank you very much, Dr. Peat. 00:50:21.000 --> 00:50:22.000 Thank you for your call. 00:50:22.000 --> 00:50:24.000 Yeah, I appreciate your call there. 00:50:24.000 --> 00:50:29.000 Dr. Peat, in the last few, six minutes or so before the top of the hour, 00:50:29.000 --> 00:50:36.000 I wanted to just quickly mention the ADD and ADHD drugs that children are 00:50:36.000 --> 00:50:43.000 so increasingly prescribed for their inability to focus and concentrate 00:50:43.000 --> 00:50:48.000 and how this is now treated as a disease for which drugs like amphetamines 00:50:48.000 --> 00:50:52.000 are prescribed for our young children. 00:50:52.000 --> 00:50:57.000 What do you have to say about that diagnosis of attention deficit disorder 00:50:57.000 --> 00:51:01.000 and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder? 00:51:01.000 --> 00:51:10.000 Things that impair the oxygen metabolism of your brain do create attention deficit, 00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:17.000 and some of the studies found that coffee improved focus and attention, 00:51:17.000 --> 00:51:25.000 not only in those with the diagnosis, but even honors students had better focus 00:51:25.000 --> 00:51:30.000 when they had a coffee supplement. 00:51:30.000 --> 00:51:37.000 So there is benefit from some supplements, 00:51:37.000 --> 00:51:44.000 but it happens that as far back as the late 1960s, 00:51:44.000 --> 00:51:51.000 people were noticing a connection between the amphetamines and lymphoma, 00:51:51.000 --> 00:51:59.000 and I was aware of that because I had a close friend who loved his Benzedrine, 00:51:59.000 --> 00:52:03.000 and he died in his 40s from lymphoma. 00:52:03.000 --> 00:52:09.000 That kept me aware of the research, and for about 30 years, 00:52:09.000 --> 00:52:14.000 I would admit that that connection existed, but lately, 00:52:14.000 --> 00:52:22.000 more people are recognizing that lymphoma is the result of toxic stress. 00:52:22.000 --> 00:52:26.000 Okay, and then Ritalin again is one of those drugs that most people will recognize 00:52:26.000 --> 00:52:33.000 in the prescription treatment of ADD and ADHD to young delicate brains 00:52:33.000 --> 00:52:36.000 that are, you know, they should be just growing healthily away, 00:52:36.000 --> 00:52:41.000 and you've mentioned obviously all these things in the past that are very beneficial, 00:52:41.000 --> 00:52:44.000 like sugar, which is one of the things that you want to keep your children away from, 00:52:44.000 --> 00:52:50.000 obviously improving your thyroid function with good nutrition. 00:52:50.000 --> 00:52:56.000 It relaxes the nerves by restoring their energy and carbon dioxide production. 00:52:56.000 --> 00:52:57.000 Yeah. 00:52:57.000 --> 00:53:02.000 Well, it's just another unfortunate example of how these things that are prescribed to us 00:53:02.000 --> 00:53:08.000 are developed and weaponized, if you like, against us for massive profit, 00:53:08.000 --> 00:53:12.000 and how there's really a lot of dangerous side effects in a lot of these things, 00:53:12.000 --> 00:53:15.000 and that most people don't really question it. 00:53:15.000 --> 00:53:19.000 The doctor is the one in power, and you do what the doctor says, 00:53:19.000 --> 00:53:23.000 and unfortunately, you get on a kind of slide. 00:53:23.000 --> 00:53:27.000 Your first prescription then becomes a second prescription, 00:53:27.000 --> 00:53:30.000 becomes a third, becomes a fourth, becomes a fifth, you know. 00:53:30.000 --> 00:53:35.000 Anyway, without laboring that point, let me just close the show. 00:53:35.000 --> 00:53:41.000 Thanks so much for your time, Dr. Peat, and thank you for those people that called in. 00:53:41.000 --> 00:53:45.000 Really appreciate you giving your time like you do. Thank you. 00:53:45.000 --> 00:53:49.000 I also wanted to just close this show, and it's a little bit close to 8 o'clock, 00:53:49.000 --> 00:53:56.000 not quite 8 o'clock, but there were a couple of things that I saw that kind of clinched it, 00:53:56.000 --> 00:54:01.000 not that talking about all this scientifically with all the evidence doesn't clinch it, 00:54:01.000 --> 00:54:05.000 but you can go find this yourself. 00:54:05.000 --> 00:54:10.000 Two of the most prestigious journals, medical journals, journals of medicine, 00:54:10.000 --> 00:54:15.000 in the world are the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. 00:54:15.000 --> 00:54:20.000 And these are two quotes that I'm going to read out now from people that were 00:54:20.000 --> 00:54:24.000 at the head of these organizations as editors, etc. 00:54:24.000 --> 00:54:35.000 Richard Horton, who's the editor-in-chief of the Lancet, said this in 2015, 00:54:35.000 --> 00:54:38.000 "The case against science is straightforward. 00:54:38.000 --> 00:54:42.000 Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue." 00:54:42.000 --> 00:54:48.000 And then Dr. Marcia Angle, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, 00:54:48.000 --> 00:54:55.000 wrote in 2009 that "it's simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research 00:54:55.000 --> 00:55:01.000 that's published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines." 00:55:01.000 --> 00:55:07.000 She said, "I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reach slowly and reluctantly 00:55:07.000 --> 00:55:10.000 over my two decades as an editor." 00:55:10.000 --> 00:55:16.000 So this has huge implications then, and as we've mentioned in the show before last, 00:55:16.000 --> 00:55:21.000 in August, that evidence-based medicine apparently is completely worthless 00:55:21.000 --> 00:55:24.000 if the evidence base is false or corrupted, which stands to reason. 00:55:24.000 --> 00:55:30.000 And there was another quote from Dr. Relman, another former editor-in-chief 00:55:30.000 --> 00:55:34.000 of the New England Journal of Medicine. He said this in 2002, 00:55:34.000 --> 00:55:38.000 "The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry 00:55:38.000 --> 00:55:43.000 not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. 00:55:43.000 --> 00:55:48.000 The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents 00:55:48.000 --> 00:55:52.000 of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it's disgraceful." 00:55:52.000 --> 00:55:56.000 Okay, so for those of you who've listened to the show this evening and called in, 00:55:56.000 --> 00:56:00.000 you can find out more information about Dr. Peat online. 00:56:00.000 --> 00:56:06.000 His website is www.raypeat.com. 00:56:06.000 --> 00:56:12.000 He has lots of fully referenced scientific articles that are not just his hearsay 00:56:12.000 --> 00:56:23.000 or his opinion, but which are quoted and referred to and in very succinct style, 00:56:23.000 --> 00:56:28.000 confer a lot of elaborate information that you can find out yourself on the web. 00:56:28.000 --> 00:56:31.000 So do your research, folks. It's all out there. 00:56:31.000 --> 00:56:35.000 And look at his website and his publications. 00:56:35.000 --> 00:56:38.000 And when you hear him and you've heard the previous shows, 00:56:38.000 --> 00:56:43.000 you can understand that he knows what he's talking about and he spent his whole life studying it. 00:56:43.000 --> 00:56:47.000 So take advantage of it. And for those that have ears, let them hear. 00:56:47.000 --> 00:56:53.000 Until this time next month, have a happy fall.