1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

fatigued but determined

Discussion in 'Meet and Greet' started by dan.orloski22, Apr 16, 2014.

  1. Josh

    Josh Gold

    I do not see the contradiction unless one is looking for the idea that one's N=1=everyone can achieve the "same" N=1=Optimal.....N=1, implies just that, within the limits of one's body's physiology and the COE's. Yes everything operates under the same laws and every system tends to have unique limits. A "genetic" issue predisposes one to deficiencies in protein substrates and or misfolded proteins at the first and second folds. Depending upon the pathways involved, there may or may not be a way to bypass it and condition the system to adequately compensate. If one reads most of the literature on methylation and genetic issues, at best they take it to the molecular level with the assumption that all COE's are the same. There is little or no atomic or subatomic mechanistic analysis, and little or no COE's considered. I have never heard Dr. Kruse say "one size fits all" and in fact he stresses the need for a practitioner, extensive testing and consideration of genetic factors. Most people jump in in the middle without reading all of the blogs, the book and do not listen to all of the webinars where there are additional jewels about his own health and path. They assume he is recommending a one size fits all approach. This is haute cuisine as far as medical theory is concerned and without a trained palate, it is difficult to appreciate. Only through Dr. Kruse's in depth conceptual approach to explanation, have I personally been able to frame where "genetic" and "epigenetic" mechanisms might fit into my own health issues and those of my friends, family and clients. Furthermore, this is the only set of tools that begins to answer the questions regarding the relative value of a given intervention at a given time in a given case/person/N=1....Be aware, as far as I can tell, Dr. Kruse is aggressively refraining from practicing medicine on the internet and recommends that everyone seek professional help to work out their health issues. At the same time, he is recommending that they pay attention to the axiomatic truths that govern the physical universe we all live in and apply these to the recommendations they are given. It is not easy and is not a contradiction of a targeted therapy that remediates a genetic predispositon that has expressed since birth and or later due to COE's. Consider how can you evaluate the limit of the effectiveness of the intervention and the likelihood that it will continue to work indefinitely....?
    Alex97232, cinnamon, Martin and 3 others like this.
  2. Josh

    Josh Gold

    I have never heard Dr. Kruse say that epigenetic mechanisms can resolve anything in one lifetime....he seems to emphasize that these mechanisms will drive the evolution to overcome the problem over generations, not in a single lifetime.
    Martin and caroline like this.
  3. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    OSF3 to OSF5 go into this into great detail. (unfortunately, they are very long reads)

    Basically, DNA (genetics) only affect the "repertoire" of proteins that you are able to express. But ultimately, protein function (which is the most important thing) is tied to the protein's size, shape, and energy levels. What are those dictated by? The Electromagnetic force and water chemistry.

    Hence why Dr Kruse has always said that you can have the functional equivalent of Bad SNPs if your redox is poor, and why a SNP defect is not a death sentence. Of course, having bad SNPs makes things harder, in that your margin of safety is lower, but that doesn't mean you can't alter your existence through improved conditions of existence (at a cellular level).
    Alex97232, cinnamon, Martin and 2 others like this.
  4. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Random sidenote: I've been thinking about this phrase from I think it was the June 2014 Webinar, where it was mentioned that consciousness does not exist in a single location in the brain, and that seemingly unrelated brain regions are capable of taking over other surgically excised regions.

    It's almost as if "a qubit, is a qubit, is a qubit", and that so long as you have enough qubit carrying capacity in your brain, the entire thing can function optimally. The various different structures of the brain may just be there as either "legacy components" of evolution.

    Or put differently, is is possible to build a brain that is made of nothing but the material found in the prefrontal cortex?

    If almost all diseases are tied to brain energy levels, wouldn't that imply A LOT more adaptability and recover capacity than we currently think is possible?


    Note: I'm speaking out of my computer programmer-centric ass here. We tend to treat all computers as homogeneous bits. ;)
    Alex97232, Martin and Jude like this.
  5. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    glad somebody reads well..........
    Alex97232 likes this.
  6. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    your bias is blinding you........I have been quite clear in what I said drives evolution. It seems you are firmly into neo Darwinism.
    Alex97232 likes this.
  7. caroline

    caroline Moderator

    Josh ..... what a great explanation you gave of all of this .......you rock!
    Alex97232 likes this.
  8. caroline

    caroline Moderator

    you too Yew ..... I have to be really nice to you since you are buying me dinner! and unlimited oysters.......
  9. Martin

    Martin Gold

    400lb, I get your drift, but I feel that even with lifelong maladies, one can start to turn that ship around through properly foldin' those proteins. This blog shows you how and why. At age 62, I may never get to "optimal", but that's irrelevant. I'm down in the engine room stoking the boiler on the good ship EPIGENETICS to see how far I can get. Cap'n Kruse is in the wheelhouse steering around the Shoals of Doubt and I'm glad I'm on board.

    (geez, the nautical references are a little thick up there, but I feel like having fun today)

    Hang in there and read why. Doc has brought this info along, bringing it from basic meat and bones to quarks and leptons. No easy feat.

    This is the only path I've ever found to help me because it uses Nature as it's straight edge.

    PS I'm with Caroline, great posts, Yew and Josh!
    Alex97232 and Jude like this.
  10. nonchalant

    nonchalant Silver

    I'm sure the genetics were there, it's just that they didn't matter. At least in the days before global nn EMF.
    They didn't express, since there was no need to.
  11. 400lbbenchpress

    400lbbenchpress New Member

    Well Josh thank you. I just balked a little when he implied that basically it was because I didn't believe in E=MC squared that I was bed ridden until I found out about my biotin transporter deficiency and that fish and sunlight would have cured it. I explicitly stated my point and argument and the only response I got was that it was my fault I didn't believe that the energy equation scaled - and that statement implied that the living the energy equation in Jack's terms would supercede genetic inequities. And now apparently you are saying that isn't true and that everyone is different. Well that is exactly what I was arguing and the only response was that I wasn't buying the energy equation. I mean that was the arguing point here that I consistently stated - that people who are basically genetically endowed with bad genes will function with less efficiency than others. I'm glad Jack agreed with you when I basically said the same exact thing yet he did not agree with me because you put no question marks in your post. lol

    I mean literally he said "^^^not. Epigenetics crosses that barrier." So therefore I ascertained that he was indeed stating that epigenetics would supercede genetics. That was an absolute statement implied in response to my argument that was the same as yours saying that not everyone can overcome a genetic defect to the point of being functional through epigenetics.

    I must be missing something... not trying to be difficult here but I have a hard time differentiating what I initially said next to what you just said as true Josh and comparing it to the argument I got from Jack. Apparently the ultimate refrain is that I need to read more of his blogs and book and podcasts.

    Again this all came from a simple question asking if everyone could obtain equal genetic efficiency through epigenetics translating to a functional life with similar productive energy but apparently there is some ambiguity here on that idea based upon Jack's diametrically opposed responses to me and you when I think we were pretty much stating the same idea.

    I am not even looking to blame someone for being wrong I just want to honestly know what the paleo answer is to this as I am left a little confused. Obviously Jack has contributed a lot to the health community and I just want to know what exactly he meant.
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2014
  12. Josh

    Josh Gold

    As I experience the forum and blog, it is an invitation to learn the concepts and apply them to my life. Conceptual truths may not apply directly as an absolute prescription to my current N=1. CT is an example of something where Dr. Kruse says in many places to first make sure that several biomarkers are in a given range before trying it. Yet, many people seem to apply an absolute "this is good for me and more is better" approach that is not optimal in many situations from what I can tell by their posts. Your mildly inflammatory post implied that you felt he had said if you do A, then B will be the result. I have never read it that way. This may be my own error, but in my experience all healthcare whether on myself or with a "client" is a "practice" where I apply techniques and concepts in an ongoing experiment to try to improve or optimize function. So it ends up being more like "if this, practice, then maybe that. Travel at the speed of light is theoretically possible, but no one has achieved it yet. Also an E=mc2 concept....

    As far as reading more, I do not see that as the prescription. For me, it is the scaling of the concepts in my own N=1 that is most informative and illuminating. It is where I get the questions that take me back to blogs, forum posts, PubMed and more to satisfy my curiosity and find functional models. As I said, I do not see a contradiction between the axiomatic concepts and the N=1 situation with the individual's evolving response....your response is evolving and you are gaining health and wisdom. Go and look at where he tells me that my methylation bypasses are ultimately unnecessary, etc.. Yet, I have found them to be as significant as anything I have done for myself and clients. Likewise with the hookworm inoculation that has, with the methylation support, profoundly changed my life over the last 15 months. He called them "lipstick on a pig"....fortunately I am partial to Ms. Piggy, so no offense taken....I often feel like a frog here anyway...I am not sure what the longterm efficacy of these are for my own N=1, and I know that it is the best that I can do in my current situation. I do not know whether they are more or less first aid or whether they are what I might consider "sustainable" over the rest of my life. There is not enough data so the only indication would be in the conceptual level stuff we are trying to get to here.
    Alex97232, ATL_Paleo and caroline like this.
  13. dan.orloski22

    dan.orloski22 Silver

    Hey Jack thanks for all the great information and inspiration. I've been having a rough patch as late. I face quite an uphill battle
  14. dan.orloski22

    dan.orloski22 Silver

    This quote from OSf 7 says it all. "The more electrons you have in your brain the more autographic efficiency you will have"
    Alex97232 likes this.
  15. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    it does.......and it is simple to do once you understand that nature's smallest things have massive effects on energy and complexity. This is why C is squared in mass equivalence.
    Alex97232 likes this.
  16. dan.orloski22

    dan.orloski22 Silver

    jack, Im starting a new therapy called Vojta today. It basically resets the cns locomotor patterns. check it out. Its amazing I found this opportunity. Its based off the work of European neurologists.

  17. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Keep us informed of your bio hack.
  18. dan.orloski22

    dan.orloski22 Silver

    Jack, do I remember one of your blogs saying that dhea helps capture electrons. I forget which one but just wanted to make sure I had that right. thanks
  19. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    DHEA helps assimilation of electrons. DHA captures them
    Alex97232 and Josh like this.
  20. Alex97232

    Alex97232 Gold

    Nothing to lose and EVERYTHING to gain.

Share This Page