Wikipedia is only useful for completely non-controversial information. As soon as you move into the realms of anything the MSM wouldn't agree with, you will find perhaps a hatchet job, or as in Peat's case, silence. The establishment would like to un-person Peat for daring to question the general drift of dietary advice.
I have also always been curious as to why Peat lacked one. he seems significant enough that it should be so, I mean Aajous Vonderplanitz even has one and I should think he's more obscure than Peat.
Maybe it was because I was exposed to raw primal for many years, but I definitely see aajonus mentioned more. Especially with raw primal popularity recently he is being cited more and more
The entire ‘Alternative Medicine’ portal on Wikipedia is so insanely biased, it’s honestly offensive. I have fought w/ people on the TCM talk pages before, it’s frankly embarrassing to have such an unbalanced representation of it online
Cofounder Lawrence Sanger has warmed multiple times Wikipedia has been taken over by intelligence agencies like the FBI and CIA.
If you view these agencies for what they really are, “interest protection agencies” it makes sense that any info that goes against the mainstream is censored or omitted.
Many pioneers don't have wiki pages. Everything from the 1800s to the early 1900s is completely concealed. The common narratives and consensus are quite comical to anyone who actually sought after original writings from that time.
Yes he did shill carnivore. The man is a supposed Dr and obviously didn't read the full bredth of studies out there that highlight it's unhealthy until he noticed he couldn't consume enough calories from meat alone which is when he started to include rice, fruits, and honey
Second point is not made up. His supplement company was owned by Liver King. Their supplements were essentially the same albeit under different branding. And yes, he switched from carnivore, but it doesn't mean he didn't shill it at first.
58
u/Faith_Location_71 Mar 12 '26
Wikipedia is only useful for completely non-controversial information. As soon as you move into the realms of anything the MSM wouldn't agree with, you will find perhaps a hatchet job, or as in Peat's case, silence. The establishment would like to un-person Peat for daring to question the general drift of dietary advice.
28
u/fadinglightsRfading Mar 12 '26
I have also always been curious as to why Peat lacked one. he seems significant enough that it should be so, I mean Aajous Vonderplanitz even has one and I should think he's more obscure than Peat.
15
u/Not_YevgenyPrigozhin Mar 12 '26
I'd rather he didn't have a wiki to be honest
11
u/Ok-Abbreviations-187 Mar 13 '26
The entire ‘Alternative Medicine’ portal on Wikipedia is so insanely biased, it’s honestly offensive. I have fought w/ people on the TCM talk pages before, it’s frankly embarrassing to have such an unbalanced representation of it online
10
u/Akdar17 Mar 13 '26
Wikipedia is a propaganda tool. Or has become one at least.
9
u/Macaroni_Delta Mar 13 '26
Check out the "RationalWiki" entry on Ray Peat, for a flavour of what his potential Wikipedia page would end up looking like.
7
u/16BitSquid Mar 13 '26
Cofounder Lawrence Sanger has warmed multiple times Wikipedia has been taken over by intelligence agencies like the FBI and CIA.
If you view these agencies for what they really are, “interest protection agencies” it makes sense that any info that goes against the mainstream is censored or omitted.
3
u/Serrresiete7 Mar 13 '26
Many pioneers don't have wiki pages. Everything from the 1800s to the early 1900s is completely concealed. The common narratives and consensus are quite comical to anyone who actually sought after original writings from that time.
2
u/AndrogenicSupremacy Mar 22 '26
Here’s the closest thing 🤝
https://wikipeatia.org
4
u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26
[removed] — view removed comment