In this episode of the Ketones and Coffee Podcast, host Lorenz welcomes Dr. Peter Ballerstedt, an expert in agronomy and ruminant nutrition. They discuss the critical role of animal source foods in sustainable agriculture and human health. Dr. Peter shares his insights on the relationship between nutrition, agriculture, and sustainability, and argues for the necessity of ruminant animals in addressing global malnutrition and chronic diseases.
The conversation covers the history of dietary guidelines, the benefits of a low-carb, high-fat diet, and the misconceptions about the environmental impact of ruminant agriculture. Dr. Peter emphasizes the importance of animal source foods for proper human development and urges listeners to spread the good news about metabolic health and sustainable farming practices.
00:00 Welcome to the Ketones and Coffee Podcast with Dr. Peter Ballerstedt
00:13 Dr. Peter's Journey: From Agronomist to Ketogenic Advocate
02:20 The Sod Father: Nicknames and Sustainable Agriculture
03:29 Addressing Global Health Issues Through Diet
04:33 Peter's Personal Health Transformation and Advocacy
11:42 The Essential Role of Animal Agriculture in Human Diet
23:23 Confronting Malnutrition: A Global Perspective
31:32 Sustainability and Health: Rethinking Environmental Impact
34:42 Debunking Livestock Feeding Myths
36:44 The Environmental Impact of Livestock vs. Human Diet
38:33 Exploring the Benefits of Ketogenic Nutrition
39:12 The Economic and Environmental Costs of Healthcare
47:56 Challenging the Pharmaceutical Industry
53:25 Personal Health Stories and the Power of Lifestyle Changes
01:00:08 Advocating for Sustainable Solutions in Animal Agriculture
01:06:04 Empowering Individuals for Health and Sustainability
Connect with Dr. Peter Ballerstedt
Website: http://grassbasedhealth.blogspot.com/
Call to action for listeners: Follow ketones and Coffee Podcast on Instagram ( https://www.instagram.com/keton.esncoffee ), Youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsZZmBEenvZnU8tA1npAODA )
~~~~~~
Estrella by Audiorezout is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
~~~~~~
Save yourself that trip to the market — Instacart delivers groceries in as fast as 1 hour! They connect you with Personal Shoppers in your area to shop and deliver groceries from your favorite stores.
Instacart - Groceries delivered in as little as 1 hour.
Free delivery on your first order over $35.
Go to ketocoachlorenz.com and use the contact form to get your Free Consultation!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (00:01):
Hey guys, this is Lawrence and
welcome back to the ketones andcoffee podcast.
I'm so grateful to have youjoining me on this journey.
Every week I bring in guests tohave the knowledge and
experience to help you on yourown journey to a better health.
So aside of this guys, today wehave a very special guest with
us.
It's Dr.
Peter Ballerstedt is a renownedagronomist and a ruminant
(00:22):
nutritionist with extensiveexperience in.
Forage production andutilization.
He is a, he is a passionateadvocate for sustainable
agriculture and the essentialrole of animal source foods in
human health.
He has dedicated his career tounderstanding and improving the
complex relationships betweennutrition, agriculture, and
(00:43):
sustainability.
The Saad father himself is anhonored Dr.
Peter.
Welcome to the Ketocin Coffeepodcast.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (00:51):
Thank you very much.
It's a pleasure to be here.
Well,
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_1314 (00:55):
You're also a ruminant nutritionist.
That's a very interesting job,sir.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (01:00):
you know, there's a lot of us.
Um, people may not be thatfamiliar with us, so maybe we
can increase the awareness.
Um, agronomists, there's notthat many of us, you know, so
forage agronomists, we get kindof specialized.
Um, but I want people to knowthat there's some really, really
good news that, um, and, andthat has to do with the, the
(01:27):
fact that there's a effectivelifestyle intervention for
people to follow to treat a widevariety of issues that are the
current pressing global healthissues.
And I said global, so it's notonly in the high income Western
(01:47):
countries.
And that a solution will involveruminant animal agriculture.
And therefore there's all thiswork that needs to be done.
And so I want to encouragepeople to look after their own
health, but also to look intothe future.
The areas that I was trained inas I'm now retired.
(02:09):
So there's room for lots ofyoung people to come into this
space, to do this kind ofimportant work.
I,
lorenz_2_05-17 (02:17):
Congratulations, by the way, on the retirement.
Yeah.
You're also called the sodfodder, right?
How did you get that name?
And, uh, what's the story behindthat?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (02:28):
yeah, I didn't have to pay anybody for
it.
That that's what's wonderful.
It was given to me.
Um, the whole thing was given instages.
So it started with me showing upat, you know, metabolic health
conferences and talking aboutruminant animal agriculture and
its role in sustainable foodsystems.
Um, And, and so this idea ofpeople didn't know this, yet
(02:51):
there are people that know this,so I'm trying to build this herd
of people.
Um, and, and so that became theRuminati, right?
These people that knew thisapparently secret knowledge that
wasn't all that secret, butokay, there it is.
And then somebody said, well,you know, you're, you're the sod
father of the Ruminati.
(03:13):
And I was like, okay, that wasgood.
And then somebody said, well,you're actually Don Pedro, the
sod father of the Ruminati.
All of those ideas were given tome because I'm not clever enough
to come up with anything likethat on my own.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (03:27):
Oh, I love it.
I love it.
You know, you talked about theepidemic that, you know, you
talked about.
That sweeps the globe, and youcall it malnutrition, I, I call
it the sick culture, the peopleresponsible for the food system,
you know, they're just playingwith people's lives, you know,
real health consequences, um, weall know this, that it stems
(03:49):
from, you know, manipulationcreated by personal agendas, but
maybe you can enlighten us, uh,you have a this wealth of
knowledge and you bring thisunique perspective on how we can
address some of the mostpressing challenges with the
food system today.
I know you advocate for a lowcarb high fat diet as well, uh,
(04:10):
for optimal human health.
Um, everyone who believes thisand, um, that includes me, we
all agree that it is the bestfor human, uh, optimal human
health.
Um, but we all have a story onhow we got.
to that conclusion.
So I want to know what led youto this path you're on today,
(04:31):
Dr.
Peter.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (04:33):
Well, I was, and first of all, you can
just call me Peter.
Um, the.
I was just listening to theconsensus conference in London
that's taking place today aswe're recording this, where
they're trying to come to someagreed upon definition of food
(04:54):
addiction.
And, and so listening to many ofthose people, combined with my
own experience, you know, the,how we talk about things and the
words we use matter.
And you can find people that wemight not agree with.
100%, but we can agree with 75%.
(05:15):
Well, we need all the allies wecan find.
And so let's think about how thewords we use might not be
helpful.
You know, in the whole campaign.
So that, that's just something Iwant to always be aware of.
Um, my personal experiencestarts in 2007.
(05:37):
Now we're skipping over mytraining and, and, and what I
did as a profession.
But in 2007, I just realizedthat, you know, I was a 51 year
old, balding, obese, prediabetic.
And.
At that time, my wife, Nancy,had been five years, so she
(06:01):
started in 2002, looking intowhat was then called low carb,
and so she had information thatwhen I was ready personally,
then she could have direct metowards some things to read.
Um, this was about the timethat, um, Gary Taubes's first
(06:26):
nutrition related book, GoodCalories, Bad Calories, came
out.
And, um, the diet that I mostlyfollowed was, uh, Michael and
Mary Dan Eads Protein Power.
I believe I read The Life Planfirst, which was a little later.
So, I got started on that around2010.
(06:51):
I started speaking.
to various public areas.
I showed up at a health andnutrition, what was it called?
It was a joint meeting of theNutrition and Metabolism Society
and the American Bariatric, uh,American Society of Bariatric
Physicians.
So those two were meeting.
(07:11):
It was up in, um, Seattle.
So that's five hours north ofme.
And I could see Gary Taubes inperson and I could meet all
these other people and it waslike, of course I'm going to go
to this.
And that was the first time in awhile that I had stood up and
described myself as a forageagronomist.
(07:33):
I had left academia, uh, in2002.
And so, um, sorry, in 1992, um,and some very interesting things
happened there.
One was, um, here are all thesepeople, medical people, they're
(07:54):
at this conference, and I knowmore about this topic than many
of them did.
And there's some stories I couldtell about that.
Um, then also, I got to interactwith some of the speakers in a
way I hadn't done for a while.
I call it stump the speaker,where you sort of throw
(08:14):
questions at them to see what'sgoing on.
And as a result of that, um, Ihad to introduce myself and what
my specialty was.
So I introduced myself as aforage agronomist, which then
led to conversations like, Whatthe heck is a forage agronomist?
Um, and when I explained that,then they said, Okay, but what
(08:38):
are you doing here?
And for me, I believe that One,there's an amount of animal
source food that's essential inthe diet.
Okay, we can talk about how muchthat might be, but there's some
amount that's essential.
And I already knew that animalagriculture is essential to
(09:02):
sustainable food systems.
I already knew that ruminantanimals were particularly
essential, and we could talkabout those.
Um, what I hadn't quiteappreciated is how animal source
food is part of our culturalheritages and traditions,
regardless of where those comefrom.
(09:23):
Looks different, obviously, butyou cannot find a naturally
occurring vegan tradition.
It, it, it's a, it's a constructof the wealthy high income
countries, particularlynorthern.
Um, and so the combination ofthose things, and then I find
(09:46):
people that are helping youknow, physicians, clinicians,
researchers that are helpingpeople find answers through
therapeutic carbohydratereduction or therapeutic
ketogenic nutrition.
But these issues come up thatare sort of You know, yeah, but,
(10:08):
well, let, let me help you withthose issues, right?
Let, let me direct you to someinformation to make you feel
better about adopting alifestyle that will actually
improve your health, and thehealth of your families, and the
health of your communities, andIn other words, don't worry
(10:29):
about this other stuff, butyeah, I understand why people
would be.
So that started for me publicly,like I said, 2010, um, I joke
sometimes about how I've beenstalking many of the people who,
you know, the audience wouldrecognize.
And I'm a, I'm a shameless namedropper.
(10:49):
Um, and now I've gotten to,introduce the metabolic health
message to my agriculturaltribes.
So I, I, I like to think thatwhat I'm doing is I'm building
bridges between my variouscommunities.
So I have my agriculturalcommunities and I'll invite
(11:09):
people like Eric Westman to comespeak to the National Grazing
Lands Coalition meeting thatthey had a couple years ago.
Um, Or, um, I, I try to havepeople come, um, and certainly I
try to represent what I'velearned from people throughout
(11:32):
the animal agriculture,especially the ruminant animal
agriculture, um, into themetabolic health focused
meetings.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (11:42):
Maybe you can help us understand your
tribe.
Us, the listeners, a, you know,are very familiar with metabolic
health, but how does it relateto the food system, the
agriculture, uh, food system?
(12:02):
Now, we talked about that crisisthough, about earlier, the
global crisis of malnutrition.
And I don't think the regularfolks like I am, I don't think
we are aware of the severity ofthat situation.
Um, you've talked about thestatistics on one of your, uh,
(12:23):
talks on YouTube.
I believe that was, uh, Low CarbUnder.
Um, and you said, 800 millionpeople are deficient and 3
billion are malnourished, but itwasn't always this way, isn't
it?
Like we see pictures from theearly 19th century, people look
(12:43):
slim, right?
Unlike today, we're almost,what, 90 percent of the U.
S.
population overweight.
I want to ask you this.
At one point in history, can youpoint to and say, this was the
start of this global epidemic?
Mm hmm.
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (13:02):
Yeah, so that, uh, there's a lot of
things there I could, I couldrespond to, but directly to that
last point, I, I think that, um,the, you certainly you can look
at data plotted and shows adramatic increase in, uh,
obesity.
(13:23):
And then, you know, some yearslater, a sort of mirroring
increase in, in type twodiabetes.
And it's going to startsomewhere in the eighties.
Of course, we had the dietaryguidelines that were first, the
first edition was 1980.
A few years before that, therewas a report out of a Senate
committee.
(13:43):
This is all in the UnitedStates.
Um, that, you know, Ended updriving this creation, uh, of
these dietary, uh, guidelines.
The, the report was calledDietary Goals.
Um, and that represented as, assomebody who's read Gary Taubes
(14:04):
understands or, or NinaTeicholtz or others, Um, will,
understand this story of, youknow, there was a controversy,
there were some scientificissues that were being explored,
and then through a series ofpolitical maneuverings and what
have you, this one side of theargument was adopted and
(14:27):
codified into the officialdietary guide, uh, guidance and
food policy.
Um, You know, it's, it, I thinkit's always good to remember
that what they say aboutcorrelation doesn't prove
causation.
Um, but my version of that is,every, Oh, we're back.
(14:50):
Wow.
That was weird.
Both screens just went black.
I'm sorry for that.
Um, the.
We were told to eat this way toavoid the killer diseases and
then that was including obesityat some point.
So it's fair to say, while it'sfair to say it didn't cause it,
(15:13):
right, because correlationdoesn't necessarily Proof
causation.
It is fair to say it dang suredidn't prevent it.
That was the reason we were toldto do this.
And then we need to understandthat there were people at the
time saying, no, don't do this.
So now let me address some ofthe points that I think you
(15:35):
were, or at least I perceived,you in the beginning of that
question.
We as organisms have to eatother organisms, right?
We don't have the ability totake inorganic materials and
make organic compounds out ofthem.
So we are technically known asheterotrophs, right?
(15:58):
Um, and so we have to beconsuming other organisms.
I view agriculture essentiallyas man's history, and mankind's
history, of altering itsenvironment to increase the
(16:18):
production of biomass.
over what that ecosystem wouldhave provided had there not been
the intervention.
Kind of takes all the romanceout of it, but I, I, and I've
run that by a number of peopleand they say, yeah, yeah, that's
right.
That's right.
(16:38):
The reality is the majority ofbiomass that's produced isn't
human edible.
So we're not even talking, youknow, eating plants.
No, these are not plants youcould eat.
Right.
Um, so Even if I grow a crop ofcorn for grain, or I grow wheat
(17:00):
for grain, over half of thatbiomass, the material from the
ground surface on up, over halfof that's not human edible.
So, even if we're going toentertain the systems that we
have, the vast majority of thatis not going to be human edible.
(17:22):
So what are we going to do withit?
Well, what we can do now andwhat we do do now with that is
we use those as feed resourcesto feed livestock.
Now, ruminants because they havethis specialized digestive
(17:42):
anatomy, and physiology.
And thanks to the microbialpopulations that they host
within their rumens, they'reable to take this high fiber
material.
We can't use fiber.
Um, the, the, the cellulose thatmakes up the majority of the
(18:04):
biomass being produced, isunavailable to us because we
don't produce the enzymecellulase.
But the microbes do, and sothose can either be in rumens or
elsewhere in the environment.
within the rumen, they degradethat material, build more of
(18:27):
themselves, they can use nonprotein nitrogen to build more
of themselves, they makemicrobial protein, they also
produce these volatile fattyacids, so they eat a low fat,
high fiber diet, poor proteinquality from our perspective,
(18:49):
either the byproducts of thefermentation within the rumen or
the microbes themselves that getharvested and digested by the
cow, the sheep, the goat, thedeer, the moose, the bison, the
buffalo.
host rumen it ends up gettingthe majority of its energy from
(19:11):
the volatile fatty acids thatare produced.
So we have no essential aminoacid in a ruminant's diet.
We have no essential fatty acidsin a ruminant's diet.
Now humans have both of those asessential nutrients.
(19:33):
An essential nutrient is onethat has to be in our diet
because we, the, the animal, theorganism doesn't have the
ability to make it.
It gets a little shaky becausesome of these, as we look, there
could be conditions in whichYeah, we can make some, but not
enough.
And so then they talk aboutthose being conditionally
(19:55):
essential.
Um, some researchers have said,actually, if you could envision
a diet with.
None of the, um, severelylimited in certain amino acids,
there's a chance we couldn'tmake enough of them.
(20:15):
So, this is kind of an area ofsome debate.
But, in any case, there's thisnice ecological fit between
ruminants and humans.
Which makes sense, the ruminantslong predate the arrival of
primates, let alone humanbeings.
(20:35):
So they were utilizing thegrasslands and, or the savannas,
the mixed tree grasslands, andthen humans came along with
them.
Subsequently, and utilize theresources that were made
available by the ruminants.
So those are things that I wantpeople to understand.
There's no either or inagriculture.
(20:57):
We can't have plant agriculturewithout animal agriculture.
And really, we need the plantagriculture as well for the
animal agriculture.
But there are certain things,like the majority of the
fertilizer that's used toproduce human edible crops
globally is manure.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (21:19):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (21:20):
So, if you get rid of the animals,
as some envision, how are yougoing to replace the manure?
And we've said nothing about howmuch more plant source food
would have to be produced tomake up for, if that was even
possible, make up for theelimination of the animal source
foods.
Um, so, so there's a lot of keyshere that I want people to just
(21:45):
be aware of and feel betterabout.
When they kind of come to thispoint where they say, you know,
if I eliminate these foods, Ifeel better, my, you know,
condition improves, the, the,the symptoms go away, whatever,
how, you know, my A1C is betterthan it's ever been, you know, I
(22:06):
don't have to take as muchmedication.
And so there's a lot of thingsto this.
I want people to be aware of.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131 (22:13):
Because we're not meant to eat those
things.
And we, and nowadays we aregoing away from animal source
foods.
Right?
And all that to say we are.
We are human beings that have tohave, you know, animal source
(22:33):
foods, right?
We're meant to eat animal sourcefrom an animal source, right?
We are not meant to eat plantbased.
Is that what you're saying?
Essentially.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (22:43):
Yeah.
I, I'd say, well, as I saidearlier, some amount of animal
source food is essential forproper human.
development and function.
I think that that's real clear.
We have evidence of many, manyhuman beings currently today
being harmed by too little.
It's high quality.
There's, there's, there's nocontroversy with it.
(23:03):
It's not like we're looking atepidemiological evidence here.
We're, we're, we're looking atpeople who are harmed because of
certain essential nutrientdeficiencies and people will
acknowledge that the best orsole source for those nutrients
is animal source foods.
So, okay, not everybody, youknow, meat is an animal source
(23:28):
food, but not all animal sourcefood is meat.
So it could be dairy.
It could be fish.
It could be poultry.
I mean, there's a, it, and evenwithin the meat category, some
people don't want to eat porkand some people don't want to
eat beef.
beef, but that still leaves lamband mutton and bison and
venison.
And, and so it's important forus to have all that on the table
(23:50):
because we have on the otherside, a lot of
oversimplification and, andbroad generalization, which is
not warranted.
So you know, you, you have thesedata points like somewhere
between a fifth and a quarter ofchildren under five years old
globally.
are stunted.
(24:12):
And that means primarily braindevelopment.
That their brains are notdeveloping properly because
they're not receiving theessential nutrition that they
have to have for proper braindevelopment.
Okay.
Um, But don't assume that that'sall in the, I mean, it's, it's
(24:33):
worst in the low and middleincome countries.
There's a really goodcorrelation with increasing
stunting with decreasing meatconsumption.
Okay.
That data is clear.
Um, but What is because of alack of access or affordability
(24:53):
in some countries is produced asa result of choices people are
making in high income countries.
Um, you know, we have, um, in,UK and US, something like a
fifth of women of childbearingage are anemic and that in many
(25:14):
cases is the result of foodchoices.
Uh, now affordability andaccess, we should always keep,
and I try to keep in mindbecause clearly, you know, being
able to afford the appropriatefood is an issue.
And so how are we going to builda better system that, that,
that, that, that, alleviatesthat.
(25:35):
Um, we have, so you mentionedearlier, there's like 820 some
million people by the laststatistics I saw that were
calorically undernourished.
Okay.
They're not getting enough rawcalories in their diet.
And what happened in the 60sprobably into the 80s was a lot
(26:00):
of concern about an expandinghuman population and an
inability to feed it, okay?
And so there were variousefforts and I fairly or unfairly
characterized that as focusingon calories.
Right, we just had to produceenough calories for people to
(26:20):
get, okay.
And, and, and, I've known someof the people who were involved
in that effort.
What I think we now need to dois focus on the quality of the
diet.
Right, it was just a, you know,if you're starving you have one
(26:42):
problem.
Nothing else matters, right?
That's your sole focus.
Um, but now we know that just,you know, if all you want are
calories, eat sugar, right, or,or guzzle corn oil or whatever.
I mean, clearly it's more thanmerely calories once we've
(27:05):
reached a point of sufficientcaloric intake.
So while we have 820 somemillion people calorically
undernourished, Which is a shameand a scandal.
We've got 2.
2 billion who are overweight orobese.
That's malnutrition.
And too many people still lookat that and they say, Oh, that's
(27:29):
overnutrition.
That's the phrase that they use.
Implying to many that if theywould just eat less or exercise
and or exercise more, then theywouldn't be overweight or obese.
And many of us within themetabolic community would
understand that that's probablynot, right?
(27:50):
The, the, the answer thatperhaps Obesity is one of the
manifestations of the metabolicsyndrome, right?
Not a cause of, and we're stilltalking about risk factors and
causing and whatever.
Maybe it's the case of humanbeings not being fed properly
(28:14):
based on
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (28:16):
I agree.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05- (28:17):
genetic background, uh, whatever.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (28:20):
Yeah.
I love that you'vedifferentiated between the low
income countries or societiesversus the high, the high income
societies, the high income, uh,countries.
Right.
One is.
Not by choice, and the other isdeliberately, um, choosing a
diet that is causingmalnutrition, right?
(28:43):
No, in another, in another sideof that, where you have poor
countries, they're juststruggling to survive, right?
Any, any, anything, any caloric,any food that has calories is
the focus in those countries.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (29:02):
Well, and, and there's some other
things too, right?
I mean, if, if, if you'retalking about something, you
know, people lack refrigeration,right?
I mean, it's, it's an amazing tome to think about life without
access to electricity, and yet,you know, 45 percent of humanity
consumes less electrical powerper year.
(29:28):
now let's talk about perishablefoods like animal source foods,
when people are in cities, whichis where 70 percent of the
population is going to be in 26years.
Right.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (29:41):
Mm,
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (29:42):
how are, you know, there's lots of
pieces to this puzzle, butuntil, you know, people kind of
catch a different vision thanhas been driving a lot of the
conversation, we don't getthere.
You know, W.
H.
O., Which, you know, may or maynot be a credible organization
at this point, um, said in oneof their, um, publications that
(30:09):
meat, eggs, dairy, and seafoodwere the best sources of the
essential nutrients childrenneed ages 6 months to 36 months,
I believe was the age range.
UNICEF says that 60, 6 0 percentof global children in that age
(30:31):
group do not get meat, eggs,dairy, seafood.
Okay, so you, you could not runstudies ethically where you
withheld food.
essential foods frompopulations, right?
I mean, that would just bewrong.
You know, that's going to causeharm.
(30:51):
So that wouldn't be allowed, butwe can go into communities where
for any number of reasons, thosefoods are not available and we
can add them as a supplement.
That work's been done.
It demonstrates an improvementin childhood development,
scholastic performance, a numberof measures.
(31:12):
So we know that there is such athing as too little in the
world.
Too little animal source food inhumans diets is a demonstrated
fact.
And then we need to get peopleto confront some of the
mythology that talks about theharm that comes from too much.
(31:32):
In terms of human health, Right,I understand that there's
another argument that they wantto frequently conflate and say,
Oh, it harms the environment,right?
No, let's set that one off tothe side.
Because Right now, somethinglike ninety, nine zero percent
(31:53):
of the U.
S.
healthcare spend is for chronicdiseases and, and, and yet this
is not confined to the highincome countries.
So I am given the opportunity tospeak to audiences in India and
they're telling me about the,the, the, can we call it a
(32:16):
pandemic of diabetes and heartdisease?
And now cancer that that countryis facing, economic resources,
you know, if you, if youmisapply them, there's a cost to
that.
(32:36):
And so is, would it make moresense rather than developing a
sort of healthcare industry onthe model of us in India, would
it be better to focus on, um,Ensuring adequate essential
nutrition, know, focused onmetabolic health because you
(32:59):
don't need to build up a hugeinfrastructure to do that.
Um, and, and at the same time,healthcare industry has an
environmental impact.
And healthcare industry, dangsure, has an economic impact.
And the failure of currentmodels of healthcare has a
(33:21):
societal impact.
And if we're going to have anhonest conversation about
sustainability, we have to lookat each of those three, uh,
broad categories, as well asseveral topics within each one.
And unfortunately, anytimesomebody talks about
sustainability these days, ittends to be oversimplified, and
(33:42):
only look at the environmentalbucket, and only look at the
emissions.
within that environmental bias.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131 (33:50):
because they're not connecting it, they,
I think, you know, they've,they're investing resources to
push a message just like whatthey did when they vilified, you
know, red meat and fat backthen.
I feel like, um, it's a greatpoint when you talked about, um,
Why don't they look at chronicdiseases and, and healthcare,
(34:13):
uh, costs as opposed to focusingon just environmental impact.
You talked about it.
Um, one of the strongestarguments is.
You know, the environmentalimpact against ruminants, isn't
it?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (34:28):
Well, and, and that's for a number of
reasons.
A number, well, let me put itthis way.
A lot of arguments that are usedin that are misunderstandings.
So you will hear people say thatit would be better to feed
(34:50):
material to humans rather thanlivestock.
Well, I've already talked aboutthe fact that most of what they
eat isn't human edible.
So there's this tremendousupcycling, that's a term of art,
where something that is of lowervalue becomes increased in
(35:13):
value.
And so that's what's going onwhen we feed livestock in
general and ruminants inparticular.
Um, number two is people willsay, okay, but that human edible
food that is used as feed shouldbe fed to humans.
(35:33):
Well, that's only 4 percent ofthe global ruminant feed
consumption is human edible.
Number two, it's foods that Iwould argue maybe we shouldn't
be eating, right?
Cereal crops have a number ofissues related to them when fed
to humans, especially whenthey're processed.
(35:57):
As most are these days, very fewpeople are eating whole wheat
berries, right?
That that's not what'shappening.
Um, and, and even thosearguments.
are frequently oversimplifiedbecause they'll say things like,
you know, you look at the feedconsumption and conversion into
(36:20):
meat and they'll throw out somevalues, but what they ignore is
how much of that feed wasactually utilizable by humans.
And that's just looking at feedas a general term.
You drill down and you look atactual human utilizable protein
and you see the beef is a net.
protein contributor to the, tothe humanity's food supply.
(36:44):
Um, people will say, well, if weweren't using all that land to
raise livestock, we could growmore food.
The problem with that is thevast majority of the land that's
used for livestock.
isn't suitable for producinghuman utilizable food.
And, and then there's also the,the, the, um, integration
(37:09):
already mentioned about using,um, the by product feed.
So one estimate from Europe wasthat for every, kilo of vegan
food, that was the term thatthey used, uh, four to five
kilos of inedible biomass wereproduced.
So this is the processing, um,byproducts.
(37:33):
Um, you know, one of the thingsthat people need to understand
is that you can't replace foodproduction with food processing.
So we start with somethingthat's okay, arguably a
commodity that you could say,yeah, humans could eat that just
(37:55):
because you can't and doesn'tnecessarily mean you should, but
okay, let's accept that, that,but when we process it, some
loss in that processing.
There's no hundred percent,there's no creation of new.
You're, you're changing it insome way, but you're not
creating more food.
(38:16):
And then we're discovering moreand more that when we do that,
we're decreasing its nutritivevalue.
So we're actually decreasinghumanity's food supply by this
processing that takes place.
And animal source foods, wedon't see that.
Um, there, there's a number ofthings here, but back to, I'm
(38:40):
just frankly amazed that there'ssuch a thing as drug free
remission of type 2 diabetes.
I'm really encouraged thatthere's such a thing as drug
free remission of mentalillnesses as a result of
ketogenic, you know, therapeuticketogenic nutrition, again, with
appropriate healthcare help.
(39:02):
And, you know, maybe it stillrequires some pharmaceutical
use, but we're hearing more andmore about reducing or
deprescribing all of thosethings.
And again, the pharmaceuticalindustry has an environmental
impact.
And why is it that we sort offocus everything on this side,
(39:24):
and, and, you know, theconversation about
sustainability sort of stops atthe farm gate at this point.
It doesn't really go through tothe, the welfare of the
population that we're trying to,support.
Now, 95 percent of the world'svegetarians are economic
(39:44):
vegetarians.
They're not philosophicalvegetarians.
would eat more animal sourcefood if it was available.
Right.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024 (39:53):
absolutely.
I, I feel like that has to be,um, that has to be said.
And, um, I feel like most of.
The criticism that's aimed atruminants are just arguments
that can be made by anybody,right?
(40:13):
Um, the, you talked about, if wetalk about cost, right, how big
of a, an issue is cost,environmental costs, as opposed
to if we focus on consuminganimal sourced food, we can
reduce the healthcare costs.
Which can help with overall
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (40:36):
Well, not only, yeah, not, so if we're
right, it's always good to keepthat phrase in mind, if we're
right, um, you know, the U.
S.
healthcare spending is somewherebetween four and four and a half
trillion dollars a year.
So that, that puts the chronicillness health care spend
(40:58):
somewhere above three and a halftrillion, right?
Because we said 90%.
So, um, that's a huge amount ofmoney.
Um, number two, the, the U.
S.
agriculture emissions footprintper the Environmental Protection
(41:20):
Agency, which puts out a sourcesand sink estimate, is somewhere
in the nine to ten percent oftotal anthropogenic greenhouse
gases.
In the U.
S.
All of animal agriculture is 4percent of total, so a couple
(41:43):
key points there.
One is it's less than half ofagriculture's.
Number two is plant agriculturehas a footprint, and if we're
going to replace animal sourcefood with plant source food, the
emissions are going to go up forthe plant source food, right?
There's no, there, there's nosolution here.
There's only trade offs.
Okay, uh, beef is 2%, somewherein there.
(42:05):
Those numbers are.
depending on when you talk.
Um, but okay, so that gives us,you know, beef is about half of
the greenhouse gas emissions oflivestock agriculture in the US.
And, um, all of animalagriculture is less than half of
(42:26):
agricultures.
Meanwhile, you've gottransportation somewhere in the
25, 28 percent range.
Power generation is somewhere inthe same range.
So, gives you an idea of wherethat is.
Um, another estimate of the U.
S.
healthcare industry said thatthe U.
(42:48):
S.
healthcare industry is asignificant source of pollution,
including 10 percentanthropogenic greenhouse gas
emissions.
So think medical waste, youknow, think, um, other, other
products of healthcare, but then10%.
Now it's not an apples to applescomparison.
(43:11):
They, they did their estimatedifferently than what the, um,
EPA uses, but it's fair to saythat's a significant.
It's a significant number.
Okay.
The, there was another estimatethat looked at the global
pharmaceutical industry and itreached the conclusion that the
(43:36):
global pharmaceutical industryis a higher intensity emitter
than the automotive industry andbased and and a wider variation
across the industry than you seein the automotive industry.
And someone else took theresults of that estimate and
(44:01):
they said from that if theaverage adult American could
eliminate their, uh sorry, ifthe average adult American with
type 2 diabetes could eliminatetheir medication use They would
lower their carbon footprint 29percent to 9 percent more than
(44:22):
if they shifted from a high meatto a vegan diet.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (44:26):
hmm.
Yeah.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (44:28):
So, so the conversations, and, and
there was another re, uh, studythat came out, uh, from Food and
Agriculture Organization, GlobalUN Organization.
In December, you know, Pathwaysto Achieving Targets in Global
Livestock Agriculture.
And what they, they, they lookedat the available science and
(44:50):
they said, what are the optionscurrently available or
potentially available forreducing emissions from
livestock agriculture globally?
And so they looked at a numberof things that we could talk
about, but the least impactfulone was personal dietary
choices.
So the thing that's getting allthe press is the least impactful
(45:15):
one.
And keep in mind that if you'regoing to say, I'm going to do
this for the environment, we'resaying for the rest of your
life, right?
That those typically are theestimates.
And we understand that many ofthese dietary choices are not
personally sustainable.
that people adopt a lifestylechange but then frequently
(45:38):
change back and frequently it's,it's fairly quickly.
Um, we have, and, and anotherpiece that was part of this for
a long time and now isunderstood to not be valid but
it's still, it's sort of likeone of these zombie myths that
just won't die.
(45:58):
Um, when a ruminant animal burpsout Methane.
Methane is a product of thatnatural process.
So a paper from a little over ayear ago now showed that you
(46:19):
have similar or comparableemissions from wildlife
dominated savannas and livestockdominated savannas.
So many of the conversations aresort of artificial because they
ignore the emissions that wouldcome from grassland if it was
(46:40):
wildlife dominated.
Like, that
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (46:42):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (46:42):
okay, but if it's livestock dominated,
then that methane must be bad.
Number two is that methanethat's burped out gets oxidized
to CO2 within about 10 years.
So the cycle then isphotosynthesis.
takes CO2 out of the atmosphere,produces carbohydrate, matter,
(47:08):
that the ruminant animalingests, some portion of that is
emitted as methane through anatural process.
That methane is then oxidized toCO2 and completes the cycle
within about 10 years.
So, if you have stable ordecreasing herd size, You
(47:30):
actually have no contributiontoward warming potential, based
on that understanding.
And there's a lot of controversyinvolved in that space, but this
is now the understanding of thatparticular thing, and how many
people know that.
How long did it take me toexplain that?
It's not a soundbite, it's notsexy, but it, it is the reality.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (47:56):
I want to say something
controversial.
You talked about controversythere.
Um, it's like they figured outhow to legally extract money
from the general public.
How many people are, you know,taking, Maintenance metformin
for type two diabetes, right?
How many people are takingcholesterol medication, even
(48:17):
though cholesterol is a myth orit has been debunked, like how,
like the fear of, you know,having high cholesterol, um, you
know, any, like they, they'retaking money from low income
families.
They're taking money fromregular people, right?
It's just legally they figuredout 90%.
You talk about 90 percent of, ofthe costs.
(48:41):
Right?
Is going to healthcares.
it's, it's legally robbing.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (48:48):
care.
Yeah.
Well, and, and so, uh, you know,I, I need to, you know, I'm not
that kind of doctor.
I didn't stay at a Holiday InnExpress last night, you know,
so, uh, you want to know howmuch fertilizer to put on your
pasture, I'm your guy.
Um, but I do want to point out,I think it's fair to say that
the current use model forpharmaceuticals is one that is,
(49:15):
it, it represents overuse.
Right?
And, and, and we can understandhow we got there.
There's lots of factors behindall that.
I don't think anyone would arguethat we need to be taking more
of them.
Now, I'm, I'm, I'm sure that insome cases under, you know,
(49:37):
advice and consent with trainedYou know, medical people that
these pharmaceuticals are usefuland necessary, and I don't want
anyone to make any changes intheir, you know, medication use
based on what they hear me say.
Um, so, but on the other hand,When there are these case
(50:03):
histories that are published,when there are organizations
like the Society for MetabolicHealth Practitioners to help
other practitioners learn how todeprescribe medications, right,
which is something that needs tobe done carefully, because, you
know, I've trained myself to saythings like, if you say Atkins,
(50:24):
people's brains explode.
If you say therapeuticcarbohydrate reduction, okay,
that's fine.
Um, if you.
If you say, um, that, you know,that people can get off their
medication, some, oh, no, no,no, you can't do that.
(50:45):
That's very dangerous.
Well, so maybe we should stopgiving them an out and talking
about side effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (50:54):
Mm hmm.
Yeah, I
peter-ballerstedt_2_05- (50:55):
because the way the medication industry
now is running is, and forgiveme, this is an agronomist
perspective, subject tocorrection, but what we have is
the industry looks for theworst, most gnarly condition
that this drug can treat.
(51:17):
Right?
So the cost benefit analysiswill be, you know, heavily
weighted toward the benefit.
And then as soon as that happensand they've gotten a use label
for it, then they find, thenthey start talking about all
these other effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (51:35):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (51:36):
And, and any medication that you take
has multiple effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (51:41):
Mm
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (51:42):
are good.
Some of those may be not sogood.
Right?
Some, but the whole thing hasbeen this dance of cost versus
benefit.
And now we're finding thatthey're, they're now bringing
these medications that once werefor diabetes.
Oh, look, we found that underthose conditions, people lost
(52:05):
some.
So now let's market them.
You know, so we've alreadygotten it approved.
We don't have to go through thatprocess again.
So I, I just want people tounderstand that medication isn't
necessarily the panacea thatpeople have been led to believe.
(52:25):
Like, you know, it's easy doc,give me something to take for
this.
Well, you know, who is it, uh,Dr.
David Unwin, um, offers hispatients, you could, here's
lifestyle intervention orlifetime medication.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (52:43):
hmm.
Mm hmm.
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (52:44):
And he said, remarkably enough,
people tend to choose thelifestyle
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (52:51):
Yeah, I'm gonna steal that.
peter-ballerstedt_2_ (52:55):
especially when you then realize that we're
going to start you on thismedication and then after a
while we'll have to move you oradd this one to it and then a
little later we'll have to addanother one.
You know, the statistics on thenumber of prescription drugs
that the, you know, Americanpublic is on is quite
(53:15):
remarkable.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (53:17):
Yeah, yeah, you know my dad
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (53:19):
of
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (53:21):
go ahead go ahead I'll come I'll
follow you.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (53:25):
Yeah, no, please, about your dad.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (53:28):
Yeah, no my dad he No, I'm just glad
and happy that his doctor, youknow allowed him to get off Uh,
cholesterol medication and, uh,his metformin medication for,
uh, maintaining his blood sugar.
So, uh, I'm happy that somedoctors are willing to work with
their patients, but not every,not all doctors are, um,
(53:50):
certainly his doctor before, um,is, uh, Opposed to a lifestyle
intervention, but, um, when he,um, found a new doctor, found
and, and looked at his bloodwork and saw how, you know,
remarkable his blood work hasbeen since adapting a ketogenic
(54:12):
lifestyle, you know, they were,she was happy and, um, finally
got him off statins medicationand, uh, You know, Mitt Foreman.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (54:25):
Isn't it remarkable to think that a
diet that would sort ofrepresent the vast majority of
humanity's evolutionaryexperience might be one that is
reflected by good biomarkers inthe individuals today.
That's remarkable.
Who would imagine?
(54:45):
This is sarcasm on my part.
Um, yeah, exactly.
And, and, and yet I, I need tokeep in mind that it, it, it
takes something in theindividual to maybe not, maybe
confront isn't the right word,but to kind of push back against
(55:07):
the white coated You know,professional.
And so, you know, credit to yourfather and credit to anything
you did for him.
Well done, son.
Um, and, and a lot of peoplehave, don't have the background
and don't feel comfortable doingthat.
(55:28):
So we have to do what we can tomake them feel better about that
and give them the tools.
so that they better understandwhat their, you know, how many
times have we heard somebodysay, my doctor, you know, is on
me about my cholesterol levels.
And you say, well, what are yourlevels?
(55:50):
And they don't know, right.
So they just, and, and so how dowe, how do we foster a
respectful conversation andrespectful for everyone involved
conversation to say you knowwhat is is this really uh so my
(56:13):
mother in law was on a low dosestatin for another heart issue
Over time, she heard Nancy and Italking about this enough that
she ultimately said, Pete, couldyou give me some papers so I
could review before my next, youknow, um, um, exam.
(56:37):
Remarkable.
She's, she was in her mid 80s atthe time, I think.
So that's kind of remarkable forsomeone of that generation to,
you know, You know, confrontthe, the, the, the doctor.
So I, I went to the doctors Iknow, and I said, which would be
the best ones to give her andbang, bang, bang.
I got this back.
(56:58):
And so she goes to the doctorand they're sitting down
reviewing her medications.
And she said, I don't think Iwant to take this anymore.
answer was okay.
Like she was all prepared forthis argument.
And as soon as she said, no, hewas like, fine.
(57:19):
Cause he could just write.
Right.
He's covered.
She's so, so again, I may bemisunderstanding the current
state of the, the practice.
My impression is, and again,this is in the U S might be
different.
Your results might vary, but inthe U S if you get a lab result,
(57:43):
Right on your printed form asthe software is taking
information from the testresults and inputting it into
the form that it's going toprint out if it's outside of a
certain range, then it likeinsert some text and changes the
font color right and out itcomes and okay now the doctor
(58:05):
reading this.
is expected to offer amedication,
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_1314 (58:12):
Mmhmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (58:14):
and if they don't do that, then
they're in some jeopardy.
But if they do, and the patientsays, I don't want to take this,
then they can say, patientdeclines, I'm covered.
And we go on to the next thing.
How many people know that?
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (58:34):
Nope.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (58:35):
how many people know?
And so I, I think that what isreally broken is the patient
physician relationship.
And I've heard lots of evidencethat just makes me scratch my
head.
Um, and I wasn't there.
I don't know.
(58:55):
Um, but I, I think that We needto kind of look at that as we're
imagining the rest of thisconversation.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (59:06):
Yeah, I feel like, um, Congrats to Was
that your mother in law, did yousay?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (59:13):
Yes.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (59:14):
Um, I feel like we have to start
them with history.
We talked about Gary Tubbs.
We talked about Nina Tickles,the books that they've written,
the author.
I think we should, we shouldstart them with history, right,
on how It all happened in thepast and how, you know, fat
cholesterol, uh, red meat, we'vebeen vilified and that whole
(59:39):
Ansel Keys, uh, situation.
I think people would understandif people understand how it
happened and the history on, youknow, there's events that
happen.
That's that got us here today.
Um, I think, you know, Havingthat history and explaining the
(01:00:02):
metabolic side of things and howthe food system works, I think
both goes hand in hand.
I know, before we, I want to berespectful of your time, given
the challenges we've talkedabout here, um, if you can
suggest a You know, sustainablesolution.
Like we always talk aboutsustainability address both
(01:00:25):
malnutrition and metabolicissues.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:00:29):
so humanity's existential crisis is
a lack of animal sourced foods.
So don't worry about that.
Um, that if you, that when youimprove your health, you are
improving the world.
And a lot of this is, you know,we have people who are working
(01:00:50):
in various levels.
Like I talked about the meetingthat I just listened to, um,
where they're trying to deliversome consensus into the
professional practitionercommunity.
And that's great.
That needs to happen.
We have people who are trying toaffect changes in dietary
guidelines and that needs tohappen.
(01:01:11):
We also need to work this fromthe grassroots, you know, pardon
the expression, um, from theground up.
Right.
And, and so.
The, the more that we can do tospread the good news and that
could be, you know, amongst ourfamily or our, you know, uh,
(01:01:34):
community of friends, you know,social events where we're
expected to bring food.
What are, you know, what are wedoing?
What are we bringing there?
Um, and then being prepared.
You know, giving some thought towhat I call the elevator speech,
right?
That, that idea that if youfound yourself, if you had a
(01:01:56):
project you wanted the companyto do, and you found yourself in
the, in the elevator with theCEO or whatever, and you had the
moment to give the pitch, whatwould the pitch be?
Something comparable on thepersonal health.
This was my condition.
I did this.
this happened and, you know,happy to help, right?
(01:02:18):
Don't, don't crank open thefirehose nozzle all at once and
give them the full blast, youknow, little, little, little,
little servings probably willincrease the adoption rate.
Um, I think that there's a lotof work in some of my
communities where they'relooking at how to best integrate
(01:02:42):
animals into the environment.
And crop agriculture, like inthe same field, you know, within
the same year or in rotationsover a couple seasons.
Um, you know, one example endedup with more food being produced
from the same area with the sameor less inputs and then some
(01:03:02):
benefits to the environment aswell.
We need to be looking for thosethings.
As I mentioned, the FAO documentfrom last December, there are
things about animal genetics,animal feeding, animal health.
Forty percent of the meat that'sproduced every year is lost due
(01:03:23):
to animal diseases.
Twenty percent.
So here you've, you've made thatwhole investment, right?
And, and whatever impact on theenvironment occurred, and twenty
percent.
is not available for use.
Well, just imagine what couldhappen in terms of making an
impact if we could address that.
(01:03:44):
Um, you know, over half of theworld's cattle are in Africa and
Asia.
Three quarters of the sheep arein Africa and Asia.
Asia and virtually all of thegoats, 98 percent or something
like that, or in Africa andAsia.
(01:04:05):
So whatever you want to do toaddress the impact of livestock,
just translate that.
That's Africa and Asia thatyou're talking about.
And imagine then whatever thesesolutions that are being
entertained in some communities,how that would impact people in
(01:04:29):
that part of the world.
And again, people will say, I'veheard it, that we can't feed
everyone the kind of, you know,diet that you or I might
advocate.
You know, we can't produce it.
It's, you know, whatever.
That's, that's their startingpoint.
(01:04:50):
And my response is, no, we must.
Right, that, that's a moralimperative for those of us that
are so blessed to help otherpeople achieve that, and it's
not producing it in Canada andU.
S.
and shipping it.
Some of that's going to takeplace, but it's doing the, the
(01:05:14):
outreach and supportinginitiatives in those parts of
the world where they have thistremendous potential for
improvement.
And that's the kind of work thatmore and more people need to
understand if they really areserious about sustainability.
If we're not just going to havethese virtue signaling
(01:05:37):
conversations, luxury beliefs,I've heard somebody describe
them as, you know, we're goingto, we're going to say the
farmers here can't produce it.
but we're still going to importit.
We're going to do things herethat increase the cost to the
consumer.
But hey, what do we care?
We're rich enough.
We can afford it.
Yeah.
(01:05:58):
You know, I'm getting less andless tolerant of that kind of
behavior.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (01:06:04):
Maybe we, maybe we, uh, can seek help
from our listeners today oranyone who is listening.
Right.
About maybe, you know, tellingthat another person about this,
you know, I feel like it's, uh,if you're in the know, you're
already right.
But what, what about the peoplearound you?
If you can help people aroundyou and, and, uh, share that
(01:06:28):
same message, maybe we canslowly, but surely, uh, You
know, open eyes and, uh, maybe,you know, create a small change,
right?
Um,
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-202 (01:06:40):
I mean, in order for darkness to
win, right.
All light has to beextinguished.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (01:06:48):
I like
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:06:49):
So any light that's any light at
all, and the darkness isdefeated.
The second part of that is itcosts the candle nothing to
light another candle, so pass italong once, once it's been given
to you.
And I, it's not to say that wedon't need the people doing the
research or all those otherlevels, but I, I, I think that
(01:07:15):
we underestimate the impact ofhave achieving that tipping
point in the population and weoverestimate how many people
that will be.
And, and I think that just likeyou said, you know, telling the
people within your orbit and,and then also just coming to
(01:07:36):
value your own health.
And the impact that will have onyour children's welfare, let
alone what we now know about howthey're fed as they're
developing and growing.
And, and then, you know, whatlife is going to be like for
them later, but just to have aparent that's not impacted by
(01:07:58):
chronic illness.
That alone has a positive impacton, on your children.
And so if we're not going tovalue it for ourselves, value it
for others, and hopefully atsome point value it for yourself
too, because each of us as humanbeings has a value and a worth
(01:08:19):
that is well beyond what most ofus can comprehend.
And, and so that's part of whatanimates me as well.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (01:08:29):
You talked about hope.
There is hope.
Thank you so much, Dr.
Uh, Peter, for coming on andsharing your story with us today
and such a great topic.
It's such an honor to have youhere, uh, talking about this.
Um, I can't follow that.
Maybe we can end here.
(01:08:51):
Such a great, uh, wisdom thatyou've shared with us here
today.
Always a
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (01:08:56):
It's my pleasure.
Thank you for the opportunity.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (01:09:00):
thank you, sir.
I appreciate you.
All right.
Bye bye.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:09:05):
Be well, everyone.
Hey guys, this is Lawrence and
welcome back to the ketones andcoffee podcast.
I'm so grateful to have youjoining me on this journey.
Every week I bring in guests tohave the knowledge and
experience to help you on yourown journey to a better health.
So aside of this guys, today wehave a very special guest with
us.
It's Dr.
Peter Ballerstedt is a renownedagronomist and a ruminant
(00:22):
nutritionist with extensiveexperience in.
Forage production andutilization.
He is a, he is a passionateadvocate for sustainable
agriculture and the essentialrole of animal source foods in
human health.
He has dedicated his career tounderstanding and improving the
complex relationships betweennutrition, agriculture, and
(00:43):
sustainability.
The Saad father himself is anhonored Dr.
Peter.
Welcome to the Ketocin Coffeepodcast.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (00:51):
Thank you very much.
It's a pleasure to be here.
Well,
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_1314 (00:55):
You're also a ruminant nutritionist.
That's a very interesting job,sir.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (01:00):
you know, there's a lot of us.
Um, people may not be thatfamiliar with us, so maybe we
can increase the awareness.
Um, agronomists, there's notthat many of us, you know, so
forage agronomists, we get kindof specialized.
Um, but I want people to knowthat there's some really, really
good news that, um, and, andthat has to do with the, the
(01:27):
fact that there's a effectivelifestyle intervention for
people to follow to treat a widevariety of issues that are the
current pressing global healthissues.
And I said global, so it's notonly in the high income Western
(01:47):
countries.
And that a solution will involveruminant animal agriculture.
And therefore there's all thiswork that needs to be done.
And so I want to encouragepeople to look after their own
health, but also to look intothe future.
The areas that I was trained inas I'm now retired.
(02:09):
So there's room for lots ofyoung people to come into this
space, to do this kind ofimportant work.
I,
lorenz_2_05-17 (02:17):
Congratulations, by the way, on the retirement.
Yeah.
You're also called the sodfodder, right?
How did you get that name?
And, uh, what's the story behindthat?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (02:28):
yeah, I didn't have to pay anybody for
it.
That that's what's wonderful.
It was given to me.
Um, the whole thing was given instages.
So it started with me showing upat, you know, metabolic health
conferences and talking aboutruminant animal agriculture and
its role in sustainable foodsystems.
Um, And, and so this idea ofpeople didn't know this, yet
(02:51):
there are people that know this,so I'm trying to build this herd
of people.
Um, and, and so that became theRuminati, right?
These people that knew thisapparently secret knowledge that
wasn't all that secret, butokay, there it is.
And then somebody said, well,you know, you're, you're the sod
father of the Ruminati.
(03:13):
And I was like, okay, that wasgood.
And then somebody said, well,you're actually Don Pedro, the
sod father of the Ruminati.
All of those ideas were given tome because I'm not clever enough
to come up with anything likethat on my own.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (03:27):
Oh, I love it.
I love it.
You know, you talked about theepidemic that, you know, you
talked about.
That sweeps the globe, and youcall it malnutrition, I, I call
it the sick culture, the peopleresponsible for the food system,
you know, they're just playingwith people's lives, you know,
real health consequences, um, weall know this, that it stems
(03:49):
from, you know, manipulationcreated by personal agendas, but
maybe you can enlighten us, uh,you have a this wealth of
knowledge and you bring thisunique perspective on how we can
address some of the mostpressing challenges with the
food system today.
I know you advocate for a lowcarb high fat diet as well, uh,
(04:10):
for optimal human health.
Um, everyone who believes thisand, um, that includes me, we
all agree that it is the bestfor human, uh, optimal human
health.
Um, but we all have a story onhow we got.
to that conclusion.
So I want to know what led youto this path you're on today,
(04:31):
Dr.
Peter.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (04:33):
Well, I was, and first of all, you can
just call me Peter.
Um, the.
I was just listening to theconsensus conference in London
that's taking place today aswe're recording this, where
they're trying to come to someagreed upon definition of food
(04:54):
addiction.
And, and so listening to many ofthose people, combined with my
own experience, you know, the,how we talk about things and the
words we use matter.
And you can find people that wemight not agree with.
100%, but we can agree with 75%.
(05:15):
Well, we need all the allies wecan find.
And so let's think about how thewords we use might not be
helpful.
You know, in the whole campaign.
So that, that's just something Iwant to always be aware of.
Um, my personal experiencestarts in 2007.
(05:37):
Now we're skipping over mytraining and, and, and what I
did as a profession.
But in 2007, I just realizedthat, you know, I was a 51 year
old, balding, obese, prediabetic.
And.
At that time, my wife, Nancy,had been five years, so she
(06:01):
started in 2002, looking intowhat was then called low carb,
and so she had information thatwhen I was ready personally,
then she could have direct metowards some things to read.
Um, this was about the timethat, um, Gary Taubes's first
(06:26):
nutrition related book, GoodCalories, Bad Calories, came
out.
And, um, the diet that I mostlyfollowed was, uh, Michael and
Mary Dan Eads Protein Power.
I believe I read The Life Planfirst, which was a little later.
So, I got started on that around2010.
(06:51):
I started speaking.
to various public areas.
I showed up at a health andnutrition, what was it called?
It was a joint meeting of theNutrition and Metabolism Society
and the American Bariatric, uh,American Society of Bariatric
Physicians.
So those two were meeting.
(07:11):
It was up in, um, Seattle.
So that's five hours north ofme.
And I could see Gary Taubes inperson and I could meet all
these other people and it waslike, of course I'm going to go
to this.
And that was the first time in awhile that I had stood up and
described myself as a forageagronomist.
(07:33):
I had left academia, uh, in2002.
And so, um, sorry, in 1992, um,and some very interesting things
happened there.
One was, um, here are all thesepeople, medical people, they're
(07:54):
at this conference, and I knowmore about this topic than many
of them did.
And there's some stories I couldtell about that.
Um, then also, I got to interactwith some of the speakers in a
way I hadn't done for a while.
I call it stump the speaker,where you sort of throw
(08:14):
questions at them to see what'sgoing on.
And as a result of that, um, Ihad to introduce myself and what
my specialty was.
So I introduced myself as aforage agronomist, which then
led to conversations like, Whatthe heck is a forage agronomist?
Um, and when I explained that,then they said, Okay, but what
(08:38):
are you doing here?
And for me, I believe that One,there's an amount of animal
source food that's essential inthe diet.
Okay, we can talk about how muchthat might be, but there's some
amount that's essential.
And I already knew that animalagriculture is essential to
(09:02):
sustainable food systems.
I already knew that ruminantanimals were particularly
essential, and we could talkabout those.
Um, what I hadn't quiteappreciated is how animal source
food is part of our culturalheritages and traditions,
regardless of where those comefrom.
(09:23):
Looks different, obviously, butyou cannot find a naturally
occurring vegan tradition.
It, it, it's a, it's a constructof the wealthy high income
countries, particularlynorthern.
Um, and so the combination ofthose things, and then I find
(09:46):
people that are helping youknow, physicians, clinicians,
researchers that are helpingpeople find answers through
therapeutic carbohydratereduction or therapeutic
ketogenic nutrition.
But these issues come up thatare sort of You know, yeah, but,
(10:08):
well, let, let me help you withthose issues, right?
Let, let me direct you to someinformation to make you feel
better about adopting alifestyle that will actually
improve your health, and thehealth of your families, and the
health of your communities, andIn other words, don't worry
(10:29):
about this other stuff, butyeah, I understand why people
would be.
So that started for me publicly,like I said, 2010, um, I joke
sometimes about how I've beenstalking many of the people who,
you know, the audience wouldrecognize.
And I'm a, I'm a shameless namedropper.
(10:49):
Um, and now I've gotten to,introduce the metabolic health
message to my agriculturaltribes.
So I, I, I like to think thatwhat I'm doing is I'm building
bridges between my variouscommunities.
So I have my agriculturalcommunities and I'll invite
(11:09):
people like Eric Westman to comespeak to the National Grazing
Lands Coalition meeting thatthey had a couple years ago.
Um, Or, um, I, I try to havepeople come, um, and certainly I
try to represent what I'velearned from people throughout
(11:32):
the animal agriculture,especially the ruminant animal
agriculture, um, into themetabolic health focused
meetings.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (11:42):
Maybe you can help us understand your
tribe.
Us, the listeners, a, you know,are very familiar with metabolic
health, but how does it relateto the food system, the
agriculture, uh, food system?
(12:02):
Now, we talked about that crisisthough, about earlier, the
global crisis of malnutrition.
And I don't think the regularfolks like I am, I don't think
we are aware of the severity ofthat situation.
Um, you've talked about thestatistics on one of your, uh,
(12:23):
talks on YouTube.
I believe that was, uh, Low CarbUnder.
Um, and you said, 800 millionpeople are deficient and 3
billion are malnourished, but itwasn't always this way, isn't
it?
Like we see pictures from theearly 19th century, people look
(12:43):
slim, right?
Unlike today, we're almost,what, 90 percent of the U.
S.
population overweight.
I want to ask you this.
At one point in history, can youpoint to and say, this was the
start of this global epidemic?
Mm hmm.
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (13:02):
Yeah, so that, uh, there's a lot of
things there I could, I couldrespond to, but directly to that
last point, I, I think that, um,the, you certainly you can look
at data plotted and shows adramatic increase in, uh,
obesity.
(13:23):
And then, you know, some yearslater, a sort of mirroring
increase in, in type twodiabetes.
And it's going to startsomewhere in the eighties.
Of course, we had the dietaryguidelines that were first, the
first edition was 1980.
A few years before that, therewas a report out of a Senate
committee.
(13:43):
This is all in the UnitedStates.
Um, that, you know, Ended updriving this creation, uh, of
these dietary, uh, guidelines.
The, the report was calledDietary Goals.
Um, and that represented as, assomebody who's read Gary Taubes
(14:04):
understands or, or NinaTeicholtz or others, Um, will,
understand this story of, youknow, there was a controversy,
there were some scientificissues that were being explored,
and then through a series ofpolitical maneuverings and what
have you, this one side of theargument was adopted and
(14:27):
codified into the officialdietary guide, uh, guidance and
food policy.
Um, You know, it's, it, I thinkit's always good to remember
that what they say aboutcorrelation doesn't prove
causation.
Um, but my version of that is,every, Oh, we're back.
(14:50):
Wow.
That was weird.
Both screens just went black.
I'm sorry for that.
Um, the.
We were told to eat this way toavoid the killer diseases and
then that was including obesityat some point.
So it's fair to say, while it'sfair to say it didn't cause it,
(15:13):
right, because correlationdoesn't necessarily Proof
causation.
It is fair to say it dang suredidn't prevent it.
That was the reason we were toldto do this.
And then we need to understandthat there were people at the
time saying, no, don't do this.
So now let me address some ofthe points that I think you
(15:35):
were, or at least I perceived,you in the beginning of that
question.
We as organisms have to eatother organisms, right?
We don't have the ability totake inorganic materials and
make organic compounds out ofthem.
So we are technically known asheterotrophs, right?
(15:58):
Um, and so we have to beconsuming other organisms.
I view agriculture essentiallyas man's history, and mankind's
history, of altering itsenvironment to increase the
(16:18):
production of biomass.
over what that ecosystem wouldhave provided had there not been
the intervention.
Kind of takes all the romanceout of it, but I, I, and I've
run that by a number of peopleand they say, yeah, yeah, that's
right.
That's right.
(16:38):
The reality is the majority ofbiomass that's produced isn't
human edible.
So we're not even talking, youknow, eating plants.
No, these are not plants youcould eat.
Right.
Um, so Even if I grow a crop ofcorn for grain, or I grow wheat
(17:00):
for grain, over half of thatbiomass, the material from the
ground surface on up, over halfof that's not human edible.
So, even if we're going toentertain the systems that we
have, the vast majority of thatis not going to be human edible.
(17:22):
So what are we going to do withit?
Well, what we can do now andwhat we do do now with that is
we use those as feed resourcesto feed livestock.
Now, ruminants because they havethis specialized digestive
(17:42):
anatomy, and physiology.
And thanks to the microbialpopulations that they host
within their rumens, they'reable to take this high fiber
material.
We can't use fiber.
Um, the, the, the cellulose thatmakes up the majority of the
(18:04):
biomass being produced, isunavailable to us because we
don't produce the enzymecellulase.
But the microbes do, and sothose can either be in rumens or
elsewhere in the environment.
within the rumen, they degradethat material, build more of
(18:27):
themselves, they can use nonprotein nitrogen to build more
of themselves, they makemicrobial protein, they also
produce these volatile fattyacids, so they eat a low fat,
high fiber diet, poor proteinquality from our perspective,
(18:49):
either the byproducts of thefermentation within the rumen or
the microbes themselves that getharvested and digested by the
cow, the sheep, the goat, thedeer, the moose, the bison, the
buffalo.
host rumen it ends up gettingthe majority of its energy from
(19:11):
the volatile fatty acids thatare produced.
So we have no essential aminoacid in a ruminant's diet.
We have no essential fatty acidsin a ruminant's diet.
Now humans have both of those asessential nutrients.
(19:33):
An essential nutrient is onethat has to be in our diet
because we, the, the animal, theorganism doesn't have the
ability to make it.
It gets a little shaky becausesome of these, as we look, there
could be conditions in whichYeah, we can make some, but not
enough.
And so then they talk aboutthose being conditionally
(19:55):
essential.
Um, some researchers have said,actually, if you could envision
a diet with.
None of the, um, severelylimited in certain amino acids,
there's a chance we couldn'tmake enough of them.
(20:15):
So, this is kind of an area ofsome debate.
But, in any case, there's thisnice ecological fit between
ruminants and humans.
Which makes sense, the ruminantslong predate the arrival of
primates, let alone humanbeings.
(20:35):
So they were utilizing thegrasslands and, or the savannas,
the mixed tree grasslands, andthen humans came along with
them.
Subsequently, and utilize theresources that were made
available by the ruminants.
So those are things that I wantpeople to understand.
There's no either or inagriculture.
(20:57):
We can't have plant agriculturewithout animal agriculture.
And really, we need the plantagriculture as well for the
animal agriculture.
But there are certain things,like the majority of the
fertilizer that's used toproduce human edible crops
globally is manure.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (21:19):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (21:20):
So, if you get rid of the animals,
as some envision, how are yougoing to replace the manure?
And we've said nothing about howmuch more plant source food
would have to be produced tomake up for, if that was even
possible, make up for theelimination of the animal source
foods.
Um, so, so there's a lot of keyshere that I want people to just
(21:45):
be aware of and feel betterabout.
When they kind of come to thispoint where they say, you know,
if I eliminate these foods, Ifeel better, my, you know,
condition improves, the, the,the symptoms go away, whatever,
how, you know, my A1C is betterthan it's ever been, you know, I
(22:06):
don't have to take as muchmedication.
And so there's a lot of thingsto this.
I want people to be aware of.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131 (22:13):
Because we're not meant to eat those
things.
And we, and nowadays we aregoing away from animal source
foods.
Right?
And all that to say we are.
We are human beings that have tohave, you know, animal source
(22:33):
foods, right?
We're meant to eat animal sourcefrom an animal source, right?
We are not meant to eat plantbased.
Is that what you're saying?
Essentially.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (22:43):
Yeah.
I, I'd say, well, as I saidearlier, some amount of animal
source food is essential forproper human.
development and function.
I think that that's real clear.
We have evidence of many, manyhuman beings currently today
being harmed by too little.
It's high quality.
There's, there's, there's nocontroversy with it.
(23:03):
It's not like we're looking atepidemiological evidence here.
We're, we're, we're looking atpeople who are harmed because of
certain essential nutrientdeficiencies and people will
acknowledge that the best orsole source for those nutrients
is animal source foods.
So, okay, not everybody, youknow, meat is an animal source
(23:28):
food, but not all animal sourcefood is meat.
So it could be dairy.
It could be fish.
It could be poultry.
I mean, there's a, it, and evenwithin the meat category, some
people don't want to eat porkand some people don't want to
eat beef.
beef, but that still leaves lamband mutton and bison and
venison.
And, and so it's important forus to have all that on the table
(23:50):
because we have on the otherside, a lot of
oversimplification and, andbroad generalization, which is
not warranted.
So you know, you, you have thesedata points like somewhere
between a fifth and a quarter ofchildren under five years old
globally.
are stunted.
(24:12):
And that means primarily braindevelopment.
That their brains are notdeveloping properly because
they're not receiving theessential nutrition that they
have to have for proper braindevelopment.
Okay.
Um, But don't assume that that'sall in the, I mean, it's, it's
(24:33):
worst in the low and middleincome countries.
There's a really goodcorrelation with increasing
stunting with decreasing meatconsumption.
Okay.
That data is clear.
Um, but What is because of alack of access or affordability
(24:53):
in some countries is produced asa result of choices people are
making in high income countries.
Um, you know, we have, um, in,UK and US, something like a
fifth of women of childbearingage are anemic and that in many
(25:14):
cases is the result of foodchoices.
Uh, now affordability andaccess, we should always keep,
and I try to keep in mindbecause clearly, you know, being
able to afford the appropriatefood is an issue.
And so how are we going to builda better system that, that,
that, that, that, alleviatesthat.
(25:35):
Um, we have, so you mentionedearlier, there's like 820 some
million people by the laststatistics I saw that were
calorically undernourished.
Okay.
They're not getting enough rawcalories in their diet.
And what happened in the 60sprobably into the 80s was a lot
(26:00):
of concern about an expandinghuman population and an
inability to feed it, okay?
And so there were variousefforts and I fairly or unfairly
characterized that as focusingon calories.
Right, we just had to produceenough calories for people to
(26:20):
get, okay.
And, and, and, I've known someof the people who were involved
in that effort.
What I think we now need to dois focus on the quality of the
diet.
Right, it was just a, you know,if you're starving you have one
(26:42):
problem.
Nothing else matters, right?
That's your sole focus.
Um, but now we know that just,you know, if all you want are
calories, eat sugar, right, or,or guzzle corn oil or whatever.
I mean, clearly it's more thanmerely calories once we've
(27:05):
reached a point of sufficientcaloric intake.
So while we have 820 somemillion people calorically
undernourished, Which is a shameand a scandal.
We've got 2.
2 billion who are overweight orobese.
That's malnutrition.
And too many people still lookat that and they say, Oh, that's
(27:29):
overnutrition.
That's the phrase that they use.
Implying to many that if theywould just eat less or exercise
and or exercise more, then theywouldn't be overweight or obese.
And many of us within themetabolic community would
understand that that's probablynot, right?
(27:50):
The, the, the answer thatperhaps Obesity is one of the
manifestations of the metabolicsyndrome, right?
Not a cause of, and we're stilltalking about risk factors and
causing and whatever.
Maybe it's the case of humanbeings not being fed properly
(28:14):
based on
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (28:16):
I agree.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05- (28:17):
genetic background, uh, whatever.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (28:20):
Yeah.
I love that you'vedifferentiated between the low
income countries or societiesversus the high, the high income
societies, the high income, uh,countries.
Right.
One is.
Not by choice, and the other isdeliberately, um, choosing a
diet that is causingmalnutrition, right?
(28:43):
No, in another, in another sideof that, where you have poor
countries, they're juststruggling to survive, right?
Any, any, anything, any caloric,any food that has calories is
the focus in those countries.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (29:02):
Well, and, and there's some other
things too, right?
I mean, if, if, if you'retalking about something, you
know, people lack refrigeration,right?
I mean, it's, it's an amazing tome to think about life without
access to electricity, and yet,you know, 45 percent of humanity
consumes less electrical powerper year.
(29:28):
now let's talk about perishablefoods like animal source foods,
when people are in cities, whichis where 70 percent of the
population is going to be in 26years.
Right.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (29:41):
Mm,
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (29:42):
how are, you know, there's lots of
pieces to this puzzle, butuntil, you know, people kind of
catch a different vision thanhas been driving a lot of the
conversation, we don't getthere.
You know, W.
H.
O., Which, you know, may or maynot be a credible organization
at this point, um, said in oneof their, um, publications that
(30:09):
meat, eggs, dairy, and seafoodwere the best sources of the
essential nutrients childrenneed ages 6 months to 36 months,
I believe was the age range.
UNICEF says that 60, 6 0 percentof global children in that age
(30:31):
group do not get meat, eggs,dairy, seafood.
Okay, so you, you could not runstudies ethically where you
withheld food.
essential foods frompopulations, right?
I mean, that would just bewrong.
You know, that's going to causeharm.
(30:51):
So that wouldn't be allowed, butwe can go into communities where
for any number of reasons, thosefoods are not available and we
can add them as a supplement.
That work's been done.
It demonstrates an improvementin childhood development,
scholastic performance, a numberof measures.
(31:12):
So we know that there is such athing as too little in the
world.
Too little animal source food inhumans diets is a demonstrated
fact.
And then we need to get peopleto confront some of the
mythology that talks about theharm that comes from too much.
(31:32):
In terms of human health, Right,I understand that there's
another argument that they wantto frequently conflate and say,
Oh, it harms the environment,right?
No, let's set that one off tothe side.
Because Right now, somethinglike ninety, nine zero percent
(31:53):
of the U.
S.
healthcare spend is for chronicdiseases and, and, and yet this
is not confined to the highincome countries.
So I am given the opportunity tospeak to audiences in India and
they're telling me about the,the, the, can we call it a
(32:16):
pandemic of diabetes and heartdisease?
And now cancer that that countryis facing, economic resources,
you know, if you, if youmisapply them, there's a cost to
that.
(32:36):
And so is, would it make moresense rather than developing a
sort of healthcare industry onthe model of us in India, would
it be better to focus on, um,Ensuring adequate essential
nutrition, know, focused onmetabolic health because you
(32:59):
don't need to build up a hugeinfrastructure to do that.
Um, and, and at the same time,healthcare industry has an
environmental impact.
And healthcare industry, dangsure, has an economic impact.
And the failure of currentmodels of healthcare has a
(33:21):
societal impact.
And if we're going to have anhonest conversation about
sustainability, we have to lookat each of those three, uh,
broad categories, as well asseveral topics within each one.
And unfortunately, anytimesomebody talks about
sustainability these days, ittends to be oversimplified, and
(33:42):
only look at the environmentalbucket, and only look at the
emissions.
within that environmental bias.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131 (33:50):
because they're not connecting it, they,
I think, you know, they've,they're investing resources to
push a message just like whatthey did when they vilified, you
know, red meat and fat backthen.
I feel like, um, it's a greatpoint when you talked about, um,
Why don't they look at chronicdiseases and, and healthcare,
(34:13):
uh, costs as opposed to focusingon just environmental impact.
You talked about it.
Um, one of the strongestarguments is.
You know, the environmentalimpact against ruminants, isn't
it?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (34:28):
Well, and, and that's for a number of
reasons.
A number, well, let me put itthis way.
A lot of arguments that are usedin that are misunderstandings.
So you will hear people say thatit would be better to feed
(34:50):
material to humans rather thanlivestock.
Well, I've already talked aboutthe fact that most of what they
eat isn't human edible.
So there's this tremendousupcycling, that's a term of art,
where something that is of lowervalue becomes increased in
(35:13):
value.
And so that's what's going onwhen we feed livestock in
general and ruminants inparticular.
Um, number two is people willsay, okay, but that human edible
food that is used as feed shouldbe fed to humans.
(35:33):
Well, that's only 4 percent ofthe global ruminant feed
consumption is human edible.
Number two, it's foods that Iwould argue maybe we shouldn't
be eating, right?
Cereal crops have a number ofissues related to them when fed
to humans, especially whenthey're processed.
(35:57):
As most are these days, very fewpeople are eating whole wheat
berries, right?
That that's not what'shappening.
Um, and, and even thosearguments.
are frequently oversimplifiedbecause they'll say things like,
you know, you look at the feedconsumption and conversion into
(36:20):
meat and they'll throw out somevalues, but what they ignore is
how much of that feed wasactually utilizable by humans.
And that's just looking at feedas a general term.
You drill down and you look atactual human utilizable protein
and you see the beef is a net.
protein contributor to the, tothe humanity's food supply.
(36:44):
Um, people will say, well, if weweren't using all that land to
raise livestock, we could growmore food.
The problem with that is thevast majority of the land that's
used for livestock.
isn't suitable for producinghuman utilizable food.
And, and then there's also the,the, the, um, integration
(37:09):
already mentioned about using,um, the by product feed.
So one estimate from Europe wasthat for every, kilo of vegan
food, that was the term thatthey used, uh, four to five
kilos of inedible biomass wereproduced.
So this is the processing, um,byproducts.
(37:33):
Um, you know, one of the thingsthat people need to understand
is that you can't replace foodproduction with food processing.
So we start with somethingthat's okay, arguably a
commodity that you could say,yeah, humans could eat that just
(37:55):
because you can't and doesn'tnecessarily mean you should, but
okay, let's accept that, that,but when we process it, some
loss in that processing.
There's no hundred percent,there's no creation of new.
You're, you're changing it insome way, but you're not
creating more food.
(38:16):
And then we're discovering moreand more that when we do that,
we're decreasing its nutritivevalue.
So we're actually decreasinghumanity's food supply by this
processing that takes place.
And animal source foods, wedon't see that.
Um, there, there's a number ofthings here, but back to, I'm
(38:40):
just frankly amazed that there'ssuch a thing as drug free
remission of type 2 diabetes.
I'm really encouraged thatthere's such a thing as drug
free remission of mentalillnesses as a result of
ketogenic, you know, therapeuticketogenic nutrition, again, with
appropriate healthcare help.
(39:02):
And, you know, maybe it stillrequires some pharmaceutical
use, but we're hearing more andmore about reducing or
deprescribing all of thosethings.
And again, the pharmaceuticalindustry has an environmental
impact.
And why is it that we sort offocus everything on this side,
(39:24):
and, and, you know, theconversation about
sustainability sort of stops atthe farm gate at this point.
It doesn't really go through tothe, the welfare of the
population that we're trying to,support.
Now, 95 percent of the world'svegetarians are economic
(39:44):
vegetarians.
They're not philosophicalvegetarians.
would eat more animal sourcefood if it was available.
Right.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024 (39:53):
absolutely.
I, I feel like that has to be,um, that has to be said.
And, um, I feel like most of.
The criticism that's aimed atruminants are just arguments
that can be made by anybody,right?
(40:13):
Um, the, you talked about, if wetalk about cost, right, how big
of a, an issue is cost,environmental costs, as opposed
to if we focus on consuminganimal sourced food, we can
reduce the healthcare costs.
Which can help with overall
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (40:36):
Well, not only, yeah, not, so if we're
right, it's always good to keepthat phrase in mind, if we're
right, um, you know, the U.
S.
healthcare spending is somewherebetween four and four and a half
trillion dollars a year.
So that, that puts the chronicillness health care spend
(40:58):
somewhere above three and a halftrillion, right?
Because we said 90%.
So, um, that's a huge amount ofmoney.
Um, number two, the, the U.
S.
agriculture emissions footprintper the Environmental Protection
(41:20):
Agency, which puts out a sourcesand sink estimate, is somewhere
in the nine to ten percent oftotal anthropogenic greenhouse
gases.
In the U.
S.
All of animal agriculture is 4percent of total, so a couple
(41:43):
key points there.
One is it's less than half ofagriculture's.
Number two is plant agriculturehas a footprint, and if we're
going to replace animal sourcefood with plant source food, the
emissions are going to go up forthe plant source food, right?
There's no, there, there's nosolution here.
There's only trade offs.
Okay, uh, beef is 2%, somewherein there.
(42:05):
Those numbers are.
depending on when you talk.
Um, but okay, so that gives us,you know, beef is about half of
the greenhouse gas emissions oflivestock agriculture in the US.
And, um, all of animalagriculture is less than half of
(42:26):
agricultures.
Meanwhile, you've gottransportation somewhere in the
25, 28 percent range.
Power generation is somewhere inthe same range.
So, gives you an idea of wherethat is.
Um, another estimate of the U.
S.
healthcare industry said thatthe U.
(42:48):
S.
healthcare industry is asignificant source of pollution,
including 10 percentanthropogenic greenhouse gas
emissions.
So think medical waste, youknow, think, um, other, other
products of healthcare, but then10%.
Now it's not an apples to applescomparison.
(43:11):
They, they did their estimatedifferently than what the, um,
EPA uses, but it's fair to saythat's a significant.
It's a significant number.
Okay.
The, there was another estimatethat looked at the global
pharmaceutical industry and itreached the conclusion that the
(43:36):
global pharmaceutical industryis a higher intensity emitter
than the automotive industry andbased and and a wider variation
across the industry than you seein the automotive industry.
And someone else took theresults of that estimate and
(44:01):
they said from that if theaverage adult American could
eliminate their, uh sorry, ifthe average adult American with
type 2 diabetes could eliminatetheir medication use They would
lower their carbon footprint 29percent to 9 percent more than
(44:22):
if they shifted from a high meatto a vegan diet.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (44:26):
hmm.
Yeah.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (44:28):
So, so the conversations, and, and
there was another re, uh, studythat came out, uh, from Food and
Agriculture Organization, GlobalUN Organization.
In December, you know, Pathwaysto Achieving Targets in Global
Livestock Agriculture.
And what they, they, they lookedat the available science and
(44:50):
they said, what are the optionscurrently available or
potentially available forreducing emissions from
livestock agriculture globally?
And so they looked at a numberof things that we could talk
about, but the least impactfulone was personal dietary
choices.
So the thing that's getting allthe press is the least impactful
(45:15):
one.
And keep in mind that if you'regoing to say, I'm going to do
this for the environment, we'resaying for the rest of your
life, right?
That those typically are theestimates.
And we understand that many ofthese dietary choices are not
personally sustainable.
that people adopt a lifestylechange but then frequently
(45:38):
change back and frequently it's,it's fairly quickly.
Um, we have, and, and anotherpiece that was part of this for
a long time and now isunderstood to not be valid but
it's still, it's sort of likeone of these zombie myths that
just won't die.
(45:58):
Um, when a ruminant animal burpsout Methane.
Methane is a product of thatnatural process.
So a paper from a little over ayear ago now showed that you
(46:19):
have similar or comparableemissions from wildlife
dominated savannas and livestockdominated savannas.
So many of the conversations aresort of artificial because they
ignore the emissions that wouldcome from grassland if it was
(46:40):
wildlife dominated.
Like, that
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (46:42):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (46:42):
okay, but if it's livestock dominated,
then that methane must be bad.
Number two is that methanethat's burped out gets oxidized
to CO2 within about 10 years.
So the cycle then isphotosynthesis.
takes CO2 out of the atmosphere,produces carbohydrate, matter,
(47:08):
that the ruminant animalingests, some portion of that is
emitted as methane through anatural process.
That methane is then oxidized toCO2 and completes the cycle
within about 10 years.
So, if you have stable ordecreasing herd size, You
(47:30):
actually have no contributiontoward warming potential, based
on that understanding.
And there's a lot of controversyinvolved in that space, but this
is now the understanding of thatparticular thing, and how many
people know that.
How long did it take me toexplain that?
It's not a soundbite, it's notsexy, but it, it is the reality.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (47:56):
I want to say something
controversial.
You talked about controversythere.
Um, it's like they figured outhow to legally extract money
from the general public.
How many people are, you know,taking, Maintenance metformin
for type two diabetes, right?
How many people are takingcholesterol medication, even
(48:17):
though cholesterol is a myth orit has been debunked, like how,
like the fear of, you know,having high cholesterol, um, you
know, any, like they, they'retaking money from low income
families.
They're taking money fromregular people, right?
It's just legally they figuredout 90%.
You talk about 90 percent of, ofthe costs.
(48:41):
Right?
Is going to healthcares.
it's, it's legally robbing.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (48:48):
care.
Yeah.
Well, and, and so, uh, you know,I, I need to, you know, I'm not
that kind of doctor.
I didn't stay at a Holiday InnExpress last night, you know,
so, uh, you want to know howmuch fertilizer to put on your
pasture, I'm your guy.
Um, but I do want to point out,I think it's fair to say that
the current use model forpharmaceuticals is one that is,
(49:15):
it, it represents overuse.
Right?
And, and, and we can understandhow we got there.
There's lots of factors behindall that.
I don't think anyone would arguethat we need to be taking more
of them.
Now, I'm, I'm, I'm sure that insome cases under, you know,
(49:37):
advice and consent with trainedYou know, medical people that
these pharmaceuticals are usefuland necessary, and I don't want
anyone to make any changes intheir, you know, medication use
based on what they hear me say.
Um, so, but on the other hand,When there are these case
(50:03):
histories that are published,when there are organizations
like the Society for MetabolicHealth Practitioners to help
other practitioners learn how todeprescribe medications, right,
which is something that needs tobe done carefully, because, you
know, I've trained myself to saythings like, if you say Atkins,
(50:24):
people's brains explode.
If you say therapeuticcarbohydrate reduction, okay,
that's fine.
Um, if you.
If you say, um, that, you know,that people can get off their
medication, some, oh, no, no,no, you can't do that.
(50:45):
That's very dangerous.
Well, so maybe we should stopgiving them an out and talking
about side effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (50:54):
Mm hmm.
Yeah, I
peter-ballerstedt_2_05- (50:55):
because the way the medication industry
now is running is, and forgiveme, this is an agronomist
perspective, subject tocorrection, but what we have is
the industry looks for theworst, most gnarly condition
that this drug can treat.
(51:17):
Right?
So the cost benefit analysiswill be, you know, heavily
weighted toward the benefit.
And then as soon as that happensand they've gotten a use label
for it, then they find, thenthey start talking about all
these other effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (51:35):
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (51:36):
And, and any medication that you take
has multiple effects.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (51:41):
Mm
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (51:42):
are good.
Some of those may be not sogood.
Right?
Some, but the whole thing hasbeen this dance of cost versus
benefit.
And now we're finding thatthey're, they're now bringing
these medications that once werefor diabetes.
Oh, look, we found that underthose conditions, people lost
(52:05):
some.
So now let's market them.
You know, so we've alreadygotten it approved.
We don't have to go through thatprocess again.
So I, I just want people tounderstand that medication isn't
necessarily the panacea thatpeople have been led to believe.
(52:25):
Like, you know, it's easy doc,give me something to take for
this.
Well, you know, who is it, uh,Dr.
David Unwin, um, offers hispatients, you could, here's
lifestyle intervention orlifetime medication.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (52:43):
hmm.
Mm hmm.
Mm hmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (52:44):
And he said, remarkably enough,
people tend to choose thelifestyle
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (52:51):
Yeah, I'm gonna steal that.
peter-ballerstedt_2_ (52:55):
especially when you then realize that we're
going to start you on thismedication and then after a
while we'll have to move you oradd this one to it and then a
little later we'll have to addanother one.
You know, the statistics on thenumber of prescription drugs
that the, you know, Americanpublic is on is quite
(53:15):
remarkable.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (53:17):
Yeah, yeah, you know my dad
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (53:19):
of
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (53:21):
go ahead go ahead I'll come I'll
follow you.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (53:25):
Yeah, no, please, about your dad.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (53:28):
Yeah, no my dad he No, I'm just glad
and happy that his doctor, youknow allowed him to get off Uh,
cholesterol medication and, uh,his metformin medication for,
uh, maintaining his blood sugar.
So, uh, I'm happy that somedoctors are willing to work with
their patients, but not every,not all doctors are, um,
(53:50):
certainly his doctor before, um,is, uh, Opposed to a lifestyle
intervention, but, um, when he,um, found a new doctor, found
and, and looked at his bloodwork and saw how, you know,
remarkable his blood work hasbeen since adapting a ketogenic
(54:12):
lifestyle, you know, they were,she was happy and, um, finally
got him off statins medicationand, uh, You know, Mitt Foreman.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17 (54:25):
Isn't it remarkable to think that a
diet that would sort ofrepresent the vast majority of
humanity's evolutionaryexperience might be one that is
reflected by good biomarkers inthe individuals today.
That's remarkable.
Who would imagine?
(54:45):
This is sarcasm on my part.
Um, yeah, exactly.
And, and, and yet I, I need tokeep in mind that it, it, it
takes something in theindividual to maybe not, maybe
confront isn't the right word,but to kind of push back against
(55:07):
the white coated You know,professional.
And so, you know, credit to yourfather and credit to anything
you did for him.
Well done, son.
Um, and, and a lot of peoplehave, don't have the background
and don't feel comfortable doingthat.
(55:28):
So we have to do what we can tomake them feel better about that
and give them the tools.
so that they better understandwhat their, you know, how many
times have we heard somebodysay, my doctor, you know, is on
me about my cholesterol levels.
And you say, well, what are yourlevels?
(55:50):
And they don't know, right.
So they just, and, and so how dowe, how do we foster a
respectful conversation andrespectful for everyone involved
conversation to say you knowwhat is is this really uh so my
(56:13):
mother in law was on a low dosestatin for another heart issue
Over time, she heard Nancy and Italking about this enough that
she ultimately said, Pete, couldyou give me some papers so I
could review before my next, youknow, um, um, exam.
(56:37):
Remarkable.
She's, she was in her mid 80s atthe time, I think.
So that's kind of remarkable forsomeone of that generation to,
you know, You know, confrontthe, the, the, the doctor.
So I, I went to the doctors Iknow, and I said, which would be
the best ones to give her andbang, bang, bang.
I got this back.
(56:58):
And so she goes to the doctorand they're sitting down
reviewing her medications.
And she said, I don't think Iwant to take this anymore.
answer was okay.
Like she was all prepared forthis argument.
And as soon as she said, no, hewas like, fine.
(57:19):
Cause he could just write.
Right.
He's covered.
She's so, so again, I may bemisunderstanding the current
state of the, the practice.
My impression is, and again,this is in the U S might be
different.
Your results might vary, but inthe U S if you get a lab result,
(57:43):
Right on your printed form asthe software is taking
information from the testresults and inputting it into
the form that it's going toprint out if it's outside of a
certain range, then it likeinsert some text and changes the
font color right and out itcomes and okay now the doctor
(58:05):
reading this.
is expected to offer amedication,
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_1314 (58:12):
Mmhmm.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (58:14):
and if they don't do that, then
they're in some jeopardy.
But if they do, and the patientsays, I don't want to take this,
then they can say, patientdeclines, I'm covered.
And we go on to the next thing.
How many people know that?
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (58:34):
Nope.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-2 (58:35):
how many people know?
And so I, I think that what isreally broken is the patient
physician relationship.
And I've heard lots of evidencethat just makes me scratch my
head.
Um, and I wasn't there.
I don't know.
(58:55):
Um, but I, I think that We needto kind of look at that as we're
imagining the rest of thisconversation.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (59:06):
Yeah, I feel like, um, Congrats to Was
that your mother in law, did yousay?
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (59:13):
Yes.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (59:14):
Um, I feel like we have to start
them with history.
We talked about Gary Tubbs.
We talked about Nina Tickles,the books that they've written,
the author.
I think we should, we shouldstart them with history, right,
on how It all happened in thepast and how, you know, fat
cholesterol, uh, red meat, we'vebeen vilified and that whole
(59:39):
Ansel Keys, uh, situation.
I think people would understandif people understand how it
happened and the history on, youknow, there's events that
happen.
That's that got us here today.
Um, I think, you know, Havingthat history and explaining the
(01:00:02):
metabolic side of things and howthe food system works, I think
both goes hand in hand.
I know, before we, I want to berespectful of your time, given
the challenges we've talkedabout here, um, if you can
suggest a You know, sustainablesolution.
Like we always talk aboutsustainability address both
(01:00:25):
malnutrition and metabolicissues.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:00:29):
so humanity's existential crisis is
a lack of animal sourced foods.
So don't worry about that.
Um, that if you, that when youimprove your health, you are
improving the world.
And a lot of this is, you know,we have people who are working
(01:00:50):
in various levels.
Like I talked about the meetingthat I just listened to, um,
where they're trying to deliversome consensus into the
professional practitionercommunity.
And that's great.
That needs to happen.
We have people who are trying toaffect changes in dietary
guidelines and that needs tohappen.
(01:01:11):
We also need to work this fromthe grassroots, you know, pardon
the expression, um, from theground up.
Right.
And, and so.
The, the more that we can do tospread the good news and that
could be, you know, amongst ourfamily or our, you know, uh,
(01:01:34):
community of friends, you know,social events where we're
expected to bring food.
What are, you know, what are wedoing?
What are we bringing there?
Um, and then being prepared.
You know, giving some thought towhat I call the elevator speech,
right?
That, that idea that if youfound yourself, if you had a
(01:01:56):
project you wanted the companyto do, and you found yourself in
the, in the elevator with theCEO or whatever, and you had the
moment to give the pitch, whatwould the pitch be?
Something comparable on thepersonal health.
This was my condition.
I did this.
this happened and, you know,happy to help, right?
(01:02:18):
Don't, don't crank open thefirehose nozzle all at once and
give them the full blast, youknow, little, little, little,
little servings probably willincrease the adoption rate.
Um, I think that there's a lotof work in some of my
communities where they'relooking at how to best integrate
(01:02:42):
animals into the environment.
And crop agriculture, like inthe same field, you know, within
the same year or in rotationsover a couple seasons.
Um, you know, one example endedup with more food being produced
from the same area with the sameor less inputs and then some
(01:03:02):
benefits to the environment aswell.
We need to be looking for thosethings.
As I mentioned, the FAO documentfrom last December, there are
things about animal genetics,animal feeding, animal health.
Forty percent of the meat that'sproduced every year is lost due
(01:03:23):
to animal diseases.
Twenty percent.
So here you've, you've made thatwhole investment, right?
And, and whatever impact on theenvironment occurred, and twenty
percent.
is not available for use.
Well, just imagine what couldhappen in terms of making an
impact if we could address that.
(01:03:44):
Um, you know, over half of theworld's cattle are in Africa and
Asia.
Three quarters of the sheep arein Africa and Asia.
Asia and virtually all of thegoats, 98 percent or something
like that, or in Africa andAsia.
(01:04:05):
So whatever you want to do toaddress the impact of livestock,
just translate that.
That's Africa and Asia thatyou're talking about.
And imagine then whatever thesesolutions that are being
entertained in some communities,how that would impact people in
(01:04:29):
that part of the world.
And again, people will say, I'veheard it, that we can't feed
everyone the kind of, you know,diet that you or I might
advocate.
You know, we can't produce it.
It's, you know, whatever.
That's, that's their startingpoint.
(01:04:50):
And my response is, no, we must.
Right, that, that's a moralimperative for those of us that
are so blessed to help otherpeople achieve that, and it's
not producing it in Canada andU.
S.
and shipping it.
Some of that's going to takeplace, but it's doing the, the
(01:05:14):
outreach and supportinginitiatives in those parts of
the world where they have thistremendous potential for
improvement.
And that's the kind of work thatmore and more people need to
understand if they really areserious about sustainability.
If we're not just going to havethese virtue signaling
(01:05:37):
conversations, luxury beliefs,I've heard somebody describe
them as, you know, we're goingto, we're going to say the
farmers here can't produce it.
but we're still going to importit.
We're going to do things herethat increase the cost to the
consumer.
But hey, what do we care?
We're rich enough.
We can afford it.
Yeah.
(01:05:58):
You know, I'm getting less andless tolerant of that kind of
behavior.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (01:06:04):
Maybe we, maybe we, uh, can seek help
from our listeners today oranyone who is listening.
Right.
About maybe, you know, tellingthat another person about this,
you know, I feel like it's, uh,if you're in the know, you're
already right.
But what, what about the peoplearound you?
If you can help people aroundyou and, and, uh, share that
(01:06:28):
same message, maybe we canslowly, but surely, uh, You
know, open eyes and, uh, maybe,you know, create a small change,
right?
Um,
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-202 (01:06:40):
I mean, in order for darkness to
win, right.
All light has to beextinguished.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (01:06:48):
I like
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:06:49):
So any light that's any light at
all, and the darkness isdefeated.
The second part of that is itcosts the candle nothing to
light another candle, so pass italong once, once it's been given
to you.
And I, it's not to say that wedon't need the people doing the
research or all those otherlevels, but I, I, I think that
(01:07:15):
we underestimate the impact ofhave achieving that tipping
point in the population and weoverestimate how many people
that will be.
And, and I think that just likeyou said, you know, telling the
people within your orbit and,and then also just coming to
(01:07:36):
value your own health.
And the impact that will have onyour children's welfare, let
alone what we now know about howthey're fed as they're
developing and growing.
And, and then, you know, whatlife is going to be like for
them later, but just to have aparent that's not impacted by
(01:07:58):
chronic illness.
That alone has a positive impacton, on your children.
And so if we're not going tovalue it for ourselves, value it
for others, and hopefully atsome point value it for yourself
too, because each of us as humanbeings has a value and a worth
(01:08:19):
that is well beyond what most ofus can comprehend.
And, and so that's part of whatanimates me as well.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_131424 (01:08:29):
You talked about hope.
There is hope.
Thank you so much, Dr.
Uh, Peter, for coming on andsharing your story with us today
and such a great topic.
It's such an honor to have youhere, uh, talking about this.
Um, I can't follow that.
Maybe we can end here.
(01:08:51):
Such a great, uh, wisdom thatyou've shared with us here
today.
Always a
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17- (01:08:56):
It's my pleasure.
Thank you for the opportunity.
lorenz_2_05-17-2024_13142 (01:09:00):
thank you, sir.
I appreciate you.
All right.
Bye bye.
peter-ballerstedt_2_05-17-20 (01:09:05):
Be well, everyone.
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.