I did a site search for "meto" with Stan as the user, and I was surprised there were only about 30 comments.
I learned some interesting things. I hope others find them interesting, too. This is a long post, but it's all relevant. I highly recommend others do their own research and not just rely on what someone says because others do.
I noticed Stan was a member for just under four months, I thought it was much longer. His first meto comment was on the SN Megathread, which started in April 2018; he joined in August 2019.
Apparently there was an SN regimen before he wrote the guide. As I've read through some of the threads, I'm making the educated assumption that it came from the PPH. He made this comment on the SN thread only two weeks after he'd joined:
On September 29, he was in a conversation on the megathread discussing someone taking 30g and he was concerned about how much water they'd need for that, just like so many of us who think 20g to 50ml is a whole lot of SN, we don't yet realize that it's very soluble. He was already researching grams to bodyweight rations. They were also discussing at that point in the thread how Nitschke (PN) had gone up on the recommended dose from 30g to 35g! (During those four months, it changed to 20-25g).
October 22, replying on the SN megathread to someone who couldn't get meto prescribed. It seems at this point he'd already done a lot of research on meto and on the method and was giving advice:
Same day:
On October 28 he posted a venting thread about the SN Megathread. The OP pretty much sums up his thoughts on the method being short and sweet, and that a document such as the guide he authored should be updated if needed. I'm also including this for the humor.
Same thread, more ranting, made me giggle:
Last few giggles from the rant thread, including an intelligent(ly written) question from a former popular member, I'm sure some folks will appreciate her appearance here.
Here's an interesting comment he made on someone's thread getting feedback on their regimen. I find it interesting because, in the screenshot of the PPeH I posted in the OP, PN says that fasting and Tagamet are potentiators for rapid gut absorption. Stan's first sentence seems to disagree, but he's talking about the stomach, and at the end it seems that it potentiates passing the SN into the small intestine, where it can be absorbed. I'm not sure who's off here, PN, Stan, both or neither. Anyhow, it seems to me that, like fasting, particular types of antacid are a good idea, and may be more helpful than meto in that they assist the method in working, while meto tries to stop something from happening but may or may not, depending on the person. (Further below, in the most important quotes, meto is also shown to help empty gastric contents, which is minor since the stomach should already be empty from fasting, except for the water taken with supplmental meds.)
This next one is particularly interesting. On Nov. 2 Stan posted a comprehensive guide to SN. He'd previously posted a working document, this one was meant to be the final version, but due to comments, he made some adjustments.
Here's why it's interesting and relevant to the guide needing to be updated for accuracy (which was not an original consideration of this thread). Stan only lists in the guide five symptoms to be expected after ingesting SN. We know now there are many more (in fact I made a list on the SN successes and failures thread of symptoms reported in success, with percentages, and there were closer to fifteen symptoms). In the second post of this thread, Stan gives his rationale for the symptoms he listed. (An alternative but potentially dissatisfying solution to altering the guide would be to create a pinned document that lists symptoms and percentages of experience, since these are anecdotal reports and therefore not verifiable.)
The next two posts are the most relevant in this comment. Unless I find something to contradict them, I won't be quoting anymore. The first one is very long and I recommend reading all of it, though I've put certain parts in bold. Stan explains why he wrote the guide, how he came up with the information, and how meto works for the method, which is not significant. In the second quote, he explains why he never committed to meto as being a necessary part of the regimen -- whether he was correct or in error, I believe this provides sufficient information to clear up the conflicting text in the guide. I'll work on an edit and submit it in this thread for review.
^
I note that Stan died about three weeks before I joined the forum, and I'd forgotten that for at least my first couple months here, people commonly commented that vomiting may be due to the power of the mind. I always had an internal knee-jerk reaction to that. It felt to me, right or wrong, like a doctor saying something is in a patient's mind, that is, psychosomatic, when there is in fact a physical cause. I've noticed that the popular narrative then changed to meto targeting certain receptors that diphenhydramine (Benadryl) would not, and I'm not sure with what member(s) that originated, I only recall those who seemed to be the most informed about it, and I believe it's addressed in @Quarky00's pinned SN Resource thread. After Stan, Quarky00 did his own research became the forum SN expert. Now the popular narrative on the forum is that meto is a must, and vomiting is a common cause of method failure (which I said in a comment on this thread I may research anecdotes to either prove it or debunk it).
Summary/enhanced perspectives:
I think the confusing text in the Guide regarding meto can be edited to clarify Stan's intention. I'll work on that and post here.
Stan's stance was that meto is not necessary. That doesn't mean it's accurate, only that it was his consistent stance.
I believe the SN symptoms listed in the guide should be updated, whether in the guide or a pinned resource for reference. The list of five symptoms came from Stan's Internet research on hypoxia, and I believe we have more accurate information now. I do not believe this list sets up a reasonable expectation. (This wasn't an intention for the thread but came up as I was researching his posts about meto, and vomiting is both a symptom and part of the purpose of this thread.)
Stan's purpose for researching the regimen and tweaking it are explained in the second to last quote. As we know, he wasn't a doctor or a scientist, but someone who was good at researching and digging up information; he called himself a factoid hunter for a reason. He was imperfect, and not all of the information he gathered is conclusive or necessarily accurate. So the guide is exactly that, a guide, not the Bible, any more than the PPH is the Bible.
In comparison, PN is also imperfect but is a doctor; regularly changes doses, alters the protocol, changes ratings, etc.; he doesn't explain his rationale for the elements of the method nor changes; which Stan did; and he doesn't "stand on the shoulders of giants" and list the sources for his rationale, nor did Stan. As a doctor and researcher, PN knows what makes a medical text credible, while I don't know Stan's academic background or career and whether he would have known that references are important for the credibility of both the author and the text. An author's credibility and status can lower or elevate opionions about the text's potential credibility. Stan enjoys a high status of respect on the forum, which I believe has influenced the reception of the guide. PN is a doctor, which influences he reception of the PPH by laypeople and non-academics.
