Drew Dowd

@realfarie Appreciate you 🤘🏼

This is so good. Definitely a must read

mastermind syndrome: where you apply random teachings from a passionate speaker who has no idea the context of your business… …and blame your team for the repercussions

@dakotahermes To add, also learning what NOT to do is equally as important

if you're an agency/freelancer - this is the best advice i can give you learn at least one thing from every business you work with. even if they suck at the thing they hired you for, they are probably better than you at 10 other things. i've run ads for companies that have rev-ops setups i would have never dreamed of and other companies who do better organic social media than 99% of people and others who crush email marketing. each time i get into a new biz i ask myself, "what can I learn from them?" knowing that if I can implement one new thing each time, in time i will have an infinity gauntlet of skills that will make me unstoppable.

@thecaseywoodard @eptwts and AI front runners

Does anyone have a great course or learning resources on how to write better prompts? I feel I am under-utilizing AI heavily, not only for development but also for linguisitics, marketing, personal use, etc. Tag or link below.

@iblamejulius Also this with SMS and such as well:

FYI: if you’ve seen a mysterious drop in your Facebook ads performance after January 6th, most ad accounts started seeing Landing Page views decline by a large margin. This seems to mostly be affecting your audience with Apple devices. Apple claims that iOS 26.3 strips fbCLID from URLs before a page loads. fbCLID is a CRITICAL variable in your match scores. As with all iOS updates, more and more people are installing, which means this issue will only get worse. It looks like the drop in performance is from Facebooks reaction to this update. Most important thing to do rn is make sure the rest of your data pipeline is genuinely infallible. Just like with other privacy- based iOS updates, Facebook will just need more hashable data from you. If don’t have an 8.5+ match score minimum right now, stop EVERYTHINT YOURE DOING and fix that shit. Hit up @gagevbusiness if you need guidance here, he helped me out tremendously. And keep running more ads. That’s all.

If you’re a biz that uses SMS for literally anything… a lot of my reminders from Doctors, marketing, etc have all ended up here without warning. Update just happened, didn’t notice until today. If you’re seeing a degradation in SMS responses/ show rate/ engagement… probably why. No solution right now other than manual messages from reps/self for revenue generating things.

I get what you’re saying. I don’t necessarily agree with it being a “reach” in terms of context tho. I’d push back a bit on the “highly nuanced” framing here, not because nuance doesn’t exist, but because I think we might be drawing the line in the wrong place. (Plus if we say something is highly nuanced or contextual, then we also have to define what that means in a given situation). When you say video games are virtual while social media leads to real world improvement, I’m curious: what makes one form of digital engagement more “real” than the other? Let’s use the testosterone example. Someone discovers that content on X, adopts the ideology, buys into the lifestyle. But isn’t that also a kind of character-building? just one where the avatar is their online persona instead of a game character? They’re still operating within a digital feedback loop, collecting validation, optimizing for metrics (followers, likes, perceived status). The question I’m wrestling with is if someone grinds in a game for rank, we call it escapism. But if someone grinds on social media for ideological clout, aesthetic perfection, etc, we call it self-improvement. What’s the actual difference beyond which platform we’ve decided to valorize? I don’t think either is inherently better or worse. I think it comes down to intentionality and outcome. Both can teach discipline, both can create community, and both can become traps where people lose themselves in pursuit of external validation. So maybe the real distinction isn’t “video games vs social media” but rather: are you using the platform, or is it using you? Does it serve your growth, or are you serving its algorithm? Curious as to where you draw that line?

I half agree. Definitely a reach in terms of context. Video games is virtual. Taking on ideologies from social media and improving yourself is levelling up in the real world Highly nuanced. For example: discovering high testosterone on social media, how to increase, that whole universe. Which is huge on X. Has real world advantages. Building a digital world and character does not. I understand what you’re trying to say, doesn’t really apply though

Video games are a healthier use of time than social media scrolling.

Couldn’t one argue people do the exact same on social media? Emotionally investing in ideologies or ways of seeing the world, and thus spend hours “leveling up” to fit some image someone else still tells them they should be. And then as a result, build a life around the same stuff they’re seeing on social media?

@Nicolascole77 Majorly disagree People become emotionally invested in video games Build lives, spend hours levelling up, way more consuming

@ChamberofFit @Elijahkrings Not that you asked me, but I started with 100mg a day and just titrated up based on feeling. Took a non methylated b complex with it to balance the other co-factors tho

@Elijahkrings Talking specifically with Thiamax — TTFD

Other stuff that works here High dose thiamine Ubiquinol Improving mitochondrial function through light diet exercise sleep H2S might be compensating at first but then wrecks havoc, lowering mitochondrial throughput substantially and lowering intestinal redox

i think the distinction you’re drawing between relief and restoration is an important one. That said, I’m trying to understand where you stand on creatine more clearly, because a few points seem to contradict what’s been repeatedly observed in both biology and biochemistry: 1.) If creatine is just a ‘man-made artifact,’ how do we explain that the human body synthesizes ~1–2 g daily and that creatine-transporter deficiencies are recognized metabolic diseases corrected by supplementation? 2.) if its effects are mostly placebo or hormetic stress, how do you reconcile that with direct imaging and muscle-biopsy data showing objective increases in phosphocreatine stores (even in double-blind trials where subjects don’t know they’re taking it?) 3.) philosophically, if a molecule’s origin in 19th-century chemistry makes it ‘dubious,’ wouldn’t that reasoning also invalidate compounds like vitamin C, cholesterol, or ATP. all first isolated through similar extraction methods? from my perspective, creatine doesn’t behave like a symptom-relief agent. it behaves like a structural energy substrate. one that cells already rely on for ATP buffering. the more interesting discussion might be why some bodies utilize it more efficiently than others, not whether it’s inherently foreign.

Funny thing about this, is my wife has PCOS and Endometriosis, and has been FOOKED by birth control and her hormones can be all over the place. However, we tweaked diet strategy for things that work better for her body and emphasized proper micro-nutrients and electrolyte balance, created a stress management protocol on a daily basis, and after about 2-3 months at a maintenance calorie level (that actually grew over the time), we were able to get her in a deficit and she’s dropped 10 pounds in about 3 months. Hormones can make things harder for sure AND need to be considered, but the laws of thermodynamics don’t lie and you probably have more body fat on you than you think.

Fat women love convincing themselves they’re overweight because they’ve got an overwhelming amount of muscle Men do this too FWIW But as we know….this is nothing but pure COPE And the irony is, if they had all the muscle they claim to have, losing weight would be even EASIER!

Understanding the history and context of science is wildly important. So kudos on the history lesson. Questions I have for this (hopefully this can benefit everyone looking for good info): if creatine were just a byproduct of the extraction process, how do modern labs detect it directly in living muscle? if it didn’t truly exist in tissue, how do muscles regulate phosphocreatine and ATP turnover? would that same reasoning also apply to glucose or vitamin C since they were discovered through similar chemistry?

@jakelazyrich Feel like now i gotta do a whole report on this bc REAL

We need to talk about how adaptive identity affects your career happiness.

@SamaHoole framing here is interesting for sure. I always thought calling glycogen ‘protected’ was kind of like calling low metabolism ‘efficient.’ Feels more like conservation than performance based on the framing here

Here’s the simple science of why training with low reps is ideal if you’re trying to build muscle on carnivore. Because it doesn’t require glycolysis, and thereby doesn’t deplete glycogen and impair performance. The phosphocreatine system powers efforts lasting 10-30 seconds: exactly the duration of a 4-6 rep set. Glycolysis only kicks in significantly after 30 seconds. The phosphocreatine then recharges over 3-5 minutes, which is the time you should be resting anyway. Being adapted to ketosis, a process that takes 2-3 months, will further protect glycogen stores by elevating the intensities at which you can use ketones. The caveat here is that you can expect performance issues if you’re not yet keto adapted, and glycogen depletion can still be an issue if you train with high volumes. Even just moderate amounts of glycogen depletion can impair motor recruitment and thereby put a knock on the growth stimulus. Luckily, high volumes aren’t necessary for hypertrophy, and they are actually counter-productive due to fatigue. So you don't need carbs, as long as you lift heavy. Move some weight.

@SamaHoole Ah i see. Interesting. Isn’t gluconeogenesis way more energy-demanding than direct glycolysis though? I always thought relying on that pathway long-term would kinda raise cortisol and slow recovery.

@DrewDowd Yep, because I'd imagine a lot of the demands of glycolysis can be met by increased gluconeogenesis and recycled lactate.

People ask me: "how do you train heavy without carbs?" The answer: use a training style that doesn't require glycolysis. Low rep strength work uses phosphocreatine. Meat provides creatine. Keto adaptation protects existing glycogen. You're not missing carbs because your energy demands never require them.

@SamaHoole So in that case, does the phosphocreatine system’s recovery rate change when glycogen is lower? Like, can a keto-adapted system actually restore PCr as fast between sets without robust glycolysis?

@DrewDowd The point isn't that the glycolytic system remains untouched. But that the strain is much lower in the 4-6 range, and that strain can be easily managed in a keto-adapted system that already preserves glycogen very well.

Thing about Russel Wilson is his Career started to go the opposite direction after his Mindset coach Trevor Moawad died. Makes you wonder just how much Trevor’s impact meant to him. If you’ve never read his book “Getting back to Nuetral” highly recommend. Will give a ton of insight. Correlation isn’t necessarily causation but nonetheless an interesting parallel.

Just to make sure I’m tracking, you’re saying creatine might not actually exist in meat, and was maybe just “created” in the lab when it was first extracted? If we follow that logic though, wouldn’t that make any molecule we’ve discovered through extraction potentially fake? What would count as proof that something like creatine is real to you? Because we can literally measure it in living tissue now. At some point, if nothing counts as proof just because humans found it in a lab, doesn’t that kind of lead to “nothing’s real” territory?