Carnivore - Discussion community
New Community, I've created some seed posts!
Carnivore - The ultimate elimination diet
Purpose
Rules
You're viewing a single thread.
Just to front run the inevitable arguments - There are many healthy lifestyles / diets - Carnivore is one option. I have no urge to convert or decry other choices.
If your thriving, and insulin sensitive, doing something else - more power to you! Good on you.
What evidence do you have that it's healthy? Everything I've seen points to meat being linked to things like heart disease and cancer.
Also, how do you rationalize choosing a diet that maximizes animal suffering and environmental harm?
All those studies linking meat to health risks usually point at red meat, and not poultry, pork and fish.
There is evidence of risks from just meat in general, but yes, it's primary red meat and meat cooked at high heat that are the concerns.
Thanks for asking the questions! I appreciate your willingness to have a discussion!
The purpose of this community is not to change anybodies minds, or campaign, I'm happy people have chosen other diets - and I'm really glad those other paths are working for people!
What evidence do you have that it’s healthy?
The most concise resource I can point you to is : https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/skeptical-doctors They do a excellent, job and cite sources!
Carnivore is a subset of a low carb / ketogenic diet.
If you want to join me in discussing the literature: https://hackertalks.com/post/5678163 https://hackertalks.com/post/5678151 https://hackertalks.com/post/5592913 https://hackertalks.com/post/5596592 (This one requires a few more hoops and is a study about exogenous ketones, but still relevant when making diet choices)
Insulin resistance is the de facto marker of modern health issues; Carnivore by virtue of not spiking insulin, is a insulin sensitive diet, and avoids the metabolic syndrome family of problems (high blood pressure, cardio vascular disease, fatty liver disease, diabetes etc, etc)
Everything I’ve seen points to meat being linked to things like heart disease and cancer.
Heart disease is inextricably linked to metabolic syndrome, and insulin resistance; There are also findings suggestive of cancer linked to metabolic syndrome as well (see above). Carnivore, as a strict ketogenic subset, avoids metabolic syndrome entirely by maintaining insulin sensitivity.
how do you rationalize choosing a diet that maximizes animal suffering
If you choose a non-animal food diet for philosophical reasons, I applaud you, I can't fault you, and I wish you the best success.
Personally, I have a long journey to fix metabolic issues, and the bioavailability of animal based nutrition is significantly higher https://hackertalks.com/post/5606539 and is part of my recovery plan. Getting proper vitamins and minerals is hard on any diet! Depending where you draw the line, this can be achieved with dairy, eggs, and fish as well.
how do you rationalize choosing a diet that maximizes ... environmental harm?
I agree modern farming techniques need to be changed for both sustainability and humanitarian reasons. I've discussed the improvement of modern industrial food production before: https://hackertalks.com/post/5620914/6043326 but it boils down to
Keto is interesting, I haven't personally tried it, but I definitely think it can be a useful tool, even if we don't know how safe it is long term. However there are plant based ketogenic diets, so I don't think that really supports a carnivore diet. It still remains that meat is linked to heart disease and cancer.
Nutrient density and bioavailability is a fair point, but nothing that can't be compensated for by either eating more of certain foods or supplements within a plant based diet. And even if you were convinced that meat is necessary anyway, how is a full meat diet better than a mixed diet?
As far as ethics and environmental cost, while I agree with you that it could be less bad, meat production will never be ethical, nor sustainable. Raising cows for example, even with the most natural methods, still uses an enormous amout of resources including land and water for feed. And unless you're somehow capturing the methane produced, that has a significant environmental cost as well.
The current reality of the meat industry today is much worse, though. If you're eating meat today, you're supporting today's meat industry.
It still remains that meat is linked to heart disease and cancer.
As far as I'm aware the studies that have shown this link are observational (i.e. the literature will say "linked", "associated", "correlated"), with significant healthy user bias. None of the papers have compared ketogenic omnivore, vs pure carnivore, vs pure vegan (not keto). But if your aware of a paper that has a stronger link, I'd love to read it - I genuinely mean that, I'll read every word of it!
I fully admit a standard american diet (SAD) - is a recipe for cancer, and heart disease! Any diet that moves away from it is a improvement! So if the studies linking to heart issues in the context of insulin resistance really apply to a insulin sensitive carnivore diet?
Allow me to flip the coin as a illustration - We know high sugar intake, and high carbohydrate intake are incredibly linked with insulin resistance - which is the driver for diabetes, cardio vascular issues. Using the same logic you have used, I could say (since all sugar/carbs comes from plants), with full accuracy and confidence, 'it still remains that plants are linked to heart disease and cancer'. Clearly this is absurd and reductive way to discuss things.
Here is a bonus fun read on the issues with observational data and cherry picking: https://www.diagnosisdiet.com/full-article/meat-and-cancer
And even if you were convinced that meat is necessary anyway, how is a full meat diet better than a mixed diet?
If we agree that animal based foods are bioavailable and biocomplete, then a mixed diet would be for variety, or food availability. Can a insulin sensitive omnivore diet do as well as carnivore, probably. The markers I care about are all cause mortality, inflammation, gut health, and most importantly ease of compliance.
If someone has a chronic gut issue, like Chron's or IBS... then carnivore is nearly a requirement to a decent quality of life. Most of carnivore food is fully digested before it gets to the intestines, which is why its such a boon for people with gut issues.
meat production will never be ethical, nor sustainable.
I respect your conclusions, and I thank you for sharing them with me.
If you're eating meat today, you're supporting today's meat industry.
Yes, with great enthusiasm, hence my creating this community. Though I do purchase my meat directly from a sustainable farm.
There are many, many, studies showing these links. I don't think keto is relevant in assessing the risk of meat itself.
And no, meat is not biocomplete. You'll eventually run into vitamin deficiencies if you don't eat anything else. Although you can always supplement.
https://health.selfdecode.com/blog/carnivore-diet/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2840051/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fsn3.3300
https://www.myibsteam.com/resources/carnivore-diet-for-ibs-is-it-effective
Though I do purchase my meat directly from a sustainable farm.
Even if it's relatively "sustainable" compared to other meat production, it still has an enormous environmental cost compared to plant foods.
I don't expect to change your mind about this, and if this diet is the only thing that works for you personally to address your gut issues, so be it, I can't really fault you for that.
But anyone else reading this should know that it's neither healthy nor sustainable.
You'll eventually run into vitamin deficiencies if you don't eat anything else.
What is deficient?
Everything is in a context, I'm just going to discuss one in your first link (which isn't research, just a blog) - Scurvy. The intuit eating their traditional diet did not get scurvy, famously... funnily enough - meat has vitamin C in it (among other things) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22063662/
Oh, I now realize the first site also lists Vitamin A as a carnivore deficiency, but also says Liver is the best source of Vitamin A..... That is .... some gymnastics there. Let me say, you can't eat healthily by just eating muscle. You have to eat the whole animal - tip to tail. Liver too! Liver is the best thing you ever eat. The fat is necessary, the organs are necessary. That is why ground meat is probably the best food you can get at a grocery store (just behind liver)
The second paper - Food questionnaire applied to a high carbohydrate population (healthy user bias/observational study)
Third paper - They even use 'MAY' in the title, which also means MAY NOT.
The fourth - is a article by a lay person.
This is the poor quality science issue I was referring to in the previous post.
If your going to have a blanket statement like this isn't sustainable - you have to address real counter examples - the intuit lived without plants, and without cancer on a all carnivore diet.
There are other nutrients than vitamin c and a, but If you're eating a high seafood diet and lots of liver, great.
Low carb isn't going to magically protect you from cancer and heart disease. Studies don't have to be specifically on low carb diets to be valid. Also 'may be a significant risk factor' is normal scientific wording for finding a statistical correlation.
the intuit lived without plants, and without cancer I don't think we have evidence for that, and I'm not sure it's even relevant.
More importantly though, even the best farming practices, there is no sustainable or environmentally friendly way to produce meat. Again, I'm not sure what the Inuit have to do with that, given how different our modern meat industry is. But growing food, feeding it to animals (who produce greenhouse gasses), and eating those animals is an extremely inefficient and destructive way to get food. Not to mention the horrific treatment, enslavement, and killing of those animals.