The Case for the Carnivore Diet: Why I believe it's most optimal

[Seeker in the Dark]

I want to start this post by first saying this is mainly my opinion/view on why I believe the carnivore diet is optimal for humans. As this is one of those topics that some people get mad about for some reason, I'd like to say that it's best for SS to remain objective and emotionless when studying such topics. What you eat is not your religion, there's no need to be emotionally attached to it. Rather than attacking me, I would prefer to see coherent rebuttals to what I have to say, I have no steak in this other than helping fellow SS as well as myself be as healthy as possible and I'll change my mind freely on this if shown to be wrong. If you believe the diet you're doing right now is perfect for you, then by all means, stick to it.

While I'm not the best person to present this, I'll do my best. I'll make my case by addressing(A) common objections(O) to Carnivore.

O1: The diet is extreme and restrictive

A1: Extreme is a very relative term, usually used by people to discredit whatever they're calling "extreme". Pretty much all of the views the JOS holds would be considered "extreme" by mainstream society. The term restrictive sounds better on the surface as the diet seems very restrictive compared to what an average diet consists of, but is restriction itself bad? It's good to restrict things that aren't good for you, like drugs, alcohol and so on, even if they make you feel good. I'll later argue why I think pretty much all plants aren't good for human consumption(unless for medicinal purposes).

O2: It's unhealthy (meat is claimed to cause this or that disease)

A2: I'll keep this brief as I don't want to turn this into an essay. The blame red meat and saturated fat get for certain diseases comes from associative, epidemiological studies that lump red meat consumption with smoking, unhealthy habits, sugar and so on. The data is then adjusted and sorted by the researchers. I recommend you research this further rather than simply looking at mainstream-approved surface points. These are the same people who told us C19 vaccines were good for us, I'd take anything they have to say with a grain of salt. A good YouTube channel for this that I'd recommend is Bart Kay, he goes into the biochemistry behind these diseases and has 20 years behind studying human biology. He is abrasive though, which he admits is just part of his shtick to get more views, but look past the attitude and focus on the claims, then verify for yourself what he says by looking at academic, scientific papers, avoid using blogs or promotional websites for these kinds of things.

O3: We need glucose

A3: Yes, but the body can produce all the glucose it needs for the parts of it that need glucose, the process is called gluconeogenesis:

Physiology, Gluconeogenesis - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf

O4: Glucose is the optimal fuel

A4: While there might be an argument for this if you're doing extreme sports and need a lot of fast energy, I do not believe glucose is the best fuel for overall energy. The two main fuels the body uses from food are glucose and fat. Glucose ages the body, attaches to and corrupts DNA, proteins and just causes damage. Dietary animal fat does none of those things. The process is called glycation, it's biochemically proven:

The role of glycation in the pathogenesis of aging and its prevention through herbal products and physical exercise - PMC

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) are non-enzymatic modifications of proteins or lipids after exposure to sugars. In this review, the glycation process and AGEs are introduced, and the harmful effects of AGEs in the aging process are discussed. ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The body also adapts to fuel usage and will optimise itself to using glucose if you've been consuming a diet primarily consisting of that for a long time. The microbiome also will optimise itself to glucose consumption with the bacteria there eating the glucose you feed them. This is why it's advised to gradually switch to carnivore over several weeks/months rather than cold turkey, as switching cold turkey will lead to issues such as low energy, mood swings, stool issues and so on. This is the main reason people report problems with carnivore. A gradual switch will allow your body and the microbiome to slowly optimise themselves to fat consumption.

O5: We need fiber for optimal digestion

A5: Hundreds of thousands of people who do carnivore do just fine without fiber. The issues people get with their stools when doing carnivore is because they switched cold turkey, which shocks the microbiome which has adapted to fiber in the same manner as glucose, causing these issues. I do not think we need fiber, and there has been some research that suggests removing fibre actually can improve constipation issues:

Stopping or reducing dietary fiber intake reduces constipation and its associated symptoms - PMC

AIM: To investigate the effect of reducing dietary fiber on patients with idiopathic constipation. METHODS: Sixty-three cases of idiopathic constipation presenting between May 2008 and May 2010 were enrolled into the study after colonoscopy excluded ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

O6: We need plants for certain vitamins/minerals we can't get from meat

A6: The most common Vitamin mentioned is Vitamin C. There is in fact Vitamin C in beef, even after it's cooked, not as abundant as in fruit but enough for humans. Again I'd refer to the hundreds of thousands of carnivores who do just fine on the diet without getting scurvy. The daily recommended amount for Vitamin C has been argued by some to be far higher than it's needed to be because glucose is chemically almost the same structure as Vitamin C, which then leads it to compete with the Vitamin for absorption in the body:

This isn't usually a problem for the average person as Vitamin C is easy to get if you eat a lot of fruit. With glucose out of the picture, however, Vitamin C is now free to be absorbed in the body without competition.

As for other vitamins/minerals, red meat and especially beef pretty much contains all of them in their optimal amounts.

Another issue with plants is the antinutrients they have, which then impede the absorption of several vitamins/minerals. Do research antinutrients for yourself. Thoroughly sprouting and cooking the plants will remove most anti-nutrients in them though, but why go through all that effort when you can just fry some meat for a couple of minutes and get all you need? Meat also easily meets our protein requirements, good luck getting 100g of protein from any plant food alone in one setting.

This was a summary of why I personally believe the carnivore diet is optimal. There is a lot of detail left out here which I recommend you research for yourself and come to your own conclusions regarding the claims. I may be wrong on this and I'll change my mind if I believe a good rebuttal was made.

 

[Hs666]

...

There is no need to argue. The Jos and the Gods (creators of humanity) say that human beings are omnivores and need both. Everything else is garbage.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

There is no need to argue. The Jos and the Gods (creators of humanity) say that human beings are omnivores and need both. Everything else is garbage.

Historically, there has been several human civilisations that were mainly plant-based(not in the vegan sense, I mean diet was mainly plant with some animals, usually grains) or animal-based (inuits, mongols).

The Mongol traditional diet was and still is in many areas mainly meat. Lamb is/was their staple, they eat lamb like civilisations ate bread/rice, in that quantity. I couldn't believe it when I read it the first time. Mongolian men are also the ones with the highest testosterone in the world. However, in second place are the Ethiopians, who are omnivores but also have periods in the year when they go vegetarian.

Human diets have an amazing variety. Some might do better on mainly plants, others mainly animals. The case I made for carnivore explained the general arguments made by those who know what they're talking about regarding the carnivore diet.

Personally, I think animal-based is likely better for most people, but I could be wrong. Millions have reported huge benefits from strictly limiting or even eliminating carbs and adding more meat/fat to their diets by doing a variety of keto/carnivore diets. But there are also people who benefited more from low fat, high carb diets, and some who do better on a balanced diet.

Idk exactly why tbh. No other species has the variety that we do. Bears are a close example, as they eat literally everything, except polar bears that pretty much exclusively eat meat and fat, mirroring the inuits interenstingly, meanwhile the bears in other areas eat plants and animals, like humans. But those bears are separate on a species-level.

As for what you say, simply relying on authority shouldn't be the end-all. Explore why it is said, how it works and so on. Why do we need plants, provide an argument why. Most plants are not edible for humans, some are lethal even in small amounts.

 

[Henu the Great]

Historically, there has been several human civilisations that were mainly plant-based(not in the vegan sense, I mean diet was mainly plant with some animals, usually grains) or animal-based (inuits, mongols).

The Mongol traditional diet was and still is in many areas mainly meat. Lamb is/was their staple, they eat lamb like civilisations ate bread/rice, in that quantity. I couldn't believe it when I read it the first time. Mongolian men are also the ones with the highest testosterone in the world. However, in second place are the Ethiopians, who are omnivores but also have periods in the year when they go vegetarian.

Human diets have an amazing variety. Some might do better on mainly plants, others mainly animals. The case I made for carnivore explained the general arguments made by those who know what they're talking about regarding the carnivore diet.

Personally, I think animal-based is likely better for most people, but I could be wrong. Millions have reported huge benefits from strictly limiting or even eliminating carbs and adding more meat/fat to their diets by doing a variety of keto/carnivore diets. But there are also people who benefited more from low fat, high carb diets, and some who do better on a balanced diet.

Idk exactly why tbh. No other species has the variety that we do. Bears are a close example, as they eat literally everything, except polar bears that pretty much exclusively eat meat and fat, mirroring the inuits interenstingly, meanwhile the bears in other areas eat plants and animals, like humans. But those bears are separate on a species-level.

As for what you say, simply relying on authority shouldn't be the end-all. Explore why it is said, how it works and so on. Why do we need plants, provide an argument why. Most plants are not edible for humans, some are lethal even in small amounts.

You completely ignored epigenetics and environmental variances. Not only those, but different times have produced nutrition of various qualities. All these and more should be factored in. We live in a modern society, not in some far-away land where food is scarce or simply low in variety and we have adapted to this.

Yes, some people go low on carbohydrates because of their overindulgence in carbohydrates and lack of exercise. Carbohydrates are essentially fuel, after all. When the fuel is not spent, issues arise, eventually leading to diabetes/dampness (TCM perspective).

There is no one-size fits all solution because of environmental factors alone. And any approach that promotes onesided nutritional intake is silly at this point of time, unless underlying health conditions require it. For most situations and for healthy people, what you present is not a good approach.

We do not need the latest health fads around here, but you are of course welcome to experiment on your own whatever you want to.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

You completely ignored epigenetics and environmental variances. Not only those, but different times have produced nutrition of various qualities. All these and more should be factored in. We live in a modern society, not in some far-away land where food is scarce or simply low in variety and we have adapted to this.

Yes, some people go low on carbohydrates because of their overindulgence in carbohydrates and lack of exercise. Carbohydrates are essentially fuel, after all. When the fuel is not spent, issues arise, eventually leading to diabetes/dampness (TCM perspective).

There is no one-size fits all solution because of environmental factors alone. And any approach that promotes onesided nutritional intake is silly at this point of time, unless underlying health conditions require it. For most situations and for healthy people, what you present is not a good approach.

We do not need the latest health fads around here, but you are of course welcome to experiment on your own whatever you want to.

By TCM do you mean Traditional Chinese Medicine?

 

[Hs666]

...

The jos is “the Assembly of the Gods.” The information you find here comes from the gods through the leader present in the jos.

You should accept the reality of the facts. If I created, for example, an object, you could not know better than I do, what this object needs, because you do not know it. Your opinions are only conjecture, moreover in this sense erroneous. The reason why is simple and I explained it to you earlier.

There is no need to get technical, with vague knowledge taken a little here and a little there. You can't know more than the gods. To think such a thing is delusion. You're only wasting time, and health if you apply it, and if everything goes smoothly good for you, that's what even vegans say though, before they die from absurd diets. Then everyone does what they want, the Gods always leave free will, and some understand and/or find out too late, that the Gods and the Jos were right, as always.

 

[Henu the Great]

By TCM do you mean Traditional Chinese Medicine?

Yes, and to be more precise, chronic dampness in the body leads to diabetes. This can be alleviated with rigorous exercise and moderation in carbohydrate intake.

 

[Meow!]

Humans are literally built to eat both meat and plants. Simply look at your own teeth. What is needed is the ancient knowledge of how to prepare the things we eat in order to get the best out of spaces grow enough food and healthy animals to feed a large amount of people. our food and the desperate need to return to the ancient ways of farming when we were more in harmony with mother earth. We know thru science now about the microorganisums in the soil and how they help plants and animals get more nurtrients. Plenty of people prove today that we can with small acres of land feed many people. once an entire country goes this way then discussions such as what diet is best will fall away as we will prove once and for all that balance of both plants and animals with proper handeling such as fermenting certain veggies will give us all the best of both worlds.

I suggest you look at the site Weston A Price Foundation as they have copious amount of both old world knowledge and scientific studies.


Hail Father Satan

 

[ᥫ᭡. Echos ৻ꪆ]

I want to start this post by first saying this is mainly my opinion/view on why I believe the carnivore diet is optimal for humans. As this is one of those topics that some people get mad about for some reason, I'd like to say that it's best for SS to remain objective and emotionless when studying such topics. What you eat is not your religion, there's no need to be emotionally attached to it. Rather than attacking me, I would prefer to see coherent rebuttals to what I have to say, I have no steak in this other than helping fellow SS as well as myself be as healthy as possible and I'll change my mind freely on this if shown to be wrong. If you believe the diet you're doing right now is perfect for you, then by all means, stick to it.

While I'm not the best person to present this, I'll do my best. I'll make my case by addressing(A) common objections(O) to Carnivore.

O1: The diet is extreme and restrictive

A1: Extreme is a very relative term, usually used by people to discredit whatever they're calling "extreme". Pretty much all of the views the JOS holds would be considered "extreme" by mainstream society. The term restrictive sounds better on the surface as the diet seems very restrictive compared to what an average diet consists of, but is restriction itself bad? It's good to restrict things that aren't good for you, like drugs, alcohol and so on, even if they make you feel good. I'll later argue why I think pretty much all plants aren't good for human consumption(unless for medicinal purposes).

O2: It's unhealthy (meat is claimed to cause this or that disease)

A2: I'll keep this brief as I don't want to turn this into an essay. The blame red meat and saturated fat get for certain diseases comes from associative, epidemiological studies that lump red meat consumption with smoking, unhealthy habits, sugar and so on. The data is then adjusted and sorted by the researchers. I recommend you research this further rather than simply looking at mainstream-approved surface points. These are the same people who told us C19 vaccines were good for us, I'd take anything they have to say with a grain of salt. A good YouTube channel for this that I'd recommend is Bart Kay, he goes into the biochemistry behind these diseases and has 20 years behind studying human biology. He is abrasive though, which he admits is just part of his shtick to get more views, but look past the attitude and focus on the claims, then verify for yourself what he says by looking at academic, scientific papers, avoid using blogs or promotional websites for these kinds of things.

O3: We need glucose

A3: Yes, but the body can produce all the glucose it needs for the parts of it that need glucose, the process is called gluconeogenesis:

Physiology, Gluconeogenesis - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf

O4: Glucose is the optimal fuel

A4: While there might be an argument for this if you're doing extreme sports and need a lot of fast energy, I do not believe glucose is the best fuel for overall energy. The two main fuels the body uses from food are glucose and fat. Glucose ages the body, attaches to and corrupts DNA, proteins and just causes damage. Dietary animal fat does none of those things. The process is called glycation, it's biochemically proven:

The role of glycation in the pathogenesis of aging and its prevention through herbal products and physical exercise - PMC

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) are non-enzymatic modifications of proteins or lipids after exposure to sugars. In this review, the glycation process and AGEs are introduced, and the harmful effects of AGEs in the aging process are discussed. ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The body also adapts to fuel usage and will optimise itself to using glucose if you've been consuming a diet primarily consisting of that for a long time. The microbiome also will optimise itself to glucose consumption with the bacteria there eating the glucose you feed them. This is why it's advised to gradually switch to carnivore over several weeks/months rather than cold turkey, as switching cold turkey will lead to issues such as low energy, mood swings, stool issues and so on. This is the main reason people report problems with carnivore. A gradual switch will allow your body and the microbiome to slowly optimise themselves to fat consumption.

O5: We need fiber for optimal digestion

A5: Hundreds of thousands of people who do carnivore do just fine without fiber. The issues people get with their stools when doing carnivore is because they switched cold turkey, which shocks the microbiome which has adapted to fiber in the same manner as glucose, causing these issues. I do not think we need fiber, and there has been some research that suggests removing fibre actually can improve constipation issues:

Stopping or reducing dietary fiber intake reduces constipation and its associated symptoms - PMC

AIM: To investigate the effect of reducing dietary fiber on patients with idiopathic constipation. METHODS: Sixty-three cases of idiopathic constipation presenting between May 2008 and May 2010 were enrolled into the study after colonoscopy excluded ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

O6: We need plants for certain vitamins/minerals we can't get from meat

A6: The most common Vitamin mentioned is Vitamin C. There is in fact Vitamin C in beef, even after it's cooked, not as abundant as in fruit but enough for humans. Again I'd refer to the hundreds of thousands of carnivores who do just fine on the diet without getting scurvy. The daily recommended amount for Vitamin C has been argued by some to be far higher than it's needed to be because glucose is chemically almost the same structure as Vitamin C, which then leads it to compete with the Vitamin for absorption in the body:

This isn't usually a problem for the average person as Vitamin C is easy to get if you eat a lot of fruit. With glucose out of the picture, however, Vitamin C is now free to be absorbed in the body without competition.

As for other vitamins/minerals, red meat and especially beef pretty much contains all of them in their optimal amounts.

Another issue with plants is the antinutrients they have, which then impede the absorption of several vitamins/minerals. Do research antinutrients for yourself. Thoroughly sprouting and cooking the plants will remove most anti-nutrients in them though, but why go through all that effort when you can just fry some meat for a couple of minutes and get all you need? Meat also easily meets our protein requirements, good luck getting 100g of protein from any plant food alone in one setting.

This was a summary of why I personally believe the carnivore diet is optimal. There is a lot of detail left out here which I recommend you research for yourself and come to your own conclusions regarding the claims. I may be wrong on this and I'll change my mind if I believe a good rebuttal was made.

I personally am very picky with meat but I'm forcing myself to consume more. I naturally enjoy vegetables and fruits more, but I'm well aware that animal products are incredibly vital for humans.

One just has to look at vegans to see how unhealthy it is to turn into a herbivore.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

I just want to say I didn’t get any real rebuttal to what i had to say, only appeals to religious authority(where did the Gods say we need to eat plants?) ,dismissing the diet as a fad even though humans pretty much ate a carnivore diet with few plants for millions of years before agriculture was invented, merely claiming the diet isn’t optimal or sustainable without saying why or merely claiming humans need plants without arguing why either, or saying that humans ate plants in the past and that’s why we need them, which is also not a good argument either. Humans for example have also been drinking alcohol for millennia, there are even myths of Gods drinking alcohol, does that mean we need alcohol? Of course not.

I presented scientific arguments why i believe what i believe. I gave studies, used scientific terms in their correct definitions, talked about biochemistry and explained why the diet doesn’t actually contain defiencies, going into detail about vitamins, minerals and fiber. I also adressed the common objections to the carnivore diet. All of that was entirely ignored by everyone who replied to the post, instead resorting to thought-stopping rebuttals that consisted of dismissive claims without any scientific substantiation.

I will address the teeth argument though. Just compare the teeth of prehistoric humans who primarily ate meat to the teeth of agricultural humans who primarily ate grains, then see who had healthier teeth.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

I suggest you look at the site Weston A Price Foundation as they have copious amount of both old world knowledge and scientific studies.


Hail Father Satan

Speaking of Price, he actually bolsters what I have to say. Some perhistoric human populations ate mainly meat with some fruits and vegetables. Others ate pretty much only meat with few if any plants. Very little carbs and sugar. Fruits back then barely had any sugar so I doubt even the humans who ate some plants even ate above 100g of carbs a day, which today would count as a low carb diet if it wouldn’t be carnivore.

Here is the source and what he had to say regarding their teeth pre-agriculture:

The Perfect Teeth of Prehistoric Humans - Ketopia

Diet has a strong influence on dental health. Alice and Fred Ottoboni turn back the clock to paleo prehistory to reveal why the modern diet destroys teeth.

ketopia.com

From the article:

“The Primitive Diet:​

Price identified fourteen tribal diets that differed widely in composition but all of which conferred almost complete immunity to tooth decay and resistance to illness. Some of the healthful diets were based on sea foods and others on domestic animals or dairy foods; regardless of source, all contained animal products of some kind. Some contained no plant foods while others included a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. Some diets were eaten cooked and others eaten raw. Preservation methods among the primitive groups included drying, salting, and fermenting.

Price analyzed the primitive diets and found that all contained at least four times the water soluble vitamins and minerals than the current modern diets and at least ten times the amount of fat soluble vitamins from animal fats, including vitamins A, D, and Price’s Activator X.

Components of the modern diets that were totally absent from the primitive diets were white sugar and flour, canned foods of all varieties, pasteurized or skimmed milk, and refined or hydrogenated vegetable oils.”


As for epigenetics and variances, people from all races and phenotypes have claimed benefits from adopting a carnivore or low-carb diet. Just look online, you’ll find Whites, Blacks, Asians, Arabs and so on.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

Speaking of Price, he actually bolsters what I have to say. Some perhistoric human populations ate mainly meat with some fruits and vegetables. Others ate pretty much only meat with few if any plants. Very little carbs and sugar. Fruits back then barely had any sugar so I doubt even the humans who ate some plants even ate above 100g of carbs a day, which today would count as a low carb diet if it wouldn’t be carnivore.

Here is the source and what he had to say regarding their teeth pre-agriculture:

The Perfect Teeth of Prehistoric Humans - Ketopia

Diet has a strong influence on dental health. Alice and Fred Ottoboni turn back the clock to paleo prehistory to reveal why the modern diet destroys teeth.

ketopia.com

From the article:

“The Primitive Diet:​

Price identified fourteen tribal diets that differed widely in composition but all of which conferred almost complete immunity to tooth decay and resistance to illness. Some of the healthful diets were based on sea foods and others on domestic animals or dairy foods; regardless of source, all contained animal products of some kind. Some contained no plant foods while others included a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. Some diets were eaten cooked and others eaten raw. Preservation methods among the primitive groups included drying, salting, and fermenting.

Price analyzed the primitive diets and found that all contained at least four times the water soluble vitamins and minerals than the current modern diets and at least ten times the amount of fat soluble vitamins from animal fats, including vitamins A, D, and Price’s Activator X.

Components of the modern diets that were totally absent from the primitive diets were white sugar and flour, canned foods of all varieties, pasteurized or skimmed milk, and refined or hydrogenated vegetable oils.”


As for epigenetics and variances, people from all races and phenotypes have claimed benefits from adopting a carnivore or low-carb diet. Just look online, you’ll find Whites, Blacks, Asians, Arabs and so on.

Correction: Price here is analysing the diets of modern tribes, but he is using them as reference for prehistoric diets as the tribal diets pretty much are continuations of these diets.

Stable isotope testing also proves that prehistoric human diets were primarily fatty meat and some plants, mainly seasonal fruit and cooked roots, which basically meant barely any carbs, although quite a bit of fiber.

Low carb/carnivore is not a fad, it’s merely returning to our prehistoric way of eating, mainly meat and some if any plants. The “fad” insult is just a mainstream/vegan reply, and not an argument, similar to other insults that pretend to be arguments like “racist”, “islamophobe”, and so on.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

To add some counterweight, there have been populations who live very healthy lives on diets with not a lot of animal products. The Japanese for example have eating a primarily carb, vegetable-heavy diet with a lot of fermented foods and live to their 80s on average. I just wanted to give a proper argument for the low-carb/carnivore perspective as I think it gets criticised unjustifiably while it could help a lot of people and has shown to be a proper, stable and healthy alternative to the mainly carb-based diets people have, with scientific and archaeological backing (unlike actual, dangerous fads like veganism, which is an unhealthy and extremely recent diet that no humans in the past ate).

 

[Meow!]

we also have to remember that they did ferment a lot of food which helped with what they had to eat and we have a lot more options now. but we don't properly ferment foods which has caused a good deal of harm too on top of a lot of other things. Which is why i love the Weston site because they work with our modern options and show how we can optomize them to the best ability without feeling as if we are depriving ourselves. I need to get back to the site myself and figure out how to do more of their suggestions.

Hail Father Satan

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

we also have to remember that they did ferment a lot of food which helped with what they had to eat and we have a lot more options now. but we don't properly ferment foods which has caused a good deal of harm too on top of a lot of other things. Which is why i love the Weston site because they work with our modern options and show how we can optomize them to the best ability without feeling as if we are depriving ourselves. I need to get back to the site myself and figure out how to do more of their suggestions.

Hail Father Satan

I personally drink kefir everyday. It's one of the best, if not the best fermented food out there.

 

[SomewhatCoherent]

To add some counterweight, there have been populations who live very healthy lives on diets with not a lot of animal products. The Japanese for example have eating a primarily carb, vegetable-heavy diet with a lot of fermented foods and live to their 80s on average. I just wanted to give a proper argument for the low-carb/carnivore perspective as I think it gets criticised unjustifiably while it could help a lot of people and has shown to be a proper, stable and healthy alternative to the mainly carb-based diets people have, with scientific and archaeological backing (unlike actual, dangerous fads like veganism, which is an unhealthy and extremely recent diet that no humans in the past ate).

I think a lot of people, not just on here get over zealous about diets. If you aren't the same thing as them there is something wrong with you. Humans are adaptable and to all kinds of diets and we can switch between them if needed.

 

[ᥫ᭡. Echos ৻ꪆ]

To add some counterweight, there have been populations who live very healthy lives on diets with not a lot of animal products. The Japanese for example have eating a primarily carb, vegetable-heavy diet with a lot of fermented foods and live to their 80s on average. I just wanted to give a proper argument for the low-carb/carnivore perspective as I think it gets criticised unjustifiably while it could help a lot of people and has shown to be a proper, stable and healthy alternative to the mainly carb-based diets people have, with scientific and archaeological backing (unlike actual, dangerous fads like veganism, which is an unhealthy and extremely recent diet that no humans in the past ate).

I suppose it also depends on race and individual.

 

[Meow!]

the japanese also eat a lot of products from the sea and rice is diffferent than wheat so it's also the food itself that is a big factor on how the diet works with the individual. it's a facinating field when you take out the politics and use as much fact as possible- mean no sugar companies paying for the reasearch studies which really screwed us over the years.


Hail Father Satan

 

[Pan_Shaman]

I am on cetogenic diet currently. Dont plan on going carnivore, cetogenic diet is 25-40grs of carbs max and it works for me.

Its also a treatment to diabetes and multiple chronic psychiatric conditions, such as bipolar, epilepsy etc. its emerging and i think it can be useful to people, such as me, who need it cause of psychiatric ilness.

Frankly, i could go carnivore but its ultra expensive. Being cetogenig for a month now i ll say i have much less inflamation, my apettite dropped and i feel healthier in the mind (carbs cause inflammation on the brain). But i speak only from my side, everyone should eat what they feel like its best as long as they are researching it and doing it consciously.

 

[Centralforce666]

The primary problem with the carnivore diet is that it does not contain an adequate balance of the five flavours, being Salty, Sour, Bitter, Sweet and Pungent.

The use of bitters, sours and pungent in particular, whose flavours are required to:

In the case of bitters, drain, disinhibit and assist in cleaving turbid from clear. This is essential to ensure that the clear food substances are cleaved from the turbid ones, so as to reduce damp and phlegm conditions in the body. It is true that Lamb is a bitter meat, however all the bitter substances have an affinity for different parts of the body. Lamb enters the Heart, but the Liver, Stomach, Large Intestine, Small Intestine, Kidneys and Bladder also need to be drained so there needs to be a variety of bitter foods according to the seasons. Modern research has shown that bitter compounds in plants are often only found in that one plant, and stimulate different stages of metabolism and digestion.

In the case of sours, all the sour meats are animals which it is frowned upon to eat (dog meat is considered sour) and the evidence in human history of sour products forming staple parts of cultural diets is overwhelming. Sauerkraut in Germany, Kimchi in Korea, Miso in Japan, French Cheeses, Kombucha, and vinegar are all things which are fermented and carry a sour flavour. The sour flavour is essential for drawing the clear fluids from the alimentary tract into the yin organs (Lungs, Heart, Kidney, Spleen and Liver) and from a modern bioscience point of view, the bacteria that grows during the fermentation process ends up in the gut, displacing and competing with bad bacteria and encouraging better gut health which improves absorption.

In the case of pungent, the orient has made its own case for this, particularly in India, Nepal, Vietnam, with curries forming a large part of their diet. Pungent (spicy) flavours, including vegetables such as radish, onion and leek serve to open the body's orifices. The pores, the nasal passages, the upper and lower gastric sphincters. Again, no one pungent ingredient is sufficient to promote health, as each one has an affinity for a different part of the body, and variety is essential to the proper opening of these orifices to prevent blockage and stagnation.

The concept of nutrition alone cannot sustain the body. One MUST consider absorption and assimilation, as well as the appropriate expulsion and draining of wastes.