It's really hard out there for someone looking for THE diet, you have heart surgeons and other docs touting carnivore, and then you have the complete opposite, how is anyone supposed to find something that works by other means than trying out for themselves. Also the evidence for anything is compelling to support almost any line of eating, i get all the theoretical evidence against carnivore and am not sold on it, still i would not tell anyone feeling their best ever on it that they will die from it. On paper carnicore has many question marks like what you mention here and also l-carnitine, igf-1, ammonia, lipids to name a few, who really knows if after all high ldl has downsides. Thankfully personally i will never probably be able to afford full on carnivore on quality meat, even though beef is not as critical when it comes to animal diet as mentioned. Just have to stick to avoiding all the bad stuff mostly.
Advice needed. TRT started
- Thread starter downsouthindevon
- Start date
Notably absent is a critique of the actual studies. That's like my saying that your posts are riddled with misinformation without providing specifics.
I presume your real world data consists of a few anecdotes, which even if reflecting reality — not a given — might be applicable to a small fraction of the population. If you dismiss scientific rigor then you can't establish much of anything.
Quantifying with vague statements like "so many people" is virtually meaningless. It's an unblinded test with nothing to indicate whether the purported response rate is one in a hundred or one in a million. All you have is a hypothesis that needs to be tested. An alternative hypothesis is that in "decreasing consumption of other things" these individuals managed to eliminate the few items they were sensitive to, which had nothing to do with meat.
What points? You mean unsupported opinion? This is the guy who talks about the importance of balance while promoting a diet that is exceptionally unbalanced.
What does "we see" mean? A couple reports on a forum? There's nothing here to support dietary recommendations for the general population.
If it's so easy to poke holes in then why not actually look at the study and critique it directly? But that takes work.
Any source for that or did you just make up the number? How many tried a FODMAP elimination diet first? As noted above, even if there's truth to the anecdotes, it could just be a matter of removing a few problematic foods. This would be independent of meat consumption.
Oh nice, I could not love Anthony Chaffee’s stuff more. I’ve watched hundreds of his vids at this point. When I think of the people that have minds that I appreciate the most, when it comes to health and nutrition, it’s Dr Anthony Chaffee, Dr Paul Saladino, and Dr Shawn Baker. Anthony might be at the top of that list tho. Love his views/ takes on things
@Cataceous Any source for that or did you just make up the number? How many tried a FODMAP elimination diet first? As noted above, even if there's truth to the anecdotes, it could just be a matter of removing a few problematic foods. This would be independent of meat consumption.
[/QUOTE]
I keep it simple. If I consistently see anecdotes of people curing long time chronic gut issues with certain methods, over other methods, I take that as evidence that there is something to these methods that’s working for more people than other methods, then I try to reverse engineer why this method is working so well for so many people, and/ or gather information from people much smarter than me reverse engineer why
I can see a low fodmap diet possibly helping with gut issues, but I can also see a bunch of foods that could absolutely cause people gut issues, which wouldn’t make sense to consume if healing the gut is their goal. If healing the gut is the goal, I absolutely wouldn’t be regularly consuming veggies, nuts, seeds and grains. I would be trying to eat as little fiber as possible. The best diet that I’ve come across to date, to heal gut issues, is the carnivore diet, or if u want to be even more strict, the lion diet.
If they did a study where they took say 100 participants, and had 50 on a carnivore or lion diet, and 50 on a low fodmap diet, I already know how the study would play out. The results wouldn’t even be close. The 50 participants doing a carnivore or lion diet would have much more success, at healing their gut issues, than the other 50 participants. I personally don’t need a study to realize this, but it obv would be beneficial to have it, so people that don’t understand the body as much, in regards to how different foods affect it, could see how beneficial a carnivore/ lion diet is, compared to other ways of eating. In this case, at least in regards to healing gut issues. Now understanding why the carnivore/ lion diet would be better, in this scenario, wouldn’t be explained by the study, I assume. That would still require people to do research on the ins and outs of why the carnivore/ lion diet is so beneficial, when it comes to optimal health of the human body. Like I’ve said in the past, all truth/ facts come to light eventually. So I know the carnivore/ lion diet will only become more and more popular and accepted, because the truth/ facts don’t lie. It’s just taking some people longer to realize why the diet works so well, than others, which is completely understandable. But the carnivore/ lion diet is only going to become more accepted and practiced as time goes on, that I can 100% guarantee. Again, I don’t have any skin in the game. I just have done the research enough to know this will be the case
[/QUOTE]
I keep it simple. If I consistently see anecdotes of people curing long time chronic gut issues with certain methods, over other methods, I take that as evidence that there is something to these methods that’s working for more people than other methods, then I try to reverse engineer why this method is working so well for so many people, and/ or gather information from people much smarter than me reverse engineer why
I can see a low fodmap diet possibly helping with gut issues, but I can also see a bunch of foods that could absolutely cause people gut issues, which wouldn’t make sense to consume if healing the gut is their goal. If healing the gut is the goal, I absolutely wouldn’t be regularly consuming veggies, nuts, seeds and grains. I would be trying to eat as little fiber as possible. The best diet that I’ve come across to date, to heal gut issues, is the carnivore diet, or if u want to be even more strict, the lion diet.
If they did a study where they took say 100 participants, and had 50 on a carnivore or lion diet, and 50 on a low fodmap diet, I already know how the study would play out. The results wouldn’t even be close. The 50 participants doing a carnivore or lion diet would have much more success, at healing their gut issues, than the other 50 participants. I personally don’t need a study to realize this, but it obv would be beneficial to have it, so people that don’t understand the body as much, in regards to how different foods affect it, could see how beneficial a carnivore/ lion diet is, compared to other ways of eating. In this case, at least in regards to healing gut issues. Now understanding why the carnivore/ lion diet would be better, in this scenario, wouldn’t be explained by the study, I assume. That would still require people to do research on the ins and outs of why the carnivore/ lion diet is so beneficial, when it comes to optimal health of the human body. Like I’ve said in the past, all truth/ facts come to light eventually. So I know the carnivore/ lion diet will only become more and more popular and accepted, because the truth/ facts don’t lie. It’s just taking some people longer to realize why the diet works so well, than others, which is completely understandable. But the carnivore/ lion diet is only going to become more accepted and practiced as time goes on, that I can 100% guarantee. Again, I don’t have any skin in the game. I just have done the research enough to know this will be the case
Attachments
Last edited:
Anyone that does strict carnivore, with foods from animals fed their natural diets, and none of the foods being processed, like the pasteurizing/ homogenizing of milk, for example, will always see a decrease in visceral fat, that’s just how the body operates/ reacts when consuming these foods. It’s not a question of if someone will see visceral fat loss, on strict carnivore with the right type of animal foods, it’s a question of how much visceral fat loss they will see. So if he is in fact doing strict carnivore, with the right types of carnivore foods, I don’t see an reason for him to need to lie about something like this
What are u referring to when u said sprinting?
Phil Goodman
Well-Known Member
This is a pretty bold response from someone who is basing his argument on this..
- We recruited 11 unrelated subjects (n=10 per diet; 9 individuals completed both arms of the study).
- We constructed two diet arms, each of which consisted mostly of plant- or animal-based foods (Extended Data Fig. 1). Subjects on the plant-based diet ate cereal for breakfast and precooked meals made of vegetables, rice, and lentils for lunch and dinner (see Supplementary Table 1 for a full list of diet ingredients). Fresh and dried fruits were provided as snacks on this diet. Subjects on the animal-based diet ate eggs and bacon for breakfast, and cooked pork and beef for lunch. Dinner consisted of cured meats and a selection of four cheeses.
- they don’t ask about symptoms or even look at any health markers other than the microbiota, then assume the picture they are painting with that is accurate. It’s quite likely their assumptions about what those things do and don’t do are inaccurate, or at the very least incomplete.
- and finally…there’s this little gem”
“This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (P50 GM068763), the Boston Nutrition Obesity Research Center (DK0046200), and the General Mills Bell Institute of Health and Nutrition, Minneapolis, MN
Imagine that, the study came to a conclusion which can be used to profit one of the organizations that supported it.
The Bell Institute | National Nutrition & Health Information
The Bell Institute of Health & Nutrition is General Mill's source for scientific health & nutrition, expertise, studies & data that creates value & growth.
“The Bell Institute of Health and Nutrition is the company’s source for scientific health and nutrition expertise that creates value and growth for General Mills.”
Ya good point. So I’ve tried quite a few different iodine protocols. Always using lugols 2% solution. But I’ve done up to 100mg/ day for a bit, and then 50mg/ day for quite a while. Never observed any noticeable benefits on these dosages, and they’re much much higher than the RDA of iodine, so didn’t like the idea of taking so much, and not seeing anything from it.
I eventually err’d on the side of caution, and used 1 drop of 2% ED for a long time. Most things I’ve read/ heard lead me to believe that a solid protocol for most people would be 1-3 drops of 2% lugols ED. Here’s a couple vids advocating for that dosage. I’ll also link some other vids and Reddit threads worth checking out
HIGH VS LOW IODINE USE
The Iodine Crisis | Book Review
Iodine: Why You Should Start Taking This ASAP
Iodine: The Life Changing Supplement | Part 2
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/bu6nh9/my_experience_for_the_last_two_weeks_on_iodine/
https://www.reddit.com/r/thyroidhealth/comments/fecflo/lugols_iodine/
https://www.reddit.com/r/decaf/comments/jkq5ml/deleted_by_user/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Nootropics/comments/k8o41v/lets_talk_iodine_the_essential_nootropic_a_7/
Such misplaced confidence. I predict a high incidence of constipation and microbiome disruption in the carnivore group, and further that only a few percent are able to stick with the diet for more than a few months.
That and the American Gut Project, and innumerable others, e.g. this one.
... much scientific evidence has accumulated on the association of dietary fibre with body weight and overall metabolic function (including effects on glucose and lipid regulation and insulin sensitivity). Perhaps at least in part stemming from the known associations of dietary fibre intake with a healthy gut microbiome, favourable body weight and overall metabolic health, dietary fibre intake also associates with a reduced risk for the development of cardiovascular disease and mortality. There have also been descriptions of further health benefits of dietary fibre, including reduced risk of malignancy and improved colonic health. In this section, we provide a summary of the main health benefits of dietary fibre and the risks associated with a lack of dietary fibre, with a focus on abdominal adiposity and overall metabolic health [15].
...This tidbit is especially interesting. Gut bacteria may start feeding on your protective mucus if you don't give them fiber:
... chronic dietary fibre deficiency resulted in the gut microbiota using host-secreted mucus glycoproteins as an alternate nutrient source [54]. There was subsequent erosion of the colonic mucus barrier with greater epithelial access and predisposition to lethal colitis [54]. It is likely that in humans, dietary fibre also plays a protective role for the intestinal barrier and overall colonic health.
This is so ironic, because ur the one spreading the misinformation lol. The whole needing fiber for regular bowel movements and gut health is a very old/ antiquated myth created to sell fiber supplements. It’s one of the silliest health myths there is. Let’s create bulk in the intestines to decrease constipation, sounds like a great idea. It’s the complete opposite. If u want regular bowel movements, consume as little fiber as u can. Talking to u is like talking to someone that still believes every single bit of misinformation that we were all taught growing up, created by companies trying to make money. It’s like everyone else slowly started to realize all these food myths were nonsense, but u never learned/ adapted, and still believe every single one. Fiber is important for bowel regularity, red mead, egg yolks, and saturated fat in general leads to cardiovascular disease, LDL is the “bad” cholesterol, margarin is better than butter, get multiple servings of grains in every day, eat ur vegetables. Like I’ve said before. U seem to be very much up on the current research/ data, when it comes to HRT, but idk if I’ve ever met/ talked to someone more behind, when it comes to diet/ nutrition and how food affects the human body. It’s like talking to someone from the 1960’s lol
Lol indeed. Published, peer-reviewed studies versus the YouTube clowns of the day.
The last clown in particular discredits himself immediately: "There's really no data that fiber improves constipation."
The previously cited paper notes:
5.1. Gut Motility
Of all the beneficial effects of dietary fibre, perhaps the most widely known and appreciated is the effect on gut motility and prevention of constipation. Many studies support such an effect, which appears incontrovertible based on the available evidence. In one randomised controlled double-blind trial on the effects of ‘vege-powder’ (consisting of chicory, broccoli and whole grains) on constipation alleviation in >90 participants, compared with the control group, those who received vege-powder had significant improvements in symptoms of constipation (including stool hardness, defecation frequency and straining to defecate) at 2 and 4 weeks [21]. Further evidence to support the clinical utility of dietary fibre as an effective treatment of constipation stems from a systematic review reported by Rao et al. [22]. Evidence was sought for dietary fibre intake and restrictions in fermentable oligosaccharide, disaccharide, monosaccharide and polyol (FODMAP-restricted diet) in the management of chronic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) [22]. For chronic constipation, dietary fibre was beneficial in five of the seven studies examined, and all three of the studies of IBS-associated constipation. The FODMAP-restricted diet also appeared to improve overall IBS symptoms [22]. Current evidence would appear to support the beneficial effects of dietary fibre on gut motility and as an effective management strategy for both the prevention and treatment of constipation.
Phil Goodman
Well-Known Member
Like i said…you’ll just bob and weave when issues with the studies are presented.
If you’d like, we can go back and discuss the original study you linked to (re)start there.
Phil Goodman
Well-Known Member
Thanks! Will check those out as I get time over the next few days.
Systemlord
Member
I've been on the carnivore diet for 8 months and recently ate asparagus with my ribeye steak and had massive gut issues right afterwards. Back on a true carnivore diet, no such issues. I went without fiber for so long, the moment I reintroduced it, it caused massive gut/GI problems!
I remember where in a Spiderman movie, where Spiderman flips off his bicycle over a car in regular clothes and a little boy asks, how did you do that, to which Spiderman replies, I eat my vegetables.
It's all advertising and propaganda. Brainwashing Americans one movie at a time!
Last edited:
This is one study. What about all the studies showing that increasing fiber intake causes constipation, and the less fiber the participants ingested, the less constipation they had. I’ve been a nurse for 12 years, and in the medical field for almost 20, these fiber supplements aren’t effective at treating constipation. I see it first hand on a regular basis. They’re only prescribed because medical science is always at least a decade behind current literature, and these supplements make big pharma money. Adding bulk to stool will never decrease constipation. Just think about it logically for a second. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that adding bulk to stool is the opposite of what u want to do if someone is constipated
Hahah I mean obv we all know Popeye, u think that was just an accident that spinach was how he got his super power? Propaganda is a part the game. And it’s because it works! Lol. From my understanding, they were trying to get kids to eat more spinach, as an iron rich meat substitute, during the Great Depression. So ya, propaganda is a real thing, and it’s very effective, historically. I mean look at Cataceous, he’s here defending antiquated ideas about food that have been proven incorrect for years now, but still won’t let these ideas go due to the very effective propaganda that he was subject to growing up. And this is a very smart guy, that this is happening to. Just imagine how easily swayed people with lower IQ’s are gonna be
But that’s interesting about ur experience trying to reintroduce asparagus. Could be due to the fiber, could be due to the plant toxins, hard to say. Could be a mix of both. I also think there’s something to a person’s gut biome. Anthony Chaffee talks about it often. How someone on carnivore for a while, will experience worse side effects from eating crap food, than if they were simply just eating crap foods all the time. It could be a case of when ur eating crap foods, ur not aware of how crappy u feel, and when ur eating strict carnivore, u feel so good, and anytime u feel worse, it’s more pronounced and noticeable. But I do think it could also be due to ur gut biome/ bacteria adapting to the foods u regularly eat, and if u introduce crap foods that ur not used to eating, maybe the bacteria u have in ur gut can’t process them as well. Just a hypothesis. Either way, I’ve heard carnivores say too many times that they react to crap foods worse after doing strict carnivore, than they did when they were eating those crap foods regularly. So there’s something going on there. But regardless, ur experience is real, and it’s not in ur head. For whatever reason, the asparagus gave u that negative reaction. So clearly ur body is telling u to avoid it. Ur not alone tho. Jordan Peterson can’t even eat a salad without feeling strong negative effects from it. Some people are just more sensitive than others. But I assume these foods are causing negative reactions with everyone. With some people they’re just so minor, that they don’t notice the negative effects. Same with gluten, for example. I believe that ingesting gluten causes negative effects with everyone. Someone people notice them, some people don’t. Just depends on the persons sensitivity to it
Ok, where is the substantive criticism? You think the N is too small? Then show where the p values do not support the conclusions. You're expecting the study to investigate something other than its stated purpose? Do you dispute the observed differences in the microbiomes?
One study referencing dozens of other studies. One of those looked at 11 other studies, and found that "Fibre was beneficial in 5/7 studies in [chronic constipation] and 3/3 studies in [constipation-predominant IBS]. FODMAP-restricted diet improved overall IBS symptoms in 4/4 and IBS-C symptoms in 1/3 studies ..."
There are some causes of constipation that are independent of fiber intake. But these aren't grounds to steer the general population away from increased fiber intake, with its clear link to health.
Dude, ur so far removed from what people actually experience in reality. Ur a stereotypical case of being too smart for ur own good. Ur intelligence is actually hurting u here lol. It’s preventing u from realizing what actual humans are actually experiencing in the actual real world, which again, is all that matters. The body is extremely complicated, and there’s so many moving parts working together at all times. There’s never gonna be flawed studies that can definitively say this, or definitively conclude this. There’s just too many variables to consider, and most studies don’t take into consideration/ track even half the variables that they need to, in order to make conclusions that are worth taking seriously. Checkout this interview. The woman suffered her whole life, from a young girl, 40+ years, with anorexia, schizoaffective disorder (she heard voices her whole life) osteopenia, hypothyroidism, and a few other disorders. She tried everything for 40+ years, nothing helped her. She eventually had prolapses of her internal organs, due to internal muscle loss. Woman’s story is insane. Long story short, she eventually got on the carnivore diet, and then the lion diet, and every last one of her disorders went away within a year. Anorexia, voices in her head, her physical disorders, her hyperthyroidism, etc. We don’t need studies to prove that a carnivore/ lion diet heals the body in ways people/ doctors can’t even begin to imagine, and optimizes the body better than any other way of eating. All u have to do is listen to real world stories like this, and thousands, if not millions of anecdotes from others experiencing similar miracles. Have u heard of a cure for cancer in mainstream medicine or in ur precious studies yet? I’m guessing the answer is no. Does the carnivore/ lion diet cure cancer in most people that have it, when done correctly? Yes, yes it does. And it does it in a very simple way. But how can that be possible without studies saying that it does? Because studies don’t dictate real world results, that’s why. Real world results tell us exactly what to expect in the real world. Doesn’t matter if studies reinforce it or dispute it. That’s irrelevant. Results are results regardless of what literature/ studies tell us should theoretically happen. It’s just how the world works. I hope u never get cancer, but if u do, I hope ur smart enough at the time to go on a carnivore/ lion diet, and give urself the best chances of survival. And for anyone that says the carnivore/ lion diet doesn’t cure cancer, just research any and all anecdotes of people curing cancer via diet. The majority of them are all the same. Go on a high fat, moderate to high protein, animal based diet, mainly consisting of ruminant animal meat, and getting their energy for the body mainly from ketones, and not from sugar. It’s the same formula repeated for a reason. Cancer lives off of sugar. It’s not rocket science to have ur body rum off of ketones and not sugar, if u have cancer. If cancer runs off of sugar, then ummm starve the cancer of what it feeds off of. Again, doesn’t take someone with a medical degree to come to this conclusion. But do we see oncologists telling their patients to run off of ketones, instead of sugar, nope. If only the studies they read in medical school had this information in them. If only.
Last edited:
Phil Goodman
Well-Known Member
Yes, I think the N is too small to make broad conclusions that apply to the population. I don’t dispute the observed differences in microbiomes, I dispute what they infer from those differences. I also have issues with what they constructed for the meat diet while implying it applies to all meats. Eating processed garbage and cheese for dinner is vastly different than eating a steak from a grass fed cow. They make claims about the effect of meat on inflammation, yet again lots of people on carnivore diets see DRAMATIC improvement in inflammation and other issues. You can’t say that those are rare or only a handful of cases while pointing to a study with <12 participants…or at least you can’t do so while being consistent.
But honestly, similar to the other thread where we had this discussion, I think there are truths on both sides. I think there can be a value in having a balanced diet and complex microbiome that can handle anything the body can throw at it. But I also think that for people who can sustain a mostly meat diet there body will adjust and it will result in great health. However, one of the trade offs will be that the new microbiome, which may be great for their body in that diet, will get wrecked if they eat anything outside of that very narrow diet. So again, there is a lot more at play and our bodies are a lot more capable of adapting to different diets and environments….but one of the diets we are incapable of adapting to is the Standard American Diet. The health of this country clearly illustrates that. And the same people promoting that diet which has costs trillions of dollars and millions of years in human lives are the same ones creating the study like the one we’re discussing here that you referenced as a guide for what is and isn’t healthy to consume.
Share this page
Sponsors
Online statistics
- Members online
- 6
- Guests online
- 9
- Total visitors
- 15
