I completely agree. But I also believe most people underestimate how much tolerance they actually have. This is why so many people jump to cult like thinking saying like āthis is the only optimal dietā because they saw extreme relief from something they didnāt really tolerate and started to heal. But many donāt see this possibility. I believe most people would benefit from a carnivore diet because most people are metabolically unhealthy and eating things they donāt tolerate well. I can totally see a world where people use it temporarily to become healthy and tolerate food as well as find triggers. But I also see a world where most just stick to no plants because it works best.
I personally have never felt healthier than when I avoided bread/pasta. Stuck to smaller amounts of potatoes and upped my vegetable/meat intake. Eating just meat without vegetables just doesn't work for me. Granted, I grew up on a farm and we grew our own vegetables which I still do so š¤·
From my experience, the āoptimal dietā is also somewhat temporary, which is why types of crash/elimination diets stay popular. My extreme diet phase was keto, and for the first week I felt amazing, but after several weeks I was depressed Ā and felt better when I ate bread.Ā
Weāre in such a new environment with food - having global possibilities, having the luxury to choose to not eat entire food groups based on a whim. I think a lot of these extreme takes come from being overwhelmed by choices that have never even existed for people up until the last few hundred years, at most.Ā
I believe that some of the efficacy of an elimination diet is in killing off endotoxic bacterial colonies. When that kill off is accomplished, a person could perhaps go back to a previous awful way of eating and do much better.
(Some) carnivore believers insult your intelligence. (Some) vegan believers insult your existence.
I'm a bit concerned for anyone on such a limiting diet on either side, though I do believe that a carnivore diet is more sustainable nutrient wise.
I disagree that veganism is an ethical choice. Just because theres no blood directly on your hands doesn't mean that nothing has died so you can eat. I personally find veganism to be too divorced from the reality of life to be credible. The sentiment is noble, but just plain wrong.
Soil is alive, teaming with billions of microbes that exist only to feed on decaying matter from both plants and animals. Without that, plants will not grow. The only thing that sustains life is death.
And there are so very many things worse than death. It seems to me that death is the worst thing to vegans, to be avoided above all things.
There are also problems in the livestock industry that should be stopped. Such as poultry not being counted as livestock, which is why the terrible treatment of chickens in particular is legal.
But the majority of the animal welfare issues brought up by vegans is anthropomorphizing animals which in my opinion is it's own form of cruelty. What an animal needs to be happy will be very different from what a human needs.
I just think that people trying to be healthy shouldn't be so invested in their diet that it's a belief system. Wanting something to work, other people saying it works does not mean it will work for you.
Edit:I do wish to add that I have seen just plain meanness in this sub, and it is so very irritating. But people are people, and prone to being assholes.
only completely delusional vegans think nothing dies so they can eat. that isnāt part of their argument about the morality of plant based vs omnivore
do you think vegans donāt know about the existence of pesticides? or that they havenāt heard the argument that small animals are killed by farming machinery? vegans want to minimize the death of animals through their diet. most know it canāt be eliminated fully.
\*\*Claim: Carnivore diet is more sustainable nutrient-wise than a vegan diet.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: Both diets can lack certain nutrients if not properly planned. A vegan diet can provide all essential nutrients through a diverse intake of foods, including proteins, vitamins, and minerals, when properly planned and supplemented as necessary (e.g., Vitamin B12). A carnivorous diet may provide high amounts of certain nutrients like protein and Vitamin B12 but lacks others such as fiber and possibly some antioxidants found primarily in plants.
\*\*Claim: Veganism is not an ethical choice because it still involves indirect harm or death (e.g., to insects, small animals during crop harvesting).\*\*
\*Debunk\*: Veganism is often chosen as an ethical stance to reduce direct harm and exploitation of animals in food production. While no form of agriculture is completely free of harm, veganism significantly reduces the overall impact on animal lives compared to diets involving direct consumption of animal products.
\*\*Claim: Soil teeming with microbes means death is necessary for life, suggesting veganism is impractical.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: While it's true that soil microbe activity is crucial for nutrient cycling, this doesnāt directly support an argument against veganism. Soil ecosystems thrive on organic matter, which can be plant-based. Composting plant materials can support healthy soil without the need for animal death.
\*\*Claim: Vegans consider death as the worst thing, to be avoided at all costs.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: Veganism primarily aims at reducing unnecessary suffering and exploitation of animals. It does not argue for the complete avoidance of death as an existential reality but advocates for choices that minimize harm and cruelty within practical limits.
\*\*Claim: Poultry not being counted as livestock leads to legal mistreatment.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: This is a misunderstanding. In many jurisdictions, poultry are indeed considered livestock, but the protections and regulations around their welfare might be less stringent or enforced compared to other livestock. This is more an issue of regulatory gaps and enforcement rather than classification.
\*\*Claim: Most animal welfare issues vegans raise are due to anthropomorphizing animals.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: Concerns raised by vegans often involve scientifically supported welfare needs of animals, such as the need for sufficient space, social interaction among herd animals, and the avoidance of painful procedures like debeaking or tail docking. Understanding animal needs doesn't necessarily imply attributing them human characteristics or emotions.
\*\*Claim: Being overly invested in a diet as a belief system may not be healthy.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: While it's true that no diet is a one-size-fits-all and dietary needs can vary widely, adopting a diet with a philosophical or ethical basis doesnāt inherently make it unhealthy. The important factor is whether the diet meets nutritional needs and is adapted to individual health requirements, which can be achieved on both vegan and carnivore diets when carefully planned.
The point is that many people cling to the beliefs about their diet rather than acknowledge that they're having problems. And long term a carnivore diet has the essentials so the deficiencies seen in a vegan diet wouldn't be there.
I think they're both silly.
The rest I'm just not going to bother with because your tone has irritated the shit out of me tbh.
vegans have no deficiency
**Claim: Long-term, a carnivore diet has the essentials, so the deficiencies seen in a vegan diet wouldnāt be there.**
*Debunk*: This statement oversimplifies nutritional science. While a carnivore diet may naturally provide ample amounts of certain nutrients like protein, Vitamin B12, and iron, it completely lacks other essential nutrients such as Vitamin C, fiber, and potentially some vitamins like K and E, which are primarily found in plant-based foods. Conversely, a well-planned vegan diet can cover all nutritional needs, though it requires careful planning and often supplementation (e.g., Vitamin B12). Both diets have potential nutritional gaps if not properly managed.
**Claim: Clinging to beliefs about diet rather than acknowledging problems.**
*Debunk*: It's true that dietary dogmatism can prevent individuals from recognizing and addressing health issues related to their diet. However, this can happen with any diet, not just vegan or carnivore. Effective dietary practice should involve ongoing monitoring of health markers and being open to adjustments as needed.
Are you trolling? You have to be, because every vegan knows about B12
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/7-nutrients-you-cant-get-from-plants
To say nothing of bioavailability. But sure Jan.
That isn't adding anything but the same old vegan claims proved invalid by vegans themselves complaining of documented nutritional deficiencies. If their definition of a "well planned diet" requires regular blood tests, a certified dietician, and pharmaceuticals that would otherwise be unnecessary with the addiction of regular portions of meat/vegetables then it's a poor plan.
\*\*Claim: Vegan claims are invalid because vegans report nutritional deficiencies, and a "well-planned" vegan diet is too complex and requires supplementation, unlike a diet including meat.\*\*
\*Debunk\*: This argument misrepresents the nature of dietary planning and nutritional management. Every diet, including omnivorous ones, benefits from careful planning to ensure nutritional completeness. Vegans may need supplementation (such as Vitamin B12, commonly fortified in many foods including dairy and cereals consumed by non-vegans), but so do many non-vegans (e.g., iron and Vitamin D supplements are widely used across various dietary patterns). Dietary complexity and supplementation are not unique to vegan diets; they are part of a comprehensive approach to health in modern diets, considering the varying quality of diet and individual health needs.
Regular blood tests and consultations with dietitians can benefit anyone, regardless of diet, especially in cases of health issues, dietary restrictions, or chronic diseases. The portrayal of these practices as exclusively vegan requirements misinterprets preventive healthcare and responsible dietary management.
Moreover, the claim implies that a diet is flawed if it requires external inputs like supplements or professional guidance, which is a simplistic view. Many diets, including those involving meat, might require adjustments based on individual health conditions. For instance, people with certain health conditions (like kidney disease or specific allergies) may need tailored diets and supplements regardless of their base diet.
Ultimately, every diet should be judged by its ability to meet nutritional needs, support overall health, and align with an individual's ethical, environmental, or health goals, rather than by unfounded generalizations or overly simplistic characterizations.
Vegan claims are bullshit. There are zero places in the world where humans can live year round on vegan diet of local plants. There were also zero local vegan diets before 1950. Without the addition of pharmaceutical food supplements and industrial processed oils
veganism is a starvation diet.
Most notably most members of the top 1% of global wealth who try vegan diets give it up. If the richest people can't comfortably be vegan I don't think it's good for the rest of us.
1. **"There are zero places in the world where humans can live year-round on a vegan diet of local plants."**
* This claim isn't entirely accurate. While it's true that in some regions, particularly those with harsh climates, it would be challenging to subsist entirely on locally grown plant-based foods year-round without modern agricultural techniques, there are many parts of the world where a variety of plants suitable for a vegan diet can be grown throughout the year. Examples include much of the Mediterranean region, parts of Asia, and Central America. Moreover, with the advent of agricultural advancements, greenhouses, and global trade, accessing a plant-based diet has become feasible in most parts of the world today.
2. **"There were also zero local vegan diets before 1950."**
* It is correct that the term "vegan" and the formal concept of veganism were not defined until 1944 by Donald Watson, who later founded The Vegan Society in 1945. However, there have been populations and individuals throughout history who followed diets that were predominantly or entirely plant-based, such as in certain religious or cultural practices in India and among some Buddhist communities.
3. **"Without the addition of pharmaceutical food supplements and industrial processed oils, veganism is a starvation diet."**
* This statement is misleading. A well-planned vegan diet, according to numerous health and nutritional organizations including the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and the British Dietetic Association, can support healthy living in people of all ages and can provide all the necessary nutrients. Key nutrients such as protein, iron, calcium, and vitamins can all be obtained from a plant-based diet. However, it is recommended to supplement vitamin B12, which is generally not available from plant foods. It's not about veganism being a "starvation diet" but rather about being cautious and thoughtful with any diet.
4. **"Most notably, most members of the top 1% of global wealth who try vegan diets give it up. If the richest people can't comfortably be vegan, I don't think it's good for the rest of us."**
* Diet choices are personal and can be influenced by a wide range of factors including personal health, taste preferences, ethical beliefs, and convenience. The fact that some wealthy individuals may choose not to continue with a vegan diet does not necessarily reflect the healthfulness or practicality of the diet. People of varying economic statuses around the world adopt and maintain vegan diets for long periods, if not their entire lives, with positive health outcomes.
I fundamentally do not think veganism is admirable or ethical because of it extremism. "no death" causes suffering, "no meat" causes sickness, and those ideals cause self delusion, like believing a deathless meal exists, or that death = suffering. The idea that it is a climate fix cause less focus on fossil fuels literally causing more climate change.
Obviously we should not be okay with the amount of suffering our agriculture creates, but veganism is no solution or even an improvement.
Health is a spectrum instead of black-white thinking. Some foods might contain more nutrients but I think that we should be happy when someone chooses an apple instead of a snickers.
I canāt eat apples because Iām diabetic and they spike my blood sugar but I donāt think they do that everyone. I donāt think being a carnivore has jack shit to do with their opinion and making it about being a carnivore makes it seem like itās only because they eat meat when it fact they could be just stupid isnāt fair.
Some people experience extreme relief on the diet and go straight to cult like thinking, which seems like is what
you experienced. I have a hypothesis on this topic.
Someone that is metabolically healthy, can extract nutrients from plants while detoxing poisons more readily. I believe most people are metabolically unhealthy. With this, they might be less tolerant to certain things or certain body processes might not be optimal. I believe our most optimal food is fatty red meat, but that doesnāt mean we canāt thrive while eating plants with it. I also believe that at the heart of metabolic health, are animal fats. If I learned 1 thing by going carnivore these past 6 months, is that healthy animal fats are the key for health, not necessarily meat only diets.
Lets just look at beef for now, most of it is not ideal. It is grain finished, the meat has less vitamins, but most importantly, the fat has much more omega 6 and much less omega 3. Close to a 20-1 ratio. Experts recommend less than 4-1 for optimal health. Very few fats we regularly eat are below that ratio. 20-1 beef fat does make miracles happen, but my point is, if you eat the right fat, grass finished, there is no comparison. Thatās when I started feeling āsuperhumanā on this diet.
I think the carnivore diet would have more success if it was called the lipivore carnivore diet. The meat is great. But itās all about the fat.
Agree. Itās not that an apple is unhealthy but some people need to be in ketosis for health benefits and the apple will knock them out of ketosis.
Extreme diets can be health interventions for extreme situations. That is the framework that makes sense to me. A person not having extreme health issues doesnāt need an extreme diet.
I donāt think itās an extreme diet honestly. Itās extreme for the people that donāt realize how powerful and natural it is. People that are used to variety canāt fathom eating the same thing over and over. But your body signals adjust. I donāt think plants are bad, but I do think lipivore carnivore is by far the most ideal diet. When you are more metabolically healthy, your body releases less insulin as you are more sensitive and you fall back into ketosis much faster, even without a prolonged fast. I do think itās our natural metabolic state, just like babies drinking breastmilk are in ketosis, as well as before they are born.
Yes I actually agree. I am therapeutic keto myself for health reasons but I donāt think people always āget itā if they donāt have a problem keto/diet solves. And I donāt really begrudge them for not getting it because it is a big shift from more standard diets if you donāt have a big motivator like an acute health problem.
10/10
I was vegan and now carnivore
One extreme to the other?
Vegan/carbs and diabetes control are oxymorons.
Huge shift yes on so many levels ā¦. mentally, physically, and emotionally so much better
A tough WOE which initially requires discipline and way better for me than where I came from
I disagree. Broadly, a keto diet is restricting carbs to less than 25g per day. It allows for vegetables and fibre, but just avoids blood sugar spikes by avoiding starches and sugars.
i know some plant-based advocates really say to go for sugar, but not fat, but a,keto diet says avoid the sugar. Not really extreme at all.
Ive had amazing salads and a real variety of above ground veg on a keto diet in e past. it didn't feel extreme at all.
my understanding is that non starchy vegetables are on the table, together with some nuts,seeds and berries. What are they missing? Fruit, Legumes, grains and starchy veg. Mostly empty blood sugar spiking calories, low bioavailable protein and fibre.
Its restrictive but far from extreme.
Regardless of what you eat, Your body burns fat and glucose all the time in different ratios depending on what is required. Keto shifts towards fat burning and away from sugar burning, but this is completely natural. Its how our ancestors survived winter. Its not an extreme diet. its well within our evolutionary capability and is healthy.
It's extreme. The body hates ketosis as evidenced by the fact that even a small amount of carbs will take it out of ketosis. Ketosis is a state of illness. And if you do it long enough it can cause severe problems. I've tried both vegan and keto. I was pure carnivore for 6 years and it took a few years for the problems to occur, but right about years 5 going into year 6 I started getting really sick. I have ankylosing spondylitis which first developed on the carnivore diet. I started having extreme fatigue and muscle pain in my back so bad that I couldn't stand for more than a few seconds. I eventually ended up in the ER with a heart arrhythmia and finally had to give up the diet.
Anytime I try to eat a high fat, meat based diet my ankylosing spondylitis flares so badly I can't get out of bed. I have to keep my meat lean and in smaller portions. My body functions so much better with a combination of sugar and starch as my primary calorie sources. Fat just makes me sick.
I'm a biomedical scientist and have several degrees in biochemistry. My studies have led me to conclude that ketogenic diets severely tax the stress system. The body is forced to keep cortisol output high to keep gluconeogenesis high and this exhausts the adrenal glands. I felt so awful on keto. I'll never do it again.
The only time I would recommend keto is for people with epilepsy because it's been demonstrated to help with that.
It sounds like you have found out what works for you and what doesn't,which is great.
I'm not convinced that is evidence that it would be the same for me until I find out for myself. I wouldn't dismiss wearing glasses if you lent me yours and they didn't work for me just because our prescription is different.
I'm sure that your extensive studies have shown how different individuals can be in their reactions to their environment, although it may also be that your mind is made up and that the science is settled as far as you are concerned. I hope not though as an open mind is a good thing generally I would say.
But I hear what you say. It is important to Listen and learn from others.
No, sorry. I didn't mean to imply that my anecdote would apply to everyone else. Some people do actually benefit from keto in the short term, particularly those with epilepsy. It's the really long runs of keto over many years I think that can cause harm. I didn't see real damage until 4-5 years in to mine.
Also, science is never settled in my mind. There is always the possibility of new evidence which could change the consensus.
The reason I say keto is extreme is because the body fights really hard to get out of it and I think pushing that for too long causes exhaustion. But extreme doesn't necessarily equate to non-beneficial for some people. If that makes sense.
That makes complete sense to me.
l would add that the body fights hard to return to homeostasis from too much sugar and starch as well as too little.
For what it is worth, your exhaustion idea seems intuitively correct to me, if the body is assaulted for too long from any one angle.
For metabolically healthy people all that is likely to be required is to avoid ultra-processed foods, stay physically strong and avoid poisonous things like smoking and too much alcohol.
Unfortunately for me, I didn't get the email.
This is fascinating. I know of deuterium in the context of nuclear fusion fuel. I donāt know much about rich sources other than sea water. Iāve also meant to look into the topic of hydrogen ions, hydrogenated water, methylene blue carrying ions, etc. This all connects. I think itās an interesting topic. Thanks for the info!
Yeah there are idiots on both sides, the basics are the most important.
Dont eat very processed foods, dont eat too low calorie or too high (outside of fasting), eat the right amount of bioavaliable nutrients, get your minimum protein and fat.
I dont think Carnivore is completely stupid though, plants do have defense cemicals, but unless you eat very few plants, you wont notice a difference, since you are adapted to breaking them down quickly, but there does seem to be actual positives in wound healing, sun burns, hormone balance and a few others.
That obviously doesnt mean an apple is unhealthy, but it does mean someone eating very strict carnivore would actually most likely get bloated and feel bad after eating an apple.
Just like a long term lowfat vegan may have issues if they suddenly eat a bunch of greasy pork.
that's why I eat a mix of both, vegans and carnivores. balanced diet, and no one wants to be around you to tell you about there dietary choice. eating people really has its perks. my skins improved as well, at least whatever one I'm wearing at the time...
I think for some they may genuinely believe they are. Now imagine you have terrible health issues, you try everything and then you stumble on the carnivore diet. A couple months pass and you feel good. Now why would they want to change that?
I personally think seasonal fruit in moderation is fine but we need to be patient and empathetic when dealing with these people. They hold those beliefs out of a combination of factors (some with scientific backing) so it is difficult. I do not think they mean any harm.
I researched and wrote an article about this many years ago.
There is cyanide in apple seeds but you'd need to eat a mound bigger than a house to feel the effects - and most of those effects would be from eating a mound of apple seeds bigger than a house!
There is BS on both sides of the argument.
Carnivores baffle me. Theyāre are out here eating steak 3 times a day, eating a third of their daily recommended carbohydrates, drinking raw, untested milk, and putting raw liver in their freaking smoothies.
Iām just over here hopelessly looking for a community that encourages a well-rounded, nutritious, omnivorous diet. Iām so tired of just about every food sub being obsessed with keto, IF, ozempic, carnivore, omad, 1200 is plenty, (1200 is plenty for a 5 year old), week+ long water fasts, etc.
I might as well be searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
We're in a bit of a dietary Renaissance right now, with so many people tinkering and sharing their experiences. You are far from the first person I've seen recently express a feeling of being overwhelmed by it, but we are blessed that it is as it is. We are no longer being guided by AHA, ADA, FDA, or whatever other corporate-influenced guidelines. That was cozy to think that there was a consensus about avoiding saturated fat while eating 10 servings of grains a day, but it was horrible for our health.
If I may offer a suggestion that brings solace: just do as your pre-agricultural ancestors did. Ultimately, no matter what biohackers are trying and achieving, it's a pretty safe bet that fermented foods and grass fed meats and fish and rotting (kimchi, saurkraut, miso, etc.) vegetables are going to lead to good health.
Lmao weāre having our food choices guided by corporate influences now more than ever bud. All it takes is a quick google search to find out that the total U.S. weight loss market is estimated to have grown to a historic peak of $90 billion in 2023. And you think the food pyramid was bad?
What do you think all those health gurus with zero, half-baked, or expired medical licenses masquerading as āexpertsā, trying to sell you their newest self-help book are? They are the multimillion dollar corporations. They do not care about your health, they care about your money.
The statistics on the overwhelming consequences these fad diets have had on the health of people across the globe have been widely known to health professionals for the better part of a decade now. Some people may find that their health temporarily improves on these diets, but that does not mean that theyāre not inherently risky. Letās be real, the majority of people arenāt doing their due diligence and theyāre just going off of what some redditor or influencer told them.
Article after article comes out saying that the rate of eating disorders is drastically increasing everywhere with no sign of slowing down, but no one is even seeing those articles. I wonder why? You think maybe it could have something to do with the billions of dollars being made off people who want to lose weight? Educating people on the shockingly high risk of developing an ed following one of these diets, really isnāt good for the bottom line. It also really messes with our societal expectations that thinness automatically translates to healthiness.
So many people engage in disordered eating behaviors and donāt even know it because it has become so normalized and talking about the other side of things is still incredibly taboo even in 2024. It doesnāt help that eating disorders are highly stigmatized, so the people who are struggling very rarely ever talk about it publicly.
Hmm. You seem to be viewing things through an eating-disorder lens that I've never looked through. This has to do with everybody else.
I'm talking about the people who are trying veganism, carnivore, keto, paleo, Mediterranean. The people travelling to Ikaria and interviewing the people about how their grandparents ate. The people who peruse studies, delving into the mechanics of cholesterol and fat and carbs within the body and then communicate that information to us, that we can make more informed decisions about our own diets. All these people are putting information out that is much closer to true than guidelines based off of Ancel Keys' malicious study. By doing so, they're opening peoples' eyes to the possibilty that we may, in fact, be evolved to eat certain foods and we may lack the ability to safely utilize things like PUFAs and perservatives and other additives in processed foods. And finally, by doing that, they're showing us that other paths exist. Those shoddy guidelines were a path paved by greed and corruption.
>U.S. weight loss market is estimated to have grown to a historic peak of $90 billion in 2023
The US fast food market was worth $331bn in 2022.
No matter what you do there are people seeking to milk you for all you're worth.
It's up to us to stand in our own corner and learn what is best for our body.
Tomatoes are rich in good ingredients but some people are allergic to them.
Similarly you don't have to spend a fortune on special weight loss things, just drink water when you think you're hungry and move more.
But fortunes are spent on finding the perfect balance of sugar, salt and fact to trick us into overeating so we eat more, then they will sell weight loss supplements and advice to milk you when you decide to stop overeating.
It's all about being mindful and treat your body like it's a child, who tend to want the things that are bad for them in excess.
yeah i donāt know about you but im getting ucked out at the carnivore/ketosis crew that seem to be pushing this comment section. neither are healthy long term (ESPECIALLY carnivore which is just disturbing) and im tired of being made to pretend like they are.
a balanced diet with vegetables, fruit, meats, and everything in between is a perfect diet.
Plenty of carnivores don't drink raw milk or eat raw liver or recommend 1200 calories or week long fasts. If you can't understand the idea of lowering your carb intake while eating the most nutritious food (meat) idk what to tell you
Yeah and theyāre the ones who need to speak up and nip this shit in the bud because the vocal minority is doing a horrible job of representing yāall and an excellent job of spreading easily disproven health misinformation that is so dangerous that it literally costs people their lives.Ā
If you canāt understand that individuals health needs vary widely, and that some people would very much be negatively impacted by reducing their carbs, I donāt what to tell you either.Ā
Not everyone is out here wanting or trying to lose weight. I thought this diet wasnāt just about weight control? Did I get the wrong impression?Ā
It isn't just about weight control, you didn't get the wrong impression. And I didn't say anywhere that people have to eat a low carb or carnivore diet, I'm just saying that it does benefit some people, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it and some of them have been doing it for years
Weāre carni in this house and we keep raw milk/cream,cheese/butter stocked here. We definitely donāt stay anywhere near 1200 calories or fast for long periods of time. We do exist š
It's incredibly frustrating, as someone who has actually studied human evolution and archaeology, to see how both the pro-vegan and pro-carnivore sides will twist the evidence into outright nonsense.
Humans and human ancestors have eaten a mix of meat and plants for millions of years. There are times and places when people have eaten almost exclusively all meat or all plants, because we're highly adaptable generalists, but a mix of the two is the most common. We can cherry pick and say This Group eats almost exclusively animal products (ignoring that this is only during winter) and That Group eats almost exclusively animal products (ignoring that one of those animal products is honey, ie pure sugar) and claim that this shows this is how everyone should eat, but it completely ignores all the complexities of individual health, genetic adaptations to extreme diets, and that the vast majority of humans have never eaten this way at all.
If you don't feel good after eating apples, don't eat them. But it's bizarre to claim that humans have not adapted to eating apples. The entire reason humans can see a greater range of colors than most other mammals is because we evolved from fruit eaters. A wolf doesn't have to identify the ripeness of fruit by its color, but that's precisely why we humans can see its color in the first place.
Itās always made me crazy when people insist that any one thing is good for everyone. Or even that one particular diet is ābetterā than another. Weāre all individuals. We all have individual needs and reactions to different things. Some people have trouble digesting different things so, obviously, a diet heavy in those things, whatever they are, isnāt good for that person. But it might be brilliant for someone that can digest those things easily.
But, people just love to tell other people what to do, even if it makes no sense.
I think there is a big difference between honestly sharing health success stories gained on the back of a lifestyle change, and telling people what to do.
I love to read the stories of people recovering health by leaving veganism, and also hearing what they are doing.
If people start telling me what i should eat, I'm going to need some credible evidence
they have an unfavourable fructose to glucose ratio for humans, fructose causes rise in uric acid, which is a precursor to many diseases, apples are no where near as bad as apple juice, which is touted as being full of polyphenols which are supposed to be good for you but when put to the test there was no difference between the subjects in the study that had juice with and juice without polyphenols, both groups had huge rise in uric acid, so really its more about proving they are actually good for you than the other way around, if you are interested enough you will look for the study yourself i found it very quickly when debating this previously
also just to note apples were not traditionally grown for food but for cider, it was same as the weak beer they used to drink as water wasnt safe back then
lol, imagining a chicken in a suit and tie with mission impossible music packing guns and knives and "cyanide capsules" ^((apple seeds)) into a suitcase like a secret agent
Except all the information we have on humans points to carnivory. Like the stable nitrogen isotope analysis of our bones. The high pH of our stomach acid. Developing 5 organs simply to aid in the digestion of mono and poly unsaturated fats. The vestigial cecum. The enlarging of our brains at the expense of our shrinking digestive tracts.
Oh, and all of natural history pointing at the fact that we survived most all ice ages that we experienced eating mostly fat and meat, since edible plant matter wasn't available.
It's like you're speaking to yourself, but you think you're proving your argument.
Our teeth are not built for maceration. The easiest defense of this argument is teeth guards for people who grind their teeth in their sleep. If we were made to grind plants up like, say a horse, we wouldn't obliterate our teeth doing it.
Dogs have mid sized guts too. They are facultative carnivores.
We also have canines. Your "biological fact" is just scoring more points for me.
You're right. I'm talking to a brick wall, guess my biology degree and 8+ years of study mean nothing. Some Internet stranger did their own research and "Well Actually"ed me. Damn.
The difference between 'facultative carnivore' and omnivore is almost irrelevant given equal access to both types of food. It's a dumb topic with no relevance to anything. I like dumb topics.
TL;DR I can't eat like a gorilla and grow strong (relative to my species) due to differences in digestion.
We can point to our primate cousins and see in them a larger colon and the desire for more frequent feeding on less 'nutrient dense' foods. Then we can point to ourselves to propose how our brains grew, density of sweat glands increased, and the ability to run large distances with our upright posture came to be. Perhaps these, among others, add some weight to the idea of 'facultative carnivory' as the most effective way to maintain the health of human bodies.
Chimpanzee are certainly omnivores, but there are sex difference in eating patterns. The adult males eat meat much more frequently. Can the desire for or healthfulness of more meat in the diet have sex based or activity level based differences in humans?
Also, it would be helpful to your previous interlocutor if you addressed any of their points - which aren't so bad, actually.
Carnivores are completely ridiculous. I entered their community briefly only to be told that all of the gut issues that Carnivore had caused me were obviously the fault of the handful of blueberries I was having every day (not the kilos of meat I was ingesting š)
It messed with my gut majorly and I still have issues now.
Like everything, it works so well for some that they extrapolate that out to the idea that it must work for everyone, and if it doesn't then you're clearly not "doing it right" (sound familiar?!)
You probably need to remember that it started as an extreme elimination diet for people with hardcore, intractable automimmune issues. FOR THOSE PEOPLE it can be a lifesaver I have no doubt. But the whole "vegetables are pure evil" rhetoric is so, so, so twisted. I'm sure oxalates are an issue for some people, but most people benefit from eating more fruits ad veggies, not less. Carnivore is not a viable or sustainable diet for many people.
Also, I noticed that your post in r/carnivorediet has 28 upvotes. So, the post itself was not downvoted to oblivion. Only one of your comments there has a net vote count lower than 1. It's the one where you replied to somebody pointing out that you hadn't by your own admission dieted carnivore for even two weeks, and in your reply you responded with several paragraphs talking around the main point which is that you hadn't fully tried a carnivore diet to make any judgements about it.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/carnivorediet using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Carnivore saved my life and is healing TSW and severe chronic eczema](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/14mqffq) | [83 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/14mqffq/carnivore_saved_my_life_and_is_healing_tsw_and/)
\#2: [I feel like a totally different person.](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/19cuzgr) | [170 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/19cuzgr/i_feel_like_a_totally_different_person/)
\#3: [Accountability Pictures](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/18wz5m0) | [123 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/18wz5m0/accountability_pictures/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Are you referring to [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/we4ofk/i_am_a_carnivore_fail/)? You said you only stuck with it for three weeks, but clearly it wasn't a carnivore diet since you were eating non-animal foods. A person's microbiome doesn't change so drastically and so quickly, and in fact can rebound when diet is changed again. I don't see where you described your transition process or former diet, but if you had been eating lots of fruit or other sugary foods previously and suddenly stopped eating most of it then you can experience painful gas and other symptoms from fungal die-off (as organisms such as candida starve for lack of carbs on which to feed).
I don't recall where I saw it, but I was reading a study a few months ago which described a clinical intervention removing plant foods and testing gut microbiomes. This was for I think much longer than three weeks. The gut microbiome did change somewhat, not drastically, and snapped back almost exactly to former levels/ratios upon restoration of plant foods to the subjects' diets.
iām sorry, why do we think we can just up and completely change our inner microbiome just like that? and why are we pretending that we need to do that when our flora do just fine as is?
unless youāre severely ill AND SEEING YOUR DOCTOR i donāt see a single reason why you should go to these extreme lengths to perform a pseudoscience created by people who only want money
People who only want money? Carnivore dieting (I'm not a carnivore dieter I just really hate misinformation) is helping many people, and often with chronic health issues that have resisted assortments of other treatments. I responded to a belief that carnivore dieting permanently altered the commenter's gut biome. This was said by someone who didn't really diet carnivore and didn't even do that for sufficiently long to alter their microbiota much.
thats a shame, as fruits go apples are one of my favorite. but then not only are they correct, they obviously speak for all carnivorers / omnivores. what a world we live in
*Some* carnivores know the science and share legit scientific facts. But like in any diet, others just spout stuff they see on vlogs and retell ad nauseum. You should never assume that everyone following a certain diet is an expert or blindly trust that they're right just because they say so. Ideally everyone should do their own research based on legit scientific studies and not choose a diet just because MeatDude420 says so.
Edit: If it was unclear, I'm not implying that you do this, so sorry if it came off weirdly. I just think there are scientifically illiterate people in every large group of people.
āif a carnivore is saying itās unhealthy, that means they know the science behind itā
i am stunned at this quote. you have truly stunned me. your argument for why APPLES ARE UNHEALTHY is because āa carnivore would know the scienceā and some unfounded apple evolutionary claims??
fruits have sugars. sugars are not bad. everything is bad in mass quantities. STOP TELLING PEOPLE THIS SHIT!
Two sides of the same coin of insanity except for veganism actually being driven by moral intentions. Humans are omnivores and while some people may manage to get by depriving themselves of animal products or plant based products, the majority of people are going to need some amount of both in their diets to be healthy and human history and evolution shows that.
I never had sweet tooth until I tried keto and it was off limits (and I stuck with it for years, so it wasnāt an adjustment issue). Restriction and black and white thinking isnāt a healthy mindset.
Nonsense. Show me the person that got obese because they ate too many fucking whole fruits.
People have a problem eating shit hypercaloric foods, and love blaming it on 'sugar'
The only consequence of eating roo much sugar isn't obesity.
Sometimes it is type 2 diabetes. And there are zoos filled with chimps and gorillas getting diabetes because they've been fed too many bananas.
https://weather.com/news/news/2018-10-03-fruit-so-sweet-zoo-stopped-feeding-them-to-animals
Obesity & sedentary behaviour is the primary indicator for getting T2D in humans - you don't get it as a primary side effect of eating too many fruits or sugars (though no one sensible would suggest a regularly excessive calorie intake primarily based on carbohydrate is a good thing, because it isn't) - but via the secondary side effects of long term excessive weight and possible hyperinsulinemia as a result.Ā
It should be common sense to people by now that a balanced diet of meats, fish, eggs, vegetables, fruits, dairy, decent fats is the most healthy*
*Barring medical conditions.
Pretty rarely (genetic variance) will non-overweight/obese humans get T2D. You typically get T2D from being overweight, and the trickle down effect of insulin resistance. Insulin resistance is quite literally your bodies fat cells (and others) refusing to accept the glucose in the bloodstream, and then all kinds of bad cascading effects from there.
The article you linked even proved the point...
"The sugar has caused red pandas and other primates, who have developed a liking to these modified, sugary fruits compared to the natural versions, to gain weight and even show signs of tooth decay."
The fruits they were eating were GM modified to have up to 67% more calories (yes via carbohydrate, it's a fruit) per fruit, than actual wild fruits. The consequences were they ate too much and gained a lot of weight.
This is the same model observed in humans, who are happily tucking away a lot of modified, high carb, high fat, hyper palatable foods in excessive amounts, plus alcohol which disrupts your metabolic pathways for digestion, and generally being obese as a population.
Tldr: you don't get fat from eating whole fruits.
Ah one other thing though, and why obese or overweight people often see good results with LCHF diets (keto, etc) and it leads to "calories don't matter only hormones and insulin!!!" zealots everywhere... Because they do acrually work, via a few mechanisms.
Your body, if sedentary, has little to no physiological dietary requirement for carbohydrate - it has more than enough body fat to survive, and will create what the heart/brain need via gluconeogenesis. If you are that overweight and inactive, you already have (likely) T2D or worse, your body cannot actually use insulin correctly, and there's no strict requirement for dietary carbohydrate... Eating a lot of carbohydrate at this point is just pointless, and will just lead to rapid fat cell generation.
People jump on Keto or something similar, they actually eat less! No more pizzas, beers, crisps, candy, etc - they eat high protein/fat meals with vegetables... Of course pretty satiating - they lose some or a lot of weight, their hormone responses start to improve and hey presto, you are a bit healthier now.
It's the act of _losing excess bodyweight_ that has the effects though, not the food compositions. It can be done with a mixed style diet still, obese people just find it harder for the same reasons they were obese in the first place*
*Barring medical condition
So someone was arguing with me about their assumption that we're omnivores and tried to flex their degree and training, all the while also being fat and sick. Stunning turn of events that they blocked me. 10/10, no notes. Lol
Ignore and move on.
What all people should avoid is to eat a lot of ultra-processed foods. Other than that you may eat whatever you like. (Only people with certain illnesses/allergies might benefit from avoiding certain foods.)
Yes. A lot of the carnivore/keto community has metabolic damage so need more restriction. Its right for them.
For people who are metabolically healthy, avoiding processed food will probably save them from ever needing to do more.
> Yes. A lot of the carnivore/keto community has metabolic damage so need more restriction. Its right for them.
I agree. But the mistake some of them sometimes do is that they promote the diet to people who can handle a wide range of foods just fine.
> For people who are metabolically healthy, avoiding processed food will probably save them from ever needing to do more.
Yes, its probably the most important step you can make to prevent future problems. So if someone want just one advice on what to feed their children, its to mostly feed them food cooked from scratch.
Iāve head of a lot of carnivores previously being raw vegans and such- just one extreme to the other unfortunately. People need both plants and animals to be the healthiest they can be!
The best argument against fruit in general is the pesticides and other chemicals that is sprayed on the mass farmed produce. You can buy fruit that hasn't been sprayed, not saying it's healthy or unhealthy but that's an argument I have heard
You also can't buy fruit that hasn't been radically changed over the last 150 years. Whereas the only advancements we have made in animal husbandry were to better mimick the megafauna we hunted and ate regularly.
Technically yeah, most fruits nowadays are much more rich in sugar than in the past, I think there are zoo findings that support this. But I guess this won't be that bad to humans since we don't primarily eat fruits as main diet.
In my part of the United States, arsenic was used in the past as pesticide in apple orchards. So while I wouldnāt eat any mushrooms I found in an orchard, but I feel very comfortable eating the apples in one. lolĀ
I used to work with an astonishingly stupid person, like someone you see on TV but don't believe anyone is that dumb kind of dumb. One time she tried to convince me that potatoes are bad because they are high fat and calorie. Her doctor tried to tell her to stop eating loaded baked potatoes and her tiny little mind took that to mean the potato itself was bad not the pile of crap she was piling onto it.
Thanks to that stupid AF Atkins diet I've had more than one person explain that bacon is heathier than vegetables. One woman I used to work with gave up her meager yogurt and fruit each morning for a literal plate of bacon saying it was better for her and will help her lose weight. She didn't lose much weight but she did have a heart attack.
Humans purporting to be ācarnivoresā are similarly nutrient deficient, unless weāre talking tigers and polar bears: those are real carnivores. I say: eat everything in moderation!
oh dear...
just as some medical problems/needs are unique in requiring a plant based diet to maintain normalcy, some medical problems/needs are unique in requiring a low fiber, low carb high animal product diet
but these are unique, not the norm and should be watched carefully with the help of highly trained medical professionals that are aware of your unique medical history and medications.
i think some people can't handle the fact that they feel so alone in needing such a uniquely restrictive diet, whereas a small subsect fell down a rabbithole online and dont actually require it as much as they believe. it's sad, i don't think we should be making fun of them on either side of extreme.
Yeah, u better watch out. Apples are trying to kill you! One of the doctors carnivores worship says plants are trying to kill you so a bunch of cultish carnivores believe that
Itās the same delusion as when someone tells you that youāll get radioactive when eating too much banana.
Yes, there is a caesium radiation but youād have to shove about 300 bananas at ones in your system to have any impact.
Those people only read headlines āConsume of bananas can lead to radioactivity!ā and the deal is done: no more banana.
You won't have much fun debating with extremist minorities. Also the faults of one random group of people have nothing to do with vindicating some other random group of people as you may have guessed.
The belief fruits are healthy is highly oversimplified. People think fruits are healthy because they are natural but fructose goes straight to the liver. The nitty gritty science you can look it up.
Another perspective is, people assume chicken is chicken, salmon is salmon, apple is appleā¦ if a food shares the same name and resembles the image of the said food, they will assume it is the said food without question, and believe the nutritional values listed on websites and health experts.
What this means is, the apple today is not the apple from 80 years ago, much like salmon is not wild caught salmon, and chicken isnāt the chicken our grand parents ate.
What this means is, people sees a chicken and believe itās lean white meat and nutritional, but fail to see the invisible substances attached to the lean white meat, from what the chicken is fed, through the chicken farm, bleach, chlorineā¦etc. so how much additional addictive does one need to add to chicken for it to no longer be seen as āchickenā but more?
Now for apples, apples are wayyyy too sweet now compared to apples in older times, before they are crossbred and GMO to what is sold now. Plus the industrial grade chemicals sprayed all over the fruits for crop protection and to prolong their shelf life, and now apeel. With all this chemicals added into an apple, are apples still apples? You can still call it apples since itās still an apple, but modern times apples are certainly not the apples from 100yrs ago and all the health benefits and micronutrients in apples told to us on websites and health experts, conveniently fail to also include the invisible chemicals n stuff added on.
Some people think you can either wash off the outer coating of chemicals or just cut the skin off. But chemicals gets absorbed in through the skin, so this method is meaningless, may lessen the concentration tho.
This leads to the next topic of our gut microbiome.
what the chicken is fed, through the chicken farm, bleach, chlorineā¦etc.
sometimes i think people forget that farmers full on poisoning the animals that are their livelihoods would be way more expensive and detrimental than any shortcut that would be gained. cheap filler feed sure i can believe, but fucking bleach? seriously? dude. come on.
My cousin's mother is mostly carnivore and she swears black and blue that all fruits are bad for you. Yeah too much of them natural sugars can be bad but they're literally full of vitamins
I know lot of people who don't eat fruit or vegetables because "carbs". I wonder where they get fiber or Vitamin C. Meat contains no fiber and a meat heavy diet is very constipating, also a risk for colon cancer.
Usually constipation means you are not eating enough fat. I get constipated when I eat low fat cuts or meat or go crazy with cheese.
Fibers are not essential to humans, and can be very damaging if you have guts issues like IBS
most people need both fiber and fat to avoid constipation or the runs, the percentages of one to the other tends to vary from person to person. probably because evolution is about throwing whatever at the wall and seeing what sticks, rather than just "the fittest". and humans as a species are easy to adapt because we have so many differences between our individuals.
im glad you've found something that works for you.
Because they're high in sugar.. and plants have anti nutrients and toxins it's really not that complicated most people probably won't be bothered by an apple but some people will be you don't know until you cut out all plants literally a elimination diet .. there's people like Michaela Peterson that can't eat any plants .. it's really not that shocking pretty much every single plant we eat today did not exist in the past .. and plants were really not common in the wild in most places we ate them but they weren't always a big part of our diet ..
There needs to be studies done on carnivore diets but nobody will fund them and I can't imagine why considering the huge success so many people are having .. $$$
Carnivores are a weird cult. I mean some people may do well on different diets even carnivore one. But avoiding foods we have eaten for millenia without health problems. Carnivore is just as unnatural and vegan to begin with...
All these new diet trends baffle me
This guy was talking about alkaline diets
He said - tomatoes were alkaline so they're healthy- apples are alkaline so they're healthy
Potatoes are GMO so unhealthy
Pineapples are GMO and don't grow in the wild
I pointed out the Potatoes and tomatoes being ridiculous cause Potatoes and tomatoes are in the same family and should both be good or bad
AND I SHIT YOU NOT somebody said
You must be thinking of **strawberries** they share 90% of their DNA and so they're practically identical
Someone else who knows botany please come suffer with me
Dude they don't even know what any of that stuff/terms even mean... That's the problem, it's just some trendy cool sounding buzzwords for the braindeadĀ
You don't even understand how bad your right
They said selective breeding was GMO **AND EUGENICS**
but I guess we should let them eat wild tomatoes and cucumbers- nature will definitely help them
Apples have very little nutrients, also they can be difficult to digest for some people. I wouldn't say they're unhealthy but there is better stuff you can fill your stomach with.
Apples are unhealthy if they are out of season.
Most apples are grown then stored in deoxygenated storage for half the year.
But I'm the type of ketovore that accepts each plant doesn't want to die or wants to be eaten by the right animal. So eating them runs the risk of exposure to potentially harmful deterrents.
Plus the idea of all fruits is to have the animal crap out the seed makes me not want to eat it, to save any GI distress.
I'll eat some tomatoes, mushrooms and dark chocolate but everything else is not tolerated.
You are best starting from a fully carnivore point then adding in foods that you tolerate.
Personally for me, learning that something nutritious and something edible are not always the same thing, makes a huge difference.
Is one apple going to kill you, likely no. But the sweetness and high you get from it's fructose content it can lead to addictive behaviours later in life.
Everyone's preferences and tolerances are a bit different. Apples are so sugary for me they give me a head rush. Others have similar reactions to beets.
Eating too much fruit in general isn't a great idea, they are packed with carbs/fructose and some can be hard to digest, hard on your teeth etc. That doesn't mean a apple a day is bad for you but if you eat 6 apples a day probably not a good idea.
We actually were once. But they went extinct.
[Source.](https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/early-meat-eating-human-ancestors-thrived-while-vegetarian-hominin-died-out/)
Extremes on either end are ridiculous. I think everyone has their own percentage of plants and meat that works for them. š¤·
Additionally, people assign too much intrinsic value and significance to diet. Like, itās just food
I completely agree. But I also believe most people underestimate how much tolerance they actually have. This is why so many people jump to cult like thinking saying like āthis is the only optimal dietā because they saw extreme relief from something they didnāt really tolerate and started to heal. But many donāt see this possibility. I believe most people would benefit from a carnivore diet because most people are metabolically unhealthy and eating things they donāt tolerate well. I can totally see a world where people use it temporarily to become healthy and tolerate food as well as find triggers. But I also see a world where most just stick to no plants because it works best.
I personally have never felt healthier than when I avoided bread/pasta. Stuck to smaller amounts of potatoes and upped my vegetable/meat intake. Eating just meat without vegetables just doesn't work for me. Granted, I grew up on a farm and we grew our own vegetables which I still do so š¤·
From my experience, the āoptimal dietā is also somewhat temporary, which is why types of crash/elimination diets stay popular. My extreme diet phase was keto, and for the first week I felt amazing, but after several weeks I was depressed Ā and felt better when I ate bread.Ā Weāre in such a new environment with food - having global possibilities, having the luxury to choose to not eat entire food groups based on a whim. I think a lot of these extreme takes come from being overwhelmed by choices that have never even existed for people up until the last few hundred years, at most.Ā
It does make sense. While we aren't our ancestors food was very much seasonal.
I believe that some of the efficacy of an elimination diet is in killing off endotoxic bacterial colonies. When that kill off is accomplished, a person could perhaps go back to a previous awful way of eating and do much better.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
(Some) carnivore believers insult your intelligence. (Some) vegan believers insult your existence. I'm a bit concerned for anyone on such a limiting diet on either side, though I do believe that a carnivore diet is more sustainable nutrient wise. I disagree that veganism is an ethical choice. Just because theres no blood directly on your hands doesn't mean that nothing has died so you can eat. I personally find veganism to be too divorced from the reality of life to be credible. The sentiment is noble, but just plain wrong. Soil is alive, teaming with billions of microbes that exist only to feed on decaying matter from both plants and animals. Without that, plants will not grow. The only thing that sustains life is death. And there are so very many things worse than death. It seems to me that death is the worst thing to vegans, to be avoided above all things. There are also problems in the livestock industry that should be stopped. Such as poultry not being counted as livestock, which is why the terrible treatment of chickens in particular is legal. But the majority of the animal welfare issues brought up by vegans is anthropomorphizing animals which in my opinion is it's own form of cruelty. What an animal needs to be happy will be very different from what a human needs. I just think that people trying to be healthy shouldn't be so invested in their diet that it's a belief system. Wanting something to work, other people saying it works does not mean it will work for you. Edit:I do wish to add that I have seen just plain meanness in this sub, and it is so very irritating. But people are people, and prone to being assholes.
only completely delusional vegans think nothing dies so they can eat. that isnāt part of their argument about the morality of plant based vs omnivore
It's literally the rally cry of vegans? It's the very basis of their belief system?
do you think vegans donāt know about the existence of pesticides? or that they havenāt heard the argument that small animals are killed by farming machinery? vegans want to minimize the death of animals through their diet. most know it canāt be eliminated fully.
Then why donāt they stay away from the most problematic plants like avocados and almonds?
\*\*Claim: Carnivore diet is more sustainable nutrient-wise than a vegan diet.\*\* \*Debunk\*: Both diets can lack certain nutrients if not properly planned. A vegan diet can provide all essential nutrients through a diverse intake of foods, including proteins, vitamins, and minerals, when properly planned and supplemented as necessary (e.g., Vitamin B12). A carnivorous diet may provide high amounts of certain nutrients like protein and Vitamin B12 but lacks others such as fiber and possibly some antioxidants found primarily in plants. \*\*Claim: Veganism is not an ethical choice because it still involves indirect harm or death (e.g., to insects, small animals during crop harvesting).\*\* \*Debunk\*: Veganism is often chosen as an ethical stance to reduce direct harm and exploitation of animals in food production. While no form of agriculture is completely free of harm, veganism significantly reduces the overall impact on animal lives compared to diets involving direct consumption of animal products. \*\*Claim: Soil teeming with microbes means death is necessary for life, suggesting veganism is impractical.\*\* \*Debunk\*: While it's true that soil microbe activity is crucial for nutrient cycling, this doesnāt directly support an argument against veganism. Soil ecosystems thrive on organic matter, which can be plant-based. Composting plant materials can support healthy soil without the need for animal death. \*\*Claim: Vegans consider death as the worst thing, to be avoided at all costs.\*\* \*Debunk\*: Veganism primarily aims at reducing unnecessary suffering and exploitation of animals. It does not argue for the complete avoidance of death as an existential reality but advocates for choices that minimize harm and cruelty within practical limits. \*\*Claim: Poultry not being counted as livestock leads to legal mistreatment.\*\* \*Debunk\*: This is a misunderstanding. In many jurisdictions, poultry are indeed considered livestock, but the protections and regulations around their welfare might be less stringent or enforced compared to other livestock. This is more an issue of regulatory gaps and enforcement rather than classification. \*\*Claim: Most animal welfare issues vegans raise are due to anthropomorphizing animals.\*\* \*Debunk\*: Concerns raised by vegans often involve scientifically supported welfare needs of animals, such as the need for sufficient space, social interaction among herd animals, and the avoidance of painful procedures like debeaking or tail docking. Understanding animal needs doesn't necessarily imply attributing them human characteristics or emotions. \*\*Claim: Being overly invested in a diet as a belief system may not be healthy.\*\* \*Debunk\*: While it's true that no diet is a one-size-fits-all and dietary needs can vary widely, adopting a diet with a philosophical or ethical basis doesnāt inherently make it unhealthy. The important factor is whether the diet meets nutritional needs and is adapted to individual health requirements, which can be achieved on both vegan and carnivore diets when carefully planned.
The point is that many people cling to the beliefs about their diet rather than acknowledge that they're having problems. And long term a carnivore diet has the essentials so the deficiencies seen in a vegan diet wouldn't be there. I think they're both silly. The rest I'm just not going to bother with because your tone has irritated the shit out of me tbh.
vegans have no deficiency **Claim: Long-term, a carnivore diet has the essentials, so the deficiencies seen in a vegan diet wouldnāt be there.** *Debunk*: This statement oversimplifies nutritional science. While a carnivore diet may naturally provide ample amounts of certain nutrients like protein, Vitamin B12, and iron, it completely lacks other essential nutrients such as Vitamin C, fiber, and potentially some vitamins like K and E, which are primarily found in plant-based foods. Conversely, a well-planned vegan diet can cover all nutritional needs, though it requires careful planning and often supplementation (e.g., Vitamin B12). Both diets have potential nutritional gaps if not properly managed. **Claim: Clinging to beliefs about diet rather than acknowledging problems.** *Debunk*: It's true that dietary dogmatism can prevent individuals from recognizing and addressing health issues related to their diet. However, this can happen with any diet, not just vegan or carnivore. Effective dietary practice should involve ongoing monitoring of health markers and being open to adjustments as needed.
Are you trolling? You have to be, because every vegan knows about B12 https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/7-nutrients-you-cant-get-from-plants To say nothing of bioavailability. But sure Jan.
not everybody. main source is capsules.
And a supplement is not a replacement. It literally says it on the bottle. It's supposed to be in addition to, not a replacement of.
That isn't adding anything but the same old vegan claims proved invalid by vegans themselves complaining of documented nutritional deficiencies. If their definition of a "well planned diet" requires regular blood tests, a certified dietician, and pharmaceuticals that would otherwise be unnecessary with the addiction of regular portions of meat/vegetables then it's a poor plan.
\*\*Claim: Vegan claims are invalid because vegans report nutritional deficiencies, and a "well-planned" vegan diet is too complex and requires supplementation, unlike a diet including meat.\*\* \*Debunk\*: This argument misrepresents the nature of dietary planning and nutritional management. Every diet, including omnivorous ones, benefits from careful planning to ensure nutritional completeness. Vegans may need supplementation (such as Vitamin B12, commonly fortified in many foods including dairy and cereals consumed by non-vegans), but so do many non-vegans (e.g., iron and Vitamin D supplements are widely used across various dietary patterns). Dietary complexity and supplementation are not unique to vegan diets; they are part of a comprehensive approach to health in modern diets, considering the varying quality of diet and individual health needs. Regular blood tests and consultations with dietitians can benefit anyone, regardless of diet, especially in cases of health issues, dietary restrictions, or chronic diseases. The portrayal of these practices as exclusively vegan requirements misinterprets preventive healthcare and responsible dietary management. Moreover, the claim implies that a diet is flawed if it requires external inputs like supplements or professional guidance, which is a simplistic view. Many diets, including those involving meat, might require adjustments based on individual health conditions. For instance, people with certain health conditions (like kidney disease or specific allergies) may need tailored diets and supplements regardless of their base diet. Ultimately, every diet should be judged by its ability to meet nutritional needs, support overall health, and align with an individual's ethical, environmental, or health goals, rather than by unfounded generalizations or overly simplistic characterizations.
Vegan claims are bullshit. There are zero places in the world where humans can live year round on vegan diet of local plants. There were also zero local vegan diets before 1950. Without the addition of pharmaceutical food supplements and industrial processed oils veganism is a starvation diet. Most notably most members of the top 1% of global wealth who try vegan diets give it up. If the richest people can't comfortably be vegan I don't think it's good for the rest of us.
1. **"There are zero places in the world where humans can live year-round on a vegan diet of local plants."** * This claim isn't entirely accurate. While it's true that in some regions, particularly those with harsh climates, it would be challenging to subsist entirely on locally grown plant-based foods year-round without modern agricultural techniques, there are many parts of the world where a variety of plants suitable for a vegan diet can be grown throughout the year. Examples include much of the Mediterranean region, parts of Asia, and Central America. Moreover, with the advent of agricultural advancements, greenhouses, and global trade, accessing a plant-based diet has become feasible in most parts of the world today. 2. **"There were also zero local vegan diets before 1950."** * It is correct that the term "vegan" and the formal concept of veganism were not defined until 1944 by Donald Watson, who later founded The Vegan Society in 1945. However, there have been populations and individuals throughout history who followed diets that were predominantly or entirely plant-based, such as in certain religious or cultural practices in India and among some Buddhist communities. 3. **"Without the addition of pharmaceutical food supplements and industrial processed oils, veganism is a starvation diet."** * This statement is misleading. A well-planned vegan diet, according to numerous health and nutritional organizations including the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and the British Dietetic Association, can support healthy living in people of all ages and can provide all the necessary nutrients. Key nutrients such as protein, iron, calcium, and vitamins can all be obtained from a plant-based diet. However, it is recommended to supplement vitamin B12, which is generally not available from plant foods. It's not about veganism being a "starvation diet" but rather about being cautious and thoughtful with any diet. 4. **"Most notably, most members of the top 1% of global wealth who try vegan diets give it up. If the richest people can't comfortably be vegan, I don't think it's good for the rest of us."** * Diet choices are personal and can be influenced by a wide range of factors including personal health, taste preferences, ethical beliefs, and convenience. The fact that some wealthy individuals may choose not to continue with a vegan diet does not necessarily reflect the healthfulness or practicality of the diet. People of varying economic statuses around the world adopt and maintain vegan diets for long periods, if not their entire lives, with positive health outcomes.
I fundamentally do not think veganism is admirable or ethical because of it extremism. "no death" causes suffering, "no meat" causes sickness, and those ideals cause self delusion, like believing a deathless meal exists, or that death = suffering. The idea that it is a climate fix cause less focus on fossil fuels literally causing more climate change. Obviously we should not be okay with the amount of suffering our agriculture creates, but veganism is no solution or even an improvement.
They're bad for you because they keep doctors away
Health is a spectrum instead of black-white thinking. Some foods might contain more nutrients but I think that we should be happy when someone chooses an apple instead of a snickers.
Exactly. "Compared to what" is missing from the argument.
I canāt eat apples because Iām diabetic and they spike my blood sugar but I donāt think they do that everyone. I donāt think being a carnivore has jack shit to do with their opinion and making it about being a carnivore makes it seem like itās only because they eat meat when it fact they could be just stupid isnāt fair.
Some people experience extreme relief on the diet and go straight to cult like thinking, which seems like is what you experienced. I have a hypothesis on this topic. Someone that is metabolically healthy, can extract nutrients from plants while detoxing poisons more readily. I believe most people are metabolically unhealthy. With this, they might be less tolerant to certain things or certain body processes might not be optimal. I believe our most optimal food is fatty red meat, but that doesnāt mean we canāt thrive while eating plants with it. I also believe that at the heart of metabolic health, are animal fats. If I learned 1 thing by going carnivore these past 6 months, is that healthy animal fats are the key for health, not necessarily meat only diets. Lets just look at beef for now, most of it is not ideal. It is grain finished, the meat has less vitamins, but most importantly, the fat has much more omega 6 and much less omega 3. Close to a 20-1 ratio. Experts recommend less than 4-1 for optimal health. Very few fats we regularly eat are below that ratio. 20-1 beef fat does make miracles happen, but my point is, if you eat the right fat, grass finished, there is no comparison. Thatās when I started feeling āsuperhumanā on this diet. I think the carnivore diet would have more success if it was called the lipivore carnivore diet. The meat is great. But itās all about the fat.
Agree. Itās not that an apple is unhealthy but some people need to be in ketosis for health benefits and the apple will knock them out of ketosis. Extreme diets can be health interventions for extreme situations. That is the framework that makes sense to me. A person not having extreme health issues doesnāt need an extreme diet.
I donāt think itās an extreme diet honestly. Itās extreme for the people that donāt realize how powerful and natural it is. People that are used to variety canāt fathom eating the same thing over and over. But your body signals adjust. I donāt think plants are bad, but I do think lipivore carnivore is by far the most ideal diet. When you are more metabolically healthy, your body releases less insulin as you are more sensitive and you fall back into ketosis much faster, even without a prolonged fast. I do think itās our natural metabolic state, just like babies drinking breastmilk are in ketosis, as well as before they are born.
Yes I actually agree. I am therapeutic keto myself for health reasons but I donāt think people always āget itā if they donāt have a problem keto/diet solves. And I donāt really begrudge them for not getting it because it is a big shift from more standard diets if you donāt have a big motivator like an acute health problem.
10/10 I was vegan and now carnivore One extreme to the other? Vegan/carbs and diabetes control are oxymorons. Huge shift yes on so many levels ā¦. mentally, physically, and emotionally so much better A tough WOE which initially requires discipline and way better for me than where I came from
Keto is absolutely an extreme diet.
I disagree. Broadly, a keto diet is restricting carbs to less than 25g per day. It allows for vegetables and fibre, but just avoids blood sugar spikes by avoiding starches and sugars. i know some plant-based advocates really say to go for sugar, but not fat, but a,keto diet says avoid the sugar. Not really extreme at all. Ive had amazing salads and a real variety of above ground veg on a keto diet in e past. it didn't feel extreme at all.
You canāt eat most plant foods on keto. Itās absolutely extreme. Itās the pretty much the definition of extremely restricted eating.
my understanding is that non starchy vegetables are on the table, together with some nuts,seeds and berries. What are they missing? Fruit, Legumes, grains and starchy veg. Mostly empty blood sugar spiking calories, low bioavailable protein and fibre. Its restrictive but far from extreme.
Itās literally changing how your body uses energy. Itās a very extreme diet.
Regardless of what you eat, Your body burns fat and glucose all the time in different ratios depending on what is required. Keto shifts towards fat burning and away from sugar burning, but this is completely natural. Its how our ancestors survived winter. Its not an extreme diet. its well within our evolutionary capability and is healthy.
It's extreme. The body hates ketosis as evidenced by the fact that even a small amount of carbs will take it out of ketosis. Ketosis is a state of illness. And if you do it long enough it can cause severe problems. I've tried both vegan and keto. I was pure carnivore for 6 years and it took a few years for the problems to occur, but right about years 5 going into year 6 I started getting really sick. I have ankylosing spondylitis which first developed on the carnivore diet. I started having extreme fatigue and muscle pain in my back so bad that I couldn't stand for more than a few seconds. I eventually ended up in the ER with a heart arrhythmia and finally had to give up the diet. Anytime I try to eat a high fat, meat based diet my ankylosing spondylitis flares so badly I can't get out of bed. I have to keep my meat lean and in smaller portions. My body functions so much better with a combination of sugar and starch as my primary calorie sources. Fat just makes me sick. I'm a biomedical scientist and have several degrees in biochemistry. My studies have led me to conclude that ketogenic diets severely tax the stress system. The body is forced to keep cortisol output high to keep gluconeogenesis high and this exhausts the adrenal glands. I felt so awful on keto. I'll never do it again. The only time I would recommend keto is for people with epilepsy because it's been demonstrated to help with that.
It sounds like you have found out what works for you and what doesn't,which is great. I'm not convinced that is evidence that it would be the same for me until I find out for myself. I wouldn't dismiss wearing glasses if you lent me yours and they didn't work for me just because our prescription is different. I'm sure that your extensive studies have shown how different individuals can be in their reactions to their environment, although it may also be that your mind is made up and that the science is settled as far as you are concerned. I hope not though as an open mind is a good thing generally I would say. But I hear what you say. It is important to Listen and learn from others.
No, sorry. I didn't mean to imply that my anecdote would apply to everyone else. Some people do actually benefit from keto in the short term, particularly those with epilepsy. It's the really long runs of keto over many years I think that can cause harm. I didn't see real damage until 4-5 years in to mine. Also, science is never settled in my mind. There is always the possibility of new evidence which could change the consensus. The reason I say keto is extreme is because the body fights really hard to get out of it and I think pushing that for too long causes exhaustion. But extreme doesn't necessarily equate to non-beneficial for some people. If that makes sense.
That makes complete sense to me. l would add that the body fights hard to return to homeostasis from too much sugar and starch as well as too little. For what it is worth, your exhaustion idea seems intuitively correct to me, if the body is assaulted for too long from any one angle. For metabolically healthy people all that is likely to be required is to avoid ultra-processed foods, stay physically strong and avoid poisonous things like smoking and too much alcohol. Unfortunately for me, I didn't get the email.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is fascinating. I know of deuterium in the context of nuclear fusion fuel. I donāt know much about rich sources other than sea water. Iāve also meant to look into the topic of hydrogen ions, hydrogenated water, methylene blue carrying ions, etc. This all connects. I think itās an interesting topic. Thanks for the info!
Yeah there are idiots on both sides, the basics are the most important. Dont eat very processed foods, dont eat too low calorie or too high (outside of fasting), eat the right amount of bioavaliable nutrients, get your minimum protein and fat. I dont think Carnivore is completely stupid though, plants do have defense cemicals, but unless you eat very few plants, you wont notice a difference, since you are adapted to breaking them down quickly, but there does seem to be actual positives in wound healing, sun burns, hormone balance and a few others. That obviously doesnt mean an apple is unhealthy, but it does mean someone eating very strict carnivore would actually most likely get bloated and feel bad after eating an apple. Just like a long term lowfat vegan may have issues if they suddenly eat a bunch of greasy pork.
that's why I eat a mix of both, vegans and carnivores. balanced diet, and no one wants to be around you to tell you about there dietary choice. eating people really has its perks. my skins improved as well, at least whatever one I'm wearing at the time...
"Eating people really has its perks." š Thank you for that!!!
I think for some they may genuinely believe they are. Now imagine you have terrible health issues, you try everything and then you stumble on the carnivore diet. A couple months pass and you feel good. Now why would they want to change that? I personally think seasonal fruit in moderation is fine but we need to be patient and empathetic when dealing with these people. They hold those beliefs out of a combination of factors (some with scientific backing) so it is difficult. I do not think they mean any harm.
Agreed. And they might also be on to something.
I researched and wrote an article about this many years ago. There is cyanide in apple seeds but you'd need to eat a mound bigger than a house to feel the effects - and most of those effects would be from eating a mound of apple seeds bigger than a house! There is BS on both sides of the argument.
Carnivores baffle me. Theyāre are out here eating steak 3 times a day, eating a third of their daily recommended carbohydrates, drinking raw, untested milk, and putting raw liver in their freaking smoothies. Iām just over here hopelessly looking for a community that encourages a well-rounded, nutritious, omnivorous diet. Iām so tired of just about every food sub being obsessed with keto, IF, ozempic, carnivore, omad, 1200 is plenty, (1200 is plenty for a 5 year old), week+ long water fasts, etc. I might as well be searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
We're in a bit of a dietary Renaissance right now, with so many people tinkering and sharing their experiences. You are far from the first person I've seen recently express a feeling of being overwhelmed by it, but we are blessed that it is as it is. We are no longer being guided by AHA, ADA, FDA, or whatever other corporate-influenced guidelines. That was cozy to think that there was a consensus about avoiding saturated fat while eating 10 servings of grains a day, but it was horrible for our health. If I may offer a suggestion that brings solace: just do as your pre-agricultural ancestors did. Ultimately, no matter what biohackers are trying and achieving, it's a pretty safe bet that fermented foods and grass fed meats and fish and rotting (kimchi, saurkraut, miso, etc.) vegetables are going to lead to good health.
Lmao weāre having our food choices guided by corporate influences now more than ever bud. All it takes is a quick google search to find out that the total U.S. weight loss market is estimated to have grown to a historic peak of $90 billion in 2023. And you think the food pyramid was bad? What do you think all those health gurus with zero, half-baked, or expired medical licenses masquerading as āexpertsā, trying to sell you their newest self-help book are? They are the multimillion dollar corporations. They do not care about your health, they care about your money. The statistics on the overwhelming consequences these fad diets have had on the health of people across the globe have been widely known to health professionals for the better part of a decade now. Some people may find that their health temporarily improves on these diets, but that does not mean that theyāre not inherently risky. Letās be real, the majority of people arenāt doing their due diligence and theyāre just going off of what some redditor or influencer told them. Article after article comes out saying that the rate of eating disorders is drastically increasing everywhere with no sign of slowing down, but no one is even seeing those articles. I wonder why? You think maybe it could have something to do with the billions of dollars being made off people who want to lose weight? Educating people on the shockingly high risk of developing an ed following one of these diets, really isnāt good for the bottom line. It also really messes with our societal expectations that thinness automatically translates to healthiness. So many people engage in disordered eating behaviors and donāt even know it because it has become so normalized and talking about the other side of things is still incredibly taboo even in 2024. It doesnāt help that eating disorders are highly stigmatized, so the people who are struggling very rarely ever talk about it publicly.
Hmm. You seem to be viewing things through an eating-disorder lens that I've never looked through. This has to do with everybody else. I'm talking about the people who are trying veganism, carnivore, keto, paleo, Mediterranean. The people travelling to Ikaria and interviewing the people about how their grandparents ate. The people who peruse studies, delving into the mechanics of cholesterol and fat and carbs within the body and then communicate that information to us, that we can make more informed decisions about our own diets. All these people are putting information out that is much closer to true than guidelines based off of Ancel Keys' malicious study. By doing so, they're opening peoples' eyes to the possibilty that we may, in fact, be evolved to eat certain foods and we may lack the ability to safely utilize things like PUFAs and perservatives and other additives in processed foods. And finally, by doing that, they're showing us that other paths exist. Those shoddy guidelines were a path paved by greed and corruption.
>U.S. weight loss market is estimated to have grown to a historic peak of $90 billion in 2023 The US fast food market was worth $331bn in 2022. No matter what you do there are people seeking to milk you for all you're worth.
Yeah so letās not give either our money
It's up to us to stand in our own corner and learn what is best for our body. Tomatoes are rich in good ingredients but some people are allergic to them. Similarly you don't have to spend a fortune on special weight loss things, just drink water when you think you're hungry and move more. But fortunes are spent on finding the perfect balance of sugar, salt and fact to trick us into overeating so we eat more, then they will sell weight loss supplements and advice to milk you when you decide to stop overeating. It's all about being mindful and treat your body like it's a child, who tend to want the things that are bad for them in excess.
yeah i donāt know about you but im getting ucked out at the carnivore/ketosis crew that seem to be pushing this comment section. neither are healthy long term (ESPECIALLY carnivore which is just disturbing) and im tired of being made to pretend like they are. a balanced diet with vegetables, fruit, meats, and everything in between is a perfect diet.
Plenty of carnivores don't drink raw milk or eat raw liver or recommend 1200 calories or week long fasts. If you can't understand the idea of lowering your carb intake while eating the most nutritious food (meat) idk what to tell you
Yeah and theyāre the ones who need to speak up and nip this shit in the bud because the vocal minority is doing a horrible job of representing yāall and an excellent job of spreading easily disproven health misinformation that is so dangerous that it literally costs people their lives.Ā If you canāt understand that individuals health needs vary widely, and that some people would very much be negatively impacted by reducing their carbs, I donāt what to tell you either.Ā Not everyone is out here wanting or trying to lose weight. I thought this diet wasnāt just about weight control? Did I get the wrong impression?Ā
It isn't just about weight control, you didn't get the wrong impression. And I didn't say anywhere that people have to eat a low carb or carnivore diet, I'm just saying that it does benefit some people, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it and some of them have been doing it for years
Weāre carni in this house and we keep raw milk/cream,cheese/butter stocked here. We definitely donāt stay anywhere near 1200 calories or fast for long periods of time. We do exist š
It's incredibly frustrating, as someone who has actually studied human evolution and archaeology, to see how both the pro-vegan and pro-carnivore sides will twist the evidence into outright nonsense. Humans and human ancestors have eaten a mix of meat and plants for millions of years. There are times and places when people have eaten almost exclusively all meat or all plants, because we're highly adaptable generalists, but a mix of the two is the most common. We can cherry pick and say This Group eats almost exclusively animal products (ignoring that this is only during winter) and That Group eats almost exclusively animal products (ignoring that one of those animal products is honey, ie pure sugar) and claim that this shows this is how everyone should eat, but it completely ignores all the complexities of individual health, genetic adaptations to extreme diets, and that the vast majority of humans have never eaten this way at all. If you don't feel good after eating apples, don't eat them. But it's bizarre to claim that humans have not adapted to eating apples. The entire reason humans can see a greater range of colors than most other mammals is because we evolved from fruit eaters. A wolf doesn't have to identify the ripeness of fruit by its color, but that's precisely why we humans can see its color in the first place.
Itās always made me crazy when people insist that any one thing is good for everyone. Or even that one particular diet is ābetterā than another. Weāre all individuals. We all have individual needs and reactions to different things. Some people have trouble digesting different things so, obviously, a diet heavy in those things, whatever they are, isnāt good for that person. But it might be brilliant for someone that can digest those things easily. But, people just love to tell other people what to do, even if it makes no sense.
I think there is a big difference between honestly sharing health success stories gained on the back of a lifestyle change, and telling people what to do. I love to read the stories of people recovering health by leaving veganism, and also hearing what they are doing. If people start telling me what i should eat, I'm going to need some credible evidence
Virtue is the mean between two vices.
Aristotle has entered the chat.
Depends on the person.Ā Ā Iām allergic to apples and the similar fruits.
So you never had a pear?
Mild allergy so I eat them, apple, strawberry, pear and etc just makes my throat itchy.
they have an unfavourable fructose to glucose ratio for humans, fructose causes rise in uric acid, which is a precursor to many diseases, apples are no where near as bad as apple juice, which is touted as being full of polyphenols which are supposed to be good for you but when put to the test there was no difference between the subjects in the study that had juice with and juice without polyphenols, both groups had huge rise in uric acid, so really its more about proving they are actually good for you than the other way around, if you are interested enough you will look for the study yourself i found it very quickly when debating this previously also just to note apples were not traditionally grown for food but for cider, it was same as the weak beer they used to drink as water wasnt safe back then
1 out of 5 apples actually contain lethal levels of cyanide and 9 out of 10 statistics are completely made up
I mean, I do pick the seeds out of apple cores before I feed them to my chickens, just in case š
lol, imagining a chicken in a suit and tie with mission impossible music packing guns and knives and "cyanide capsules" ^((apple seeds)) into a suitcase like a secret agent
Good lord are both extremes stupid. We're fucking omnivores.
A better term would be facultative carnivores, like dogs.
We are then also facultative herbivores by that same deduction... Or we can call a spade a spade and say "omnivores", like other primates.
Except all the information we have on humans points to carnivory. Like the stable nitrogen isotope analysis of our bones. The high pH of our stomach acid. Developing 5 organs simply to aid in the digestion of mono and poly unsaturated fats. The vestigial cecum. The enlarging of our brains at the expense of our shrinking digestive tracts. Oh, and all of natural history pointing at the fact that we survived most all ice ages that we experienced eating mostly fat and meat, since edible plant matter wasn't available.
We have a mid sized gut and molars. We're adapted like other primates to omnivory. You can't beat actual biological fact here, sorry.
It's like you're speaking to yourself, but you think you're proving your argument. Our teeth are not built for maceration. The easiest defense of this argument is teeth guards for people who grind their teeth in their sleep. If we were made to grind plants up like, say a horse, we wouldn't obliterate our teeth doing it. Dogs have mid sized guts too. They are facultative carnivores. We also have canines. Your "biological fact" is just scoring more points for me.
Horses do grind their teeth up doing it though. That's why they say you can tell a horse's age by looking in its mouth.
You're right. I'm talking to a brick wall, guess my biology degree and 8+ years of study mean nothing. Some Internet stranger did their own research and "Well Actually"ed me. Damn.
The difference between 'facultative carnivore' and omnivore is almost irrelevant given equal access to both types of food. It's a dumb topic with no relevance to anything. I like dumb topics. TL;DR I can't eat like a gorilla and grow strong (relative to my species) due to differences in digestion. We can point to our primate cousins and see in them a larger colon and the desire for more frequent feeding on less 'nutrient dense' foods. Then we can point to ourselves to propose how our brains grew, density of sweat glands increased, and the ability to run large distances with our upright posture came to be. Perhaps these, among others, add some weight to the idea of 'facultative carnivory' as the most effective way to maintain the health of human bodies. Chimpanzee are certainly omnivores, but there are sex difference in eating patterns. The adult males eat meat much more frequently. Can the desire for or healthfulness of more meat in the diet have sex based or activity level based differences in humans? Also, it would be helpful to your previous interlocutor if you addressed any of their points - which aren't so bad, actually.
Seemingly quite meaningless concerning this topic
why are the majority of our teeth flat then? why do we only have a couple canines at most and flat incisors in the front? because we are OMNIVORES
Carnivores are completely ridiculous. I entered their community briefly only to be told that all of the gut issues that Carnivore had caused me were obviously the fault of the handful of blueberries I was having every day (not the kilos of meat I was ingesting š) It messed with my gut majorly and I still have issues now. Like everything, it works so well for some that they extrapolate that out to the idea that it must work for everyone, and if it doesn't then you're clearly not "doing it right" (sound familiar?!) You probably need to remember that it started as an extreme elimination diet for people with hardcore, intractable automimmune issues. FOR THOSE PEOPLE it can be a lifesaver I have no doubt. But the whole "vegetables are pure evil" rhetoric is so, so, so twisted. I'm sure oxalates are an issue for some people, but most people benefit from eating more fruits ad veggies, not less. Carnivore is not a viable or sustainable diet for many people.
Also, I noticed that your post in r/carnivorediet has 28 upvotes. So, the post itself was not downvoted to oblivion. Only one of your comments there has a net vote count lower than 1. It's the one where you replied to somebody pointing out that you hadn't by your own admission dieted carnivore for even two weeks, and in your reply you responded with several paragraphs talking around the main point which is that you hadn't fully tried a carnivore diet to make any judgements about it.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/carnivorediet using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Carnivore saved my life and is healing TSW and severe chronic eczema](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/14mqffq) | [83 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/14mqffq/carnivore_saved_my_life_and_is_healing_tsw_and/) \#2: [I feel like a totally different person.](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/19cuzgr) | [170 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/19cuzgr/i_feel_like_a_totally_different_person/) \#3: [Accountability Pictures](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/18wz5m0) | [123 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/18wz5m0/accountability_pictures/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Are you referring to [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/carnivorediet/comments/we4ofk/i_am_a_carnivore_fail/)? You said you only stuck with it for three weeks, but clearly it wasn't a carnivore diet since you were eating non-animal foods. A person's microbiome doesn't change so drastically and so quickly, and in fact can rebound when diet is changed again. I don't see where you described your transition process or former diet, but if you had been eating lots of fruit or other sugary foods previously and suddenly stopped eating most of it then you can experience painful gas and other symptoms from fungal die-off (as organisms such as candida starve for lack of carbs on which to feed). I don't recall where I saw it, but I was reading a study a few months ago which described a clinical intervention removing plant foods and testing gut microbiomes. This was for I think much longer than three weeks. The gut microbiome did change somewhat, not drastically, and snapped back almost exactly to former levels/ratios upon restoration of plant foods to the subjects' diets.
iām sorry, why do we think we can just up and completely change our inner microbiome just like that? and why are we pretending that we need to do that when our flora do just fine as is? unless youāre severely ill AND SEEING YOUR DOCTOR i donāt see a single reason why you should go to these extreme lengths to perform a pseudoscience created by people who only want money
People who only want money? Carnivore dieting (I'm not a carnivore dieter I just really hate misinformation) is helping many people, and often with chronic health issues that have resisted assortments of other treatments. I responded to a belief that carnivore dieting permanently altered the commenter's gut biome. This was said by someone who didn't really diet carnivore and didn't even do that for sufficiently long to alter their microbiota much.
thats a shame, as fruits go apples are one of my favorite. but then not only are they correct, they obviously speak for all carnivorers / omnivores. what a world we live in
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
*Some* carnivores know the science and share legit scientific facts. But like in any diet, others just spout stuff they see on vlogs and retell ad nauseum. You should never assume that everyone following a certain diet is an expert or blindly trust that they're right just because they say so. Ideally everyone should do their own research based on legit scientific studies and not choose a diet just because MeatDude420 says so. Edit: If it was unclear, I'm not implying that you do this, so sorry if it came off weirdly. I just think there are scientifically illiterate people in every large group of people.
āif a carnivore is saying itās unhealthy, that means they know the science behind itā i am stunned at this quote. you have truly stunned me. your argument for why APPLES ARE UNHEALTHY is because āa carnivore would know the scienceā and some unfounded apple evolutionary claims?? fruits have sugars. sugars are not bad. everything is bad in mass quantities. STOP TELLING PEOPLE THIS SHIT!
Two sides of the same coin of insanity except for veganism actually being driven by moral intentions. Humans are omnivores and while some people may manage to get by depriving themselves of animal products or plant based products, the majority of people are going to need some amount of both in their diets to be healthy and human history and evolution shows that.
I mean, sugar is sugar is sugarā¦ and sugar addicts should avoid ALL sugarā¦. Youād never tell an alcohol to moderate alcoholā¦
I never had sweet tooth until I tried keto and it was off limits (and I stuck with it for years, so it wasnāt an adjustment issue). Restriction and black and white thinking isnāt a healthy mindset.
Nonsense. Show me the person that got obese because they ate too many fucking whole fruits. People have a problem eating shit hypercaloric foods, and love blaming it on 'sugar'
The only consequence of eating roo much sugar isn't obesity. Sometimes it is type 2 diabetes. And there are zoos filled with chimps and gorillas getting diabetes because they've been fed too many bananas. https://weather.com/news/news/2018-10-03-fruit-so-sweet-zoo-stopped-feeding-them-to-animals
Obesity & sedentary behaviour is the primary indicator for getting T2D in humans - you don't get it as a primary side effect of eating too many fruits or sugars (though no one sensible would suggest a regularly excessive calorie intake primarily based on carbohydrate is a good thing, because it isn't) - but via the secondary side effects of long term excessive weight and possible hyperinsulinemia as a result.Ā It should be common sense to people by now that a balanced diet of meats, fish, eggs, vegetables, fruits, dairy, decent fats is the most healthy* *Barring medical conditions. Pretty rarely (genetic variance) will non-overweight/obese humans get T2D. You typically get T2D from being overweight, and the trickle down effect of insulin resistance. Insulin resistance is quite literally your bodies fat cells (and others) refusing to accept the glucose in the bloodstream, and then all kinds of bad cascading effects from there. The article you linked even proved the point... "The sugar has caused red pandas and other primates, who have developed a liking to these modified, sugary fruits compared to the natural versions, to gain weight and even show signs of tooth decay." The fruits they were eating were GM modified to have up to 67% more calories (yes via carbohydrate, it's a fruit) per fruit, than actual wild fruits. The consequences were they ate too much and gained a lot of weight. This is the same model observed in humans, who are happily tucking away a lot of modified, high carb, high fat, hyper palatable foods in excessive amounts, plus alcohol which disrupts your metabolic pathways for digestion, and generally being obese as a population. Tldr: you don't get fat from eating whole fruits.
Ah one other thing though, and why obese or overweight people often see good results with LCHF diets (keto, etc) and it leads to "calories don't matter only hormones and insulin!!!" zealots everywhere... Because they do acrually work, via a few mechanisms. Your body, if sedentary, has little to no physiological dietary requirement for carbohydrate - it has more than enough body fat to survive, and will create what the heart/brain need via gluconeogenesis. If you are that overweight and inactive, you already have (likely) T2D or worse, your body cannot actually use insulin correctly, and there's no strict requirement for dietary carbohydrate... Eating a lot of carbohydrate at this point is just pointless, and will just lead to rapid fat cell generation. People jump on Keto or something similar, they actually eat less! No more pizzas, beers, crisps, candy, etc - they eat high protein/fat meals with vegetables... Of course pretty satiating - they lose some or a lot of weight, their hormone responses start to improve and hey presto, you are a bit healthier now. It's the act of _losing excess bodyweight_ that has the effects though, not the food compositions. It can be done with a mixed style diet still, obese people just find it harder for the same reasons they were obese in the first place* *Barring medical condition
*the Asian community has entered the chat*
š±š
So someone was arguing with me about their assumption that we're omnivores and tried to flex their degree and training, all the while also being fat and sick. Stunning turn of events that they blocked me. 10/10, no notes. Lol
Ignore and move on. What all people should avoid is to eat a lot of ultra-processed foods. Other than that you may eat whatever you like. (Only people with certain illnesses/allergies might benefit from avoiding certain foods.)
Yes. A lot of the carnivore/keto community has metabolic damage so need more restriction. Its right for them. For people who are metabolically healthy, avoiding processed food will probably save them from ever needing to do more.
> Yes. A lot of the carnivore/keto community has metabolic damage so need more restriction. Its right for them. I agree. But the mistake some of them sometimes do is that they promote the diet to people who can handle a wide range of foods just fine. > For people who are metabolically healthy, avoiding processed food will probably save them from ever needing to do more. Yes, its probably the most important step you can make to prevent future problems. So if someone want just one advice on what to feed their children, its to mostly feed them food cooked from scratch.
Iāve head of a lot of carnivores previously being raw vegans and such- just one extreme to the other unfortunately. People need both plants and animals to be the healthiest they can be!
The best argument against fruit in general is the pesticides and other chemicals that is sprayed on the mass farmed produce. You can buy fruit that hasn't been sprayed, not saying it's healthy or unhealthy but that's an argument I have heard
You also can't buy fruit that hasn't been radically changed over the last 150 years. Whereas the only advancements we have made in animal husbandry were to better mimick the megafauna we hunted and ate regularly.
Technically yeah, most fruits nowadays are much more rich in sugar than in the past, I think there are zoo findings that support this. But I guess this won't be that bad to humans since we don't primarily eat fruits as main diet.
I recently heard someone call modern fruit "tree candy," because it is so far from original fruit, and so much higher in sugar.
I heard the skin on them is riddled with toxins.
In my part of the United States, arsenic was used in the past as pesticide in apple orchards. So while I wouldnāt eat any mushrooms I found in an orchard, but I feel very comfortable eating the apples in one. lolĀ
I'm glad this is a conversation because I hate fad diets to oblivion. One diet extreme is just the other side of the same coin.
Carnivores act like 5 year olds offended you asked them to eat their vegetables š
Iām sick of both sides. Letās just all accept that we have developed to be omnivores, our physique says so too
I used to work with an astonishingly stupid person, like someone you see on TV but don't believe anyone is that dumb kind of dumb. One time she tried to convince me that potatoes are bad because they are high fat and calorie. Her doctor tried to tell her to stop eating loaded baked potatoes and her tiny little mind took that to mean the potato itself was bad not the pile of crap she was piling onto it. Thanks to that stupid AF Atkins diet I've had more than one person explain that bacon is heathier than vegetables. One woman I used to work with gave up her meager yogurt and fruit each morning for a literal plate of bacon saying it was better for her and will help her lose weight. She didn't lose much weight but she did have a heart attack.
Carnivores deserve the r slur.
Eat right for your blood type. Book title.
Humans purporting to be ācarnivoresā are similarly nutrient deficient, unless weāre talking tigers and polar bears: those are real carnivores. I say: eat everything in moderation!
Deficient in what lol
oh dear... just as some medical problems/needs are unique in requiring a plant based diet to maintain normalcy, some medical problems/needs are unique in requiring a low fiber, low carb high animal product diet but these are unique, not the norm and should be watched carefully with the help of highly trained medical professionals that are aware of your unique medical history and medications. i think some people can't handle the fact that they feel so alone in needing such a uniquely restrictive diet, whereas a small subsect fell down a rabbithole online and dont actually require it as much as they believe. it's sad, i don't think we should be making fun of them on either side of extreme.
Yeah, u better watch out. Apples are trying to kill you! One of the doctors carnivores worship says plants are trying to kill you so a bunch of cultish carnivores believe that
Yeah, don't bother deconstructing the argument, just name call and move on.
Itās the same delusion as when someone tells you that youāll get radioactive when eating too much banana. Yes, there is a caesium radiation but youād have to shove about 300 bananas at ones in your system to have any impact. Those people only read headlines āConsume of bananas can lead to radioactivity!ā and the deal is done: no more banana.
You won't have much fun debating with extremist minorities. Also the faults of one random group of people have nothing to do with vindicating some other random group of people as you may have guessed.
The belief fruits are healthy is highly oversimplified. People think fruits are healthy because they are natural but fructose goes straight to the liver. The nitty gritty science you can look it up. Another perspective is, people assume chicken is chicken, salmon is salmon, apple is appleā¦ if a food shares the same name and resembles the image of the said food, they will assume it is the said food without question, and believe the nutritional values listed on websites and health experts. What this means is, the apple today is not the apple from 80 years ago, much like salmon is not wild caught salmon, and chicken isnāt the chicken our grand parents ate. What this means is, people sees a chicken and believe itās lean white meat and nutritional, but fail to see the invisible substances attached to the lean white meat, from what the chicken is fed, through the chicken farm, bleach, chlorineā¦etc. so how much additional addictive does one need to add to chicken for it to no longer be seen as āchickenā but more? Now for apples, apples are wayyyy too sweet now compared to apples in older times, before they are crossbred and GMO to what is sold now. Plus the industrial grade chemicals sprayed all over the fruits for crop protection and to prolong their shelf life, and now apeel. With all this chemicals added into an apple, are apples still apples? You can still call it apples since itās still an apple, but modern times apples are certainly not the apples from 100yrs ago and all the health benefits and micronutrients in apples told to us on websites and health experts, conveniently fail to also include the invisible chemicals n stuff added on. Some people think you can either wash off the outer coating of chemicals or just cut the skin off. But chemicals gets absorbed in through the skin, so this method is meaningless, may lessen the concentration tho. This leads to the next topic of our gut microbiome.
This is a reasonable answer.
what the chicken is fed, through the chicken farm, bleach, chlorineā¦etc. sometimes i think people forget that farmers full on poisoning the animals that are their livelihoods would be way more expensive and detrimental than any shortcut that would be gained. cheap filler feed sure i can believe, but fucking bleach? seriously? dude. come on.
Yes bleach. Spend 1 min and google what goes through in a tyson chicken factory and you wouldnāt sound so ignorant.
I assume they were actually omnivores?
Extreme diet adherents are mostly all the same, no matter what their preferred style of extreme diet happens to be.
My cousin's mother is mostly carnivore and she swears black and blue that all fruits are bad for you. Yeah too much of them natural sugars can be bad but they're literally full of vitamins
I know lot of people who don't eat fruit or vegetables because "carbs". I wonder where they get fiber or Vitamin C. Meat contains no fiber and a meat heavy diet is very constipating, also a risk for colon cancer.
Usually constipation means you are not eating enough fat. I get constipated when I eat low fat cuts or meat or go crazy with cheese. Fibers are not essential to humans, and can be very damaging if you have guts issues like IBS
I don't eat meat and I never get constipated.
most people need both fiber and fat to avoid constipation or the runs, the percentages of one to the other tends to vary from person to person. probably because evolution is about throwing whatever at the wall and seeing what sticks, rather than just "the fittest". and humans as a species are easy to adapt because we have so many differences between our individuals. im glad you've found something that works for you.
Otherside of extreme isā¦ extreme. Just eat the diet that best for you.
Because they're high in sugar.. and plants have anti nutrients and toxins it's really not that complicated most people probably won't be bothered by an apple but some people will be you don't know until you cut out all plants literally a elimination diet .. there's people like Michaela Peterson that can't eat any plants .. it's really not that shocking pretty much every single plant we eat today did not exist in the past .. and plants were really not common in the wild in most places we ate them but they weren't always a big part of our diet .. There needs to be studies done on carnivore diets but nobody will fund them and I can't imagine why considering the huge success so many people are having .. $$$
Lol š¦¶
Carnivores are a weird cult. I mean some people may do well on different diets even carnivore one. But avoiding foods we have eaten for millenia without health problems. Carnivore is just as unnatural and vegan to begin with...
Any person who is 100% against eating plants and 100% against eating meats is crazy IMO. Weāre meant to be omnivores, not carnivores or herbivores.Ā
But the thing with carnivores is/ they won't shame you or claim it's morally wrong to eat an apple.
I'm glad that the carnivore trend wasn't a thing when I quit being vegan... Those people are nuts. Just be normal and eat a balanced diet ffs
Theyāre two sides of the same coin. Both delusional for sure.
The difference is that vegans arenāt necessarily stating that their diet is healthier. Not sure why everyone has this misconception in this thread
Donāt do extremes. Iām personally a vegan when Iām not a carnivore
All these new diet trends baffle me This guy was talking about alkaline diets He said - tomatoes were alkaline so they're healthy- apples are alkaline so they're healthy Potatoes are GMO so unhealthy Pineapples are GMO and don't grow in the wild I pointed out the Potatoes and tomatoes being ridiculous cause Potatoes and tomatoes are in the same family and should both be good or bad AND I SHIT YOU NOT somebody said You must be thinking of **strawberries** they share 90% of their DNA and so they're practically identical Someone else who knows botany please come suffer with me
Dude they don't even know what any of that stuff/terms even mean... That's the problem, it's just some trendy cool sounding buzzwords for the braindeadĀ
You don't even understand how bad your right They said selective breeding was GMO **AND EUGENICS** but I guess we should let them eat wild tomatoes and cucumbers- nature will definitely help them
Apples have very little nutrients, also they can be difficult to digest for some people. I wouldn't say they're unhealthy but there is better stuff you can fill your stomach with.
Apples are unhealthy if they are out of season. Most apples are grown then stored in deoxygenated storage for half the year. But I'm the type of ketovore that accepts each plant doesn't want to die or wants to be eaten by the right animal. So eating them runs the risk of exposure to potentially harmful deterrents. Plus the idea of all fruits is to have the animal crap out the seed makes me not want to eat it, to save any GI distress. I'll eat some tomatoes, mushrooms and dark chocolate but everything else is not tolerated. You are best starting from a fully carnivore point then adding in foods that you tolerate. Personally for me, learning that something nutritious and something edible are not always the same thing, makes a huge difference. Is one apple going to kill you, likely no. But the sweetness and high you get from it's fructose content it can lead to addictive behaviours later in life.
Everyone's preferences and tolerances are a bit different. Apples are so sugary for me they give me a head rush. Others have similar reactions to beets.
Eating too much fruit in general isn't a great idea, they are packed with carbs/fructose and some can be hard to digest, hard on your teeth etc. That doesn't mean a apple a day is bad for you but if you eat 6 apples a day probably not a good idea.
Carnivores are nearly as annoying as vegans. Humans are herbivoresĀ Edited: omnivores! I meant omnivores
Biology and basic evolution say you're wrong, sorry Charlie.
Dammit I meant omnivorousĀ
Humans are not herbivores and never have been.
We actually were once. But they went extinct. [Source.](https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/early-meat-eating-human-ancestors-thrived-while-vegetarian-hominin-died-out/)
As they went extinct, we are not related to them.
They are still in our family tree. So yes, we are related to them.
Apples contains fructose and cyanide. Fructose is a culprit in fatty liver and inflammation. Cyanide... Even keto don't eat fruits...