Carnivore diet

[Anonymous]

More grifter influencer nonsense.

[Anonymous]

I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

[Anonymous]

I have learned that every medical study on this planet is tainted. People with money can get the studies to show whatever they want.
Try the carnivore way if eating. If you feel amazing, keep doing it. If it sucks, stop doing it.
If you look up Dr. Anthony Chaffee, he has the answers to all your questions. There are other doctors too but I feel he is the best

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have learned that every medical study on this planet is tainted. People with money can get the studies to show whatever they want.
Try the carnivore way if eating. If you feel amazing, keep doing it. If it sucks, stop doing it.
If you look up Dr. Anthony Chaffee, he has the answers to all your questions. There are other doctors too but I feel he is the best

It is a lot more common that most people recognize

"The sugar industry paid three Harvard researchers to conduct research on heart disease and sugar consumption. The researchers were paid to review and dismiss findings that linked high sugar consumption to heart disease, and instead blame saturated fat and cholesterol"

[Anonymous]

"The American Heart Association (AHA) is a nonprofit organization with a mission to “build healthier lives free of cardiovascular disease and stroke.” Yet in its 2011-2012 financial statement, the AHA noted $521 million in donations from non-government and non-membership sources and many well-known large drug companies, including those who make and market statins, contribute amounts in the $1 million range"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Yes, the main reason it has such great results is because it eliminates all the garage from your diet. Pretty much everything we are given as food today is an attempt to get you addicted and to get you to over consume and spend as much money as possible. It's all about profits. Even the fruit in our grocery stores has been genetically altered to contain more sugar that what occurs naturally. The food companies are just as nasty as the pharmaceutical companies

[Anonymous]

Op here. I was excited and surprised to see that folks are still posting on this thread so I figured I’d come back with an update.

I am not currently eating carnivore, but I did follow the diet loosely for about a month and saw good (but not shockingly good) results. Since then, I’ve been maintaining with a general low carb lifestyle. I may do carnivore again to lose another stubborn 5 lbs or so. I was amazed how indulgent it felt to eat an arugula salad with avocado, or plain Greek yogurt with berries and nuts, after doing carnivore. It’s a great reset in that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

Then why in the world would you follow this extreme diet if all you are going on is the advice of a few influencer doctors who make money off of you watching their content? I thought there was some controversial studies showing that this was a good way to eat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

Then why in the world would you follow this extreme diet if all you are going on is the advice of a few influencer doctors who make money off of you watching their content? I thought there was some controversial studies showing that this was a good way to eat.

There are tons of real world examples of people improving their lives. People are losing weight while gaining muscle, getting off medications for both physical and mental health issues, skin conditions are clearing up, obsessive food addictions are disappearing. Lots of benefits are being reported. Is it the only way to achieve these benefits? Probably not but it's certainly doing a lot of good for a lot of people. I'm surprised that at 50 years old, I can pack on muscle so easily. I only have the desire to eat once a day and all my anxiety issues have disappeared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

Then why in the world would you follow this extreme diet if all you are going on is the advice of a few influencer doctors who make money off of you watching their content? I thought there was some controversial studies showing that this was a good way to eat.

There are tons of real world examples of people improving their lives. People are losing weight while gaining muscle, getting off medications for both physical and mental health issues, skin conditions are clearing up, obsessive food addictions are disappearing. Lots of benefits are being reported. Is it the only way to achieve these benefits? Probably not but it's certainly doing a lot of good for a lot of people. I'm surprised that at 50 years old, I can pack on muscle so easily. I only have the desire to eat once a day and all my anxiety issues have disappeared.

Lay off TikTok and those "real world examples" when it comes to your health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

Then why in the world would you follow this extreme diet if all you are going on is the advice of a few influencer doctors who make money off of you watching their content? I thought there was some controversial studies showing that this was a good way to eat.

There are tons of real world examples of people improving their lives. People are losing weight while gaining muscle, getting off medications for both physical and mental health issues, skin conditions are clearing up, obsessive food addictions are disappearing. Lots of benefits are being reported. Is it the only way to achieve these benefits? Probably not but it's certainly doing a lot of good for a lot of people. I'm surprised that at 50 years old, I can pack on muscle so easily. I only have the desire to eat once a day and all my anxiety issues have disappeared.

Lay off TikTok and those "real world examples" when it comes to your health.

Lol. What about my own example? Just embrace your medications and move on to a different thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that this is essentially an elimination diet and helps people who have intolerances for certain foods. People also feel better on this diet due to lower sugar consumption. However, for those of you who plan to stay on it long term, aren't you worried about the increased risk of cancer from all the red meat consumption? There have been so many studies pointing to the connection over the years. I posted a recent study reiterating the connection below. Also, what about increased B12 and iron levels. There are studies showing that women may live longer than men due to lower levels of iron. I get that animal products are superior in their nutrient density, but is that really ideal for the lifestyles that most of us live. If there was ever a time when people were mainly carnivore (this is highly debated), they were not focusing on longevity but more survival. Just because a diet gives you short-term benefits doesn't mean it's good in the long-term.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-scientists-excessive-red-meat-consumption.html

https://www.verywellhealth.com/blood-iron-levels-aging-study-5072914

Those studies are highly confounded. They are based on a meta-analysis of I believe 16 studies if I recall correctly. Actually, the author of the meta-analysis had something like 580 studies and removed all but the 16 without giving any justification. That's a huge red flag. Then, of the remaining 14 or 16 they did keep, 2 were highly suspect 7th-day adventist studies. You know, the kind where they ask you, "how often over the preceding 8 years did you eat red or processed meat?" Not only do people not report what they ate correctly or even know what they ate, but the questions conflate red with processed meat. This is why the result is that "red and processed meat" is associated with cancer. They can't separate the two, which is actually key. So, if you remove those 2 studies, the remaining ones actually don't show a correlation between cancer and meat consumption. So the whole thing involved cherry-picking studies to make the outcome what they wanted. It's a garbage meta-analysis.

Sure, but isn't the Carnivore crowd also cherry picking studies and doctors to try to show that it is healthy..... Everyone always talks about the same 3 doctors who support this diet and how they have all the answers. Why is that any different than any of the other extreme diets that have gained support over the years. There are just as many studies and doctors who say veganism is healthy and the way to go.

No. The carnivore proponents generally admit that there are not sufficient studies to conclude that carnivore will help or hurt life expectancy. We understand that these studies are nearly impossible to attempt, as governments don’t even allow it and the timeline to prove outcome is really very long.

Then why in the world would you follow this extreme diet if all you are going on is the advice of a few influencer doctors who make money off of you watching their content? I thought there was some controversial studies showing that this was a good way to eat.

There are tons of real world examples of people improving their lives. People are losing weight while gaining muscle, getting off medications for both physical and mental health issues, skin conditions are clearing up, obsessive food addictions are disappearing. Lots of benefits are being reported. Is it the only way to achieve these benefits? Probably not but it's certainly doing a lot of good for a lot of people. I'm surprised that at 50 years old, I can pack on muscle so easily. I only have the desire to eat once a day and all my anxiety issues have disappeared.

Lay off TikTok and those "real world examples" when it comes to your health.

Lol. What about my own example? Just embrace your medications and move on to a different thread

No thanks. You are spewing dangerous nonsense and need to be rebuffed. You are free to slowly kill yourself but I am also free how full of S you are for doing it. Your own example is not science!!!!!!!! how many times do you need to be told.