Carnivore Diet: The Antithesis to Veganism
ScorpioL1GHT
Posts: 15 Member
I always enjoy researching different diets, but the Carnivore Diet in particular stands out to me the most. Maybe because of the menu...
The Carnivore diet is the polar opposite of Veganism and includes meat, seafood, and poultry, but can include other animal products such as eggs and dairy. Many adherents suggest you do not need plants foods to thrive and can even maximize your health through this way of eating by increasing fat and protein consumption and reducing carb intake very close to 0. There are growing communities dedicated to carnivorous eating such as Zero Carb Zen, World Carnivore Tribe, etc.
I don't believe there have been any long-term studies done on a group of people eating a purely animal-based diet. Could this eating lifestyle really be the answer for people? I do believe in individualized nutrition and disagree that one diet works for everyone.
As for my opinion, I am definitely interested in perhaps attempting this way of eating because I always loved eating meat when I was younger and felt more satiated, energized, and healthy every meal it was included. I can't say I ever really craved plant foods such as fruits or vegetables so giving them up wouldn't be the end of the world for me (never had much of a sweet tooth either). I would like to hear anyone's honest opinion on the Carnivore Diet and I am curious if you are interested in trying out this lifestyle!
So...will Carnivore become the new Vegan???
The Carnivore diet is the polar opposite of Veganism and includes meat, seafood, and poultry, but can include other animal products such as eggs and dairy. Many adherents suggest you do not need plants foods to thrive and can even maximize your health through this way of eating by increasing fat and protein consumption and reducing carb intake very close to 0. There are growing communities dedicated to carnivorous eating such as Zero Carb Zen, World Carnivore Tribe, etc.
I don't believe there have been any long-term studies done on a group of people eating a purely animal-based diet. Could this eating lifestyle really be the answer for people? I do believe in individualized nutrition and disagree that one diet works for everyone.
As for my opinion, I am definitely interested in perhaps attempting this way of eating because I always loved eating meat when I was younger and felt more satiated, energized, and healthy every meal it was included. I can't say I ever really craved plant foods such as fruits or vegetables so giving them up wouldn't be the end of the world for me (never had much of a sweet tooth either). I would like to hear anyone's honest opinion on the Carnivore Diet and I am curious if you are interested in trying out this lifestyle!
So...will Carnivore become the new Vegan???
19
Replies
-
Everyone eating nothing but animal products wouldn't be sustainable economically or environmentally.
It's boring but the "best" diet is probably just the one with a wide assortment of whole foods covering the spectrum of macros and nutritional needs with some grains and processed foods mixed in for bulk for budget reasons.40 -
There is a small number of MFP members who do carnivore. They are in the keto and Low Carber Daily groups, and in a very small carnivore group. To find more people who do it you ca look around Google: nequalsmany, zero carb life, zeroing in on health... There is also a subgroup in the ketogenic forums. It's out there.
I dabble in carnivore but have not really got it to stick. I haven't seen amazing benefits above a very low carb/ketogenic diet to help me commit, but I've only done it for for as long as 2 months so I might not have given it enoug time. As it is now, I am carnivore for most meals but do sometimes have my favorite raw veggies, a bite of fresh fruit or nuts as a snack.
I do feel a bit better than when my carbs are around 15 g, but I'm not a meat lover so I get tired of it and tend to stray back to whole plants as a treat. Every time I do do that, I end up with a bit more stomach issues and constipation. Because of this, I seem to be slowly leaning more and more to carnivore as time goes by. Plus, I NEVER overeat meat. I just can't, so it turns into an effortless way to lose weight for me - I lost over 10 lbs in the last couple of months when I was carnivore without even trying.
Yesterday I had some potato and nuts. Today my stomach is a problem and I've now had a migraine for almost 24 hours. Just sticking to meat feels better, it's just boring (to me) and harder to do when entertaining.
Go for it if you want to try it. You may want to increase sodium to prevent electrolyte imbalance as insulin levels drop. Perhaps look into a group for support as you start. Not many people understand carnivore, and there are a lot of common misconceptions about it like: Do you ever poop again? Bad breath? Scurvy? Starved brain? Too much protein? Micro Biome? Lack of fibre as a chronic health concern? T2D? Cholesterol levels going up? You get the picture.
7 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
26 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.15 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
OP could try fatarian. Is that actually a word?2 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
18 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
My hubby has hemochromatosis and eating an all protein would be a bad idea. He blood lets every so often when his numbers go wonky.7 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
That would be like telling people they should avoid grains because I'm a celiac. Or telling people to severely limit eating fat because of the few with familial Hypercholesterolemia. Or telling everyone to not eat tree nuts because of the few who have an allergic reaction to it. Telling people to avoid eating as a carnivore because around 0.33% of the world has hemochromatosis seems... overprotective to me. And not very common.
It makes no sense for most people to plan their diet by the dietary needs of the few with rare chronic health conditions. For almost everyone (except for those with a few rare conditions like meat allergies) eating as a carnivore is safe.L1zardQueen wrote: »Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
My hubby has hemochromatosis and eating an all protein would be a bad idea. He blood lets every so often when his numbers go wonky.
In this situation, I absolutely agree that eating only meat would be foolish. I hope he is doing well.19 -
It is genetic thing. Thank heavens our son does not have it.
I had the opposite problem. Menopause cured it. Lol2 -
What about studies done on the Innuit Peoples or peoples in places like Nepal, where plant food is actually fairly scarce and yak makes up a large part of the diet in milk, butter, and meat?
It was my understanding that the Peoples of the far north didn't get much plant matter at all but got most of their vitamins from the organ tissue of the animals that made up their diet.
I don't have sources so feel free to correct me, but I swear I recall reading something about that.
7 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
That would be like telling people they should avoid grains because I'm a celiac. Or telling people to severely limit eating fat because of the few with familial Hypercholesterolemia. Or telling everyone to not eat tree nuts because of the few who have an allergic reaction to it. Telling people to avoid eating as a carnivore because around 0.33% of the world has hemochromatosis seems... overprotective to me. And not very common.
It makes no sense for most people to plan their diet by the dietary needs of the few with rare chronic health conditions. For almost everyone (except for those with a few rare conditions like meat allergies) eating as a carnivore is safe.L1zardQueen wrote: »Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
My hubby has hemochromatosis and eating an all protein would be a bad idea. He blood lets every so often when his numbers go wonky.
In this situation, I absolutely agree that eating only meat would be foolish. I hope he is doing well.
Your analogy of what I stated is flat wrong.
I did not state that a person should avoid meat consumption because someone else has a condition, rather that there are health conditions that often are not diagnosed unless a person goes into a lopsided diet. There are several conditions that could arise from an all bread diet, or an all fruit diet, and I would advise similarly about such a plan as well.
Hemochromatosis (iron overload) is not that rare, it has an incidence of 1 in 227 among people of northern european descent. There are others that relate to protein breakdown products such as uric acid, that can lead to kidney disease or gout. That does not mean that a person with these conditions needs to avoid meat entirely, but it does mean they should limit what they eat and choose the types they eat more carefully.
So, for the OP, my original advice stands. Consult with an RD about any plan that advocates an extreme reliance on a single class of foods, and try to find out if there are any risk factors he needs to be aware of. It would be better to go into such a plan well informed than to find out in the emergency room.
21 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
That would be like telling people they should avoid grains because I'm a celiac. Or telling people to severely limit eating fat because of the few with familial Hypercholesterolemia. Or telling everyone to not eat tree nuts because of the few who have an allergic reaction to it. Telling people to avoid eating as a carnivore because around 0.33% of the world has hemochromatosis seems... overprotective to me. And not very common.
It makes no sense for most people to plan their diet by the dietary needs of the few with rare chronic health conditions. For almost everyone (except for those with a few rare conditions like meat allergies) eating as a carnivore is safe.L1zardQueen wrote: »Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
You'd say it, and be wrong. There are several common conditions, such as hemochromatosis, which make relying on animal sources for all of one's needs very risky. Usually people don't know they have such conditions until they try some such plan without researching it and finding out if they're at risk for complications.
My hubby has hemochromatosis and eating an all protein would be a bad idea. He blood lets every so often when his numbers go wonky.
In this situation, I absolutely agree that eating only meat would be foolish. I hope he is doing well.
Your analogy of what I stated is flat wrong.
I did not state that a person should avoid meat consumption because someone else has a condition, rather that there are health conditions that often are not diagnosed unless a person goes into a lopsided diet. There are several conditions that could arise from an all bread diet, or an all fruit diet, and I would advise similarly about such a plan as well.
I did not say that people should avoid meat consumption because someone has a condition. I said that advising people to avoid a carnivorous diet (which is animal products like meat, eggs, dairy, seafood) because of rare health conditions is overprotective.
So are you saying that a lopsided diet is what leads to a diagnosis in those rare conditions? If so, I will disagree. My diet was not lopsided when I was diagnosed with celiac disease.
Or are you saying that some health condition could be caused by a carnivorous diet, and if so, what? I do agree that an all fruit or all bread diet will cause health problems (like a lack if protein and B12) but what problem would a carnivorous diet cause in a normal health person?Hemochromatosis (iron overload) is not that rare, it has an incidence of 1 in 227 among people of northern european descent. There are others that relate to protein breakdown products such as uric acid, that can lead to kidney disease or gout. That does not mean that a person with these conditions needs to avoid meat entirely, but it does mean they should limit what they eat and choose the types they eat more carefully.
So, for the OP, my original advice stands. Consult with an RD about any plan that advocates an extreme reliance on a single class of foods, and try to find out if there are any risk factors he needs to be aware of. It would be better to go into such a plan well informed than to find out in the emergency room.
Possibly my mistake on hemochromatosis' occurrence rate. On the rare diseases website I looked up, it said about 1 in 300 had it, or about 0.33%. It's genetic though and could not be caused by a carnivorous diet. Even if it is 1/227, that's considered to be rare. I know celiac is considered rare and it has going on twice the rate of occurrence.
Current thinking on gout is that it is not set off by meat but rather by too much fructose. My husband had gout and manages to avoid it if he limits his sugars and beer - not a problem on a carnivorous diet.
And Uric acid from meat does not cause kidney disease, although it could aggravate a pre-existing kidney condition.
Most RDs will not be well versed in a carnivore diet. I'd be cautious about any advice they gave on it. I do agree that educating oneself on a diet is always smart to do before starting. The more you know, the better.
18 -
So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.22
-
L1zardQueen wrote: »It is genetic thing. Thank heavens our son does not have it.
I had the opposite problem. Menopause cured it. Lol
LOLBecomingBane wrote: »What about studies done on the Innuit Peoples or peoples in places like Nepal, where plant food is actually fairly scarce and yak makes up a large part of the diet in milk, butter, and meat?
It was my understanding that the Peoples of the far north didn't get much plant matter at all but got most of their vitamins from the organ tissue of the animals that made up their diet.
I don't have sources so feel free to correct me, but I swear I recall reading something about that.
They don't get much plant matter. You're right. Nor do Masai men, the First Nations peoples of the Canadian plains, or some other cultures like the Mongols.
They will sometimes have some plant matter though. It's far from the bulk of their diet and was limited to a short season. Those who choose to go purely carnivorous tend to do so for health reasons. They don't tolerate plants well. Most are omnivorous with a carnivorous leaning. Very few do zero plants with no coffee, spices, or alcohol.
The carnivores that I know often skip organ meat and don't supplement. I don't believe organ meat is needed to live line a carnivore. I'm sure it would add nutrition if you are it.9 -
Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.3
-
Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
9 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_cuisine
Food sources
Hunted meats:
Sea mammals such as walrus, seal, and whale. Whale meat generally comes from the narwhal, beluga whale and the bowhead whale. The latter is able to feed an entire community for nearly a year from its meat, blubber, and skin. Inuit hunters most often hunt juvenile whales which, compared to adults, are safer to hunt and have tastier skin. Ringed seal and bearded seal are the most important aspect of an Inuit diet and is often the largest part of an Inuit hunter's diet.[1]
Land mammals such as caribou, polar bear, and muskox
Birds and their eggs
Saltwater and freshwater fish including sculpin, Arctic cod, Arctic char, capelin and lake trout.
While it is not possible to cultivate native plants for food in the Arctic, Inuit have traditionally gathered those that are naturally available,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] including:
Berries including crowberry and cloudberry
Herbaceous plants such as grasses and fireweed
Tubers and stems including mousefood, roots of various tundra plants which are cached by voles in underground burrows.
Roots such as tuberous spring beauty and sweet vetch
Seaweed1 -
This only works if Joe Rogan strangles the animal with his bare hands!7
-
Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
If RDs can advise people about the pros and cons of a vegan diet without vegan specific training, they can certainly guide someone looking for a carnivore diet. They would have the education to evaluate a meal plan for nutrition and compatibility with a person's medical history, recommend adjustments, and note any problems to be mindful of.
So yes, I honestly believe an RD can give reasonable advice to their client on approaching a carnivore diet and help them be successful if they embark on it. It is preferable, in my estimation, than taking unqualified advice from carnivore enthusiasts online who oversell the benefits and downplay the potential downsides.
19 -
Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
If RDs can advise people about the pros and cons of a vegan diet without vegan specific training, they can certainly guide someone looking for a carnivore diet. They would have the education to evaluate a meal plan for nutrition and compatibility with a person's medical history, recommend adjustments, and note any problems to be mindful of.
So yes, I honestly believe an RD can give reasonable advice to their client on approaching a carnivore diet and help them be successful if they embark on it. It is preferable, in my estimation, than taking unqualified advice from carnivore enthusiasts online who oversell the benefits and downplay the potential downsides.
It's possible an RD would do an okay job with a carnivore diet. Maybe. Possibly. I would be shocked if they are taught about carnivore nutrition. But comparing it to vegan RD advice is stretching it (IMO) unless you are looking at advice from decades ago when veganism first started to have some adherents. Maybe 1950? I'm guessing (hoping) RDs have had training in the vegan diet by now. Carnivore? Probably not.
What benefits to a carnivore diet I do you believe I oversold? I know I mentioned that I feel somewhat better doing it in terms of intestinal health, but not hugely so.
And what potential downsides did I downplay (besides the 1 in 227 or 300 who unfortunately builds up too much iron in their blood) for the typical person eating only animal products? I mentioned it was boring to me...
13 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
And fruitarian is much safer than breatharian. Just because you can find people doing something worse doesn't make yours better.15 -
Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
Curious as to what kind of beef you're getting 2lbs of for $8 Cdn?5 -
Here in beef country (Texas) I can get a 3lb roll of 80/20 ground chuck for $10.50 regular price. 73/27 is about $1 cheaper than that. Steak costs more, but I can still get top sirloin for $8 a pound.0
-
Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
If RDs can advise people about the pros and cons of a vegan diet without vegan specific training, they can certainly guide someone looking for a carnivore diet. They would have the education to evaluate a meal plan for nutrition and compatibility with a person's medical history, recommend adjustments, and note any problems to be mindful of.
So yes, I honestly believe an RD can give reasonable advice to their client on approaching a carnivore diet and help them be successful if they embark on it. It is preferable, in my estimation, than taking unqualified advice from carnivore enthusiasts online who oversell the benefits and downplay the potential downsides.
It's possible an RD would do an okay job with a carnivore diet. Maybe. Possibly. I would be shocked if they are taught about carnivore nutrition. But comparing it to vegan RD advice is stretching it (IMO) unless you are looking at advice from decades ago when veganism first started to have some adherents. Maybe 1950? I'm guessing (hoping) RDs have had training in the vegan diet by now. Carnivore? Probably not.
What benefits to a carnivore diet I do you believe I oversold? I know I mentioned that I feel somewhat better doing it in terms of intestinal health, but not hugely so.
And what potential downsides did I downplay (besides the 1 in 227 or 300 who unfortunately builds up too much iron in their blood) for the typical person eating only animal products? I mentioned it was boring to me...
Why would a properly trained RD need to have carnivore-specific training? They're trained in human nutritional needs and how to access diets. Even if they never encountered a specific way of eating before, they'd be able to determine whether or not a proposed plan would meet general human needs, as well as any specific needs an individual may have related to lifestyle/medical conditions.
The only way an RD wouldn't be able to help plan the diet without special training is due to your argument that human nutritional needs actually *change* when they eat all meat or mostly meat (that they don't need things like fiber, that certain vitamin needs change) and I haven't yet seen anything that has convinced me that this is true. I know you genuinely *believe* it to be true, but I don't think it has been studied enough for anyone to be that confident about it.21 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
Curious as to what kind of beef you're getting 2lbs of for $8 Cdn?
We're on a budget, so not top of the line. I eat a lot of ground beef. Buy roasts on sale and slice them into steaks or chops. When meat goes on sale, my grocery cart is pretty full.
I tend not to just eat beef in a day. There's eggs, pork, chicken, cans of tuna or mussels. I'll eat processed meats like smokies too. I will often have cheese too. None are higher quality, grass fed, organic... Or even have a name brand. LOL
I try to get our beef from farms in our province. That cuts costs too.
To me, meat doesn't seem that expensive but that's probably because I am a celiac. GF foods are usually more expensive. Bread, noodles, muffins are all double to triple the price of normal products. I can't honestly say that I noticed our grocery bill going up.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »Going carnivore is a pretty big bounce from your last idea of going fruitarian. Carnivore would be marginally safer than fruitarian, but it would still require you to carefully plan your diet to get certain micronutrients in sufficient amounts. It will also tend to be more expensive if you don't get larger primal cuts or whole carcass meats.
I'm not sure why extreme edge case diets appeal to you, but you should research them very carefully and perhaps consult a registered dietician before embarking on one.
I'd say carnivore is MUCH safer than fruitarian. There are not nutrients lacking in a carnivore diet, and the vitamins that are lower in meat (like only 10mg vit. c in 1 or 2 lbs beef) seem to be needed in much lower amounts if not eating carbs. No supplementation is needed. If worried, one can always eat ofal.
As to cost, it depends on what you eat. If I eat a couple of pounds of beef a day, the cost is around $8 Cdn. a day.
And fruitarian is much safer than breatharian. Just because you can find people doing something worse doesn't make yours better.
Strictly speaking, if diet A is worse than diet B, that would make diet B better.
I never said carnivore was "best". I think it is great for a small number of people. i know it is not nutritionally lacking. That's all.11 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
If RDs can advise people about the pros and cons of a vegan diet without vegan specific training, they can certainly guide someone looking for a carnivore diet. They would have the education to evaluate a meal plan for nutrition and compatibility with a person's medical history, recommend adjustments, and note any problems to be mindful of.
So yes, I honestly believe an RD can give reasonable advice to their client on approaching a carnivore diet and help them be successful if they embark on it. It is preferable, in my estimation, than taking unqualified advice from carnivore enthusiasts online who oversell the benefits and downplay the potential downsides.
It's possible an RD would do an okay job with a carnivore diet. Maybe. Possibly. I would be shocked if they are taught about carnivore nutrition. But comparing it to vegan RD advice is stretching it (IMO) unless you are looking at advice from decades ago when veganism first started to have some adherents. Maybe 1950? I'm guessing (hoping) RDs have had training in the vegan diet by now. Carnivore? Probably not.
What benefits to a carnivore diet I do you believe I oversold? I know I mentioned that I feel somewhat better doing it in terms of intestinal health, but not hugely so.
And what potential downsides did I downplay (besides the 1 in 227 or 300 who unfortunately builds up too much iron in their blood) for the typical person eating only animal products? I mentioned it was boring to me...
Why would a properly trained RD need to have carnivore-specific training? They're trained in human nutritional needs and how to access diets. Even if they never encountered a specific way of eating before, they'd be able to determine whether or not a proposed plan would meet general human needs, as well as any specific needs an individual may have related to lifestyle/medical conditions.
The only way an RD wouldn't be able to help plan the diet without special training is due to your argument that human nutritional needs actually *change* when they eat all meat or mostly meat (that they don't need things like fiber, that certain vitamin needs change) and I haven't yet seen anything that has convinced me that this is true. I know you genuinely *believe* it to be true, but I don't think it has been studied enough for anyone to be that confident about it.
Exactly. RDs are not trained in carnivore because it is very unusual. I doubt it will ever be mainstream. I doubt it will even hit the popularity of veganism, which makes sense. Most people do not need to eat carnivore so why bother.
I'm hoping carnivore will be studied more. So far, there has only been one long term, year long study and that was on two men who lived a carnivore diet healthfully for a few years in the Arctic but no one believed them. They lived in a hospital for one year and had all food monitored to prove it was not unhealthy. They were fine with no deficiencies to be seen.
Shawn Baker, a carnivore athlete of a couple years, has put together a website called n equals many, to try to start the data collection and raise interest in learning about the diet. They do need more data.
For things like vit. C we know that you don't need as much when not eating carbs. For fibre, people obviously live well without it; the misconception that a lack of fibre causes colon cancer is slowly going away. My guess is that most RDs would be pushing vitamin C and fibre supplements despite the small bit of science , and lots of anecdotal experience, that is out there that shows it isn't needed. Most RDs seem to still think that people should limit saturated fat- that would be a problem here.
In the end, most vitamins and minerals are more bio available in animal products so less seems to be needed.
Really, there isn't a lot that an RD could recommend on a carnivorous diet beyond eat organ meat. Maybe to avoid processed meats and nitrates... or get seafood a couple of times a week?6 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Everyone eating nothing but animal products wouldn't be sustainable economically or environmentally.
It's boring but the "best" diet is probably just the one with a wide assortment of whole foods covering the spectrum of macros and nutritional needs with some grains and processed foods mixed in for bulk for budget reasons.
Pretty much this...
I really don't understand people's desire to go to the extremes.15 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Regarding what qualifies as a rare disease: in the US less than 200,000 individuals at any given time, in the EU an incidence of 1 in 2000. By both measures a disease with a 1 in 200 incidence is not rare.
My mistake. I guess I did not read up enough on it. 1 in 227 would be over 200 000.
Regardless, I don't consider 1 in 227 a reason for advising all against a carnivorous diet.So you advise not consulting a RD because they won't subscribe to your "keto uber alles" worldview? Ok then.
No. It's because RDs are not trained in dealing with a carnivorous diet. I imagine many would approach it from a moderation-in-everything RDA bias. They teach what they are taught.
Do you honestly believe that RDs are taught how to help people eat a healthy successful carnivore diet? All animal diets have gained some interest, but it is still just a tiny population who is interested in eating that way.
If RDs can advise people about the pros and cons of a vegan diet without vegan specific training, they can certainly guide someone looking for a carnivore diet. They would have the education to evaluate a meal plan for nutrition and compatibility with a person's medical history, recommend adjustments, and note any problems to be mindful of.
So yes, I honestly believe an RD can give reasonable advice to their client on approaching a carnivore diet and help them be successful if they embark on it. It is preferable, in my estimation, than taking unqualified advice from carnivore enthusiasts online who oversell the benefits and downplay the potential downsides.
It's possible an RD would do an okay job with a carnivore diet. Maybe. Possibly. I would be shocked if they are taught about carnivore nutrition. But comparing it to vegan RD advice is stretching it (IMO) unless you are looking at advice from decades ago when veganism first started to have some adherents. Maybe 1950? I'm guessing (hoping) RDs have had training in the vegan diet by now. Carnivore? Probably not.
What benefits to a carnivore diet I do you believe I oversold? I know I mentioned that I feel somewhat better doing it in terms of intestinal health, but not hugely so.
And what potential downsides did I downplay (besides the 1 in 227 or 300 who unfortunately builds up too much iron in their blood) for the typical person eating only animal products? I mentioned it was boring to me...
Why would a properly trained RD need to have carnivore-specific training? They're trained in human nutritional needs and how to access diets. Even if they never encountered a specific way of eating before, they'd be able to determine whether or not a proposed plan would meet general human needs, as well as any specific needs an individual may have related to lifestyle/medical conditions.
The only way an RD wouldn't be able to help plan the diet without special training is due to your argument that human nutritional needs actually *change* when they eat all meat or mostly meat (that they don't need things like fiber, that certain vitamin needs change) and I haven't yet seen anything that has convinced me that this is true. I know you genuinely *believe* it to be true, but I don't think it has been studied enough for anyone to be that confident about it.
Exactly. RDs are not trained in carnivore because it is very unusual. I doubt it will ever be mainstream. I doubt it will even hit the popularity of veganism, which makes sense. Most people do not need to eat carnivore so why bother.
I'm hoping carnivore will be studied more. So far, there has only been one long term, year long study and that was on two men who lived a carnivore diet healthfully for a few years in the Arctic but no one believed them. They lived in a hospital for one year and had all food monitored to prove it was not unhealthy. They were fine with no deficiencies to be seen.
Shawn Baker, a carnivore athlete of a couple years, has put together a website called n equals many, to try to start the data collection and raise interest in learning about the diet. They do need more data.
For things like vit. C we know that you don't need as much when not eating carbs. For fibre, people obviously live well without it; the misconception that a lack of fibre causes colon cancer is slowly going away. My guess is that most RDs would be pushing vitamin C and fibre supplements despite the small bit of science , and lots of anecdotal experience, that is out there that shows it isn't needed. Most RDs seem to still think that people should limit saturated fat- that would be a problem here.
In the end, most vitamins and minerals are more bio available in animal products so less seems to be needed.
Really, there isn't a lot that an RD could recommend on a carnivorous diet beyond eat organ meat. Maybe to avoid processed meats and nitrates... or get seafood a couple of times a week?
If there has only been one long-term study and that was of just two men, I'm not sure if we can conclude that we need less vitamin C on a carnivore-style diet. That's my point. Most of the people I've seen arguing that nutritional needs are fundamentally altered in people who eat in this way seem to be arguing from anecdote or personal experience.
RDs typically won't, and shouldn't, give dietary recommendations based on very small studies or anecdotal experiences. I'm not sure how they would be trained in this type of diet, as you're recommending, when there are so few resources available for anyone who is approaching this from the science-based nutritional POV.12 -
Nobody has mentioned this yet, but my biggest concern with this way of eating is the risk of cancer. From what I understand the research done on meat consumption as a risk to cancer is somewhat skewed because those studies are done on people who follow an omnivorous diet or the standard american diet. So how can we be sure increasing meat is the cause? What if it is the heavily processed and sugary foods people eat on a daily basis that results in this?
Is there any studies that anybody can direct me to that give clear evidence that more meat = more risk of cancer?
3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions