Florida man eats diet of butter, cheese, beef; cholesterol oozes from his body
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
They lost 36-pounds in just 6-weeks time (and ate as much as they wanted, so never hungry).
But they did a blood test and it was panic time. The doctor told him he's on the brink of cardiac arrest and had to be put on medication and immediately introduce vegetables into their diet.
The appeal of the carnivore diet is, you can eat as much as you want - so long as it's only meat.
The trick is, meat is actually fairly low in calories and protein (meat) is extremely filling.
So you're achieving a calorie deficit without being hungry.
The calorie values on food are 'bomb-calorific', which is about as far from what goes in your gut as possible.
'Bio-availabilty' is the term to look up.
What? Meat, from fish to chicken to beef, is one of the most caloric foods, rivaled only by nuts and oils. Meat usually is high in fat, it's very hard for it to be low-calorie. The weight loss doesn't come from a low-calorie diet, but from forced ketosis due to prolonged lack of glucose.
As others hace said, it's the carb deprivation that makes you lose weight, you could easily do a vegetarian diet and lose the same or more weight without abusing fat and rising your bad cholesterol.
324 calories - serving of granola cereal
One of those is way more filling & less calories than the other.
https://www.eatthismuch.com/calories/one-grilled-chicken-bre...
https://www.mynetdiary.com/food/calories-in-breakfast-granol...
For me, eating a keto diet makes it easy to achieve a daily caloric intake that is significantly less than other diets I have tried because of meat being high in fat it creates greater satiety that lasts longer. Most keto and carnivore diets result it being easier to achieve caloric deficits for that reason.
There may be some out there that increase caloric consumption (and usually do for the first couple of weeks of the diet) but soon after your body adapts to fat for energy, you tend to eat much less in my experience.
So if you are religiously tracking (and I have for 8 years now), you will find that your weight loss under keto also abides by CICO rules. Ketosis is helping to burn your fat stores, and it’s easier to get there because you are not eating carbs, but your body is burning fat stores because it has a calorie deficit.
Even if you are in ketosis, never eating a carb, but not in a caloric deficit, you simply will not lose weight.
Lol what the fuck?
and yes, meat and foods high in fiber are satiating. That's common knowledge.
No it's not. Calories is just a unit of energy. And there are good energy sources, and bad ones as well. It's not just one single factor that rules everything. Quality and variety of food matters a lot.
Carbs are the devil. They’re also my primary calorie source after years in ketosis because cholesterol is also a killer.
These diets work for people who will not stop eating until they feel full. As that fullness takes so much longer with processed sugary foods they consume too many calories. It’s very hard to consume 2,000 calories of red meat in one sitting.
The idea eating meat alone is healthy is totally spurious.
This is a rather odd dig towards a non-anonymous user (using his real name) and is ironically coming from a pseudoanonymous account (with no real name associated with it).
MDs want "stable" patients who resemble patients they've familiar with. Even though that could mean being diabetic on half-a-dozen meds. Based on my genes, I would be fat and diabetic by now if I had kept following only my doctor's advice.
I've written about my diet here: https://srid.ca/carnivore-diet
Without going into details here, very possibly the worst possible outcome ensued.
Don’t eat a high cholesterol diet. Really. It’s really bad for you, like kill you dead bad for you.
There isn’t some global vegetable conspiracy that invented atherosclerosis. It’s like the #1 or #2 killer alongside cancer.
If you are saying that you too were on a carnivore diet long term (5+ years) and very possibly experienced "the worst possible outcome" related to cholesterol levels, you would be the first person to report as such. Perhaps you would like to publish the anecdote in detail somewhere (including just exactly what you ate, as "a high cholesterol diet" is imprecise enough to mean many things)?
Heart disease kills 700k per year just in the US alone.
It’s well known that high cholesterol diets are extremely unhealthy. The research is totally unambiguous.
Us keto/carnivore people are great at finding stuff online that tells us it’s fine to eat a high cholesterol diet and that it will be safe and fine.
It is not safe and it is not fine.
If you must be no-carb, do vegan keto, but don’t eat a high cholesterol diet.
What other effects have you noticed, good or bad?
I believe the modern understanding of the cholesterol theory of heart disease is that it's not simply LDL that is the problem, but instead small dense LDL. SD ldl can be measured directly of course, but you can kind of get a sense of whether you're likely to have it based on having triglycerides over 115, and the high triglycerides are in turn usually caused by lots of sugar or simple carbs in your diet. Something a person on a carnivore diet won't probably have
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/meat-rotten-putrid-paleo...
But I suppose that part of the paleo diet doesn't have mass appeal
Natural human stomach pH is low, like carrion-eating scavenger-low: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastric_acid#Comparison_betwee....
Anyway they've found evidence of heart disease in mummified human remains so you can't trust ancient people either.
Maintaining your health should focus first and foremost on remedying the DYSREGULATION that is often caused by inflammation, infection, trauma etc
And maybe even exercising its capabilities Of regulation, e.g. sauna/cold plunge cycles (just the first example I thought of)
What's wrong with just eating a bit of meat, fish, vegetables, carbs and fats? Just nice, real food in moderate amounts...
For one thing you won't get many likes, subscribes, retweets, or what have you.
People like that need to into all the way into eg no fiber, no carbs or they won't heal.
It's just against the operating principles of a society with a massive industrial food economy. People are conditioned to eat on every occasion to the point that consuming food becomes the occasion.
Usually it's not just the diet, but it is an easy and even fun place to start.
Including yours truly: https://srid.ca/carnivore-diet
For instance on that page about the Comanche it is claimed they only ate meat (which is absolutely inplausible from the start) but Wikipedia says they "also gathered wild fruits, seeds, nuts, berries, roots and tubers, including plums, grapes, juniper berries, persimmons, mulberries, acorns, pecans, wild onions, radishes, and tuna, the fruit of the prickly pear cactus. The Comanche also acquired maize, dried pumpkin, and tobacco through trade and raids."
Also, it seems, that meat is indeed not "nutritionally" complete and your source for that claim is some quack trying to sell his book?
It's great if a meat-only diet works for you, but I don't think there's scientific evidence to support it.
Finally, in regards to your "some quack" put-down, it actually behoves on you to provide evidence that an exclusively animal-based diet (especially with offal) is necessarily "deficient". It would seem that you lack sufficient understanding of nutrient bioavailability (generally high in animal foods), as well as the fact that RDA is not absolute (note for instance the reduced requirement speculations for Thiamin & Vitamin C in <https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/17/1/140>)?
"The carnivore diet met several NRV thresholds for nutrients such as riboflavin, niacin, phosphorus, zinc, Vitamin B6, Vitamin B12, selenium, and Vitamin A, and exceeded the sodium threshold. However, it fell short in thiamin, magnesium, calcium, and Vitamin C, and in iron, folate, iodine and potassium in some cases. Fibre intake was significantly below recommended levels."
Yes, I read it beyond the abstract. And if you did too, you'd know about the theory that "the requirement for thiamin is reduced due to a reduction in thiamin-requiring glycolytic metabolism" or that "the large quantities of carnitine available in an animal-based diet may provide Vitamin C sparing effect".
> As I understand it it only confirms my view
As even the abstract, that you limited yourself to read, goes on to confirm that these nutrient requirements are reduced in a carnivore diet -- cf. "facilitates a lower requirement of certain nutrients" -- then your understanding is a doozie, let alone it support your unsubstantiated view that "meat is indeed not "nutritionally" complete".
But yes, as you pointed, there has been a real increase in "weird" diets in the past 3-4 decades. The internet is one factor. The other major reason for this, I believe, is the increased commercial competition in the food and agriculture industry. In the last 2-3 decades, we've all been bombarded with ads and PR campaigns about organic foods ("eat pure / natural / raw") and superfoods ("eat smart / right") or promotions of old-new crops ("eat what our elders ate") like Millets etc. etc. Then there's the PR campaigns from fast food and processed food industries and the PR campaigns from the instant cooking industry.
However much we would all like to think that we are immune from advertising campaigns, the reality is that it does impact us. So we shouldn't be surprised that people are confused and there has been a rise in eating orders - https://www.yandex.com/search/?text=rise+in+eating+disorders
She was severely overweight.
Mostly vegetarian, but had strange ideas about nutrition. E.g. she believed (from reading in the media) that seed oils were "Heart Healthy™ ".
Then I read the article.
Sigh.
I've tried to agitate against the "Florida Man..." and "Florida Woman..." stereotype, but it's just gotten to a point.. I guess I don't know what to say anymore?
This isn't one of those cases, though. This is someone speedrunning a heart attack.