Here's my dilemma. I have been doing 98% carnivore now for 10 months, and feel great. It's not 100% since I put honey in my 1-2 cups of coffee/day (with heavy cream...yum) and eat fruit maybe 3-4 times a month. Other than that, it's steak, homemade hamburger patties and cheese. I lost 25 lbs and am probably the leanest/strongest combo I have ever been. I realized that even though I squat heavy, my knees feel great probably because of the lack of inflammation from crummy food.

My dilemma is I can't find good studies that talk about fiber or cholesterol or fat because in general nutrition studies seem flawed. One study I read had saturated fat as bad, but the control group ate saturated fat from muffins and there seems to be a lot of examples like that. Has there ever been a study that shows that even if you are lean, work out, avoid processed foods and refined sugars, you are still at high risk of a heart attack due to high LDL, and more so apo B? If CRP is low, homocysteine is low, triglycerides are low, and HDL is high, are people still having heart attacks?

I'm not trying to push an agenda, I just have found a diet that I love but I DO NOT want to do it if there is good data supporting its negative effects. I'd honestly eat more fruit, but fruit and vegetables give me IBS. It's not totally cleared on carnivore (was short term), but much better still.

I hear Peter Attia stress how bad apoB is, but what data is he referencing that says it's bad even if the other markers are good?

I think you might find the answers you are looking for in some of Layne Norton's videos. He talks a lot about different fats and fiber and how they fit into a healthy diet (a lot of his time is spend debunking fad diets, but the information is there).

His information is ALWAYS based in peer reviewed literature, specifically randomized human control studies.

https://m.youtube.com/@biolayne1/videos

I listen to Layne, and he's obviously very educated and cites sources. I even searched last night, but again I don't think there are relevant studies that control for the variables I was referencing. I didn't cherry pick those variables, just things I have heard from the Attia's of the world.

I may need to start an X account so I can ask him and hopefully get a response.

Maybe I'll also get my CAC score and CT angiogram at the 1 year mark of the diet. I think it was Paul Saldino, who I know isn't carnivore anymore, that did a CT angiogram and found no blockage after years of carnivore.

Interesting. I'm surprised he hasn't addressed it. He does a regular "Ask me anything on IG". Maybe you could try asking there, too.

With that said, I think most (if not all) major health concerns (heart attack, stroke, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, etc, etc) are mitigated by maintaining a healthy weight/body fat percentage. If you can do that, then the best diet is the one you can stick to. If the numbers on a certain test start to creep out if the healthy range, then reassess.

I'd agree with these comments if you're a healthy person. Moderation in consumption is probably the answer to all of our dietary issues. That written, not everyone has a healthy body. I'm a Type 1 Diabetic and have been for 40 years. I've eaten keto now for 17 years and it has done me a world of good as far as diabetes management, test results, etc.

While a normal person should be able to eat what they want and when in moderation, not all of us can do that. Keto has been a revelation to any diabetic willing to practice a little bit of self-control and discipline.

Test results show my LDL to be "high-for-a-diabetic", but not egregiously high. HDL is high and triglycerides are super low. A1Cs run in the 4.5-4.7 range. This isn't possible eating "the way God intended."

Based in what i have seen the heart CT is not very predictive of future cardiovascular events. I believe the CAC is much better at it.

The problem is that the research you want is very hard to conduct ina controlled manner. You're usually limited to observational studies and retrospective cohort studies in populations that follow certain diets already (carnivore, vegan, keto, etc). Few people in these diet groups want to switch for a prolonged period of time just to see what happens. Likewise people not in these groups are willing to put up with it for a prolonged period.

So you're kind stuck with what you can get. It's also hard to convince someone to eat something potentially unhealthy to see if they get a heart attack. And the time course of damage from unhealthy diets is often years, or decades.

Ultimately, I think genetics is the number one factor at play. Followed by a healthy weight, controlling blood pressure, staying active, and avoiding processed foods in general. After that whether you go vegan or carnivore is probably splitting hairs, assuming your genetics don't predispose you to something that affects vegans/carnivores differently.

The difference between the CAC and CT angio is that the CAC just shows whether there's calcium or not. And non-calcified plaques are a little higher risk for rupture, I think (but i'm not sure). It doesn't show non-calcified plaques, and it doesn't show how much flow is actually getting through. Same thing with cardiac stress tests, they're good screening tools, but not as good as a diagnostic. You can have significant coronary disease, but might not have any lesions that actually significantly limit flow. Or you could have minimal disease, but just a massive lesion that limits flow quite a bit.

HeartofTexas is a cardiologist on the board, he could definitely give more insight if he sees the thread.

Now I'm curious if you could get a bunny rabbit to go carnivore. And a bit worried if a breeding couple escaped.

94chem said:

---

Good questions...

I kind of think that carnivore is the vape of the dietary world - way better than smoking, but not as good as not vaping. On top of that a lot of people who never would have "smoked" in the first place choose carnivore instead of a more balanced diet.

I am a scientist, so I understand what research actually is, and more needs to be done, and our government has lied to us about the food pyramid.

I am also a Christian, and it's hard for me to believe that fruits, vegetables, and grains are not meant to be eaten.

---

You do realize that modern cows, bananas and everything "natural" we eat has been engineered by humans? Some scientists suggest that we evolved to eat meat first, since it is the most nutrient dense, but we retained the ability to eat fruit and vegies in a pinch.

Yeah, I really want to find some place that still has the gros michel banana. Apparently they were ravaged by a fungus decades ago and everyone switched to the cavendish banana. Supposedly gros michel has a more banana flavor - like more akin to artificial banana flavor which is what it was modeled after.

But yeah, would be interesting to see what original fruits and veggies were like thousands of years ago. Also the effect they've had on the animals that eat them.

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Yeah, I really want to find some place that still has the gros michel banana. Apparently they were ravaged by a fungus decades ago and everyone switched to the cavendish banana. Supposedly gros michel has a more banana flavor - like more akin to artificial banana flavor which is what it was modeled after.

But yeah, would be interesting to see what original fruits and veggies were like thousands of years ago. Also the effect they've had on the animals that eat them.

---

Yeah, why hasn't a geneticist been able to engineer a gros michel banana? Find some old DNA and get to work!!!!

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

The problem is that the research you want is very hard to conduct ina controlled manner.

---

I would say the other problem is the research wanted is expensive. And what corps with deep pockets would gain from, I mean fund, a study showing this?

They're working on the bananas!

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pbi.13216

Quote:

---

In summary, we have successfully applied the CRISPR/Cas9 system to edit the MaGA20ox2 genes in 'Gros Michel' and obtained semi-dwarf mutants. Manipulation of Ma04g15900 and/or Ma08g32850 genes is likely to be an efficient strategy to develop semi-dwarf or dwarf banana germplasm resources. Future efforts will be given to evaluate the characteristics of growth and yield of these mutants at multiple locations in different years to minimize the environmental influences. Results from these current and future studies will be of significant impact on banana dwarf breeding.

---

That's where I'm kinda going. Carnivore might not be the best, compared to a meat/egg/vegetable/fruit diet/whole grain diet, but it's the one that gets me lean. I've gone from >25% bf to 18% and working towards 12%. I feel that if I'm lean and not eating processed foods, and keep on good mass and do cardio, then I should be good for a long period.

I posted this because I find it hard to believe that if a population of people stuck to carnivore, or any diet, and stayed lean and worked out, that they would be still keeling over early due to heart attacks. Of course "logic" doesn't work in science, and this could be the case, but just doesn't make sense.

GeorgiAg said:

---

94chem said:

---

Good questions...

I kind of think that carnivore is the vape of the dietary world - way better than smoking, but not as good as not vaping. On top of that a lot of people who never would have "smoked" in the first place choose carnivore instead of a more balanced diet.

I am a scientist, so I understand what research actually is, and more needs to be done, and our government has lied to us about the food pyramid.

I am also a Christian, and it's hard for me to believe that fruits, vegetables, and grains are not meant to be eaten.

---

You do realize that modern cows, bananas and everything "natural" we eat has been engineered by humans? Some scientists suggest that we evolved to eat meat first, since it is the most nutrient dense, but we retained the ability to eat fruit and vegies in a pinch.

---

Yeah, so what? Just because red delicious apples taste terrible and we can only get 1 kind of banana doesn't mean that genetic engineering is trying to kill us. I think of Norman Borlaug as a hero, not a villain.

Those natural things evolved from something else. And most of the nitrogen in your body came from Haber-Bosch. And our drugs are made from petrochemicals. And there are 300 chemicals in a cup of coffee...I could go on. But I'd be quite surprised to discover that eating only meat is the optimal human diet. I had a t-bone steak for breakfast this morning. I'm good for today, except for the ribs I'm about to grill for dinner

"But I'd be quite surprised to discover that eating only meat is the optimal human diet."

I'm not looking for the optimal human diet, I am looking for something that is sustainable and not detrimental to my health.

Yeah, I don't know. I know one person that went carnivore and had good lipid number before hand, and then his total cholesterol shot up to 300 with his LDL close to 200. He also felt strong and lean. But I advised him to cut back. Those are pretty hard numbers to make it worth the potential long term risk.

What was his LDL comprised of? When I did keto and followed up with blood tests, my LDL went up but VLDL was very low. If most of your LDL is the larger and not small bb like LDL, then does it matter?

Also, does even the very low density and apoB LDL make it into the artery walls if there isn't any lesions in the artery? From the research I can gather, inflammation leads to the lesions and then your LDL matters significantly. Have any studies shows apoB makes into into the artery walls through some other mechanism?

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Yeah, I don't know. I know one person that went carnivore and had good lipid number before hand, and then his total cholesterol shot up to 300 with his LDL close to 200. He also felt strong and lean. But I advised him to cut back. Those are pretty hard numbers to make it worth the potential long term risk.

---

Dr. Shawn Baker is a big proponent of carnivore diet. He wrote a book and has been on the Joe Rogan podcast a few times.

https://carnivore.diet/dr-shawn-baker-md/

There are no reputable studies, but there is this self reported study from Harvard

Quote:

---

The self-reported changes in health status were overwhelmingly positive:

• 95% improved overall health
• 91% improved hunger/food cravings
• 89% improved energy
• 85% improved mental clarity
• 83% improved focus
• 78% improved strength
• 76% improved endurance
• 69% improved sleep
• 69% improved chronic disease
• 66% improved memory

How chronic conditions changed

• 98% improved or resolved diabetes and insulin resistance
• 97% improved or resolved gastrointestinal conditions
• 96% improved or resolved musculoskeletal issues
• 96% improved or resolved psychiatric symptoms
• 93% improved or resolved overweight/obesity (mean BMI decreased from 27.2 to 24.3)
• 93% improved or resolved hypertension
• 92% improved or resolved urologic issues
• 92% improved or resolved dermatologic issues
• 89% improved or resolved autoimmune conditions
• 84% improved or resolved cardiovascular issues

How medication use changed

• 100% discontinued other diabetes injectables
• 92% discontinued insulin for type 2 diabetes altogether
• 90% discontinued or decreased insulin
• 84% discontinued oral diabetes medications.

Level of satisfaction with the carnivore diet

• 98% of participants reported being very satisfied or satisfied

---

https://www.doctorkiltz.com/the-harvard-carnivore-diet-study/

2girlsdad said:

---

"But I'd be quite surprised to discover that eating only meat is the optimal human diet."

I'm not looking for the optimal human diet, I am looking for something that is sustainable and not detrimental to my health.

---

The evidence suggests we evolved as carnivores.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.24247

I'd be willing to bet, most, if not all, people who lose weight and go from being obese to not being obese see all those same improvements - regardless of whether or not they are on the carnivore diet or use some other method to restrict calories.

It's not what they are eating, it's that they are eating LESS and losing weight.

TXTransplant said:

---

I'd be willing to bet, most, if not all, people who lose weight and go from being obese to not being obese see all those same improvements - regardless of whether or not there are on the carnivore diet or use some other method to restrict calories.

It's not what they are eating, it's that they are eating LESS and losing weight.

---

Yeah, I think this is likely the case as well. You lose weight because you're eating less calories, which may be easier on carnivore. Also, the data suffers from selection bias tremendously.

Losing weight is easier when you avoid processed foods, even if it's not strict carnivore.

Facts. I'm trying to do a clean bulk right now, and it is an absolute struggle to get the calories in. If I get busy at work and don't eat on time, I just can't get enough calories in me without staying up late or eating something sugary/fatty (in my case some dark chocolate I keep stashed for emergencies).

Plus, there's also the set point theory that I'm working against.

I track my macros, and I hear you. Hitting protein is easy, if I eat low fat protein. But when I try to hit both my carb and fat goals (and stay within my calorie goal), it's much harder. If I eat a fatty protein, I blow my fat macro and don't get enough protein. It's a delicate balancing act.

Fat is the hardest one for me because if I'm just low on fat, I don't really want to drink some oil or eat a pat of butter.

I feel the same, but been on a cutting diet for a while, decided to try carnivore while doing it, which is surprisingly hard for me to get the protein intake without blowing the total calories above calorie burn for the day. I'll typically do a steak for dinner, but breakfast I have to be more balanced, with eggs, chicken, and egg whites to hit the numbers.

2girlsdad said:

---

Here's my dilemma. I have been doing 98% carnivore now for 10 months, and feel great. It's not 100% since I put honey in my 1-2 cups of coffee/day (with heavy cream...yum) and eat fruit maybe 3-4 times a month. Other than that, it's steak, homemade hamburger patties and cheese. I lost 25 lbs and am probably the leanest/strongest combo I have ever been. I realized that even though I squat heavy, my knees feel great probably because of the lack of inflammation from crummy food.

My dilemma is I can't find good studies that talk about fiber or cholesterol or fat because in general nutrition studies seem flawed. One study I read had saturated fat as bad, but the control group ate saturated fat from muffins and there seems to be a lot of examples like that. Has there ever been a study that shows that even if you are lean, work out, avoid processed foods and refined sugars, you are still at high risk of a heart attack due to high LDL, and more so apo B? If CRP is low, homocysteine is low, triglycerides are low, and HDL is high, are people still having heart attacks?

I'm not trying to push an agenda, I just have found a diet that I love but I DO NOT want to do it if there is good data supporting its negative effects. I'd honestly eat more fruit, but fruit and vegetables give me IBS. It's not totally cleared on carnivore (was short term), but much better still.

I hear Peter Attia stress how bad apoB is, but what data is he referencing that says it's bad even if the other markers are good?

---

I did really try today to find studies that fit the parameters you're looking for, and as it's kinda played out in this thread, it's really hard to find a specific study like that

However, I think this is a good place for this video. The channel is done by an MD/PhD who's only focus on the channel is to go through nutrition studies and break down the pros and cons- no matter the subject or the author or the type of diet it is. I find it's probably one of the most objective channels on YouTube talking about nutritional science- without an obvious bias.

Bonus is he has a TON of videos on saturated fat, LDL, ApoB and so many other health issues, and even interviews experts in all these fields.

:

I eat a lot of chicken and turkey breast. Gets boring sometimes, so I'll mix it up with boiled shrimp from HEB on the weekends.

I recently found some sous vide beef options. A seasoned sirloin at Costco and the Kevin's brand Korean beef. Tons of flavor and very little fat (no sugar in the Korean beef sauce either). These have been good alternatives when I get tired of chicken and turkey.

I'll check it out, thanks for the advice!

Good video. Especially where he explains that science isn't as clear as everyone sees in the movies. It's rarely a straight jump from hypothesis to Eureka moment. I think people watch too much science fiction and just have unrealistic expectations of what science and medicine can do safely.

Thank you! I've never come across him when searching the topic.

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Good video. Especially where he explains that science isn't as clear as everyone sees in the movies. It's rarely a straight jump from hypothesis to Eureka moment. I think people watch too much science fiction and just have unrealistic expectations of what science and medicine can do safely.

---

That may be part of it, but the bigger and more problematic part is that is that so much of the science/medical community and others in government and leadership positions always tells us the science is settled when it fits their narrative.