this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
0 points (50.0% liked)

Friendly Carnivore

65 readers
31 users here now

Carnivore

The ultimate, zero carb, elimination diet

We are focused on health and lifestyle while trying to eat zero carb bioavailable foods.

Keep being AWESOME

Purpose

Rules

  1. Be nice
  2. Stay on topic
  3. Don't farm rage
  4. Be respectful of other diets, choices, lifestyles!!!!
  5. No Blanket down voting - If you only come to this community to downvote its the wrong community for you

Other terms: LCHF Carnivore, Keto Carnivore, Ketogenic Carnivore, Low Carb Carnivore, Zero Carb Carnivore, Animal Based Diet, Animal Sourced Foods

Library

The relation of alimentation and disease - Salisbury 1888

The fat of the land - Stefansson - 1946

founded 4 weeks ago
MODERATORS
totallynotjet@lemm.ee
jet@hackertalks.com
psud@aussie.zone
0
I think we (low carb in general) are winning (aussie.zone)
submitted 6 days ago by psud@aussie.zone to c/carnivore@lemm.ee
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It helps that we're right. That it can't be bad to eat what humans have eaten for 2 million years.

But 2 recent things I've looked at were studies done a few decades ago and shelved because they didn't get the "right" answer, but were recovered recently and published showing the lipid hypothesis was wrong and the cause of metabolic disorder was carbohydrates

They were suppressed in the 70s and 80s, now they are published. Dietary guidelines in Australia (one of the biggest wheat exporters) now allow low carb for treating type 2 diabetes.

I do believe we're watching a change in consensus (which as always is progressing one death at a time - perhaps it's good that the other side is committed to a metabolically dangerous path)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It helps that we're right. That it can't be bad to eat what humans have eaten for 2 million years.

The flaw in your logic is that nature's only purpose is reproduction. As long as you make it at least that far, nothing else matters. Reproduction starts relatively early in our lifetime.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thats a interesting point, reproductive success also encompass strategies where the longevity of the parent gives better chances to the offspring as well.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Only to a point. Even if you include raising kids, that's only roughly halfway into our lifetime though.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but we are a community / social species, being a active member of a tribe even if outside of reproductive activities still gives benefits to the children of the community. Security, altruism, food availability, etc.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

What does that have anything to do with our diet?

[–] psud@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago

To the point of being social, living longer lets you help a younger generation survive and raise their kids

Were you fortunate enough to have a grandparent living with you when you were young? It makes things much easier for the parents, much nicer for the kids

[–] psud@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago

You need to live to ~20, call it 45 to raise several children (you need probably 3 surviving ones per couple in an ice age) and the only food option is the animals that can eat the plants below the ice

You need to be able to live on meat your whole life or your line dies out when the cold comes, you need to be able to live on meat all winter in interglacials because no plants that we can eat are available