At around 1:26 you started talking about the reasons that the poor can’t eat well. I grew up dirt poor. Have you ever split a single wiener lengthwise and rolled it onto a piece of bread for a hotdog? I grew up thinking that was what everyone did. For Christmas I would get a whole box of ritz crackers all to myself! In spite of that degree of poverty, we always had soup if nothing else. It contained whatever was available. Mum called it “ cream of garbage soup” and put in any and all leftover vegetables or meats. It was always served with water to drink and a slice of bread. Kids don’t grow up in a vacuum. You can make healthier choices even at a food bank. Not perfect, mind you, just marginally healthier. The kids won’t eat it or like it? Poverty doesn’t allow for pickiness. You have two choices: eat it or go hungry. Kids aren’t stupid. Explain to them the situation and let them understand the problem. The idea that the impoverished can’t cook or be creative is usually wrong. I know. I lived it.
Hello, with regard to the clip you played of Paul Saladino. Why not just have him on a podcast and discuss your points of view. I'd like to see and hear that. Respectfully.
Paul doesn't debate people who he knows would beat him In a debate, despite his claim that he can't find anyone who wants to debate him he has been offered debates by vegan many times
@@humanoid8344A vegan cannot win a debate on nutrition ethics or saving the planet. Veganism is a religion. It defies logic and requires blind faith. 1:20:58
@@humanoid8344A vegan can not win a debait on ethics, nutrition, or saving the planet. No creature was teeth, should be eating fruit. True herbivores eat grass, not vegetables. Plants contain close to and in some cases less than zero nutritional value. They require far too much transportation. And are extremely bad for the environment. Animal agriculture does not require farmland. Humans are carnivores. We don't need to eat plants. We are much happier and healthier when we don't. 1:21:10
If these guys were open for debate it wouldn't be so difficult to leave comments on the channel. A vegan can not win a debait on ethics, nutrition, or saving the planet. No creature was teeth, should be eating fruit. True herbivores eat grass, not vegetables. Plants contain close to and in some cases less than zero nutritional value. They require far too much transportation. And are extremely bad for the environment. Animal agriculture does not require farmland. Humans are carnivores. We don't need to eat plants. We are much happier and healthier when we don't. 1:21:10
My nan lived to 86 eating meat and veg and my partners grandad lived to 96 just walking and eating meat and veg (mostly frozen) It seems these days that all food is harmful in some way. Kind of sick of it. I just want to eat.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill There's so much we don't know. If the data was the crystal ball. The western part of world wouldn't be 70 % on atlases on one medication or drug. God designed is more complicated than data. Infinite possibilities. Other factors at play.
I strongly believe whichever camp we reside in, we should be bashing those that produce adulterated food like substances and not those that are either in the carnivore or WFPB camp. Rise above this kind of talk and stick to the positive sides of WFPB.
I'll briefly tell my story regargind morals. Me and the wife started wfpb due to health and environmental too, although not as educated at the time as Alan is. Our daughter was 5 months old. However, my wife and I had studied a lot regarding the benefits of breast milk and the connection that exists between mom and baby. That was incredible to study and even more incredible to see happening between them. I'm sure parents here can relate to that. Unfortunately, my wife had a condition on her breast that would make feeding our baby very painful. For weeks. She persevered because of the importance we had learned, but the help we were seeking in between wasn't able to understand what was it. Candidae, bad catch, tongue issues, you name it. All were discarded. We tried laser, but that would solve only for that day. After a few months, with such sore nipples she finally found, searching articles online, a condition that would match all symptoms. Raynaud's Syndrom. The pediatritian later agreed to that and turned back to University to see the treatment she didn't even know. After all that, and seeing the relationship that grows since pregnancy between a mom and her baby, the milk industry affects me more than any other. moral is not there.
Wow…I’ve been searching/waiting for a podcast like this for so long! Just to hear a reasoned, expert take on carnivore, keto, veganism etc - and to hear from you guys that you were “that guy” regurgitating stuff from keto blogs etc was really reassuring and healing to my bruised ego (I was also “that guy” until recently. I’ve struggled to find the true way forward between your mate Saladino and those on the “other side” like Tim Spector (and yes, I realise now that they are not experts of equal standing!). This is the true damage of the “follow the science” stuff spouted by the government during COVID - they’ve sowed so much skepticism about “mainstream” science that I now find it very difficult to trust mainstream sources. Thanks for going through all of that in a non-judgemental and rigorous way.
Yay, it's back! I was 40 minutes in and then it disappeared. Simon, it would be great to hear from some Physios on your podcast too. I work in the field and would love to you and others talk about injury/ nutrition. Apologies if I missed a podcast on that subject and thanks for all you do!
Thanks Simon, it's your podcast that's made me start to question the information I hear and be more discerning of who I choose to listen to. I love that your are science/evidence based and you only interview those who also show up with the evidence.
Excellent in depth discussion from three outstanding intelligent educated reasonable speakers. Alan’s ethical ambivalence was valuable and worth hearing and considering - he’s definitely part of the solution. The breadth of knowledge of scientific literature with a seasoned perspective of how it is ignored and abused brings this forum to a high level of credibility.
The problem with doctors like this who HATE PAUL SALADINO, is that Paul is not like that, he is more positive and his advice actually benefits people in the short term. I think it is very likely that an all meat diet will not be good in the long term, but when you tell people who used to be fat with skin problems, joint issues, GERD, etc that their new diet that they are doing is bad, and they should trust the experts when the experts could never fix their problems before it is kind of like saying “Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”
This is vegan bias and everyone who comments positively are vegan or ignorant to the fact we have only been eating plants for 15000 years and be for that we ate mostly meat for the rest of our existence so our digestive system is not designed to extract nutrients from plants. The fact that we have so much poop when eating vegetables and trash diets should show the simplest minded person we are not absorbing much and when eating meat you have a very little amount of poop and as long as you eat the fat it’s soft without eating fiber.
Of all things discussed in this video, the censorship is the most important. We *cannot* censor the communication of thoughts and ideas. Our profit motives prefer to divide thoughts and ideas into two opposing narratives because that's the most effective way to maximize ad revenue, interaction, and controversy. This has the side effect of removing the nuanced narratives that literally allow people to understand each other. Remove understanding, and you encourage division and radicalism. Our speech is even more fundamental than our diet. The reason this is true is because the way war communicate determines what foods we eat. The algorithms on RU-vid push this vegan vs carnivore debate because those are the two extremes that bring in the most ad revenue. Meanwhile, the nuance in this video gets tamped down and a mood reasonable Mediterranean or DASH diet gets no attention. In short, we basically have no idea how to use our technology, yet we think we are using it well. None of the division was a problem before TV/radio/internet, because our communication wasn't being manipulated for profit motives. It's quite simple actually, we are abusing our technology like a child would abuse unrestricted access to a candy store.
This one was phenomenal! Loved the variety of subjects and the good faith conversation. For the ethical segment, I recommend he looks into the phycological effects on cows being separated from their calves for the yogurt and the cognitive abilities or pain of fish versus the very thing that you value in your own life in the context of cooking and eating. It's that whole feeling and suffering that the animal goes through for the minor inconvenience of a slightly different flavor or routine (which is even less for someone like you who enjoys plant based foods and is 80% there). I know you mentioned that suffering is a concept a bit difficult to grasp in value but it almost seems like you say such things while acting others, for example the very fact that you try to help out by spreading information or taking an environmental stance or even being passionate about the things you care about. Almost seems like a selective nihilism. Like you said philosophy is much more complex and nothing I can say in this comment would be enough to flesh out the entire thought but hopefully this is a new angle to tackle the same question from. Either way, amazing podcast with the nuanced analysis, laughs, sarcasm, and knowledge. Great job by all three of you. Big fan
@@TheProofWithSimonHill it was super fun to watch as well and I think you guys did a great job. Don't take this as a critique of the approach you guys did. I was hoping to offer a slightly different lense for Alan to start looking at because even though he intellectually may have not made a connection, his behavior does reflect something different. There may also be an angle of even if it doesn't mean anything in his eyes it is still a behavior or belief worth adopting just as an effort to create meaning and value for our fellow humans and other animals.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill a philosophy specialist would be fun to have but those conversations can get very confusing quickly so it may take more than an episode to build up the foundation and background and then get to higher order conclusions like veganism. Similar to throwing someone with no science background into reading their first nutrition study, there is going to be a lot of questions or premature conclusions. This is just something I've noticed when philosophers try to communicate with the public but if anyone can find a way to break that down, I'm sure you'd be one of them! Cheers Friend
Thoroughly enjoyed that segment as well. Those are difficult but necessary conversations to have at times and all three remained respectful throughout. I, like Alan, reflect on the meaning of life and my purpose. While I also don't know what my purpose IS, I know what it IS NOT (causing unnecessary harm to others). This process of elimination helped me to make that connection that many have.
How do you justify all the animal deaths that occur in order to grow and protect protect crops? Animals are drowned in rice fields, their burrows ploughed up, they are driven out of their habitats, they are baited with poisons, trapped and hounded to death. There is no food without exploiting or harming animals. The people who go vegan because they want to be compassionate towards animals are simply deluding themselves.
The point raised at 1:10:00 is very true. Nothing will ever change that belief system. For these hardcore, anti-science, nutritional influencers, when they experience their predictable negative health outcomes, the default excuse will always be “it was genetics” or the years of SAD lifestyle before adopting their meat-centric diets. I’ve already seen examples of this on numerous occasions.
Or the excuse will be "it was because of the ONE time I ate french fries cooked in toxic seed oils" or some other nonsense with the word "seed oils" in it 😂
This is a bit of a straw-man as to why most ordinary people adopt this sort of diet. Many people *genuinely* do experience a remission of lifelong health and autoimmune symptoms on a carnivore diet, which is why such an extreme diet exists. Furthermore, food interactions do seem to at least potentially exist, and populations are not individuals. Mikhaila Peterson is an example of a person who has *phenomenal* bloodwork (sub 2nd percentile for Framingham risk) and is on a purely carnivore diet, and seems to experience debilitating symptoms eating other food. But Mikhaila isn't everyone, and plant based diets don't work for everyone. The conflation of population vs individual is precisely why epidemiological data is merely a start point. As Attia says, why not take a statin if it's truly improving so much of your health?
I'm really glad you boys had the discussion on ethics with Alan. It was a respectful, honest, and critical conversation. However, to voice my thoughts, I would say that whilst vegan ethics can be debated philosophically, I would say veganism and animal rights is mostly based on logic and reason. Despite Alan saying that he had nihilisitc views and relativistic morals, I think he would agree on the fact that he is against causing unneccesary animal abuse. From there I would then question whether he thinks its possible to consume animal products without causing animal abuse. He may have his reasonings for or against that question at this point (as he did, in relation to anchovies, as an example) but by in large if he was exposed to footage of each of these industries and the ways all animals suffer immensely as a result (as he said he has seen), I believe Alan would arrive at the conclusion that its very unlikely to avoid animal abuse. And as a result of your discussion, Alan did conclude that his main justification for animal product consumption is predominantly taste pleasure and enjoyment. From here, I would ask him, does taste pleasure justify animal abuse when its unneccesary for him to continue to do so? Thats a personal choice of his to make, but considering taste pleasure is largely subjective and can easily adapt, I would hope he would agree that its morally unjustifiable. He also said that he would choose lab-produced animal products over animal-produced versions, if that becomes available in the future. Assuming this decision was made from a harm/suffering reduction standpoint, I would question that if he was in the animals position (being enslaved, tortured, abused and eventually murdered) would he want someone to stop oppressing/consuming him sometime in the future or would he want them to stop now? (Given he has the knowledge and capability to live vegan). I assume the answer would be now.
Thanks for your thoughts. The lab produce comment was for environmental considerations, just to clarify. I do think it is possible to consume animals without the kind of abuse you’re referring to; not every company operates a system of inflicting abuse (i.e., some dairy producers have more transparent standards). Also to clarify the comment re: taste/enjoyment, that isn’t an isolated reason, as you say it is modifiable; it is the convergence of both the perspective on suffering/abuse with the personal enjoyment.
@@alanflanagan3804 Thanks for the clarification, I was aware that I was going on a few assumptions there. However, I would say that even if these industries were to be 100% abuse free (even though 90%+ are factory farmed), majority if not all these animals (including dairy cows, hens, etc.) are sent to be slaughtered when they're considered no longer profitable often at fraction of their natural lifespan. And if were talking eggs and dairy, I'm also interested as to what these 'abuse-free' industries do with their male calves and chicks. Most if not all are murdered because they dont produce milk or eggs. And I'm yet to see an example where what goes on inside a slaughterhouse as not being abusive. But let's say there is a way of killing animals 100% pain free, would you still say its justifiable to take the life away from an individual, if it was unnecessary to begin with? I mean if you were in their position, what would you want your oppressor to do? Kill and eat you? Or just eat something (not someone) else?
@@jackhiggs269 This is why I tried to articulate the issues, at least I see it, of the "100% or 0%" type of absolutist framework, because there is basically nothing short of the 100% level that is acceptable otherwise. I guess my point it is not necessarily that 100% pain free has to be present, or that all food systems are the same. So the distinction that I made during the discussion was that, I can look at industrial beef production and decide that there is a net harm in that system that moves in favour of not buying meat. But I can't look at a mackerel and think that it has a competing interest that tips the needle in the same direction.
i exchanged messages with john meadows before he died. after a heart scare he told me he was eating a plant predominant diet but was still eating a lot of animal protein. he became much more conscious of his fat intake if i remember correctly
HI guys, I have to say love your casual friendship style , yet each one of you so giant in research data and interpretations, really enjoy listening to you. please do an in-depth coverage of osteopetrosis, when the screening is recommended , i.e should be recommended at what age [my doc told me , "the reason they don't do it before age 55 is because if one has osteoporosis, they don't want to treat it for such a long period of time with meds!!] esp, which test to monitor if there is improvement or not with treatment and other non conventional treatments, thanks
At 1: 41 Alan mentions a plant-based protein supplement having 50 grams of protein. Can you clarify the name of the supplement/meal, and the manufacturer/distributor? Thanks.
There was a local bodybuilder in my area. Competitive at a Canadian level, not world class. I knew him for decades from the gym, but that was all. He died in his early 50s of (I think) liver cancer. For sure, meaty diet and PEDs. But it's just sad, he was a nice guy with a family. He would acknowledge me (probably because I just kept showing up thru the years, even if I never got any muscles). He never had that pro wrestler strut, I never had to get out of his way when he walked by. It's just sad.
Please don’t underestimate the “lay” person. I believe if we are truly interested in a topic and curious (willing to learn), we can plow through meaty material! Please continue with your in-depth approach to these topics. Thank you!
1:31:00 The socioeconomic barriers to health are real. However, the reversal of this issue starts with education. If part of that education is telling people how difficult it is to eat healthy, then you are reinforcing those vicious cycles of decaying health. This makes people into victims and discourages them from even getting started. Perception is everything here. Junk food worsens the lack of energy that people have from being overworked. Whereas, if people were to stick to a healthy diet for 6 months, they would re-establish a gut microbiome that turns the vicious cycles into benevolent cycles. So in this case, it's literally dangerous to tell people they can't help themselves do to socioeconomic factors. The hardest part is getting started, and it only gets easier from there... You get better at meal prepping, cooking, and your health improves. We cannot encourage the victim mentality. We must encourage people to exercise their free will. The food deserts are a problem that needs federal funding, and we need to educate people to vote for people that are willing to make it happen!
The big problem with the Carnivore Diet is not just that people ‘feel’ good on it, it is that every measurable health marker dramatically improves. Inflammation, HbA1c, blood pressure, reduction in insulin use for diabetics, reduction in medication for metabolic diseases, lipids (except LDL-C in some cases), and skin disorders to name just a few of the most often reported ones. When many thousands of carnivore dieters anecdotally report these huge measurable and observable health improvements, surely we need trials that include cohorts that don't consume any plant material at all? Vague hand waving admonitions that ‘they’ll suffer 5 years down the road’ are not convincing.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill it is of interest how that weight loss achieved. In general, people reduce calories by reducing carbohydrates (e.g. the 4 Cs- cookies, candy, cake and coke) to lose weight which automatically makes their animal food consumption a larger %age of their diet. It would be worthwhile to find out which is the bigger contributor to the improvement in health markers - weight loss, decreased plant food or increased animal food.
@@neilxify all this benefits are attributed to drastic weight loss. You can find armies of people resolving thier AI disorders including psoriasis on mediterranean/pescatarian diets, vegetarian or DASH diet. They just aren’t mobilized by agressive internet quacks who sell testicle supplements and they simply live their new healthy lives without being obsessed with food like carnivore dieters. Long term detrimental consequences of high LDL are something that we will be observing from those who stick to that carnivore orthorexic disorder for longer period of time. Testicle supplement quacks are very well aware that most people will not stick to it long enough to develop heart disease and they take advantage of short term benefits that are 100% weight loss benefits. Fun fact. Shawn Baker spent couple of days in the city of Mostar in August. My friend saw him in the restaurant and they made a nice selfie. When Shawn returned to his table my mate noticed that the guy is eating traditional Bosnian cake made of walnuts and sugar syrup 😂
@@neilxify Interestingly, those same measures see improvement on a whole food, plant-based diet, which is practically the opposite of a carnivore diet. This is not to recommend one diet over the other; it’s almost like the farther you get from the standard American diet, in any direction, you get health improvements. It will be interesting to see multi-year prospective cohort studies on people eating carnivore diets.
@@mspatricia3151 “Ah, but your (calculated) LDL-C probably went up! You’ll pay dearly with bad health in the long run.” Just kidding. I’ll bet all your health markers have improved without excessive weight loss. Planty nutritionists need to get out more and see what happens when people eschew plants, instead of wasting their time relying on nutrition epidemiology studies.
I kinda get why there's bro talk at the beginning, relaxes everyone, humanizes them, BUT it also makes me think a little less of you all (bro-science...) and it makes an already long convo even longer. to be clear I did listen to the whole thing and have listened to alot of your material, am between Alan and you on the plant based spectrum, generally believe plants are the way to go, and didn't hear anything obviously weird, but Alan isn't doing research, he's summarizing studies, and knowing that he's coming at this from a weight lifting bro perspective changes things a little for me.
@@alanflanagan3804 sorry, I see you on Web of Science, so I was wrong about that, but still on Simon's podcast you are primarily talking about nutrition science in general, not specifically your own work
@@sethboviper No worries mate. Yeah this is true, Simon just wanted to have a free-flowing chat and meander through topics, which most people seem to have enjoyed. I seldom talk about my own diet or personal stuff, so I have to say I enjoyed it! I have a couple of interesting papers about to get submitted, so when they're published I'll sit back down with Simon and we can talk about my own research specifically, and in more detail.
1:21:11 "the diet we follow is somewhat of a luxury" It is. I checked at our local Loblaws in Toronto. Right now, 2000 kcal costs 3 CDN for potato chips and 68 CDN for kale (the darling of lifestyle medicine) and let's not even talk about asparagus. This is a **caricature** but it illustrates the problem and that is not even talking about the shopping, storing, preparing and cleaning aspects and the time that goes into them. When someone is working two or three jobs to make ends meet, while facing long commute times and other challenges, how does that person have a choice? The pricing structure needs to change. We should find a way to make more healthful food way cheaper and more convenient, and THEN (and only then) increase the price of the less healthful food so that it becomes the luxury it should be. Politicians have work to do. Important work.
This click bait video came up again on my feed. I let it play because the title sounded so interesting. Turns out it's just jibber jabber. At best, it may be entertaining. Humans are carnivores. We don't need to eat plants. We are much happier and healthier when we don't. And it's better for the planet.
A very insightful session- helped me get a more nuanced perspective on keto and carnivore. Please bring in other perspectives as well. Would be interesting to see Ben Bikman and Dr Ken Berry ( his book 'lies doctors tell you'). Thanks so much. Look forward to more interviews.
As someone with Fat Malabsorpion I was making good progress at the gym until I got a jar or two of food packed in canola oil. I do poorly with soybean or canola oil in dressings. Conversely I do OK with the same foods packed in olive oil like muffaletta olive relish.
Great episode. Only issue I had was letting him off the hook (no pun intended, or maybe there is), with the whole ‘what even is suffering?’ However, it was an informative, balanced and entertaining listen, as per. Cheers.
GREAT discussion guys!!! I would love to hear more on the protein supplementation topic. Particularly, your thoughts on supplementing intra training session with a BCAAs vs. EAAs powder. And then also comparing both of those options with taking a plant-based protein powder after training. I began supplementing with a BCAA powder a few years ago, then through research learned that EAAs is more beneficial, so I switched to that. Recently, I have been considering adding in a plant-based protein in after training sessions. But, I haven't experimented with this yet, mainly due to digestion concerns. I do eat a mostly raw diet, full of fruits, veggies, sprouts, and FIBER! But, I am wondering if I am limiting my training/recovery abilities by being in the mid-range of protein intake per my body weight.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill always, you have helped me with making three family members healthy vegans from middle of the USA horribly unhealthy omnivores. Ready to crack open your book that came in days ago. Anyways thank you so much
I loved this episode and have the highest respect for all of you! However there was one thing I didnt really understand. When Dr Goldner said that dairy was inflammatory and could give you cancer - what was wrong with that? I believe I’ve heard dr Greger, Dr Barnard, Dr Kirsti Funk and others talking about this too. Was it the way she said it (like a blanket statement without being more nuanced or is there not data to support the connections? Thanks for taking the time to explain (if you’ve got the time ofc ❤).
@@TheProofWithSimonHill Thanks! I mustve just forgotten about that. 🙌🏼 Thanks for the link. Im guessing the other doctors must be referencing studies on rodents or just not strong enough data. 🙏🏻
@@lindarkruse9301 I wonder if the negative association between dairy and cancer could be because it may be consumed instead of something worse like red meat or ultra processed food. Because from what I have seen vegans have lower rates of cancer than vegetarians that eat dairy.
@@aaronbr2001 Dairy products are often fermented, so perhaps it's that. But they also contain more saturated fat than red meat by percentage of fats in them, although the fat levels in dairy products differ wildly. Also K2 vitamin
Reading the comments here before listening to the whole thing on Spotify later this week.. seems like there's some controversy, can't wait to find out why 😆 Looking forward to listening
Hands-down, one of the most profound episodes I’ve tuned into to date. A very necessary space for the leaders of this time to come together and have alot of necessary questions addressed. Thank you 🙏🏽
The PHD’s bias is evident in how he positions himself as an authority while dismissing other individuals in the field who not only possess academic qualifications to comment but also have practical experience in dealing with individuals with varying health states. There is not a lot of uniformity when it comes to treatment and cause and effect in the Western medicine approach to nutrition, this contributes to much of the misinformation and confusion about health. This bias becomes apparent when they make sweeping statements for example about lectins, disregarding the fact that while these statements may not apply universally, lectins can be harmful to certain individuals based on their metabolic fitness and overall health. It is also important to acknowledge the existence of contradictory evidence within the fields of medicine and nutrition and including research. It is astonishing how arrogant and elitist the presenters can be, assuming authority solely based on their health literacy and ability to understand research articles which again is another issue in itself. However, it should be noted that practitioners like Dr. Hyman, despite having something to sell, also provide valuable education. this had to be noted and people will hear what they want to hear but it should be pointed out they fall into the very category they are complaining about.
Agreed. These people never healed anybody with nutrition but a piece of paper on the wall. Nutrition is the most powerful tool to heal and it is becoming more and more popular. But these people can talk on podcast. Healing is not their thing. I hope one day they are old enough, like passing 50, they will come to realization how arrogant they are. They will start to seek nutrition.
I loved this. So good. I haven't been following you for long (you appeared on my radar via the brain docs). I have definitely been missing out. Thank you.
I accidentally deleted a very deep and thought out comment because I was laughing so hard and dropped my phone. More of these episodes with the three of you please. Dr Alan is a riot.
Truly enjoyed the calming atmosphere you created during the show, Simon! I'm a Clinical Dietitian at a hospital and when someone comments on my lunch I get uncomfortable (and feel invaded truthfully) because my intake is irrelevant to what I do to educate my patients, so I understood when Alan maybe?? tried to dodge this part. In any case, would you be able to share the canola oil research mentioned in the show, please? 100% Canola oil advocate. Not too sexy, but it should be. Thank you!
I’m only in at the 1:02:23 mark of this conversation and the thoughts by all are brilliantly expressed. I wish ore individuals were open-minded enough just to engage in other conversations and think “maybe there’s more to that, I should do a deeper dive” Unfortunately, I believe most look for the ideas that support their beliefs and cannot be deterred from that, regardless of whether the science is there. And, to your point, I do not know that I’d concern myself with those individuals because it’s an all or nothing mentality - there is no gray area. I really enjoy your podcasts and look forward to future content.
I disagree I was having serious stomach problems for years tried everything that was suggested by the normal, then followed gentry then tried omad and slowly got better but finally no plants has done the job completely. But there is definitely no way we should be so different if we are the same species and veganism is obviously only political
I am currently experimenting with carnivore. My BP is much lower, my sleep is better and I have very little arthritic pain. I am 76 and have been a liberal all my life. Currently I am less progressive than my party is right now but still liberal in most policies.
In the 60s and 70s bull’s testicles were still on Austrian menues and I remember my boyfriend ordering them once. And you could easily get brains with eggs in local restaurants and other organs such as liver and kidneys and thymus were also eaten a lot!
I grew up too eating organs and loved sautéed liver with fried, crispy onions and fried slices of apples over rice. Same with „Sour kidneys“ and gratins with kidneys. Also fried tender sweet bread in port wine sauce. My father went through two World wars and famine periods related to it - he would never waste food and made us appreciate what was on the table. He was a great cook too.
The "poor people can't do this" part of the conversation bothered me. It may be true that a very small % of the American population is so low-resourced (economically/cognitively/geographically) that preparing healthy meals is a struggle, but the vast majority can learn to make dietary improvements. Difficult does not equal impossible. I'd love to see community resources directed at meeting people where they are; maybe for some that would mean adding a salad to the family dinner menu to go with their Big Macs. Fat, salt, and sugar make a powerful drug--deadlier even than opioids--but considering people incapable of demonstrating agency is not a good place to start.
Really appreciate the work that you do. Misinformation is so rampant these days, it’s difficult to find a trusted source for evidence-based, non-biased info. Would love it if you could do an episode debunking all of the Medical Medium’s claims. He’s become so popular amongst the vegan/gluten free circle in Taiwan, there are restaurants and cafes that are MM-compliant. It’s extremely disturbing the way the followers are religiously devoted, like a cult. They maintain that MM-info is the only real absolute truth.. Please do an episode on this 🙏
Definitely. More and more people are developing eating disorders because of the “cleansing tools” described in his books. Hope he’ll consider this. P.s. I did fall into the belief that I needed some of his cleanses to get better and heal my digestion. I ended up eating almost no added fat. Didn’t feel better, of course..
@@donatina1987 so glad and relieved that someone shares my point of view! Thank you so much for your reply I hope you found other more effective ways to heal your digestive issues 💛
@emilyelin2205 hi, oh that’s lovely of you, thanks for answering. Well, I still have a very sensitive stomach but fats have to be in the diet, and that eating greens and fruits and potatoes simply isn’t balanced. healthy whole fats from avocado or seeds are simply the best options you can choose from.
Great video! For the 1.6g per kg body weight, is that based off total body weight or the amount of lean mass you have? For my example, I'm about 150kg at 198cm in height. I would guess I'm 30% body fat and want to cut to 125kg. With the 150kg protein number, that's pretty hard to get so far trying the diet.
Absolutely loved the podcast, one of your best so far. And I respect/trust Alan's nutritional advice more than anyone else on the internet! But the vegan ethics part was a hard listen. I've heard so many well educated people use mental gymnastics like this to justify their unethical choices, at least Alan was honest as to why- taste. But I actually don't know if I respect him more or less for this justification. I'd have liked you to push him more on the suffering and if his nihalism towards it is consistent when humans are suffering. Hopefully he changes his actions soon, maybe a discussion with Avi or Nick Hiebert could be set up?
Thanks for your thoughts. I think the pointed aim to have me change my actions is where the religiosity of veganism becomes apparent, an aspect of the dialogue I struggle with; one is only worthy ones converted. I was as candid as I could be, but perhaps didn’t articulate certain points as well. The point about taste was not in isolation, but in combination with the perspective on suffering and utilitarianism. So it wasn’t mental gymnastics, just simply that I’m not convinced (or entirely unconvinced) that those are universal concepts that holds precedent, rather than the philosophy most suited to the outcomes consistent with vegan ethics.
@@alanflanagan3804 I feel the "not worthy" comment is unfair, just because you can't see the severity of a small portion of your consumption choices yet doesn't mean vegans are wrong to try & convince you otherwise. I also think questioning the position of someone like yourself is far more valuable than the majority of people because you are a logical fair person, who is a great communicator, with a platform, who is so close to being vegan anyway. You'd be extremely good for the movement. One of the reasons I think you're applying mental gymnastics is because you care about the environment, why? Is it not to reduce suffering? If it is (which I can't see any other reason) then this position leads you to Veganism.
@@chrisjbarr86 I take the point that it may have been unfair. In effect, I was saying that if someone is in a place where only 100% suffices, it is absolutist and anything short of that is not enough; it's a binary consideration. I could have articulated that better, mea culpa. I accept and appreciate that my profile opens this conversation and there may be some value here in that, and I'm happy to be questioned; so thank you for engaging. The thing is, I have zero intention on advocating for any diet, particularly on social media. This is why I don't post about food, or discuss my diet (Simon's podcast was the first time I'd ever discussed it). Were I to declare and start to publicly advocate for a diet, it would compromise my integrity as a researcher and scientist. It creates a rebuttable presumption of bias that can never really be shaken. Ultimately, I'm interested in contributing to improving methodology and producing good science; my interest in the food-related outcomes is secondary to that. In relation the environment, to be perfectly honest I've never thought about through the lens of suffering per se. There are any number of considerations that feed into the question of climate change. For example, one consequence that I could foresee is that climate migration could provide a platform for rising Right-wing populist parties in Europe. So there are geopolitical, economic, pragmatic, planetary, and certainly social justice related reasons encapsulated within the environmental framework.
@@alanflanagan3804 But Veganism is an anti oppression (rights based imo) movement, look at it as anti animal abuse, like the fights against sexism, racism, homophobia etc. And with those movements, rightly so it's 100% or nothing. If someone is 98% not a racist but every now & then that person uses a racial slur I'm sure you'd want them questioned & educated on this? The excuse "Why are you so absolutist about it? I'm mostly not a racist" would not suffice. Now I'm not saying you eating dairy now & then is the same as being racist, being racist is obviously worse. But the point I'm trying to make is they're both anti oppression movements & need to be absolute. I don't expect or want you to push any diet on anybody. I just think someone with your platform, communication skills & education level saying they're vegan for the animals would plant a seed in the minds of others who respect you & your opinion. I understand your point about the environment & the knock on consequences, but I'd argue you only care about those consequences because they will cause suffering. Maybe read Animal Liberation by Peter Singer, it changed my life.
@@alanflanagan3804 Hi Alan! Such a great discussion. I was wondering, do you think there must be a universal moral concept like you describe in order to locally not harm individuals that we are capable of not harming? My thought was that if I had to justify everything to the extreme, universally, I might not be able to have any sort of morality underpinning my quotidian actions. I think for me getting to veganism was a process of realizing that I was inconsistently applying my own values. I don’t go through life trying to hurt other human beings, and if I found out I was hurting someone and stopping was within my control, I would try to stop. To me, what matters most is - is this individual capable of feeling pain? If they are, I wouldn’t want to hurt them especially if I had an alternative path available. Anyway, I know it must be frustrating to face those who are trying to convert you or change your mind. I hope you can try not to conflate the level of annoyingness of those people with the underlying message. I think it’s great you are so open to conversation on this issue!
I almost managed to get through the first hour of this rambling about freedom of speech and then I decided it was not worth it. Freedom of speech is at the basis of any free society and exceptions should be made in only extraordinary circumstances where there is imminent danger to life. Political speech and scientific discourse should virtually never be censored. No 'buts.'
Simon, can you point me to a link on the environmental study you reference at about 1:27? There are so many studies out there on the internet and I trust your references. I’m going to share it with a class I’m facilitating. Thank you!
I'd like to see Alan Flanagan just once make an argument based solely on logic, without first going out of his way to smear anyone who interprets the data differently as a "quack" spreading misinformation - while oversimplifying the positions of people who see things from a different POV.
I've eaten carnivore for 5 years resulting in no more autoimmune symptoms. I was diagnosed as allergic to gluten. I dropped 35 pounds in 2 years. I generally work out 5 days a week for 2 hours a day. I'm 71 years old. I've never felt better.
Did you listen to the part from 3:26:00? You can feel good whereas on the inside it’s not good. I can imagine you feel better after losing weight if you were overweight and not eating gluten if you were gluten intolerant, but you probably haven’t fixed anything. If I may ask, how do you get fibres and for example vitamine C?
@@heleen313 Fiber is Absolutely not necessary. That's one of the myths with no scientific proof to support it. Glucose and vitamin c complete for the same cell receptors. You don't eat sugar, then vitamin c can enter the cells so a person doesn't have to take massive amounts of vitamin c. Meat has enough vitamin c.
When I started researching human nutrition I was not prepared for how extremely controversial it is. I’ve read tons of books, watched a lot of videos and listened to a lot of advice from nutritionist. They all contradict each other in some way or another. I think the best thing anyone can do is simply experiment with food and listen to their bodies and see how they feel. So far the food that makes me feel the best is a salad with nuts, carrots, avacado, eggs, and chicken. I will continue listening and learning but the truth is health will probably always be debated and we may never truly know what foods or diet is truly the best, and perhaps it varies from person to person
You name the problem. You relied on other people’s opinion. Opinions differ, data not. It‘s better to look at study level to actually find what the evidence supports.
@@DemiousStudios It‘s a nice concept to depend on feelings not knowledge! Let‘s forget everything science found out. You can feel great with a blood pressure of 200/100. It still destroys your blood vessels and organs. That is just such a stupid thing to depend on, what is suggested here. And if something makes you feel a little bit worse, does not mean it is not beneficial. Antibiotics make you feel tired, they impair mitochondrial function. But they can make a difference between surviving an infection or not. We are well past the medieval ages, where there was a great absence of knowledge, let‘s please not go back to that. „Feeling good“ can very often be attributed to placebo effect. I can give you a personal example. I believed that it would help as a kid, to drink orange juice. And I always felt better. Turns out though, that the data on vitamin C for the treatment is very inconsistent and if there are positive effects, they are minimal.🤷♀️ Perfect example of the placebo effect. Trust your brain not your feelings. The ability to think made humans so successful not the ability to seek the greatest comfort.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill i thought you had figured it out, Alan was totally clueless wrt vegan ethics, you could have pushed him on naming the trait, but i understand why you wouldn't perhaps for diplomatic reasons. His stance was kinda vague: everything is suffering tho, why does suffering matter tho. These however could have easily been dealt with if you had someone good at philosophy like Dr. Avi. Not to mention the analogy made by the other guy about saving puppies, was totally disanalogous with veganism. These are just some of the criticisms i have, obviously I'd like if someone made a video pointing this out.
@@RahulRaj-vg4jb dr. avi is a sophist, people who listen to him is to listen to what is the next kind of sophistry he has in store for his next discussion. pretty much a quack himself.
So already they start with mocking. I’ve seen a interview with Paul Saladino and two well known vegans and this childish put downs were not present. I was recommended this channel because I honestly wanted to learn but you guys start out like that. Disappointed!
Dr. Ken Berry recently did a 'Hyman' bait-and-switch move. He just posted a YT video essentially apologizing for ever having recommended any level of vegetable consumption.
@@darkdragonite1419 Ask anyone who has ever had any adverse outcome following Dr. Berry’s terrible and dangerous dietary advice and then tried to contact him about it. They’ll give you one of two possible responses: 1) No response or acknowledgement from him. 2) If he’s confronted on a live stream or public Q&A session and can’t ignore it, he’ll say something to the effect of “That’s strange because 95% of people we hear from never experienced that”.
This was fantastic ! I really appreciate this conversation, very well done and definitely needed. channel. I am a physician and I feel a bit embarrassed every time I hear my colleagues making absolute statements or recommendations on social media. I am often skeptical about why are they even on YT or IG..."what are they selling"? However, I do want to point out something I disagree. As much as I do not follow Dr Hyman, I do not find it impossible for his patient to have stopped taking insulin after 3 days of whatever diet/ potion /supplement he sold her ( assuming she was a DMT2 patient ). She probably just quit, saved some money, remained hyperglycemic for a while, probably continued her oral regiment and hopefully got her act together. I imagine she ditched junk and processed food and voila' , 3 months later....a new person! Sadly, this is extremely rare but, if true, good for her.
This podcast makes me feel a bit better about the state of rampant misinformation we are in and about my own failure to not be misguided. As you all three are highly educated and intelligent people that admit you were misguided, but now are more critical of yourselves. I think there are many quacks/zealots that do not even know they are misguided, but instead think they are the critical thinkers. And then the question becomes: How do I know that I am not the quack? I watch this carnivore presentation by Garry Groves and I was surprised it was so convincing. It is hard to objectively fact-check information that you want to hear. Nevertheless I checked one of the studies he referred to and found the study said the opposite of what he claimed. Eventually I checked the majority of the papers he cited and all of these were misrepresented or he simply lied about the contents and findings. This fact-checking cost me several hours, but if I would not have "wasted" this effort this misinformation would have lingered in my mind to come out as fact later.
Full respect to Dr Alan Flanigan but it sounds like he watches 'Dr Salad' Dr Paul Saldino's clip videos where hes being more 'sensational' and not the ones where hes broken down the science. Also, all the medical professionals from Low Carb Down Under's RU-vid channel, that promote a fat based diet and confirm the same things that Dr Salad say. It feels like Dr Alan Flanigan is not confronting his own biases. Also, something I belive he or someome mentioned in this podcast is that people appeal to authority and how its a fallacy to do so... He does it through out the video...
The assertion that healthy eating is unattainable for individuals with limited financial resources seems like a misconception to me. Practical examples demonstrate that nutritious meals can indeed be both affordable and straightforward to prepare. For instance, combining a can of black beans and a can of baked beans with a red pepper creates a cost-effective and palatable dish that I consume almost daily since I am very lazy. Additionally, oatmeal serves as a nutritious and inexpensive breakfast option. These examples illustrate that with thoughtful selection of simple ingredients, maintaining a healthy diet on a budget is feasible. However, individuals need to be aware of the importance of healthy eating. I agree that this is often the barrier, leading people with lower incomes to consume unhealthy fast food. A lack of awareness about the connections between food and health plays a significant role.
alan is doing a lot of mental gymnastics to justify eating meat when all he has to do is say he simply enjoys it and leave it at that. it was painful hearing him try to argue moral philosophies and "what even is suffering?" and make it seem like not caring about animals is some deep, complex outlook lol
As a non-Vegan, I assume his stance is that he's aware of how important the highly bio-available B vitamins, minerals and amino acids of red meat are for his general health, and instead of pointing that out, he's trying to appease the viewers that he knows are majority vegan. I don't think we'll ever get anywhere by arguing about the ethical aspect to consuming animal foods, I imagine you have a very firm stance in that regard, but some of us are more concerned with how our nutrient needs are covered by the food we consume. And based on how I understand nutritional science, that's a subject that's definitely not as skewed towards veganism as you might think. I believe even Simon Hill, himself, has admitted to this. And with that said, I think people should be allowed to eat whatever they want to eat, and then their health outcomes will be a reflection of their own decisions.
Average comment under carnivore guru video: “I am 95 years old, was dead for last 10 years and then went on carnivore diet, resurrected and am now lifting 1000 lbs every day. Also, I am dating different supermodel every day and my penis has grown so much. Carbs are evil!”
@@2k4nt that is true for any dietary group but carnies are really making sh.t up. There was a guy on Instagram who claimed that his bices grew 2 inches in circonference in one week without exercise.
@@metalrunner4398 'Carnies'... It seems like youve gone tribal... I feel like if that person you mentioned was vegan he'd be saying the same thing... For example, the Game Changers documentary where they claim a bean burrito can give men better erections erection based on giving the subjects a meat burrito one night then a bean burrito the next. To me, that is not even science and it confirms their bias Im animal based btw, just so you know my bias.
@@2k4nt ok, I am not a vegan but am environmental scientist and I have kids so I focus my animal food intake to my mom’s chicken’s backyard eggs and couple of ounces of fresh sardines a weeks. I simply want to leave some of the planet to my children. I agree Game changers is pseudoscientific non sense, much like Saladino’s ancestoral stupidity or Greger’s daily dozen.
The discussion on oils goes astray because it fails to mention the key points. All seed oils are inherently harmless. The only clear danger is from trans fat which all the oil only contain in trace amounts. The manufacturing process which involves high-heat to extract the maximum amount of oil from the seed is what creates the trans fat. Do you know what "extra virgin" means in the olive oil we all are familiar with? That means (theoretically, absent misrepresentation) that the extraction process is done with a cold press, without the added heat. You can now purchase in most developed countries (certainly in the USA) cold-pressed canola oil which intrinsically as safe as EV olive oil when you buy it at the market. The next concern comes from what happens to the oil once you buy. Most particularly, at what temperature are you going to use the oil after it's on the shelf in your kitchen. Using it for a salad dressing without the application of heat? Well either the cold-pressed canola oil or the EV olive oil would pose little or no risk. The decision of which you used depends on the taste preference. I typically use EV olive oil in dressings. Next, what about using oil in something that's baked? Obviously, in a savory olive oil bread, you'd use olive oil. But most bakers, especially those baking pastries, want a neutral flavor. Depending on the desired outcome they will typically use something like canola oil for something requiring liquid fat because it has a more neutral taste. We have little or near fear of oxidation of the fats (i.e. creating trans fat) during baking because the temperature at what is typically about 350 F (about 177 C) is not high enought to create any significant oxidation. Now where it starts being of nominal concern is where you are using an oil as a cooking medium for sauteeing or frying and at the far end of the spectrum deep frying (i.e. french fries at the fast food restaurant). At temperatures approaching. In theory, you would want to use the oil (or fat) that has the highest smoke point (oversimplified, the point at with oxidation might start occuring). Hands down, the winner goes to ghee (clarified butter) with a smoke point as high as 485 F (252 C). Of the other oils we mentioned the cold-pressed canola oil would be the next best choice with smoke point of about 468 F (242 C). Probably best to confine use of olive oil as a cooking medium to a sauté (e.g. cooking onions and other aromatics) as its smoke point is 428 F (220 C). Thus searing a blackened salmon by the pescatarian guest might cause some oxidation during the searing. So there you have it. What really should have been said in the conversation about oils.
Knowing how canola oil is processed, it’s actually mind blowing that a nutrition expert can tell you to consume this garbage without even addressing the toxic chemicals and oxidation involved with it’s processing. Simon directly asked him about it, and he just ignored it and started drooling over all the “benefits” of canola oil. The fact that rct’s can supposedly show this oxidized oil filled with toxins is “healthy” shows you that either the markers they’re using to measuring health are wrong or they’re just completely lying in the studies. I’d like to see Alan do a video showing every step of the process of extracting and preparing the kind of canola oil used in the studies he referenced, and see if he can convince people that the rancid, inedible brown smudge, something that would literally kill you if you ate it, which forms as a result of extreme heat and hexane, can be bleached into a substance not only safe for consumption but also healthy. He started praising the chemical structure of canola oil like it’s some type of deity lol, there was literally no point in bringing that up cuz he’s just begging the question. The fact that canola oil is high in pufas and lows sf’s does not mean that pufas are good and sf’s are bad, he literally had point in making that statment.
Lots of great information from various areas of nutrition. The main thing I wanted to comment on though, was stuff around COVID. Certainly lots of misinformation/conspiracy theories around vaccines, but there's unfortunately been a politicization of COVID when it comes to boosters masking policies, and school closures here in the US. Especially given that the predominant variants of Omicron over the past year are much less severe, especially if one's had COVID and/or been vaccinated and had at least one booster. The latest booster had extremely weak safety and efficacy data behind it (from 8 mice). We know that there are problems in some demographics with mRNA vaccines (miocarditus in younger men/boys), and yet boosters have been mandated by many schools and other orgaanizations that cater to these young very-low-risk demographics. Boosters haven't been shown to mitigate infection or transmission as far as I know. Similar nonsensical masking policies are mandated despite the data not being adequate to justify them in many cases. So while I think it's great to criticize the anti-vaxxers who dismissed the original vaccines for no good reason, it's equally important to note those on the other side who push boosters and masking polices that aren't justified by strong data, and in many cases may be detrimental. It's also important to note, as Alan suggested in this video, that those on the political left, progressives, tend to vilify their members if they dare to come out with a nuanced message in this regard. All vaccines, boosters, masking of toddlers, etc., must all be seen as absolutely necessary despite lack of data, or you are not considered to be a "true member of the tribe" so to speak.
2:36:33 Veganism & Ethics: I came to veganism because, as a bachelor who lives alone, I find it more convenient. I also think it is good for the environment, but that was a secondary reason. I am far less convinced about the idea of reducing suffering. Sardines were the last animal I ate before going full vegan. Am I doing the sardines a favour? I am not convinced. Is the life of a sardine really so much more enjoyable if it dies from old age and suffering than if it gets caught and I eat it? I am not convinced.
Where’s the “proof”? I see a lot of shaming and dismissing, appeals to authority and consensus, but almost no actual reasoning or justification for your guys’ thinking here.
Regarding ethics, part of the solution or part of the problem? As long as you can do better, why stop? A bit is great, but more is better, obviously. As long as it's all balanced so it doesn't swing to any extreme that results in something even worse. Has nothing to do with religion, just common sense. You do the best you can do while keeping your balance.
