At least once, everyone should see how their body operates with as few confounding variables as possible. Your baseline performance, feeling, mood, energy - is very valuable to know.
Elimination Diet - Remove as many variables from your total intake as possible. Ideally choose a single bioavailable food prepared very cleanly for 30 days.
This is important because lots of people don’t know what they have normalized as “getting older”, or “I’ve always had that”, or “I’m just inflamed”. Skin conditions, hair issues, attention, clarity, are often reported to resolve on these type of protocols.
The most famous elimination diet demonstration was with Celiac disease during WWII, wheat/bread shortages created a accidental elimination diet in Denmark and established the link between wheat protein and Celiac.
Metabolism touches every part of the body, including the brain. Metabolism is driven by diet. Food literarily affects every part of our lives.
I think people should be aware this is a very useful tool, and if there is some persistent or difficult to nail down issue - why not try it?
elimination options
Omnivore options - eggs, red meat are good options. Ground meat has higher histamine levels, so it would confound the results.
Pescatarian - fish are ok, but they are not biocomplete, but that shouldn’t be a problem for 30 days. The “sardine fast” is a type of elimination diet protocol.
Plant Based - low fodmap diets probably eliminate the most variables, but I’m not very well read on the options
Fasting - DO NOT DO LONG FASTS WITHOUT MEDICAL SUPERVISION. Probably the the most extreme option, total elimination, not exactly your base line, but if something was bothering you in your food you would at least notice it. REFEEDING SYNDROME is a real thing, and needs to be planned for when ending the fast.
Regardless, be aware of confounders - cooking oils and fats can change also be triggers, so be deliberate in your choice. Spices, seasonings, rubs, “electrolyte mixes”, marinades introduce more variables.
My Biases
I run the ketogenic and zero carb carnivore (Which is just a elimination diet I decided to live with) communities, I’m all in on that metabolic lifestyle. However, elimination protocols don’t have to aligned with my biases to be effective. Even doing something as simple as 30 days without processed foods can be helpful to know for someone.
Judy Cho wrote a great eliminate diet protocol book The Carnivore Cure Which is just eating red meat for 30 days and mapping out symptoms, mood, feelings. Plus guidance on starting, and reintroducing foods to nail down triggers. But, there are many different protocols out there, you can find one that fits your requirements.
You must log in or # to comment.
Context for those reading this:
Jet (the OP) adheres to and advocates a deeply unhealthy and pseudoscientific “carnivore diet”.
Absolutely nobody should be taking their advice when it comes to nutritional health.
There is no clinical evidence that the carnivore diet provides any health benefits. Dietitians dismiss the carnivore diet as an extreme fad diet, which has attracted criticism from dietitians and physicians as being potentially dangerous to health (see Meat § Health effects).
It also raises levels of LDL cholesterol, which increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Carnivore diets exclude fruits and vegetables which supply micronutrients. They are also low in dietary fiber, possibly causing constipation. A carnivore diet high in red meat increases the risks of colon cancer and gout. The high protein intake of a carnivore diet can lead to impaired kidney function.
They will tell you regardless that it has health benefits because they’ve deluded themselves into believing. This is who you’re getting health advice from if you choose to pursue this with no further reading into actual scientific/medical sources.
There has been a lot of weird MAHA adjacent bullshit getting posted here recently.
Like swimming in a creek of bullshit?
I don’t think you understood the point of an elimination diet. It’s not about what you eat but about what you stop eating.
If you stick to meat for 30 days and start feeling better, it’s not necessarily because meat is good for you - it’s because you stopped eating something else that your body was responding badly to. After 30 days you can start adding other foods back in one by one. If you suddenly notice a decline in how you feel, the last thing you added is the likely culprit.
It’s much easier to remove everything and reintroduce them one by one than to randomly cut out certain things to see if that makes any difference.
Everything in my comment was about their carnivore diet, not about an elimination diet – the lone exception being the last sentence advising not to start an elimination diet based on their advice without reading actual scientific/medical literature, as the OP is the opposite of a credible source for nutrition. (What I should’ve said too is to consult a doctor or a registered dietitian; people are generally not great at personally poring over primary or even secondary medical literature to decide what to do with their health, although the latter is far preferable if you do so.)
I.e., I was not making any claims to the healthfulness of an elimination diet; I have not done enough research to have any kind of credible opinion on it, which is why I chose not to express one except to advise that people actually research first (or, as appended in this comment, ask an actual expert).
Edit: I will express that the specific diet the OP proposes of “one bioavailable food for 30 days” is absurd on its face and obviously dangerous. Low FODMAP can potentially be quite good for e.g. lower GI problems, but I know little of any others.
UPDATE - I see the comments are being edited to change the narrative. I don’t know how you did it without the edit symbol showing up, that is a neat trick
I’m happy to have a collaborative discussion with you about the evidence you have on my personal eating pattern. If I recall correctly we have tried, but it just ended up with name calling, but I’m willing to try again.
As I remember our core schism is you find low hazard ratio epidemiology very compelling and use that to establish causal claims.
But in fairness you should disclose your nutritional bias as well, you promote a vegan eating pattern.
I’m happy to have a collaborative discussion with you
You’re happy to platform your wholly unsupported and completely insane worldview by making it look like something worth debating.
I don’t debate flat-Earthers.
I don’t debate anti-vaxxers.
I don’t debate “climate skeptics”.
And I don’t debate carnivore dieters. I’ve tried to correct disinformation you actively spread when I’ve seen it for the sake of others, and even that is reluctantly because too many people might not be familiar with the science and also endanger their own health. And I don’t mean “endanger” as in a plant-based diet where you have to be mildly conscientious about your intake to gain the health benefits and not end up deficient in e.g. B12; I mean that the diet inherently has no health benefits and is strictly dangerous to human health.
You’re happy to platform your wholly unsupported and completely insane worldview by making it look like something worth debating.
Let me summarize - A philosophical vegan is unwilling to discuss why their opinions on others might be biased and incorrect?
I’m happy to talk about each paper, where we can examine the data, the applicability of the evidence, and what inferences we can apply.
I mean that the diet inherently has no health benefits and is strictly dangerous to human health.
Please demonstrate that. Remember carnivore is zero carbohydrate, a ketogenic metabolism; As I remember the epidemiology you have previously used also applies to omnivore eating pattern’s - which 80%+ of the world follows.
So please make it clear, with actual evidence that is specific to zero carbohydrate carnivore, how it shows any more danger then omnivores?
Removed by mod
This is now just abuse. This is my official request that you disengage. Please don’t engage with me going forward.
At least it’s actually an unpopular opinion.
From a scientific perspective, elimination itself is a confounding factor since it doesn’t represent the body under conditions that are close to normal.
i.e. The body will react to the elimination and that reaction will vary over time, weakening the evidence gathered to determine whether the change is the result of the elimination or the absence of the item being eliminated. As these each cause different changes, they need to be considered separately.
The body will react to the elimination and that reaction will vary over time
Exactly. You can’t conclude what’s good in the long term with a 30 day trial. For instance a food might make a sick person feel good immediately but slowly damage their organs over years and kill them.
Hippocrates: “Before you heal someone, ask him if he’s willing to give up the things that make him sick.”
elimination itself is a confounding factor since it doesn’t represent the body under conditions that are close to normal.
Normal as in biologically optimal vs normal as in day to day environment - the perspective matters when discussing confounders. If you find yourself normalizing food making you sick… it would be good to know
weakening the evidence gathered to determine whether the change is the result of the elimination or the absence of the item being eliminated.
Are these not the same things? The entire idea is to remove things which could be a problem, and see how you are.
Eliminating everything from your diet except one thing tells you nearly nothing though. There’s a reason that experiments typically only examine a finite set of variables, it’s difficult or impossible to prove causality when there are 50 different possible causal factors.
If you suspect an allergy or other issue stemming from a single food, eliminate that food for a time period.
Everything you’re saying, especially trying to defend yourself via Hippocrates quote, is giving heavy fad diet vibes.
If you suspect an allergy or other issue stemming from a single food, eliminate that food for a time period.
That is a valid strategy, but it does take a long time. Remove one item, wait 4 weeks, repeat.
Everything you’re saying, especially trying to defend yourself via Hippocrates quote, is giving heavy fad diet vibes.
It’s only a 30 day suggestion.
My 30 day suggestion is to stop giving out dietary advice while not a dietician.
Or just stop with diet fads that people will laugh about next year.
And what are your credentials?
None, I’m just a dude, who loves to read about nutrition, and who has seen people get great results doing some form of elimination protocol from the most gradual of ‘no processed foods’ on up.
Got it.
I’ll listen to the people who have dedicated their lives to studying the science of stuff like this thanks
You haven’t even read up on the low FODMAP diet which is like the gold standard of elimination diets. You don’t have the first clue about what you’re supposedly trying to promote.
Brawndo has histamines! It’s what plants crave!
I’m aware of them, but they do have lots of inputs, they are structured to eliminate FODMAPs a type of carbohydate… there are other 30 day elimination protocols that are simpler and have less variables (i.e. removing all carbohydrates).
The reason I mentioned them at all is its a option for people who are plant based, since its impossible to eliminate all carbs on that eating pattern.
OP uses Pseudoscience!
Ground meat has higher histamine levels
How does grinding meat create histamines?
Grinding is a process where the inside of the meat becomes the outside of the meat, dramatically increasing the surface area, more surface area for pathogens to multiply over time. If you grind the beef and immediately cook it, then its really not a issue. However, most people buy pre-ground beef which sits around for awhile.
Histamine is a chemical, not an organism. It can’t “multiply over time.”
A WebMD article I found suggests that histamines can be higher in cured or fermented meat products (I’m guessing because they’re released by the bacteria involved in fermentation, or at least other chemical changes), but that’s not the same as just grinding the meat and waiting a couple of days to eat it.
Sorry, I probably used the wrong word, bacteria can produce histamines as one of their byproducts. More surface area exposed to the atmosphere creates more opportunities for histamine producing bacteria to produce histamines on the meats newly expanded surface.
But then you cook the food. Just stop.
Histamines are heat-stable, you can destroy the bacteria that created them, but not them. This is the same rational in why cooking rotten food doesn’t make it safe to eat.
You didn’t explain the histamines
The pathogens, the bacteria, can produce histamines, the more surface area exposed to air, the more opportunities for this bacteria to produce histamines on the meat.
Where do people get their science.
From their 🫏
No thanks.
Speaking of Jody Cho, she has many videos mentioning that elimination diets may not always get rid of all inflammation, because the cause of inflammation may also be in the environment.
There are videos on her channel about Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome possibly caused by mold in the environment. It’s not a medical diagnosis, but if there’s inflammation that won’t go away it might be worth looking into.
Judy Cho personally claims to be an expert in, and I quote:
- Autoimmune and Chronic Illness
- Chronic Infections (EBV, Vector-Borne Illness)
- Collaborative Care
- Endocrine System (Hormones, Thyroid)
- Environmental Toxins (CIRS, Mold, Endotoxins)
- Gastrointestinal System (and all Key Axes)
- Liver and Biliary System
- Immune and Lymphatic System
- Kidney and Urinary Tract
- Medication Timing, Protocols and Integration [suuure?]
- Mineral and Electrolyte Balance
- Nervous System (Psycho-Neuro-Immune Axis)
- Psychology, Motivation and Collaborative Care
Literally nobody is an actual expert in all of these fields simultaneously, and, as noted on that page, she advocates the completely pseudoscientific “carnivore diet”; in reality, she’s not an expert in any of them because she’s actively sabotaging every single one.
Why are we taking her as any kind of authority? I know “inflammation can be caused by environmental factors” isn’t groundbreaking, but then why are we citing her anyway?
Because she has a YouTube channel! Those are very hard to get!
Who TF gets medical advice from YouTube?
Right! A elimination diet may not resolve a issue, but if it helps, then there is something to keep investigating. For someone just trying to calibrate what their default is - it’s a good tool even if you can’t control all the variables with a super strict protocol or having a clean environment.
Sometimes you can accidentally do a mini-elimination. I know when I’ve done long business trips where I don’t have my comfort food and I just end up eating at one place (or convenience store) again and again… and my health incidentally improves; I wish I’d been more thoughtful when I was younger and used those events to examine the terrible things I was putting into my body.
