this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
2 points (100.0% liked)

Friendly Carnivore

65 readers
9 users here now

Carnivore

The ultimate, zero carb, elimination diet

Meat Heals.

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

Keep being AWESOME

We welcome engaged, polite, and logical debates and questions of any type


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
  6. No LLM generated posts . Don't represent machine output as your own, and don't use machines to burn human response time.

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


Resource Post!- Papers - Books - Channels

founded 4 weeks ago
MODERATORS
2
Why can't we be friends? (hackertalks.com)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by jet@hackertalks.com to c/carnivore@dubvee.org
 

This community gets lots of negative attention, and for a very vocal group of people it becomes a focus of animosity

Carnivore is a tool - the people using this tool want to be healthy

Opportunities for common causes:

    1. Whole foods - Single Ingredient foods - No Processed Foods

The Zero carb community as a whole focuses on single ingredient foods, without any processing.

    1. Sustainably produced

We all live on spaceship earth, and that system needs to be maintained for our future and our children's future. Any solution to health needs to be sustainable ecologically. That means using natures own biocycles and minimizing the need for industrial chemicals. i.e. crop rotation rather then mono-cropping, using ruminants to regenerate top soil

    1. Locally sourced foods

Moving a special product around the globe via airplanes or ocean vessel simply is a waste of energy, time, and logistics. This should be minimized in the food supply, and any solution to health and sustainability shouldn't use any imported food or ingredients. Food independence is critical for every community.

    1. Ethically raised animals

Carnivores are aware that they are part of a complex biocycle that involves many levels of life and nature interacting. Sadly this means animals will die for food production (this is unavoidable regardless of food choice). Animals that live as close to their natural biocycle as possible are the healthiest for the food supply. Good carnivores who can afford it will try to find sources of ethically raised and harvested meat - animals that are eating their natural diet in as close to their natural environment as possible.

Industrial farming is bad, and needs reform.

    1. Reduction of sugars in the diet

By virtue of being zero carb Carnivores avoid dietary sugars, but we do recognize how dangerous fructose and sucrose is in the general population (remember most of us are here to be healthy). Many Carnivores recognize the benefits of ketogenic and low carb metabolism.

    1. Progress not Perfection

For the most part the zero carb people I've met are very welcoming, non-judgmental, and don't prosecute people for not being perfect. I think we all have histories of struggling, and the understanding and empathy we can provide is the best thing we can do for each other (including our non-zero-carb friends).

    1. The need for self-experimentation

Seeing is believing, encouraging people to try their different theories and diets and seeing their own results is the only way to resolve "debates". Whatever the "philosophy" is it should be tested, and if its not working it needs debugging, or given up on.

    1. Avoiding industrial processed oils

Along the philosophy of avoiding processed foods, and foods from plants, we have double strikes against most of the industrial seed oils. While there is open debate and unclear literature on the harm of these oils, there is almost no downside to removing them from a diet, and it just becomes another uncontrolled variable that could be impacting people's results. This is just KISS

    1. Monitor your progress, only you are responsible for you

Everyone should record their biometrics periodically, especially if they are experimenting with a diet. I think Carnivore's by virtue of trying to be healthy are very likely to have a record of their biometrics going back years. This helps in the self-experimentation of the dietary adventure. In addition to the normal metrics

  • height
  • weight
  • muscle mass
  • blood pressure
  • resting heart rate
  • lipid panels
  • hba1c

people should include a daily feeling journal, how much energy they had, any small aches or issues, just so they can look back and see their mood changing over time and make connections with diet.


While we may not agree on most things, or even many things, there should be some philosophical overlap so that our communities could be on nodding terms with each other.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] amzd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good carnivores who can afford it will try to find sources of ethically raised and harvested meat

How do you ethically “harvest” meat? And why are you using a plant term for this?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't know what the plant term is here, harvested?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/harvest

The product or result of any exertion or course of action; reward or consequences.

I've just generally seen harvest as the results of labor or a process. I was using harvested here as a indirect term to speak of the slaughter of the animal.

Ethical Meat: Raised in as near its natural environment as possible, on its natural diet, geographically local to the consumer.

Ethical Harvesting: As human as possible, with as little stress as possible, as quick as possible.

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can you describe how you humanely kill an animal?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/Humane-Slaughter-Guidelines-2024.pdf

These Guidelines acknowledge that a humane approach to the slaughter of any animal is warranted, justifiable, and expected by society. The overall goal should be to minimize or eliminate anxiety, pain, and distress prior to loss of consciousness.

the overall goal of humane slaughter should be to observe the best possible standards, practices, and techniques of animal welfare, including to minimize, as much as possible, injury, anxiety, pain, and distress prior to loss of consciousness, resulting in a swift end.17,18 Therefore, both the induction of unconsciousness and handling prior to slaughter must be considered.

If you go to page 52 you can see the options for cattle dispatch in technical detail.

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I meant like the steps. Would you use a knife or a gun or?

The text you quote seems to misuse “humane” which means showing compassion. How do you compassionately kill an animal that doesn’t want to die? Is there some specific step that makes it compassionate? Or do you only kill the ones that are sick and dying?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Page 52 has all the steps you want in extreme detail.

Humane is terminating the animal with a minimization of anxiety, fear, and pain while expediting unconsciousness as quickly as possible. If you disagree on the definition of humane then I don't think our conversation is going to be very productive.

Within the context of a animal being harvested, the best way to conduct the slaughter would be.... whatever you want to call that.

Or if you prefer something less food based, if you come upon a animal in pain on the side of the road, the best way to ease its passing, the humane way.

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Page 52 has all the steps you want in extreme detail.

I was asking what you personally think. (Repeatedly)

Linking to guidelines is such an “industry spokesperson” way of talking. I was hoping to have a bit more friendly/informal conversation.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Personally? To humanely terminate a cow, I'd use a captive bolt. Quick, low error rate.

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Cows don’t die to a captive bolt, they usually don’t even lose consciousness from it. It’s basically like a lobotomy, it makes them less likely to resist and kick while being strung up.

How much time from knowing they are going to die to actually losing consciousness would you think is quick enough to be considered humane?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Cows don’t die to a captive bolt, they usually don’t even lose consciousness from it. It’s basically like a lobotomy, it makes them less likely to resist and kick while being strung up.

The document I have given you goes into detail of the process and even how fast captive bolts produce unconsciousness. They go into the theory of both mind and conceptualizing pain. They go into studies of ekgs, cortisol response, and other measures to actually get down to a science of what humane dispatch looks like.

They make a distinction that decapitation isn't humane because of those measurements meaning there is experienced pain.

I suggest you read the document.

Regardless, what is the best method of dispatch, in your opinion, that keeps the meat usable?

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The document

Okay let me rephrase again. In your opinion how much time from knowing they are going to die to actually losing consciousness would you think is quick enough to be considered humane?

Regardless, what is the best method of [slaughter]

Since eating animals is optional during all stages of our life (say all major dietician organizations), I think that we have no justification to take someone’s life. So the best method of slaughter is none. Animals are here with us not for us.

that keeps the meat usable?

I believe the best use of flesh is when it makes up a living being.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

We disagree on the fundamental premise. If you see an animal on the side of the road in pain, do you leave it be? Or do you help it exit

In the animal-based food community, we're following a program that is removing plant foods, because of the associated problems they have, specifically plant steriles, lectins, other inflammatory compounds.

The ketogenic community also has significant problems with the dietetics philosophical approach. Basically it is a philosophy, it is not based in hard science, and that's the core problem. The ketogenic community is generating hard science showing that the previous dietetic beliefs do not lead to the outcomes people are looking for

I'm happy to continue this discussion with you, but only in the context where we both work towards a more humane way to process meat.

If your philosophy is that you don't eat meat, I respect that, you're making a major lifestyle choice based on a philosophy. That's commendable. However, for health reasons I've made a different choice. And I ask that you respect that and help me be the best version of myself I can be in that context.

If you're trying to use the Socratic method to persuade me to your viewpoint, you have to start with a point of common agreement. And we haven't established that

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We disagree on the fundamental premise. If you see an animal on the side of the road in pain, do you leave it be?

I don’t think we disagree on that point.

[health related arguments]

I don’t think we’ll agree here nor do I think it’s fruitful to argue it because in my environment I’ve heard that saturated fat is the devil and the main cause for heart decease which is the second most prominent cause of death only trumped by cancer, while you are stating it as a healthy thing. I don’t have the time to research this nor do I think health is a valid justification for harming animals.

you have to start with a point of common agreement.

I don’t think so for the Socratic method but for making friends, which is what this post is about, that makes sense. From your expression of wanting a more humane way to slaughter, and desire to euthanize a suffering animal I am assuming we can find common grounds in that direction.

Would you agree that animals can suffer and are you against animal abuse?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 day ago

I don’t think we’ll agree here nor do I think it’s fruitful to argue it because in my environment I’ve heard that saturated fat is the devil and the main cause for heart decease which is the second most prominent cause of death only trumped by cancer, while you are stating it as a healthy thing. I don’t have the time to research this nor do I think health is a valid justification for harming animals.

I don't trust things I hear either. Here is a excellent overview of the literature - https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/saturated-fat#evidence-to-date I highly encourage you to read the actual journal articles, I'll do a journal club with you. But TLDR CVD is rooted in inflammation and persistently elevated insulin levels.

Cancer is a interesting one too! While the mechanisms of cancer are still unclear, it is strongly rooted in a inflammatory injury causing mitochondrial dysfunction. Here is a post on cancer as a metabolic disease, I link the journals directly. https://hackertalks.com/post/8609461 TLDR - The metabolic theory of cancer is based on cancer cells being UNABLE to metabolize fat, and only able to consume glucose and glutamine.

Now taking this together, would insulin sensitivity in a person make them less likely to get cancer, and if they do get cancer, better able to fight off the cancer? I think so, at least the balance of evidence points in that direction.

From your expression of wanting a more humane way to slaughter, and desire to euthanize a suffering animal I am assuming we can find common grounds in that direction.

Great, if you have recommendations on how I can source best practice, least harm, meat - please let me know.

Would you agree that animals can suffer and are you against animal abuse?

Yes, but my premise is that ABF is critical and necessary for my personal health journey and not optional. Given that I must consume ABF what is the best way to do that?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Given the dearth of real nutritional science in the literature - I would stereotype carnivores in the "Ok Prove it" camp... Whatever the theory is, lets collect some data and see if it works.

Personally I know I'm wrong! I just don't which part of my philosophy is wrong, or which nuance is missing. I'm open to change, I'm open to new data, I'm open to experiments. I'm trying to be a lifelong scientist. Trust... but verify

Carnivores are not some degenerate food addicts. Sure steak tastes good, but its not addictive. People don't go out at 3am to find a steak, but they do that for sugar.