this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2026
118 points (90.4% liked)

Friendly Carnivore

110 readers
1 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


Meta

Carnivore Resource List

If you need to block this community and the UI won't let you, go to settings -> blocks you can add it.

[Meta] Moderation Policy for Niche Communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

this is the way - being healthy is the laziest default!

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Are herbs and spices bad for you? What do you mean?

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, they're awesome. People in this thread trying to convince themselves the unhealthy part of KFC is the proprietary flavor blend 🤣🤣🤣

[–] xep@discuss.online 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

The unhealthy part of KFC is the breading and the industrially refined seed oils. The spices are negligible if you look at the amounts used.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

You can't look at the amounts used, it's a proprietary seasoning blend

[–] xep@discuss.online 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Yes, but since they're only used in small amounts to flavour food it's not a big deal compared to consuming large amounts of plant matter for other purposes.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The health benefits of herbs and spices are attributed to their active chemicals, including antioxidants, anti-inflammatory agents, antibacterials, and others. Thus, incorporating herbs and spices into food products offers substantial advantages in terms of functionality and provides medicinal and nutritional benefits.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756464625002245

What is your claim based on? Do you have any sources or additional reading you could point me to? I found a paper about contaminated spices, but that doesn't seem like what you're talking about.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Most of the toxins listed on that page are not related to herbs and spices, aren't in the parts of plants that are eaten, or are destroyed by cooking the food. Do you have anything a little more definitive than "some parts of some plants can be toxic"?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you have anything a little more definitive than “some parts of some plants can be toxic”?

Nope, your in the zero carb community - We acknowledge some people can eat some plants, but not all people can eat all plants. Obviously people exist who are allergic to some spices and herbs... So the same principle applies, carnivore's can use spices if they tolerate them, but not all people can tolerate them. Every plant you eat is a inflammatory burden on the body, for a healthy person its fine... but many people are not healthy.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Here we provide an overview of how different culinary herbs and spices exert anti-inflammatory activities and the extent to which they activate PPAR α and PPAR γ, inhibit the activation of NF-κB, and enhance expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Spices can play essential roles as anti-inflammatory agents in our diet, acting as pan PPAR activators and improving insulin sensitivity, counteracting dyslipidaemia and weight gain. The effects of chronic inflammation caused by obesity are counteracted and, consequently, the progression of diseases associated with chronic inflammation slowed.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378512211004385

What do you mean plants are an inflammatory burden on the body? What is that based on?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

That is the third paper you have dropped in this conversation; Have you read it cover to cover and are willing to discuss it in detail both the methods, contexts, math, and outcomes? Or is it just a conversational flourish?

What do you mean plants are an inflammatory burden on the body? What is that based on?

All food actually causes a inflammatory response, eating is a burden. Plants by virtue of being immobile have mostly resorted to chemical warfare to keep animals from eating them. A good example is capsaicin - humans like it as a spice, but its a self defense compound. It DOES create a obvious response in humans.

If you want a good introduction to some of the issues Gundry has a nice lecture - https://discuss.online/post/41144731

I had posted my notes on a few papers on lectins directly, but the old lemmy hosts going down makes them hard to find at the moment. I could dig the paper out of my pile if your interested.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I was hoping by providing sources that directly contradict the things you say, you might feel obligated to share some kind of source for why you think these things.

All food actually causes a inflammatory response, eating is a burden.

This directly contradicts several of the papers I quoted saying many herbs and spices have anti-inflammatory properties. Is there some kind of deeper truth you're pulling from? What do you know that tells you "eating is a burden," and where did you learn about it?

The lecture from Gundry relies heavily on "leaky gut syndrome," which

Leaky gut syndrome is a condition widely popularized in the lay literature, although it is not currently accepted as a formal medical diagnosis.

I'm not sure I'd really want to base my world view on. Especially since he seems to work for a "specialty lab testing" company and the NIH continues to say

The diagnosis of leaky gut syndrome is problematic. Although patients are frequently informed that the diagnosis can be readily made using results from blood work or stool studies, no validated test currently exists to make this diagnosis. Patients report a variety of myths about the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of leaky gut syndrome, which can cause alarm and can frequently lead to expensive, unnecessary tests and unproven, sometimes dangerous treatments.

It seems like he might have a vested interest in selling people on the validity of leaky gut syndrome and selling you tests. Especially when he gives little sales pitch telling you at 32:02 that if you get 4 tests, they give you a food sensitivity panel for free.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I was hoping by providing sources that directly contradict the things you say,

If you haven't read your own sources, and are not willing to discuss them in detail, you are not engaging in good faith. It becomes a asymmetric time waster for a good faith discussion. Someone reads your paper, responds to it, and you drop 5 more without engaging in the first paper in depth. I'm not saying you would do that, but it is the common pattern, which is why i have stopped reading people's papers unless they are willing to engage in good faith discussions. Also, each of your quotes from papers is the author's opinions rather then the data from the paper.

contradicts several of the papers I quoted

Quoted, but you have admitted by omission you have not read.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

each of your quotes from papers is the author’s opinions rather then the data from the paper.

Here we provide an overview of how different culinary herbs and spices exert anti-inflammatory activities and the extent to which they activate PPAR α and PPAR γ, inhibit the activation of NF-κB, and enhance expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Spices can play essential roles as anti-inflammatory agents in our diet, acting as pan PPAR activators and improving insulin sensitivity, counteracting dyslipidaemia and weight gain. The effects of chronic inflammation caused by obesity are counteracted and, consequently, the progression of diseases associated with chronic inflammation slowed.

Does this really just seem like an "opinion" to you? Just how technical do you want to get when we're still trying to establish the baseline of "herbs and spices are bad for you"?

Anti-inflammatory response

To control inflammation and the balance between an inflammatory and normal state, anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-4, IL-10, IL-13, IFN-α, and transforming growth factor, are released by macrophages [8]. The transcription factor NF-κB regulates the expression of various genes encoding pro-inflammatory cytokines, adhesion molecules, chemokines, growth factors, and chemoattractants such as MCP-1, COX-2, and iNOS. Thus, through NF-κB the inflammatory response can be down-regulated

Is this really more readable and better for a conversation than the abstract? It also doesn't help that I don't have access to the full article and don't expect anyone else to pay for it either.

Quoted, but you have admitted by omission you have not read.

Great, so what body of research have you thoroughly read that lead you to believe all plants are toxic (or at least unhealthy) and you should cut them out of your diet as much as possible? That's what I've been asking for from the beginning, but so far all you've given me was a very general WHO article about how toxins exist in plants and an hour long recorded zoom lecture trying to sell you medical tests.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Does this really just seem like an “opinion” to you? Just how technical do you want to get

I will read any paper you have read cover to cover and are willing to discuss in depth. Just quoting opinion isn't enough for a good faith discussion.

when we’re still trying to establish the baseline of “herbs and spices are bad for you”?

My exact opinion, which you can see upthread - Some people can tolerate some plants, but not all people can tolerate all plants. Herbs and spices play inside of most people's inflammation budget and are fine, but a unhealthy person may not be able to tolerate them.

Is this really more readable and better for a conversation than the abstract? It also doesn’t help that I don’t have access to the full article and don’t expect anyone else to pay for it either.

Did you read the paper in full, and are you willing to discuss it in detail? If not, quoting it doesn't change the level of asymmetric engagement your trying to tarpit the discussion with.

Great, so what body of research have you thoroughly read that lead you to believe all plants are toxic (or at least unhealthy) and you should cut them out of your diet as much as possible? That’s what I’ve been asking for from the beginning, but so far all you’ve given me was a very general WHO article about how toxins exist in plants and an hour long recorded zoom lecture trying to sell you medical tests.

https://discuss.online/post/44161218

https://discuss.online/post/25952420

https://discuss.online/post/25791954

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

https://discuss.online/post/44161218

https://discuss.online/post/25952420

https://discuss.online/post/25791954

It becomes a asymmetric time waster for a good faith discussion. Someone reads your paper, responds to it, and you drop 5 more without engaging in the first paper in depth. I’m not saying you would do that, but it is the common pattern, which is why i have stopped reading people’s papers unless they are willing to engage in good faith discussions.

Alright, so where do you want to start? Point me to one, instead of your personal library and board game collection.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You asked what I based my current opinions on, so I gave you the literature, and then you imply i'm wasting your time by citing things I haven't read - that isn't very nice of you.

If your going to read one book - Ketogenic - The science of therapeutic carbohydrate restriction in health. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2019-0-03604-7 Full Book is available on the normal book sharing websites. It doesn't say anything about herbs and spices, but it is far and away the most important and impactful book i own.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

You asked what I based my current opinions on, so I gave you the literature, and then you imply i'm wasting your time by citing things I haven't read - that isn't very nice of you.

You must be a Republican politician with that level of gaslighting and projection, that's literally what you've been doing to them the entire time, when they clearly read and were willing to discuss everything posted by both of you. That isn't very nice of you.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

People have meat allergies too though, so by your logic, there's no healthy food.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you can tolerate a food, you can eat it. It's not crime pointing out food intolerance is a factor in dietary selection.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

I didn't accuse you of a crime, just faulty reasoning and spurious dietary advice. "Some plants aren't edible or have to be cooked first and some people are allergic to some plants sometimes, so it's objectively healthier not to eat any plant ever." That math just ain't mathin' homie 🤷‍♂️

[–] xep@discuss.online -3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It is based on logic and facts.

  • Premise 1: All plants contain toxins.
  • Premise 2: There is no nutrition in plants that cannot be obtained by other means.
  • Conclusion: Don't eat plants.

I see from your comment thread with Jet that you are likely here to sea-lion and not have good faith discussion. If you'd like to actually talk about why we live this way, cite studies that you personally have read that can prove cause and effect. If they cannot, then it would help us greatly if you try to meet the Bradford-Hill criteria.

If you wish to make claims about the properties of plants, such as

toxins aren't in parts of the plants that are eaten

toxins are destroyed by cooking the food

Please provide details about the toxin, where in the plant it is found, its mechanism of action, safe dosage, and how much is destroyed by application of heat.

I won't be responding any further unless you meet these conditions. If you are genuinely curious, then I encourage you to peruse the posts in this community and its sister community, c/ketogenic.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/natural-toxins-in-food

I'm sure you'll accept this as a source since you're directly asking about my responses for it, so we can just go over the page together if that makes you feel better. This page from the WHO describes 8 types of toxins found in plants, and we can just go over them one at a time.

Aquatic Biotoxins

Toxins formed by algae in the ocean and fresh water are called algal toxins.

Algae is generally not food, and even more generally not considered an herb or spice. Interestingly, "Shellfish such as mussels, scallops and oysters are more likely to contain these toxins than fish," so I hope your plant-free diet also avoids most forms of sea-food, as they can contain these kinds of toxins.

Cyanogenic glycosides

Cyanogenic glycosides are phytotoxins (toxic chemicals produced by plants) which occur in at least 2000 plant species, of which a number of species are used as food in some areas of the world. Cassava, sorghum, stone fruits, bamboo roots and almonds are especially important foods containing cyanogenic glycosides.

This is important, but I'm pretty sure the examples given here aren't herbs and spices again.

Furocoumarins

These toxins are present in many plants such as parsnips (closely related to carrots and parsley), celery roots, citrus plants (lemon, lime, grapefruit, bergamot) and some medicinal plants.

Once again, not really herbs or spices.

Lectins

Many types of beans contain toxins called lectins, and kidney beans have the highest concentrations – especially red kidney beans. As few as 4 or 5 raw beans can cause severe stomachache, vomiting and diarrhoea. Lectins are destroyed when the dried beans are soaked for at least 12 hours and then boiled vigorously for at least 10 minutes in water.

Only a warning about lectins in beans, and I'm explicitly told that they're destroyed by cooking.

Mycotoxins

Mycotoxins are naturally occurring toxic compounds produced by certain types of moulds. Moulds that can produce mycotoxins grow on numerous foodstuffs such as cereals, dried fruits, nuts and spices.

Here we have another concern for plants, but I'm pretty sure moldy food is a problem no matter what kind of food you start with.

Solanines and chaconine

All solanacea plants, which include tomatoes, potatoes, and eggplants, contain natural toxins called solanines and chaconine (which are glycoalkaloids). While levels are generally low, higher concentrations are found in potato sprouts and bitter-tasting peel and green parts, as well as in green tomatoes.

Not in herbs and spices, and the higher concentrations you might actually be worried about are parts of the plant you don't eat.

Poisonous mushrooms

Need I say more? Mushrooms can be very dangerous, but they aren't actually plants.

Pyrrolizidine alkaloids

Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids (PAs) are toxins produced by an estimated 600 plant species. The main plant sources are the families Boraginaceae, Asteraceae and Fabaceae. Many of these are weeds that can grow in fields and contaminate food crops.

Again, not in the plants you would usually eat.

And so now I've gone over all the types of toxins found in plants provided by jet, and I'm sure you can agree that it doesn't say a lot about herbs and spices being inherently unhealthy. All I can ask now is for some kind of basis for your belief that all plants contain toxins, and how whatever standard you're using to come to that conclusion wouldn't also apply to meat or mushrooms or whatever else you're trying to eat.

[–] psud@aussie.zone -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Oh what a long list of poisons. So now you have shown that, yes, plants have ample methods of poisoning you, how do you propose to detoxify them? Most people can detoxify most of the common plant foods, but it's metabolically expensive.

But if you can afford to do so, why not just avoid all the poisons by only animals?

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It kinda sounds like you didn't read their comment at all.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

If I were to follow your precedent, my response to that link would just be: oh what a delicious herb!

Since I'm not you, I actually read what you posted, and it's pretty inconclusive. It's not an actual study, just a research compilation, so none of the methodologies or data sets are presented here, which makes verifying the claims or their relevance to human experience impossible. It doesn't define "chronic or high dose" usage, which is the only populations it's concerned with regarding possible toxicity. The thesis of the conclusion is: "More research is recommended." How damning. I like this part too: "Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) contains alkaloids, phenolic acids, saponins, tannins, diterpenes, flavonoids, and essential oils and has"antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, anticancer, neuroprotective, cardioprotective, and hepatoprotective effects", emphasis is my own. Sounds like the benefits vastly outweigh the potential side effects.

But my favorite part, though it's technically unrelated to the topic at hand, tells me a lot about the authors of this paper: "the authors used ChatGPT and Quillbot to rephrase to reduce plagiarism" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 emphasis is my own again lol

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

I'm hallucinating this entire thread, right? This conversation cannot possibly be happening in real life. "Herbs are unhealthy." I hit my head at some point, and this is some kind of fever dream.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

small amounts to flavour food it’s not a big deal

for most people, there are some people who need to cut out even spices before lingering issues recover. Not trying to be pedantic, but spices are playing inside the budget of most people's inflammation tolerance levels - which we should be up front about.

[–] MrMeowMeow@mander.xyz 5 points 3 weeks ago

This random selection of words makes no sense at all