Paul Saladino, the most vociferous carnivore, bonks

I've been wondering how long it would be before prominent "carnivores" began "bonking" on the diet.

The complete elimination of one of the three macros never made sense to me. They are there for a reason...biological evolution does not make mistakes of that magnitude.

We are the only primate with a dual fuel system (carbs and fats), and that is for a reason too...it gives us access to a broader range of calories, and the ability to survive in a broader range of climates.

But both systems are available to us, we can be carb adapted or fat adapted. How well one does with either will depend mostly on correct knowledge and persistence.

I am a plant based carb burner myself, and I do have one reservation about animal based fat-adapted diets, and that is heart disease. There is no Ornish and no Esselstyn in the paleo/carnivore universe as yet, and I doubt one will emerge. For that to happen a credentialed research team would have to produce a study of advanced CVD patients, the unfortunates on death's door, and reverse the condition completely with nothing but a change to a high-fat animal based diet. 

And the corollaries to that are all the other chronic conditions produced by bad diets, and longevity. I've run across many centenarians in my studies on the cause of health, but I can't recall any of them being animal based.

Saladino was forced to listen to his body and adapt by adding carbohydrates back into his approach. I respect him for following the evidence when confronted to it biologically, and I respect him further for going public with it despite being publicly adamant that "carbs are bad".

Kudos to Paul Saladino. Here's a video clip where he recants his previous position, and some of the details of why, and how it changed him for the better.

https://youtu.be/Iz5PymNgnSY?si=XEIDZunykSFbBnnR

Is the best "vaccine" naturally induced?

One of the two primary "natural hygiene" principles is to discontinue putting toxins into the body to the extent possible. Not doing so might be argued to be the primary cause of chronic diseases and early death. 

The quality of the fuel we put into our bodies is paramount.

The other primary principle is to eat whole unprocessed foods that have a high nutrient to calorie ratio. Some of that is also achieved simply by following principle number one, but there is an active part also that involves proactively looking for the best whole unprocessed foods available.

So one of the keys to understanding what toxins are, is they are not food. Or should I say real food, because too much of the so-called food on offer these days is "junk", and full of toxins. Food does not damage us, it nourishes us and gives us energy.

So we might say anything that is not food is actually a toxin, to one degree or the other. Even "benign" calories take up valuable space in our body and digestive system that could be used productively for the processing of real nutrition. And pharmaceutical drugs, which are "not food", are toxic to one degree or other, and many are highly toxic.

Truly healthy people rarely need pharmaceuticals right up to death. Note I did not say "never", we must learn to use modern medicine intelligently. Otherwise we are "used" by the pharma industry as a source of profit, and pharma generates more profit than any industry to this point in history. And their business model depends to one extent or other on increasing levels of disease in the population.

And if that is not an absurdity, I don't know what is.

In this video Dr John Campbell speaks about lengthy interviews he conducted with the researcher and MD Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRCPA, FRCPath, FMedSci. In the video linked below he summarizes that to about 16 minutes in duration, and in my humble opinion, worth your time.

The title of the video is "Cancer Reactivation".

https://youtu.be/Bykt4eyiDPc?si=7dh6jDzyPoaZVRMG