AMS

@winterknight Hey mate, When I do self-inquiry (just starting but have been meditating cpl years), I get quite a lot of energy sensations throughout my body and it starts to feel blissful like other meditation but then I am curious how the process of enlightenment actually happens. I have had a 5meo nondual experience before which was really intense and I feel the longer I meditate/self-inquire it starts to subtly bring it back. I am confused because some people say Self-realization is actually a pretty simple thing and it is not a mystical state, appearances don't change and without blissful emotions etc so I guess I am just wondering what the literal process is when it happens. Does a person initially realizing enlightenment feel that they have became this infinite conciousness I have experienced (maybe just less intense than tripping), permanently? is that what I am "looking" for? So in that sense is it somewhat mystical in comparison to this ordinary state of conciousness I have now? Or is it still pretty ordinary literally just without identifying with the self (which still makes it significant)? Also does it feel like death when it happens? Does it happen over a few seconds or minutes or...? Is there resistance while it happens? Sorry for the longer question and thanks heaps for any insight!

SOURCE: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions (U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY) You probably have heard that livestock practices is one of the biggest contributors to GHG emissions. This is straight up false. In the past unfair measuring methods have been used and big (but very flawed) claims were made which got international attention. They claimed that livestock production was doing more to harm the climate than all transportation modes combined!!! The claims were officially retracted but in a sense the damage was already done. Here you can read an article from 'greenhouse gas guru' Frank Mitloehner, one of the leading experts who originally pointed out this flaw to fellow scientists during a speech in 2010. Yet still to today there is so much propaganda pushed dramatizing the effect livestock production has on the environment (and also stating that meat causes ill health and should potentially be taxed, which is far from the truth and now becoming more and more known...hence popularity of low carb and less diets, including the booming carnivore diet). It really makes you wonder if it's in some's best interests to kick meat...hmmm and I don't mean for ethical or environmental reasons (rather further consolidation of world's food supply). Read his 2018 article about cows and climate change here, it's groundbreaking info that needs to be spread: https://theconversation.com/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate-94968 EDIT: The article mentions that the official GLOBAL livestock GHG emissions percentage is 14.5%, so it's definitely something, but keep in mind some third world countries have poor practices and not eating meat in first world countries won't make much of a difference at all yet it is still pushed hard. Another mindblowing statement taken from the article, if this is true, then just wow: "According to the FAO, as much as 70 percent of all agricultural land globally is range land that can only be utilized as grazing land for ruminant livestock."

I really don't mean to target you and be a dick here but just wanted to comment to spread awareness (for you and others). What is your plant-based diet like? Because if you are like the majority of vegans/plant-eaters supporting industrial agriculture then you are contributing to the death of many animals (through pesticides, harvesting processes and land being cleared/wetlands drained for irrigation) along with the suffering and starvation that comes with downsizing animal's natural habitats to make room for crop production... I have also heard child slave labor is a prominent thing in plant agriculture though I haven't researched this point yet. Also there is the blood cashew industry which forces political prisoners in vietnam to work for $3 a month for years straight which then exports to the US and other countries. Not sure where you live or what you eat but it's interesting to see there is more than meets the eye regardless. Oh and on the topic of ethics you could argue a pastured animal has a safer and more comfy life than if it was in the wild, regardless if you think it's wrong to be "exploited" by humans. In the wild, white-tailed deer fawn experience about a 50% death rate within the first 12 weeks of life. https://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/projects/deer/news/2018/a-million-ways-to-die They get torn apart by predators and eaten alive whereas I hear 96% of the live-born beef cattle make it past weaning (I see this stat from a meat advocate but not sure where he gets this official data from). Humans also have the ability to kill humanely, unlike any other predator of course. Factory-farming is of course an issue but that shouldn't strawman all meat-eating in with it, hunting is also a fantastic option! Though even though factory farming is pretty appalling the animals at least have a constant supply of food which is more than you can say for some wild animals (or humans for that matter) due to our effect on the environment. Some animal activists even want to ban hunting which would lead to some of these populations to become more overgrown which would worsen the issue and cause a lot of suffering. In terms of the environment you most probably get plants transported to you from other regions as well (transport is [on par] the highest contributor to GHG emissions and synthetic fossil fuel fertilisers is also significant which are used for industrial crops). Don't forget the other factors like electricity and water usage etc etc so you are by no means innocent either. Meat production is not overly taxing on the environment believe it or not (at least definitely not what some make it out to be), not in first world countries like the US at least where all animal agriculture, factory farming included, only accounts to 4%GHG (according to official government EPA data). Granted transport and some other factors along with the crops grown for them would bump up the number (plant agriculture is 4.7%, not sure if that includes fertilizers used but probs). Cattle is even lower with only 2-3% (and they only get grain finished...and not all of them, which many don't realize). Pastured cattle can actually be very good for the environment (not to mention ethical) by sequestering carbon from the atmosphere and restoring the soil (whereas synthetic crop fertilizer kills the soil). The methane emissions factor is also inconclusive and I have seen some data claiming that emissions from livestock has no detectable effect on the environment but there is a debate on that. But yeah if you live in a country outside of the US then of course the data will be different, though other first world countries would have similar practices I would imagine, and they have been significantly getting better and better over the years. Going vegan in the US has a very insignificant effect on global GHG emissions (0.36%, with US emissions @ 2.6%) but may lead to malnourishment (for some at least, my opinion most long term). It won't have any effect on what they are doing in Brazil for example with clearing the rainforest. I hear this is due to poor and corrupt systems set in place. it's way too simplistically minded to make the claims that a lot of plant-based people make in terms of how innocent they are. I don't have all the answers but damn sure know it's not the right move abolishing meat (especially considering a lot of agricultural land is only suitable for livestock grazing). Not saying you are advocating for this btw just venting my thoughts.

I've been somewhat following VP and I think his major problem is that he didn't give strict carnivore a long enough crack before he started adding in plants. He complains about his colon and attempts hectic fasts etc but I think what he best could have done is just stick out carnivore for some months or so more (carni serves as a basic fast anyway because you are abstaining from plant toxins and at least in this case you have fuel to power the healing). The thing is, on my carnivore group, certain cases (including mine) need much more time to heal completely and some will even need to go just beef and water (when usually ZC means any food from the animal kingdom with the logic being the antinutrients, high glucose intake and fiber from plants being problematic for some but also in certain meats histamines being a factor for an extra sensitive gut). Some cases on there have taken years for complete healing (one lady took 5 years of meat and water to cure lyme disease). A lot notice significant improvements in a month or two however. But yeah who knows, maybe there are people who really should be eating near strictly carnivorously due to their genetics. I would think more likely their baseline of health has something to do with it and that eventually they would be able to add back in at least some plants. I also know a lot of people in the ZC community don't add back any plants because there are certain benefits to eating meat only such as killing sugar cravings once and for all because your taste buds change completely, they are also under the impression that they are not missing out on any health benefits from missing plants in their diet. Others can include some plants, whatever they tolerate but still generally eat ketogenic. As you said the carni movement is pretty new in the mainstream and I think it is ideal for sick people (or anyone curious, such as athletes). I guess if OP really is hesitant to eat all meat (because it is perceived pretty crazy in today's world and could come with certain ethical issues for some, although I feel a deeper look into it can actually even somewhat level the playing field on this factor even) then they should try a whole foods paleo like diet (I think that is ideal for most, or even better keto...and maybe for longer if he already tried it though that is probably a good sign that he may need to go full carnivore if he didn't get the full benefits he hoped for, this was also my progression). Personally I think it's a mistake turning vegan/vegetarian because really there is a lot of evidence (such as the carni movement) piling up showing the health benefits of meat at the moment and evidence showing vegan/vegetarian diets not being great for some. I think certain ailments are sometimes corrected on veg diets because they are more regimented in general but not great long term (for most). That's how I see it at least.

Imo you should put your health first (this is how you can do the most good in the world) but even with your concern about the environment, you could source your meat sustainably and ethically. A lot of the arguments about meat's ill effects on the environment are talking about either factory farming or third world livestock practices.

I don't know about schizoaffective disorder but this carnivore veteran (who has eaten that way for 7 years or so but only initially wanted to try it for 3 weeks) had major improvements in her bipolar. https://www.meandmydiabetes.com/2017/05/20/amber-ohearn-carnivore-health/ She quickly dropped all meds and cured a 20 year long depression. She came from a history of low carb and keto dieting but still didn't get the desired relief until she dropped all plants. Some people are very sensitive to the defense chemicals of certain plants and lots of people report significantly improving mood disorders on the zero carb diet (on the website http://meatheals.com/ the category of 'mental health/mood' has just about the highest entries of testimonies). I don't know how this can be said so certainly when there are many carnivore veterans out there eating only from the animal kingdom and in thriving health (some reversing serious diseases). It seems to be one of the quickest paths to resetting the gut but in saying that a lot of people still don't have much desire to add back any plants into their diets even after healing. So it seems to be both a solution to eat like that permanently and achieve health or to heal your gut with intent to add plants back in later... But in saying this you could try carnivore for 30 days (it is world carnivore month right now btw :p) and then reintroduce plants back into your diet and see how you do with them.

I will share another post from a carnivore advocate. You may think this automatically discredits him because he has a certain stance but it could also be a trap of it's own to block yourself entirely off from it. You can do a google search and find a lot of other links about Hong Kong and it's meat consumption/life-expectancy claiming the same (not sure of the 400% figure). I especially wanted to include this post though because he makes a good point about correlation not equaling causation but at the same time it opens one up to the possibility that maybe they got it wrong with the whole demonization of meat. In terms of life expectancy, I guess there are a lot of other factors that must go into it too if it can be so varied amongst diets.

Interesting. There are so many studies out there claiming a whole bunch of diverse things. I think this is where we need to get to as a society in not putting our complete trust in current institutionalized nutrition (or science in general). Back in the 50s Ancel Keys came up with the hypothesis that cholesterol and saturated fat have been causing our problems but that was just a hypothesis. The field of Nutrition at large has based itself especially off epidemiology studies and a stance has become institutionalized. It now makes it hard for scientists opposing the status quo (which some have been doing for decades) and it is difficult for them to receive funding. There is also hardernosed (RCT) science out there showing that people are having health benefits from high fat/low carb diets. It seems some of us have forgotten that low fat was just a hypothesis, which is clearly getting challenged and has been since it was put forth. I don't spend much time on studies personally because often they seem not fully credible (poor data collection, many variables) or else sometimes funded by industry. So who's to know every time if there is some agenda involved in how the study is analyzed? But in saying that I wanted to point out that sometimes studies showing funding from the meat industry etc may be assumed to be biased but I have read that sometimes it's the only possible way such a study can be done becuase they can't get any other funding because it opposes the mainstream. So it seems some industry funded studies may be legit and others I would imagine biased...it's very complex. I have read that there is a lot of politics behind the scenes in the field of nutrition. This is why I try to see things from the bigger picture, this is why I think all the anecdotal evidence piling up of people doing well on lower carb diets and people getting sick as vegans...or even just that the SAD standards are also mislead (because they are eating high carb) that these are more important than some give credit. Is there not a chance that we've simply gotten it wrong? As I've said in the past form the research/anecdotes/experience I've seen (and who truly knows) every other mammal is eating a diet high in saturated fat, why would humans be the exception? I think there is a revolution happening atm and over the coming years it will become pretty obvious. Once again, not to say that some can't do well on a higher carb diet but I don't think that that should be a standard we are shooting for as as a society and imo they would probs do even better with less carbs. I know people point to the blue zones etc but some of these zones are still eating a decent amount of animal products and there are also lifestyle, community, faith etc factors that need to come to mind. It should also be known that Hong Kong has the longest life expectancy as a nation and also eats about the most meat so if nothing else then it can be at least seen that meat is not the problem. Whether or not the blue zones and hong kong could be doing better on a lower carb/higher fat diet? I would say most probs yes, but that's just my opinion of course. Here's a good book I am reading atm about the politics of nutrition and how as a society we may have gotten it all wrong with the low fat hypothesis. The researcher took 9 years to write it and interviewed many of the original people that conducted the studies/were involved. She demonstrates how it's very possible a lot of this initial science is mislead and how society has ran with it too quickly. https://thebigfatsurprise.com/

Oh and there is a good amount of anecdotal evidence (and scientific as well) showing great success with low carb and less diets. Maybe this is another potential critique of the vegan diet is that it is mostly high carb/low fat which is starting to appear mislead with many people doing much better on a higher fat diet. This already just about puts a halt in the world going vegan (if anyone is seriously considering that?). EDIT: It seems some people eat keto vegan but I would imagine they would struggle to eat enough of the right fat, I think that would also be hard to do in nature so am skeptical of it. Also imo it is especially saturated fat that we should be eating more of but we think it is bad for us.

I'm not that knowledgeable in vitamins etc but I think the main argument is that not everybody has the ability to convert plant nutrients into a very bioavailable form, or at least not on the level as if they were just eating meat. Also lots of things where you say "produced internally"etc you could never know for sure exactly if the amount is sufficient. I have also heard that certain vitamins and micronutrients need to be eaten with saturated fat for uptake (don't have a study in mind but could try and look around). In regards to vitamin D, when you say "omnivores" and "carnivores" you are not talking about a standard of optimal health, the perceived meat eaters of society are still eating 75%? or something calories from plants. Maybe vitamin D would be easier to get enough of if eating more meat, especially for the colder climates. I think this is the big thing with plant based is people think they are hitting RDA's etc on paper but how much nutrients are actually being effectively absorbed? and how optimal are the health standards to begin with? That would be hard to know and all the science in the world would struggle to predict the effectiveness of the diet accurately for everyone, a lot of variables and considering we aren't herbivores as a species it wouldn't really make sense if we could all eat that way imo. Sometimes the bigger picture must be seen rather than sticking to the technical details (which is what a lot of vegan youtubers do in debates).

I will add this vid as well. Yes Sv3rige is pretty out there but I'm noticing a chunk of what he is saying to be truth from my POV. Interesting as another theory out there, whether the conspiracy happens intentionally or organically...I would probably lean towards the latter but who knows. Want to reference Leo's radical open-mindedness and reality's counter-intuitiveness themes here!

You make a good point that it is difficult to know for sure and here I am just sharing an alternative theory to what most have heard from the vegans and the mainstream, or from what most have really ever considered. I don't expect you to take my word for it but maybe to keep it as an option because before now it hadn't been thought as one! But yes I do "believe" it to be true (as much of the diet that matters) as much as I don't want to use that word and I am also experiencing the truth (or my truth at least) directly so what can I say? I think the difference is it is clear that many vegans are quitting veganism as of late whereas I see nothing but success stories or full recoveries of people going carnivore or keto after really wrecking their bodies either on vegan or SAD. Although you can't really compare it like this, I am yet to see the same demise in the vlc/zc community assuming they stuck with the diet for a decent amount of time to allow their body to heal and didn't veer off due to cravings and acculturation (carbs n sugar are much more addictive than meat, if your body is craving meat, it's because it needs it... but still enjoys it). I realize it is a very new movement and not much institutionalized science out there is recognizing it as a possibility due to the status quo being leaning towards a vegan, high carb diet. There is still a good amount of strong studies (randomized clinical) coming out in favour of at least meat eating rather than going vegan. In the coming years there will be more science stacking up on it all but for now it is a lot of anecodtes. This is why I feel lucky to have gotten sick or else i wouldn't have found it. I also know some people cure or settle things on vegan but i think this is due to the fresh veggies etc rather than the processed carbs and sugar they weere eating and maybe it doesn't last for them. Maybe some can do a full heal, who truly knows but i think a lot plateu or decline. If you look at a lot of youtubers and people in the vegan community then they are pretty sickly looking (being general of course) and often with health or mental health ailments. These are the people who are supposed to know the best way to do the vegan diet, even professional doctors but they themselves are aging pretty bad. Maybe these ones were the unlucky ones who's bodies couldn't handle it as well as they hoped? It's the same with all the environmental stuff, I just want it to be considered an option because some articles I'm reading are very different to the graph figures below (thats a government website btw) that are getting posted in the mainstream. Some study claimed 50% in comparison to the 9% total below and one even higher I believe, the delusion begun when there was an unfair measuring of total GHG in transportation in comparison to meat production and then media made big false claims. The people later had to retract the figures that were said but since then it's been hard to clear myths (just like with the saturated fat/cholesterol thing). Also for fields of crops synthetic fertiliser gets used which is non-renewable and kills the soil (the world's topsoil is rapidly eroding) whereas from the meat perspective (appropriate grazing) can restore the land. I have also heard that 70% of existing agricultural land is only suitable for grazing animals and not crops from 'the greenhouse gas guru' Frank Mitloehner. If that is true then that is huge to think some people want us to all turn vegan! It's hard to truly know and I don't have all the answers. I am just going with what I am discovering with this unique perspective and trying to keep my mind as open as I can in doing so while achieving health. What if there is somewhat of an objective truth for human diet and we are not tapping into it because we have deluded ourselves and this is a potential big reason for a lot of the chaos you see in the world today? Just my thoughts. EDIT: According to this article? 84% of Vegetarians and even higher for Vegans turn back to meat. https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/animals-and-us/201412/84-vegetarians-and-vegans-return-meat-why

Yes from my understanding and experience animal product nutrients are more bio-available than from plants (and animals even eaten in isolation have everything the body needs with some plants being okay for some but actually unnecessary for health). The argument against plants for some is that even though something on paper may seem nutritious, how much of it is actually getting absorbed? and how much getting inhibited due to plant defense mechanisms. I have learnt that certain nutrients need fat or need to be in a combination to be uptaken and sometimes what you think is adequate potentially falls short. There are certain internal conversion processes done to make the pre-cursor nutrient available in the body and from my understanding certain people don't have the ability to effectively make those conversions for whatever reason, maybe due to their genetic/environmental background or maybe just the fact that they don't have an appropriate gut. Also it is thought that on top of the plant inhibiting digestion it can also cause inflammation and disease in high amounts. I think the fact that you are eating some animal products that this is the reason for your decent health. But then again in saying that it can be seen that even some long-term vegans are doing good but I think that will be the minority, I assume this because when you look at our physiology we are much closer to a carnivore than a herbivore, we don't have the large amounts of bacteria that these animals have, those bacteria are literally converting the plants into fat and the animal is then burning fat, as I have posted in another thread before, even herbivores are eating a diet HIGH in saturated fat even though it doesn't look so on the surface. It is thought by some that actually all the diseases are being caused by a high carbohydrate diet. Animal products in the diet have gone down drastically in the last 50 years since the demonization on saturated fat and cholesterol began due to inconclusive shaky epidemiology studies and nutrition/food industry politics. Carbohydrate (even non-refined sugar products) intake as well as vegetable oil (which is a very new food) consumption has gone way up and really the SADer is only eating 20 or 25% of their calories from animal products which is lower than in the past but still disease is the worst it's been. It makes sense if we are not supposed to be eating a diet low in saturated fat (considering the other animals aren't) and because we are we are still having these problems. High carbs is thought to cause massive spikes in insulin which over time leads to insulin resistance. A high carb diet is unnatural in nature. There are a lot of myths out there about meat, animals in first world countries at least don't get growth hormones and the animals are taken off the food-line for the duration of their antibiotic treatment if needed. It is in the farmers best interest to keep the animal healthy because it is an asset to him and also produces better seeming meat. Factory farming has it's issues but I have read theories this only exists anyway because of big industry agriculture in the first place, that is killing local farms. There is an abundance of subsidized cheaply produces grains and these major corporations make big bucks from seeds and pesticides, not to mention other industries profiting off the mishealth due to the current standard of diet. Vit D is important, who knows how much our body needs. Also a side note that maybe our standards of health and testing need to be raised to begin with. If vegan is slightly better than SAD (in the beginning at least) that still doesn't make it healthy for everyone. I have heard lots of opinions on B12 and don't really know. I do know that sometimes some herbivores eat their own feces and also there are lots of videos out there when you can see them eating small animals when the chance arises so to me it seems like inferior nutrition, and especially seeming how our guts are not even adequately built for it. Fiber and cellulose is indigestible for a human whereas real herbivores have a fermentation process due to bacteria in their stomach(s) or colon (foregut and hindgut fermenters). Human's are well equipped with potent stomach acid and necessary enzymes to break down meat. It is the easiest thing to digest. I'm glad to hear you are noticing some improvements from reintroducing meat . It's commendable as well because I know how much hate you can get from other vegans for such a choice. I think this is the great illusion, that some people do good on vegan in the short term and think they have found the answer but then stop accurately analysing their experience with it. I bet most other vegans will say you just did it wrong or you could have perfected the winning combo if you stuck with it! I think this is a quick rationalization as well because I have heard of people trying various approaches, how could these people know exactly what you ate, how much you experimented? It is also a possibility that maybe it just isn't right for you, makes sense considering a lot of evidence also goes against it. This is what appeals to some ex-vegans about the carnivore diet because it really is very simple. Eat meat drink water. I think some ex-vegans go straight to carnivore because they have some serious healing to do. Not everyone needs to though, because it is very unconventional and quite a comittment. I like how it serves as a very accurate elimination diet, you have far less variables so can finally know FOR SURE what's going on in your body. Most of us adapt to eating toxins and will never realize it, and if that is how you want to live then I am not going to judge that! Even on the ethics and environmental side of things you can go very deep with alternative information. You realize lots of the "facts" said about meat's effect on the environment for example are actually very skewed. Often they pin ALL-meat eating together, strawmanning factory farming in with pasture-raised meat and even then totally blowing it out of proportion to fit the agenda. I can show a lot of alternative figures and articles from greenhouse gas gurus and other professionals. For example I will post this info from this carnivore advocate: I think grazing cattle in the right way actually greatly has the ability to improve the carbon in the soil and reverse desertification. There are very sustainable farms out there that show promising signs for the future if the word can get out there (look up Joel Salatin's Polyface Farm). In terms of ethics each to their own but the way I see it is for my life to happen death needs to occur, if eating industrially produced plants then a lot of death and long term suffering is also happening just not so obvious to some. I think human health is more important than animals staying alive so think do what it takes for the individual. It could be argued that most livestock animals wouldn't even exist if they weren't gunna get eaten and even that one death of an ethically raised cow would last many meals whereas eating lots of big agra grains could involve many more. I think the conditions of the animals absolutely need to be improved but i also think there is a lot of misinformation and that cattle at least have a good life in the west, don't die a vicious death like they would in the wild and have food and water supplied all the time. Factory farming is definitely an issue but even then they have an ongoing supply of food, water and shelter which is more that you can say for a lot of the third world humans! I think eating more ethical meat and starting to recognize it's healing ability and potential environmental rejuevantion would actually stop the factory farming machine, I think that goes hand-in-hand with industrial agra. But even then I still opt for the factory farming system if that's what it takes for human's to have health in the current world. I also think appropriate local livestock practices could reduce world hunger and rather our cheap grains is what keeps these third world countries enslaved.

I eat a carnivore diet consisting of cooked fatty muscle meat only, for a year and a half now. Even in the carnivore community there is a divide between schools of thought of whether eating organ meat or eating it raw/drinking milk and blood leads to the best health. I have experimented with organ meats a bit in the past and don't mind some of them but they are not as easily accessible these days due to not being as popular. For now I subscribe to a specific zero carb community (there are multiple ones out there) where many 'veterans' of the diet seem to end up. The group is strictly animal products and advises against any supplements and has the stance that muscle meat only (cooked or raw) is sufficient to achieve stellar health. Lots of the veterans there still opt to eat only fatty muscle meat and feel no need to experiment any further to see if organs could be better or if raw would be more optimal or if they should even add any plant back in to the diet now that their guts have healed and could probably tolerate some, they still choose not to. There are cases there with people eating exclusively fatty ribeye steaks for 20 years straight, reversing serious diseases such as Lyme and now in thriving health with children eating the same way and them the parents looking vibrant, with great body composition and much younger than their ages. The group is my main source of wisdom (though am interested to do proper experimentation with raw etc in the future) for now because it is a collective database essentially of a decade worth of experimentation in eating from the animal kingdom only with people coming from all different baselines of health and seeing the success stories and what the quickest/most successful approach was. It is good because it dispels a lot of myths about meat, even that the healthier the animal the much better it will be for you, which we think is a given. They seem to think it is rather the abstenance from potential trigger plant foods and their defensive mechanisms that brings the great health and then meat simply has everything the body needs (the body functions quite differently compared to a carb eater) and that we are actually better equipped as carnivores (though some can definitely include more plants in their diet but in this group they don't talk about it). They seem to think we greatly evolved from lots of scavenging and then hunting of megafauna. Their stance is also not that everyone needs to eat this way to achieve health but rather that some people will need to but if someone can tolerate certain level of plants then go for it (but most don't realize actually how sensitive they are till they start omitting things). I personally think the world should be going more towards a higher fat/lower carb animal products diet and then the individual can determine the ratio how they please. This is a great follow up video to the earlier one posted and I think Primal Edge Health does it maturely and assertively.

Haha yep. No worries man, most of us carnivores are actually pretty chill. We're not about turning the whole world carnivore, just passionate about true health and preventing the abolition of meat. Do what works for you, for most that will need to include animal products imo!