BYU professor Ben Bikman says you can thrive on a carnivore diet, but not on a vegan diet. Is he right? 0:00 Intro 1:36 Humans …
BYU professor Ben Bikman says you can thrive on a carnivore diet, but not on a vegan diet. Is he right? 0:00 Intro 1:36 Humans …
© 2021 OlyaBrand
What is the truth to all of this?
Carnivores say it’s best, Vegans say it’s best; however, I’m hearing about how certain diets are good for particular DNA?
Comments in here like “vegan worked for me” but then another person saying “carnivore worked for me” would that might imply that that very diet may have just helped for THEIR specific DNA makeup? 🧬 🤔 💭
My chronic sinusitis gone completely after 6 weeks of my diet changed into vegan. Also almost every night I get dizziness and vision problems that too gone away completely. Thanks to wfpb food that made my life very healthy and full of joy filled in my life.i m 65 and regret why I started long time back.
I’m seventy and I’ve been vegan for over fifty years. I never get sick and look great . Eating plant based rules!🎉👍🤩🙌
I think you can even find someone saying the earth is flat… The Net is full of "experts" selling crap that make them rich.
1. Listen to your own body
2. We all have different genetic make ups based on where I ancestors inhibited
3. For “Doctors” a healed patient = a Loss Client.
4. Live your own truth.
I guess I’ll die soon after ten years of eating vegan. Any day now. Lmao
Btw. I have a theory regarding Lipoprotein a. I now think that Lpa as a sole risk factor is not a problem, when cholesterol is controlled ie under 150. Take for example the Framingham Study. 3000 people in this study with a cholesterol under 150 did not have any heart incidence ie zero heart attacks! In these 3000 people, 25% for sure had elevated Lpa. So when LDL ie cholesterol is controlled, Lpa should not be a problem. I think that a plant based diet makes absolutely sense for Lpa people even though Lpa is raised with a high carb diet. There are also studies stating the people with Lpa have less cancer and live longer.
The content of your videos are top quality but these walking scenes do irritate! Why just not sit on a table and talk. All these walking videos must be very work intensive.
Vegan for 10 years and I have literally no issues from it
Yeah…and all those unhealthy Vegans out there prove it. smh
The whole chain of events that leads to pre and type 2 diabtes is pretty straight forward and yet it seems the medical and scientific communities apparently cant see the forest for the trees.
Pre and type 2 diabetes is a calorie storage issue of both fat and glucose. What is driving it is grain and seeds in our processed and fast food primarily because they constitute the largest majority of calories and because when stripped of their fiber you are left with pure sugar ie flour, high fructose corn syrup sweetened beverages and pure fat ie grain/seed oils. Considering the bodies response to high glycenic/sugar is to raise insulin and insulin not only tries to shuttle glucose into cells it also tries to shuttle fat into cells. Well what happens when you habitually over consume calories of both sugar and fat the body havitually is trying to store all these calories. Apparently the fat cells also become insulin resistant as well so now you have high blood triglycerides and so they body is trying to remove both glucose and fat/triglycerides from the blood but the cells no longer are accepting the glucose or fat so where does it go? Well high glucose again gets converted to triglycerides/fat if the glycogen levels are full but now the fat cells are dysfunctional and no longer respond to insulin either and so the fat starts getting deposited into organs, muscles ectopically where they dont belong. Extopic fat causes liver and pancreas dysfunction and the cycle snowballs eventually leading to complete metabolic dysfunction .
The very simplistic aspect of this is its a combination of high sugar and high grain/seed based fats that start the ball rolling and eventually lead to complete metabolic dysfunction. Could the same happen if we used animal fats instead of seed oils but still used lots of grain creating sugars obsolutely but that primarily isnt the case. Most of the high saturated fat crowd doesnt eat much of any sugar, grain, starch or even high glycemic fruits. The reason you arent seeing the problem in healthy vegans is they tend to eat lower fat. So as long as your not eating both together it doesnt promote metabolic dysfunction . What apparently the vegans dont recognize is excess carbs beyond their glycogen stores is getting converted to fat anyway so in essence they are eating a high fat producing diet because thats just how the body deals with excess carbs. We have a limited supply of glycogen because it is a short duration fast fuel to help us escape predators, etc. since its mostly water its heavy hence why we store the majority of calories as fat and burn fat as our primary fuel source.
The reason weight loss works is because once you start decreasing body fat you primarily loose visceral fat around the abdomen and apparently you also burn the excess fat deposited in organs so the organs apparently heal and function like they are suppose to unless the damage is to great.
Bottom line is we still need to eat to equilbrium or in a slight deficit almost all the time and do some moderate exercise to keep our metabolic and cardio vascular health in check. Besides a bear there are not animals that are habitually sedentary or that eat 3 meals a day plus snacks. Why are we?
You want to loose weight do what i did eat meat, eggs, fish and low starch vegetables as the foundation of your diet. I went from 200 lbs to 160 a year and 1/4 ago and have maintained my weight loss, reversed pre diabetes and no longer require blood pressure meds.
What is the name of the complex these corniovars have? Perhaps they were involved in a bad relationship with a vegan???
What about real doctors curing people with diabetes? Jason Fung?
Yessir! Another thorough explanation and thank you xxxm💋❤️👍
The BYU Plant-Based Club would disagree 😂… should we invite him to our next club meeting? 😅
I grew up Mormon/LDS and most of my relatives are still active in the faith. My experience is that Mormons stick to the no coffee/alcohol part of the Word of Wisdom but ignore the part about eating meat sparingly. My husband’s family was harshly judging my vegan lunch just yesterday while helping them move out of their house. Mormons are big on their meat eating for sure! …and their soda drinking and giant cookie eating (there are plenty of soda and cookie shops in Utah).
Vegans are not healthy im 100 percent sure of this
This video begins with a clip of Bikman stating that a vegan diet is impossible. Which, while with modern technology turns out to be false, is probably true without the ability to supplement some important vitamins and nutrients. Weston A. Price, for example, had really hoped to find a vegetarian primitive population and was not able to in what was probably the most exhaustive group of personally recorded case studies of primitive people that we have available to us.
Next you move to a twitter comment by an upset cardiologist (or lipid scientist I didn't look him up). Cardiologists have available to them drug company funded research carried out on a population with a very poor and carbohydrate rich diet. They also don't like to have their dogma challenged. Whether the title of Bikman's article (which is all you show) is right or not that statin therapy is unwarranted on a low carb diet, the following quote from his article sums up his position pretty well
"It is known that the LCD improves many CVD-relevant biomarkers, but it is not known with certainty if an increase in LDL-C on an LCD is proatherogenic, neutral or beneficial. The basis of our lack of knowledge on this issue is the absence of any published long-term clinical trials which have characterized hard coronary events, for example, myocardial infarction, stroke or coronary death, in people who develop high LDL-C on an LCD. Therefore, despite the concerns expressed repeatedly over the past 5 decades, there is no conclusive research to indicate whether an increase in LDL-C for someone on an LCD has any effect, beneficial or harmful, on CVD outcomes."
Following this, you throw up a clip showing Bikman describing a process by which glucose is converted to sorbitol. You decide this is too complex to deal with which is fine but if that's the case this would have been much better to leave out of the video. You then worry that Bikman being confident about the mechanism he's describing might make people think he knows what he's talking about. Not really a very good argument for anything but I ramble too so I get it. You follow up by saying that you think human outcome data are more compelling. I completely agree. Next you pan to Layne Norton, who has a PhD (nice appeal to authority) who says that you can find a mechanism for anything to prove whatever you want. While I might not have worded it that way, I do tend to agree with the sentiment.
Next we get to the endorsements of Dr. Bikman's book. Because, of course, there is a direct cause and effect relationship between how much respect you have for the people who endorse a book and the accuracy of the books conclusions. You then proceed to critique the endorsers of his book. You end up touching on regenerative agriculture. I thought this video was about the accuracy of Bikman's book.
You follow this with an explanation of how insulin resistance occurs where the viewer is left to conclude that you agree with him on this mechanism.
Your next point is really odd and confusing. You put up a statement from Bikman's book that states that when he looks at diabetes studies he finds it just as viable to conclude that insulin resistance causes weight gain than the other way around. Seems like he's not making any definitive statements here just like you say scientists should represent themselves. He then backs this up with references where he claims this same conclusion was drawn. Your response to this is to claim his reference is obscure and that you think the author is respectable. Odd dichotomy but it appears you are trying to discount his argument, hence the term obscure, and set up a kill shot by using the author of his own reference against him. You then highlight what I assume is the conclusion of the article which disagrees with his analysis then cut to a clip of the author opining on what somebody should do with their diet to lose weight. You know that the author's personal opinion has nothing to do with the analysis of the data she's collected in an individual piece of research. This is dishonest and will fool the scientifically illiterate amongst your viewers.
Next you compare Swedish longevity and obeisity with that of America. You note that they eat less meat. Interesting correlation but certainly not up to the standards of science when trying to declare a cause and effect relationship. Oddly, you then put up statistics on the fact that they have much less in the way of fast food restaurants. Seems this would be more likely to be a cause of lowered obeisity than meat consumption but not a conclusion I'm willing to draw definitively based on the evidence presented.
In the interim you attempt to discredit 4 of Bikman's references because they are over 20 years old. Do data become less accurate as time passes since their publication? I'll have to look into that. Then you move onto a study that Bikman cites where 3 diets were compared head to head. Fair point on the low vs. medium fat diets and referencing the meditteranean diet. You do a more in depth dive into the data than it appears that Bikman does in his book and make a valid point that the meditteranean diet seems to work better for a special population in this specific study (diabetics). You then make a claim that the data are not as Bikman represented them. Based on what you've shown, I can't agree with you. If Bikman said that low carb worked better for diabetics in that study then I apologize and you are correct. If he didn't say that, then you may be misrepresenting his statements. You then show a 4 year follow up and comment on weight loss and lipids. Interestingly you don't show HOMA-IR for this. I have no reason to believe that it would be different but it's odd as I thought HOMA-IR (for diabetics) was the yardstick we were now using. I'm not sure how tightly the diets were monitored in this study but certainly based on the language that you cite, they were not monitored at all for the 4 year follow up. This makes at least that part of the study unreliable but, to be fair, you weren't the original one who cited it, Bikman was.
You follow this up by panning to an interview where the author of that study (I think) is interviewed. She starts off by saying “We all know that olive oil and that whole grains and fruits and vegetables are healthy.” Yikes. There's one of those definitive statements that you were upset about doctors making during you Jason Fung video. Certainly doesn't sound very scientific. The next 4 minutes or so are about her diet which seems to me to be irrelevant to me.
Then you take issue with Bikman's statement that epidemiological studies are based on questionnares. Many are but some are not. You make some ok points about the use of biological samples from certain studies but this ignores a litany of factors outside of diet concerning human health. You also go on to talk about cancer and heart disease as long developing issues. That's fine but the quote that you are refuting is about fiber's effect on insulin sensitivity. Your statements are not relevant to the specific idea you are claiming to take issue with.
The next interesting thing in this video, aside from the turtles, turtles are interesting, is a statement that you make that you can't eat high meat and saturated fat in the long term and be healthy. I would cite the Massai and Inuit as examples that that is not true. Weston A Price's book “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration” has a great section on the Massai. Unfortunately we don't have modern nutritional long term studies of people eating high meat, low processed food, low glycemic diets that I am aware of.
You close the video by making some odd statements about whether his proclamation that veganism is impossible is right or not. One is left to assume that you disagree with him probably because vegans can now supplement B12. Since this seems to have been your initial issue with Bikman, the fact that this isn't addressed during the whole video and that you make such a tepid concluding statement is odd.
All in all I will still watch your videos as you provide some very good information and I think you look at things through a different lense than me but I think your criticism of Bikman is lacking.
The background in the intro looks like Napili Kai in Maui. Love that place
It’s not impossible and quite easy….never felt better!
Duckweed is the future 👍 what you can watch out for if you are low in zinc or vegan is phytic acid (high in nuts, beans and grains). Blend oats with 10% Buckwheat (high in Phytase) use fermentation, sprout, eat sourdough bread or at least bread with longer fermentation (4 hours +).
Gah! I just finished Philip Ovadia’s book and was ready for butter, meat (minus organ meats), and veggies.
There's always something wrong with how these "diet studies" are conducted. In this case, they restricted calories on all but the low carb diet. It should be calorie restricted exactly the same way across the board. Only THEN will you see conclusive evidence as to the true benefit. But they don't want clear beneficial evidence for whatever reasons they came up with off the record. Anyway, if you are diabetic, sugar is your enemy. Period. It's not a mystery. Another thing they don't even touch on is how satiating low carb can be (when done right). If you are eating the RIGHT foods, you will never want to overeat. I believe that whatever gets you back to health is what you should maintain – whether it be vegan/vegetarian, Mediterranean, low carb or even carnivore. I am somewhat biased toward the low card lifestyle because of my addictive personality and unhealthy relationship with carbs (sugars) but I am open to other ideas and that's why I follow content such as Plant Chompers and others. I always want to hear different perspectives and draw my own conclusions rather than someone telling me what my conclusions should be. At present, I am turning around prediabetes with very low carb and dropping pounds on the way. So to each their own methods as long as they are working for them. Thanks for putting this together!
Can anyone promote the common sense diet??? A little bit of meat, some fruits and veggies, a little bit of grains. Eat food, not much.
16:40 the wave in the back haha
That wife aggro at the end. That resonated with me. I felt that.
You jab at him (Dr. Bikman) for referencing a Swedish scientist that doesn’t necessarily agree with him, and then you turn around and constantly reference Layne Norton who clearly does not agree with you (he is very much an omnivore that advocates for the calorie in/calorie out model).
I'm constantly rewatching your videos for inspiration, so thanks for producing such interesting content in an accessible way!
I wonder if you could do a video on satiety and the WFPB diet? The one thing that I always appreciated about eating paleo was never feeling hungry, not to mention how absolutely easy it is to adhere to when traveling for work. WFPB requires a LOT of extra thought and prep, but then there's the struggle of eating. I'm sometimes close to passing out because I wasn't able to eat enough in between events (we produce tradeshows, which means 16+ hour days and 30-min breaks if we're lucky). I bring the usual Lara bars, vegan soups, and beans, and have scads of fresh veggies delivered to my hotel room, but finding the time to eat it is a challenge. Before, I could have bacon and eggs for breakfast and not be hungry for 8 hours. I love WFPB, but why is it a struggle?
You put a lot of weight into 1 study that shows exactly what I would expect. Low carb diets are the hardest diet to maintain and it's one of the only diets where cheating can be disastrous.
Dr Ben Bikman gives off a creepy religious vibe. 😳
Hun, I just want to say, "You are so charming!" Your videos are just delightful, and I appreciate the bio chem and any complex cell biology you want to throw at us. There is a small nutrition hobby channel on YouTube called Peter Rogers Md. He offers profuse cell biology in what he calls an AO, Academic Orgasim. But after he delivers the AO, he comes down to earth with his real-world advice for avoiding disease. He is vegan. His eccentricities are um….numerous, but what you may like if you don't know about him is all his references for the science. Many thanks for your wonderful content.
https://youtu.be/iKlgmr49Eik