I see many people in this forum are “Carnivore”.
But in general, keto does not need to be Carnivore. The main definition of keto is a low amount of carbs/sugars.
Of course, everything in nutrition are 1-to-1 experiments (impossible to control big populations), but it seems a relative consensus that:
- Too much meat is “bad”, due to mTOR issues (even though other epidemiological studies suggest that meat for non-obese, healthy, sportive people is not bad)
- Mediterranean diet is considered to be good
I am doing something like a “Mediterranean keto” diet (it is not called this way, but it looks like it):
- 200g of vegetables per meal, twice per day
- 150g of fish/meat/eggs per meal, twice per day
- Lots of olive oil
- 3 servings of a medically controlled protein powder
I see that most of the plates people show pictures of are basically “full meat”, with little vegetables (or even fish).
Even many people argue that vegetables are “bad”, with antinutrients/bad-absorption/… I am really surprised about this, since in my life, I have seen people arguing they do not like the taste of vegetables, but nobody arguing they are “bad”.
Also, using the “precautionary principle”, one should tend to prefer a “Med keto” rather than a “carnivore keto”, due to the issues highlighted above.
Is there a particular reason for such a strong preference for carnivore, as opposed to a “Mediterranean keto”?