A Thriving Human Carnivore’s Thoughts on Nutrition Research
Joe Rogan has a very popular podcast and Jordan Peterson is a controversial Canadian professor/writer. In this 28-minute segment of a 3 hour interview, Peterson shares both his and his daughter’s amazing health transformation on a carnivore diet. Although on numerous occasions, Peterson admits that he is no nutrition expert and that he doesn’t universally advocate his diet, I have no doubt that many listeners to this interview will make an attempt to follow his carnivorous diet.
Individual Variability
As Peterson describes his history and experiences, it seems pretty clear that he has some unique autoimmune responses to many foods that don’t seem problematic for most of us. I have no reason to believe that Peterson is lying about the dramatic health improvement that he’s experienced by eating nothing but meat and animal fat. His personal diet is the antithesis to the whole food plant-based (WFPB) diet that I promote, but I would consider Peterson insane to begin eating a WFPB diet. For him, it appears that a WFPB diet is not the way to go. I can’t begin to explain why this is the case. He appears to have a very puzzling biological makeup. Green vegetables even cause him distress!
As someone who is interested in nutrition and health sciences, I’m fascinated to learn more about how a carnivore diet can have such a positive effect on some people. At the same time, I’m concerned that so many people will turn to a diet that almost certainly will lead them down the road towards chronic disease.
Peterson’s Thoughts On Nutrition Research
In his attempt to explain the pitfalls of nutritional science, Dr. Peterson states:
“Clinical studies about diet are virtually impossible to conduct because you can’t conduct a proper randomly distributed, controlled experiment. It is too hard. So, a lot of what we’re trying to do is pull out information from correlations. You can’t do it.”
Peterson is right in one respect, and partially right in another.
Where Peterson is Correct
What’s normally considered the “Gold Standard” of scientific research, the randomized control trial (preferably double-blind) is NOT the gold standard for nutritional research. Howard Jacobson provides an excellent explanation on why a randomized control trial is not appropriate for nutrition research in his article entitled: “What a Giant Squid Teaches Us About Cancer”. Once you read this article, you’ll understand that it is incredibly difficult to prove anything about human health that doesn’t involve pills or injections. So what Peterson says about randomized controlled trials is correct.
Where Peterson is Partially Correct
I’ll let Nutritional Biochemist and best-selling author T. Colin Campbell explain why Peterson is partially correct about correlational studies.
Dr. Campbell writes:
“It is true that nothing conclusive about causation can be established because of the way that these (correlational) studies are done, but this criticism depends on the assumption that investigators are trying to identify single factor causation, again defying what nutrition is”. Dr. Campbell states “the fault line in these studies is the formulation of hypotheses. If these hypotheses are formulated to truly reflect the wholistic characteristic of nutrition where multiple nutrients, biomarkers, and outcomes are simultaneously measured, then assessing causation is much more reasonable”.
Seeking to identify single factor causation makes sense in pharmacological studies but makes absolutely no sense in nutrition studies.
Peterson is right in that you can’t establish causation from correlational nutritional studies, but only if you have a very warped view of nutrition.
My definition of nutrition is highly influenced by the research and writings of Dr. Campbell. I define nutrition as: “The synergistic interaction of countless nutrients and their effects on human health”.
If you accept this definition, you can see why it is ridiculous for researchers to try and tease out the effects of specific nutrients in food on human health. Peterson is right when he says that this practice is impossible. But if he accepted my definition of nutrition, he may be open to Dr. Campbell’s conclusion that assessing causation from correlational nutrition studies is reasonable when multiple nutrients, biomarkers, mechanisms and outcomes are measured. This is what Dr. Campbell calls taking a “(w)holistic” approach to nutrition. It is the only approach that takes into account the astronomical complexity of nutrition and human metabolism.
Resources on The (W)holistic Approach to Human Nutrition
Books
— Whole – Rethinking the Science of Nutrition
Articles
— Why Are We So Confused About Nutrition?
— Research Methodology in Cancer Research
Hope to See a Rogan/Campbell Interview
I emailed a link to the Rogan/Peterson video to Dr. Campbell. I’d love to get him booked on the Joe Rogan podcast. Rogan eats a meat centered diet, but he is open-minded and interviews people with divergent views on many topics, including diet. Rogan’s opinions on the human diet are based on a highly reductionist view of nutrition and it is my opinion that both he and his listeners would benefit from hearing Dr. Campbell’s views.
Dr. Campbell responded to my email by asking if I could help him get booked on Rogan’s show. He states that he’s been on many such shows, but never as a result of a request from him. I used the Joe Rogan Contact Page to make a request. The more requests Rogan receives, the better chance that Dr. Campbell will be booked. If you’re willing to help, go to the contact page and select “Podcast Booking Inquiries”. Enter “Consider booking T. Colin Campbell” as the subject and “Making Sense of Nutrition Research” in the message area.
In the meantime, I’ll be interested to learn more about medical case studies like Peterson’s. I just hope that people who hear Peterson’s story are also aware that pretty much every longevity study suggests that following a diet like his will increase the risk of developing cancer and increase the risk of dying early from all causes. Hear world-renowned longevity researcher Valter Longo share this important information with Rich Roll in this podcast interview. (Information from 45:45 to 50:00 is especially relevant.)
Stay Healthy and Strong!
E Excerpt from Laurie Endicott Thomas’s amazing book Thin Diabetes – Fat Diabetes by clicking here!
Speak Your Mind