🎉 NEW soft, tangy, delicious corn & soy free goat chevre! BUY CHEVRE.

How are primal carnivore urges affected when you're surrounded by tons of food?

written by

Marie Reedell

posted on

August 19, 2022

I recently watched a season of the show Alone. 

For those who haven’t heard of it, it’s a competition where contestants need to survive alone in the most rugged wilderness for as long as possible. Whoever lasts the longest wins $1,000,000.

One of the more interesting things I observed was the contestants' deep primal urges for meat. Even the most knowledgeable foragers who harvested, stored, and ate loads of leaves, berries, and roots craved meat. Plants alone were simply not enough. They needed meat.

I wasn’t the only one who became fascinated with the “Alone diet” (both food and lifestyle). Lots of people started thinking about and researching it.

Here are the basic principles:

  • Eat organic
  • Eat less
  • Eat less often
  • Eat an extremely limited menu
  • Fat and protein will sustain life
  • Protein alone will not sustain life
  • Foraging for plants and wild edibles, fiber carbs, is calorically insignificant
  • Starch and refined carbohydrates are eliminated
  • Daily exercise is critical (build shelter, haul rocks, hunting, fishing, daily firewood cutting)

You might be wondering, why? Well, contestants on Alone crave and need meat because their digestive system changes to a “fat-burning metabolism”.

In the first few weeks, the contestants’ digestive systems are deprived of carbohydrates (with some sporadic fiber). They switch from a carb-burning metabolism to a fat-burning metabolism. And then, if they don’t eat enough (and ultimately begin to starve), they burn stored body fat.

This is why the contestants craved meat. They instinctively knew that they needed protein and fat to sustain their life. 

It’s similar to the Carnivore Diet, which is simple to explain. You eat meat, not plants. Dairy, eggs, and seafood are ok, too. 

The Carnivore Diet is nothing new. It’s been around since our prehistoric ancestors.

Meat-based diets have been promoted and researched since the mid 1800s. Well-known experts include James Salisbury (who the Salisbury steak is named after), Dr. Weston A. Price, Dr. Blake Donaldson, Dr. Robert Atkins. Dr. Paul Saladino, Dr. Ken Berry, and Dr. Shawn Baker.

After lots of tests and studies and publications and collaborations, all of the above doctors and researchers came to the same conclusions. Whether short term or long term, the Carnivore Diet has some major benefits. Here are the top three:

  • Clearer Thinking. Going into a state of ketosis allows your brain to generate more energy and clear excess ammonia, which slows the thinking process.
  • Improved Gut Health. It removes the most common triggers of gut inflammation and allows your gut to heal.
  • Weight Loss. It delivers the perfect mix of nutrients to shut down hunger and spike fat burning.

But, I mean, do we really need to research it to prove it? The sad answer is yes. 

Humans have lost their connection to nature and their food and their bodies. It’s as if we don’t have primal urges anymore
 or at least we can’t hear or understand them.

If you’d like to be a better listener, here’s what’s happening and what to look for after you eat carbs or fat.

When you eat carbohydrates, your body breaks them down into sugar. We can call a carb-burning metabolism a sugar-burning metabolism.

As a response to increased blood sugar, your body produces insulin. Insulin decreases your blood sugar by storing that sugar as fat. Then, your blood sugar goes down, which triggers hunger and a craving for more carbs (aka “hangry”).

Think about a cow (a herbivore) that constantly eats pasture all day. It is constantly hungry. And then I think about my kids, who can keep eating sugar and carbs to no end! They crave it soon after they eat it.

When you primarily burn fat, your blood sugar stays more balanced. This means you’ll feel satisfied longer and can easily go 3-6 hours in between meals. 

Think about a lion (a carnivore), which only feeds every 3-4 days. It is not hungry as often.

It really shouldn’t be this difficult to know what and when to eat. 

If we only had access to foraged or real farm-direct foods, it would be easier to follow instincts and know exactly what we need. But, us modern Americans are surrounded by seemingly infinite and complicated food options. 

Frozen waffles, squeeze tubes of blue yogurt, white bread, American cheese (which really isn’t cheese at all), cereals, burgers made of plants, etc. These are the current pantry staples that almost every grocery store in the US has.

Plus, most foods nowadays have dozens of ingredients and are fortified. Now how’s your body supposed to know what foods are innately “good” to eat?

And, it’s only going to get worse. In a time when plant-based and vegan diets are being promoted from so many angles - health, climate, economy - food and nutrition is getting more and more complicated.

But please don’t forget: You are in control of your body, because you control what you eat.

You have a choice every time you buy food. You have a choice at every meal. 

What do you think? How can you respond to your primal urges when you live in a world surrounded by more food options than we should? Do you have a carb-burning or fat-burning metabolism? Do you follow a specific diet?

I’d love to hear from you. Click the button above to comment on the blog (no account required) or reply to this email.

Pastured Meat

Health and Nutrition

Opinion

More from the blog

Raw milk or fermented dairy and lactose intolerance. Why might it help?

I was misinformed. At some point, I read that raw milk contains lactase. As it turns out, this is not true! It is true that raw milk contains many live enzymes that are inactivated during pasteurization. But, what about lactase? I’ve heard many anecdotal stories from people who are lactose intolerant... but can handle raw milk or fermented dairy. If raw milk, yogurt, kefir, or cheese doesn’t contain lactase, then why is that?

Our bone broth tested negative-ish for heavy metals đŸ„ł NATURAL AND CLEAN

Over the past few months a bunch of people asked us if we tested our bone broth for toxic heavy metals. When we get the same question a lot, we of course look into it. My first question was --- Is there an issue with toxic metals in bone broth? As it turns out, yes, there "can" be an issue! Heavy metals are naturally present in our environment. We need the "good" heavy metals to thrive: iron, zinc, magnesium, copper, etc. But, we can 100% do without the toxic heavy metals: arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, etc. Too many toxic heavy metals can lead to a host of pretty awful issues: nervous system damage, cardiovascular issues, cancer, endocrine disruption, kidney damage, and so on. Our body is designed to excrete heavy metals through urine (and a little bit through sweat, hair, and breastmilk too)... but only so much. There's a limit. If you're overloaded, your body will store those heavy metals in your bones, blood, tissues, and organs. Similarly, if an animal is exposed to heavy metals via food, water, air, dust, or soil, those heavy metals accumulate in the bones. Maybe the farm's soil or air is contaminated from a nearby factory. Maybe the pipes for the water has lead solder connecting them. Maybe the feed a farm is buying was grown on contaminated soil or processed on contaminated equipment.  And, of course, a main purpose of bone broth is drawing out as much as possible from the bones. If there are heavy metals in bones, they will make their way into the broth. This is especially true when you pre-soak with apple cider vinegar and simmer for 48 hours to make it thick and gelatinous (like our broth). And that led me to my second question --- Should I be concerned about every bone broth? Where is the fear coming from? Well... it seems it might be a little political. There was a study done in the UK in 2013 that scared a lot of people. It's titled "The Risk of Lead Contamination in Bone Broth Diets". This study found high levels of lead in organic chicken bone broth, which is quite concerning. And, in fact, this one study is still cited in articles written today! Let's dig a little deeper. Let's go farther than the short abstract. Here are the broths tested in the study and their test results for lead:  (9.5 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus skin and cartilage(7.01 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus bones(2.3 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus meat(0.89 parts per billion): Tap water alone cooked for the same amount of time as a control. But, they only used organic chicken from one farm. And, there's zero information about that farm, their practices, the feed, and the broth recipe. Did they use vinegar or wine in the broth? Was the chicken's water contaminated with lead? What was the quality of the feed and the soil? Were the chickens raised indoors or outdoors? So many unanswered questions! All we get is that it was one "organic chicken" that created a lead issue with broth. Another curious thing is that the broth with skin and cartilage contained more lead than the broth made with just bones. Bones are where lead is stored, so why wouldn't the broth made with bones only contain more lead? It's an odd result. Moreover, the abstract of the study specifically called out "bone broth diets" like GAPS and paleo. They even go so far as to write, "In view of the dangers of lead consumption to the human body, we recommend that doctors and nutritionists take the risk of lead contamination into consideration when advising patients about bone broth diets." That's quite curious. Why are they worried about these diets? Are the researchers anti healing through food? Who funded the research? Is it political? My opinion? This study is not comprehensive. It does not speak to all bone broths. But it does cover a potential issue if the water or animals are overloaded with heavy metals. What I glean from this study is that we need more research. We don't need fear to spread and people to stop drinking broth from this one study. Regardless of whether the fear was fabricated or legit, we tested our bone broth anyway. After all, it's always nice to validate that your food choices are as clean as you think. For Miller's, here were my concerns before testing: What if there's mercury in the fishmeal in our chicken feed?What if the soil that our animals live on is contaminated?What is the well water that the broth is made with is contaminated?What if the Celtic sea salt has lots of heavy metals? We got the test results back. I was super excited. But, I was also confused. At face value, it appeared that our bone broth tested NEGATIVE for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. You can find the test results right here! You'll notice that, for every sample, the results are "<0.01 mg/kg" and "<0.02 mg/kg".  I asked the lab what the "<" means. They said that it indicates their limit of quantitation (LOQ), the lowest concentration that can be accurately tested using the test procedure in that sample type. So the results simply report that none of the metals tested were found in the sample above the specific reporting LOQs. Whether or not they were present below this LOQ is information that is not provided by the test. When talking to the lab, I told them what we needed and assumed that this test would go below a 1 ppb. So, when the results came in, I assumed that a "mg/kg" was the same as a part per billion (ppb). Ummm... that math wasn't write! A "mg/kg" is actually a part per million (ppm). That means that the test we ran had results saying that the broth had less than 0.02 ppm (or 20 ppb) of arsenic and lead. And, it had less than 0.01 ppm (or 10 ppb) of cadmium and mercury. For some reference, the EPA says that less than 15 ppb of lead is safe in drinking water. Not saying that I agree, but it's a good reference point.  These results are good. It means the broth definitely isn't overloaded with toxic heavy metals. But, it's not good enough!!! We need to test again! We really need to a lower LOQ. We need to know the results with an accuracy of as low as 1 ppb. It looks like the lab we sent the original samples to doesn't have an LOQ that low. So here I am on the hunt for a lab to do it again. As soon as I can, I'll send samples in again and paying for more expensive testing to get the info you deserve. Stay tuned! I hope to have the new results in by the end of April 2025. Do you worry about toxic metals (or other junk) in your food? Where have your fears stemmed from? I'd love to hear from you. You can comment below (no account required) or contact us đŸ˜Š ----- Sources The risk of lead contamination in bone broth dietsBone Broth and Lead Toxicity: Should You Be Concerned?Bone Broth and Lead Contamination: A Very Flawed Study in Medical HypothesesBone Broth, Collagen, and Toxic Metals: A Research Review