I wish there was more debate

I had to stop myself from giving a review in the middle of listening to the podcast and give it a fair shot all the way to the end. But it fell flat on this debate on which diet proved to be better for longevity: plant-based or carnivore diet. I am a plant based eater and advocate (you might think I’m biased here), but I was really interested to hearing Dr. Kiltz perspective on the carnivore diet and why he thinks it’s superior. He never really got to the point of it and kept doing a “dance” around direct questions from both Simon Hill and the interviewer. Dr. Kiltz didn’t really share benefits on the carnivore diet, or any studies or evidence-based data. It was more large concepts and ideas on evolution and how we all think differently and create our own truth. Lots of jargon to me to fill space and time with no real point or context. I genuinely wanted to hear why someone would want to be on the carnivore diet. Maybe I’m missing knowledge on what the carnivore diet really does compared to the loads of scientific data that argues more diseases and health problems with animal fats and products. I wish there was more of a debate, maybe like a good tennis match with a good rally back and forth for more specific datapoints. But there wasn’t. I felt like Simon Hill was trying to narrow in on Dr. Kiltz POV, but Dr. Kiltz kept going back to his large ideal concepts and “hippie” jargon. : /

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!