This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Alternative medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine Alternative views Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and drink Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and Drink task list: To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages. Health and fitness Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

weird how there is nothing about Vilhjalmur Stefansson here 112.209.218.43 (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m trying to add the Stefansson medical trial to the article. It’s the earliest trial, and was done under clinical supervision by Dr Lieb, not through pseudoscientific questionnaires asking people what they ate over 2 years. Read The New York Times article from 1929. ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This may sound like an obvious question and it isn't to argue the article, but in hope that it may end up expanded. The "fad" part of Carnivore diets may steer towards a particular type of meat consumption, but nose-to-tail pork, including organ meat, and/or fishes of all kinds certainly seems to be considered "carnivore". Red meat isn't the only option and neither does the protein have to be excessively high. In some cases, it would be higher fat and moderate protein ala keto.

Well structured carnivore diets can cover just about every vitamin and mineral requirement or it can double down on too much of one thing. It just so happens to be meat.

Could sub-sections be added? Something like "definition of carnivore". Variations? (Many opt for some types of dairy). Nutrient coverage. 109.243.67.211 (talk) 13:24, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a section on different variations could be added. The stumbling block with a lot of these requests is that it will need a reliable source. I.e. you cannot use your own knowledge of the topic to write such a section, instead you can report on what is described by those reliable sources (of course your knowledge on the topic may help you find and structure those sources). E.g. see: Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research.

Also note that for claims related to health a far higher standard is required (Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)). Unless new research came out, there is probably no reliable source at that level to make any new claims on heath for such variations. Sklabb (talk) 11:16, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The opening paragraph is extremely one sided. This paragraph needs to cite the harvard survey that showed the beneifts to carnivore diet. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34934897/

This has to be on eof the most biased pages Ive seen on wiikpedia. There are no long term studies on Carnivore diet yet this thing reads as if its settled science. Do better. This is terrible. Jspsax79 (talk) 21:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aston305 (complain/compliment) 21:34, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

somehwre, anywhere in the first paragraph among all the biased falsities, needs to add a sentence that says "However, adherents report health benefits as evidenced by a comprehensive 2021 study administered by Harvard. I provided the link to that study above. ~2025-39602-24 (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But where? --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 21:39, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how about right after "the diet lacks dietary fiber and can increase the risk of chronic diseases. (Which in amazed this sentence made it here with no long term studies being done). ~2025-39602-24 (talk) 21:42, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

noted under Carnivore Diet#Health Concerns - "Despite this, adherents to the diet often claim improvements in overall health and well-being." Aston305 (complain/compliment) 21:43, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Jspsax79 (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the archives. We have debated the "Harvard" study many times. It fails WP:MEDRS. Veg Historian (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you heard of this:

July 10, 1929, The New York Times reported on the first clinical trial of the carnivore diet, which was conducted by Dr. Clarence W. Lieb of New York. He asserted in [that] week's issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association “that the results were beneficial to health”. I’ve asked for this to be included as a way of redressing some of the obvious, and not so obvious misinformation. ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 16:38, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a clinical trial and the source fails Wikipedia medical guidelines. This has been answered below. Veg Historian (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so, why are all of the sources in the first paragraph allowed? Nothing but article links. No studies, no surveys, etc? Based on your comment that entire paragraph should be brought down. This is a clown show. ~2025-39602-24 (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. Wikipedia reflects the mainstream scientific consensus on dietary and nutrition topics. The sources cited in the lead were written by experts including registered dietitians. Abby Langer, Office for Science and Society and Science-Based Medicine are considered reliable sources (WP:RS) on Wikipedia for non-biographical articles. Veg Historian (talk) 18:05, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add the following in the first paragraph in the History section of this article. “On July 10, 1929, The New York Times reported on the first clinical trial of the carnivore diet, which was conducted by Dr. Clarence W. Lieb of New York. He asserted in [that] week's issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association “that the results were beneficial to health”. It was a year's trial of an exclusive meat diet, which was undertaken by the Arctic explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson and a companion, R. M. Andersen. “Excessive meat eating is not only not injurious,” Dr. Lieb says, “but the experiments tended to show that health was improved, resistance to disease strengthened and the subjects underwent no variation from normal health. Furthermore, it was noted that Mr. Andersen's hair stopped falling out. The experiments were undertaken under rigorous clinical conditions by a committee of scientists under Dr. Raymond Pearl of Johns Hopkins.” ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 16:32, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

excellent find. I'll be stunned if these self appointed gatekeepers here will add that. ~2025-39602-24 (talk) 16:40, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. Day Creature (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Day Creature. My understanding of “reliable source” is that it must be published. My sources for this information were published in 1929 in The Journal of the American Medical Association and the New York Times. How are they not reliable sources? Please explain what you mean. ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide citation information for these sources and links to online versions, if available. Day Creature (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source fails WP:MEDRS and is widely cited online by carnivore diet advocates despite never being replicated. We wouldn't cite a single study or trial on Wikipedia. We need a review (WP:BMI) to keep data unbiased. This wasn't a clinical trial and the study was funded by the American Meat Institute. The original source can be read in full here [1]. Veg Historian (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Veg.

The research exists. I’m asking for it to be included in the History part of the article because it’s a verified trial that seems to have been ignored. There are other later trials on the benefits of the carnivore diet as well, so the research has been replicated, in one form or another.

Take for example this article which is part of the Research Topic:

Case report: Carnivore–ketogenic diet for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: a case series of 10 patients

Norwitz NG and Soto-Mota A (2024) Case

report: Carnivore–ketogenic diet for the

treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: a

case series of 10 patients.

Front. Nutr. 11:1467475.

doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1467475

So there is verified research, and it is gaining traction as people realise how awful the standard western diet is in keeping people healthy.

I’m all for people who can tolerate plant food having their say, but there are other points of view, and verified research into people who can’t tolerate a plant based diet.

(Myself included. I am biased as my body can no longer tolerate the phytates, oxalates, other poisons that plants produce in self defence, and the pesticides that are invariably in plant based foods.) A topic on Wikipedia has to be fair and truthful. Not use inflammatory language and misinformation as scare tactics. ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 19:27, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for putting in the effort and providing the text rather than simply complaining that things are wrong like many others. This can make it frustrating when your suggestion isn't applied however, so I hope this isn't discouraging you for trying again or working on other pages.

The issue here is that for human health claims, extra strict sourcing rules apply. In short, this must reflect current knowledge and consensus. Primary sources (describing the experiments that the authors did) are not sufficient. Instead, e.g. a review or accepted science textbook (these describe wider research others did and can indicate consensus) etc. is needed. Fun fact, my first edit on this page was removed for the very same reason.

You can read the details about this at Wikipedia:MEDRS.

Now, you can use the sources to report on the history of the carnivore diet. Without making any human health claims, this uses the standard sources requirement. E.g. the 1929 article could be used to say something like "Early research has been done in the late 1920's" if that is relevant. However, you could not add anything about health, e.g. "... and this found the diet to be beneficial for health" would be in violation of WP:MEDRS. Sklabb (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your cheerful non-antagonistic tone. I really appreciate it.

Now I just have to work out how to use the citation < > do hickies properly. 😊

Have a Merry Christmas/Hanukkah and a Happy New Year. ~2025-40155-43 (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Day Creature. Do the provided links and sources meet criteria? Jazzarelle (talk) 20:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the citation from JAMA.

LIEB CW. THE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS OF A TWELVE MONTHS' EXCLUSIVE MEAT DIET: BASED ON INTENSIVE CLINICAL AND LABORATORY STUDIES ON TWO ARCTIC EXPLORERS LIVING UNDER AVERAGE CONDITIONS IN A NEW YORK CLIMATE. JAMA. 1929;93(1):20–22. doi:10.1001/jama.1929.02710010026005 ~2025-40119-84 (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, you are ignoring Wikipedia policy. We do not cite primary sources, please read WP:MEDRS. The study you cite which can easily be found online is from 1929 [2] so this is severely outdated. It was not a clinical trial. The subjects were observed at laboratory setting during limited intervals. There is no proof they ate only meat. The study was funded by the American Meat Institute so there was an obvious agenda there. We are not going to cite a biased industry funded study from 1929 that was never replicated. Veg Historian (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Veg. I also cited the article in the New York Times.

For all intents and purposes I have followed the rules to the best of my understanding. Jazzarelle (talk) 19:52, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are the Veg Historian. You do seem to know much about bias.

I wish to include change to the article in the HISTORY section. A simple addition of clear and verifiable information much like the rest of the paragraph, on the history of the carnivore diet. Why is this an issue? Jazzarelle (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citing from Wikipedia:

• History sections often cite older work.

That’s all that should be added: a nod to previous research in the article in question, under the History section.

There is no argument.

It is a historical reference.

Everything else just emotional muddling of the waters.

To what purpose?

Please add the reference of older carnivore diet research. Jazzarelle (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Jazzarelle, please stop and move on. The replies above are sufficient to exclude the source. No more discussion is needed. Zefr (talk) 20:47, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input everyone who answered my attempt at changing the article. It’s been an education. Wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Jazzarelle (talk) 01:05, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to change this paragraph to state: From: The idea of an exclusive meat diet can be traced to the German writer Bernard Moncriff, author of The Philosophy of the Stomach: Or, An Exclusively Animal Diet in 1856, who spent a year living on only beef and milk.[9] In the 1870s, Italian physician Arnaldo Cantani prescribed his diabetic patients an exclusive animal-based diet.[10][11] In the 1880s an American, James H. Salisbury, advocated a meat diet consisting of 2 to 4 pounds of lean beef and 3 to 5 pints of hot water daily for 4 to 12 weeks.[12] It became known as the meat and hot water diet, or Salisbury diet.

To:

The idea of an exclusive meat diet can be traced to the German writer Bernard Moncriff, author of The Philosophy of the Stomach: Or, An Exclusively Animal Diet in 1856, who spent a year living on only beef and milk.[9] In the 1870s, Italian physician Arnaldo Cantani prescribed his diabetic patients an exclusive animal-based diet.[10][11] In the 1880s an American, James H. Salisbury, advocated a meat diet consisting of 2 to 4 pounds of lean beef and 3 to 5 pints of hot water daily for 4 to 12 weeks.[12] It became known as the meat and hot water diet, or Salisbury diet. In 1929 Dr Clarence W. Lieb published his study of Vilhjalmur Stefansson and R. M. Andersen’s year long diet of only meat and fat.<The New York Times, 1929 Find Meat Diet Aids Disease Resistance></CLARENCE W. LIEB, M.D. THE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS OF A TWELVE MONTHS’ EXCLUSIVE MEAT DIET: BASED ON INTENSIVE CLINICAL AND LABORATORY STUDIES ON TWO ARCTIC EXPLORERS LIVING UNDER AVERAGE CONDITIONS IN A NEW YORK CLIMATE - The Journal of the American Medical Association. 1929; 93(1):20-22. 10.1001/jama.1929.02710010026005 > Jazzarelle (talk) 01:42, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Already discussed above. Day Creature (talk) 05:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]