The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
look generally on a CGM a continuous glucose monitor on a carnivore diet it's pretty flat you don't get a lot of postprandial glucose excursions but people are eating mixed diets and you see a big glucose excursion a big rise that's probably not a good thing for humans
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
generally speaking people on ketogenic and carnivore diets do not have many postprandial excursions of glucose which is something I've talked about with Tommy wood these are called mages I believe it's median amplitude glucose excursion
generally on a carnivore diet people don't get any bump in the blood sugar throughout the day it's completely flat yeah there's there's no sense in wearing one with the carnivore diet unless you're just curious
The continuous glucose monitors that I've seen on a carnivore diet are essentially flatlines
is it when we look at AC GM continuous glucose monitor we don't get any postprandial glucose elevations it's a flat line
Post-meal glucose spikes in non-diabetics drive long-term cardiometabolic disease independently of HbA1c.
Wearing a continuous glucose monitor leads to personalized dietary improvements that hold up beyond 12 weeks.
Continuous glucose monitors meaningfully change behavior in non-diabetic adults beyond the first month.
CGM use in metabolically healthy adults induces orthorexic-style dietary anxiety without health benefit.