NEW 2026 Study Proves Our Bodies Are Not Designed To Run on Carbs

Do you think that our bodies are designed to run on carbohydrates? Any carbohydrate, it's a no. No. It doesn't matter how complex it is. You think that cuz you're getting fiber with it, the apple's better. No, it doesn't make any difference. If you're inactive, you've absolutely got no right to take in carbohydrates.

Deviant monk fruit. Is that good? This is Professor Tim No. His latest study just won the best paper of the year. Today he reveals why most of what you've been told about diet is wrong and why everyone should eat more fat.

We just had people run 5 km on the treadmill and guess what? There was no difference in performance whether people ate a high-fat diet, high carbohydrate diet and we were shocked. We showed that they had the highest rates of fat use ever measured in humans in history. There are two glucose pools in the body. No one has ever said that before.

Can a statin increase your CC score? Which means plaque buildup in the arteries. The studies I've seen show that the CAC score doesn't go down on a statin and it may go up. Every single day, we're told that bread, rice, oatmeal, and fruit are healthy. But that's wrong. You see, these foods are the primary reason you can't lose weight and why your insulin is skyrocketing.

Now, as a health researcher, I've spent years digging through all the data to find the truth. And that led me to the man who risked his career to challenge the medical industry, the world-renowned Professor Tim Nos. Now, today we're discussing a brand new 2026 study proving the human body was never designed to run on carbohydrates and why statins may actually increase plaque buildup in your arteries. After this episode, you'll likely quit carbohydrates immediately.

Now, you have to be an advocate for your own health because the system isn't coming to save you. And a very easy step is to hit the subscribe button for natural solutions and not pills. So Prof. We're told that we need carbohydrates for fat loss, for performance, and for energy, but you can prove otherwise. So do you think that our bodies are designed to run on carbohydrates?

No, I don't. I think we're designed to run on fat. And that's our evolutionary history that we weren't growing maze and all and rice and potatoes two million years ago when humans became and differentiated from other other animals. So we were eating meat and that's what made humans what we are. They gave us this big brain and this particular structure. It was eating meat that changed all that. And what we've tried to do in the last 50 years is to go back and to start eating grains. But the grains in history have always been the peasants' food. And that's people don't understand that. But if you go back to the history of Britain, England, the peasants got the grains and the wealthy people got the meat. And it's always been like that until 1977 when the US dietary guidelines changed under pressure from the grain industry. And because America had now invested in industrializing production of maize, suddenly maize became the most important component of the diet. In my country in South Africa, 45% of the dietary calories come from maize. But the people who are eating it were not designed for it. They and they've only started eating those high maize foods in the last probably hundred years. And so that's and we just simply we've had millions of years of evolution and now all of a sudden we want to change and that's why we're so all so unhealthy if we're eating that diet.

Absolutely. And when it comes to our health levels, um, how, how does too many carbohydrates affect insulin levels? So the problem is that if you expose people who are not designed to metabolize carbohydrate, they increase too much insulin and that affects many tissues in the body and some of those tissues become insulin resistant and that becomes the problem. So the fat cells are not insulin resistant. They love to take up insulin and go turn everything into fat. So we get obese and then we get all the other complications, type 2 diabetes, all the cancers, the dementias, many of the other conditions are all linked to this insulin resistance. Now I think that insulin resistance evolved because we weren't eating much carbohydrate. So we had to spare carbohydrates when we got it and that was the that sort of the basis for the insulin resistance. But now when we've changed and suddenly start eating a lot of carbohydrate, the body's really not designed for it. So that's the key. And it's never recognized. We're not told that we're insulin resistant. We're told that we are fat resistant. We can't eat fat because it's going to kill us. And it's quite the opposite. The fat is what keeps you healthy because it reduces the amount of carbohydrate you take. But as soon as you take fat out the diet, you're going to increase the carbohydrate content. And industry knows that. They make carbohydrates very addictive and that's been the cause of the obesity epidemic in the last 40 years or so.

Is it fair to say that if somebody were to eat too many carbohydrates, that's the main reason why they can't lose weight even if they drop their calories? Yeah, that's a really good question. I'm just reading Gary Tobs's book on on diabetes and one of the things about him is he goes to the history. He goes absolutely into the history and I don't know where he finds all this information but he digs it out and he's been a promoter of this insulin theory of obesity for for 20 years and when you read what he writes you can understand why because he absolutely has gone through the medical literature for the last 100 years and I'm just reading now about what happened when insulin was first introduced to and they it was used to save lives. Children with type 1 diabetes where they don't produce any insulin, they require insulin injections and it was life-saving because they were otherwise they if you don't have insulin you can die of diabetic ketoacidosis which is totally different from acid ketosis that occurs on nutritional basis. As long as you've got a little bit of insulin, you'll never die of keto acidosis. It's if you don't have insulin that you will die of ketoacidosis. So when insulin was discovered in 1921, all of a sudden these children who were on at death's door were suddenly recovered and they what the first thing that happened they put on weight and they put on masses of weight and then there was a whole debate about whether this was good. So then they started giving insulin to people who were anorexic and not eating much and they ballooned out and put on weight and there it is. There's the evidence if you want to put on weight you have to have insulin without insulin you cannot put on weight. So when when people talk about the carbohydrate insulin theory, it may not be right in everything but it's clearly reflecting the real truth that without insulin you can't put on fat. You have to have insulin. It is the the the hormone that makes you fat. So to answer your question, without insulin we no one will get fat and that we knew because type 1 diabetics fade away and die and they are completely skeletal when they die. They've got no muscle and they've got no fat. When insulin was discovered and it was curing the diabetic patients of their saving them from dying suddenly but it was making them fat. They didn't conclude that the children were getting fat because they were giving insulin. They were getting fat because insulin made them eat more. That was the argument. And that then led up to this whole story about if you're fat, it's because you just can't control your your eating and you over you eat too many calories and you're not doing enough exercise and it's all your fault. And that remains today. And it starts right then with the with insulin because people didn't want to say that insulin could possibly be bad for you. This is now the 1920s. It was saving lives. How could it possibly be bad? Oh, people were putting on weight and getting really heavy, but that wasn't a problem. Only later did they realize that insulin was a problem. And what's also interesting is that people like Joslin who ran the major clinics and when they started using insulin they noticed if you used insulin for 10, 15, 20 years you got coronary artery disease, you got severe arterial disease but they forgot that and then it became cholesterol. It wasn't insulin and diabetes that's causing heart disease, it became cholesterol. But if you go back to the stories, these were the people who were injecting high dose of insulin into diabetics and they recognized within 10 or 15 years these people died of arterial disease and that's there's the evidence for the two points.

I'm very glad that you said that because I think people get very confused when it comes to how do we lose weight? Is it just simply dropping the calories or dropping the carbohydrates? And that goes to the conversation around what are carbohydrates. So my question for you is, do you think that two slices of wholemeal bread, the healthiest bread, is as bad as one apple when it comes to the blood sugar and the insulin for somebody that has elevated insulin?

The answer is yes. They will be the same. They're equally bad for you. And as a type 2 diabetic, and we'll discuss that, I can tell you that apple or those I cannot eat one slice of bread. Not two. One slice is enough to shoot my glucose way up. Up. And that's how bad we are. If you're really insulin resistant, you we are so brittle that just at even looking at that piece of bread causes my glucose to rise. Not quite, but you understand. So, so any carbohydrate, if you're severely insulin resistant, pre-diabetic, diabetic, it's a no no. It doesn't matter how complex it is. So that you think that because you're getting fiber with it, the apple's better. No, it doesn't make any difference. In the end result, the body has to metabolize that carbohydrate, has to break it down. It forms glucose in the bloodstream and the glucose hits the pancreas and that causes a lot of insulin release and it's if you've got insulin resistance, it doesn't work properly. Still takes a long time to get rid of that glucose out of the bloodstream.

Well, that's very different to what a doctor is going to tell a person watching here. They're going to say that if you have an apple a day, it's very healthy, but try to have whole grain bread and that's very healthy for you. And that goes into your backstory, which is the cost when you tell the truth, the backlash that you got as a a person. Um, so my first question around your story, getting back to today, do you think that most doctors are compromised in their medical opinion when it comes to diet?

Yeah, I think the the profession is compromised and you know it's hard for me to say that because when I went into medicine I viewed it as a fantastic profession that was trying to help everyone and make them healthier and that remains the case in certain disciplines like surgery is phenomenal, obstetrics phenomenal and there are other that are the other parts of medicine that are exceptional. So I'm we're not criticizing those groups. We're criticizing the people the allopathic medicine where they're using medications to treat disease without understanding the root cause. When I was studying medicine, we were told why did the patient come to see you today? That's the first question you have to answer cuz she could have come a week later or she could have come a week earlier, but she came today. Why? And the second one, what's the cause of the problem? And uh I it was astonishing. I could never learn pharmacology. I hated it cuz the thought of putting these stuff in your mouth which you didn't know what it was doing to you and that all these complex names that they all made up. I couldn't learn them. So I got through medicine without any learning any pharmacology and I could treat a few conditions that I knew I had to be able to treat. So I always had a bias against treating diseases or chronic diseases. Let's focus on chronic disease with medication because I thought you must find the cause and that it's not the lack of the pill that's the cause of the problem. There's another reason. What's happened tragically in the last 20 or 30 years is the pharmaceutical industry controls the medical profession utterly, completely, absolutely. And uh they control them by telling doctors what they can prescribe and monitoring what they prescribe and then rewarding them for prescribing the right the right medications. And that's the fundamental problem and I I don't want to go any further into it, but the profession is compromised. Now the second problem in medicine and this is why I never practiced medicine to any great extent was because medicine is you learn the rules. You learn the book rules. Okay. So this is when the patient comes to you, you make a diagnosis and then you open the textbook and there's how you treat it. You don't try and prevent it or reverse it. You just treat it with these conditions. And most doctors accept that because they're not creative people. That's the point. To get into medicine, you have to have a great memory. And if you've got an eidetic memory, in other words, you've got a photographic memory, you go shooting right to the top. Why? Because you can read the New England Journal of Medicine the morning of the Grand Round. Oh, you know, the Grand Round, I'm going to see this patient. And so you go to the New England Journal, you read the latest article, and then you get up and say, "Oh, well, of course, the New England Journal of Medicine this morning's got an article on such and such." And all of a sudden, your status is elevated above everyone else. And these people can read this stuff and then they can quote it just absolutely word perfectly. And so they they are thought to be incredibly clever, but they aren't clever. The clever people are the creative ones because they make a difference. They change medical practice. And I I it took me years to learn that. But I I was fortunately trained by two people who were eidetic memories. And they were the best lecturers I ever heard and I still ever heard. But they were totally uncreative. And when you looked at their careers later on, there's nothing. They didn't change anything. It all stayed all the same. So but they were recognized as brilliant. But but they weren't because they weren't creative. And I think that's the issue that the medical profession doesn't promote creativity and even most of the research that is a lot of the research that's being done is just do what you can raise money for and you just keep doing it. It's not you you you're not rewarded for challenging the opinions. And I got kicked out of the profession because I questioned and I asked and I said I don't think that this is working. We should try something else. So that was the basis for for for that was my final realization that I'd had enough of the profession and I needed to just just distance distance myself from it.

I think that people need to appreciate that um when they see a doctor, they're not necessarily the expert in health. They've just been trained to be a doctor to prescribe the medication. It's up to us as individuals to take control of our health and to question the norm. Because if we're not like you questioning the norm, then we're going to be on statins, which I have a question about that in in terms of increasing CAC scores, but we're going to be on these medications which are not going to improve our health.

But everything changed for you in December 2010. You read something that changed your life. What happened in December of 2010?

Well, what happened that morning? I got up and went for for a run and it was a dreadful run. I felt terrible and I climbed up this tiny little hill just outside our house and when I reached the top my heart rate was 150 and I thought I was at the top of summit of Mount Everest. I felt so bad. So I knew something was wrong and obviously I hadn't been training for some time but there were other problems as well. And when I got to my computer, opened my emails, there was an advert saying, "Lose six pounds in six weeks without hunger." And the without hunger was what really appealed to me. And then I saw it was written by three guys who I respected enormously. But then they said, "It's the new Atkins for the new you." And I said, "Atkins is the most most vile doctor there's ever been because he's killed so many patients telling them to eat a high-fat diet. I'm really angry with these three guys for con for using his name and promoting his ideas." So I decided I better go straight away and buy the book. So I found the book. There was the last copy at the shop. I brought it home and I sat down and read it. And an hour and a half later, I said, "Oh my gosh, I got it all wrong. Because they had 150 references and they were published in good journals, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, and they all showed that a low carbohydrate diet had benefited aspects of human health. And I did not know, I'd never heard about one of those studies. Even though I had an interest in sport and nutrition, I'd not seen one of those studies. They'd been hidden. Why had they been hidden? Because they they threatened the whole the whole story of medicine. So I decided at lunchtime, so I got the book at 10:00, by lunchtime, 12:00, I said, "That's it. No more carbs." And so I went straight onto a meat-based diet and cut out all the sugars and the carbs. And uh immediately I realized I was diabetic. I mean, I I could see that my I felt much better within two days. I felt better and my weight just dropped off and I started running again and my running went back 20 years. I went back to being able to run what I'd done 20 years earlier. So it was a it was a miracle for me. And then I started promoting the idea. We wrote a book called The Real Meal Revolution which became one of the best sellers in South Africa's history. And that caused all sorts of problems because now the university had as a professor someone who was promoting a diet that didn't fit with the what they were teaching and more importantly I was funded and our institute was funded by an insure medical insurance company that promoted the grain-based diet and I'd been the front person for that diet and so you can imagine here I was the person they used to promote their grain plant-based diet and now I I said I don't believe it anymore. So we obviously lost our funding very quickly and and ultimately I tweeted something and the health professions council were I was reported to the health professionals council by a South African dietician who has strong strong connections to all of these big big food companies. And I was advising mothers, not a mother. That was critical. I was just giving general opinion. It wasn't medical advice. It was just it wasn't medical treatment, I should say. It was medical advice, general advice. And and they they wanted to stop doctors speaking directly to the public on this topic because if they could stop me, then they could stop all doctors speaking directly to the public on anything. So it was a they wanted to take complete control and that was the time when it was just starting this dictatorial approach to the public that governments and medical organizations will decide what you're allowed to hear. And so my my case was a test case not just about the diet but it's what doctors could say in public. And had I lost the case, doctors in South Africa and ultimately all around the world wouldn't have been able to speak to the public and give them medical opinions about what they should be doing. So anyway, the trial went over four years. I was in court for 28 days and we won on every account because we just took the science and said, "Here's the science. Look at the science." And the the prosecution was so awful. They represented South African dietetics and it was just abysmal. They produced one scientific paper which we showed was probably fraudulent. It was there was something wrong with the paper and that this paper was supposedly showing that a low carbohydrate diet was no better than a high carbohydrate diet. No better. But they were trying to prove that it should be much worse and was killing people. They never brought that evidence, but that was the complaint against me that and had one guy got up and one professor of psychiatry, that's all they could get as a medical person was a psychiatrist. He said, "No is going to kill millions of children by telling them not to eat to eat meat and to be weaned on meat."

Yeah. As we've discussed so far, too many carbohydrates drives insulin resistance and chronic disease. And the first step to fix it is to significantly reduce your carbohydrates sometimes to under 20 grams a day. As you do this, your body goes through a major transition and you might experience some side effects. Things like headache, nausea, fatigue, and cramping. Now, all this is very normal, but this is where salt is so important. I want you to be very generous with your salt in every meal and in your water. But if you still feel these side effects, you really need a precise balance of electrolytes, specifically sodium, potassium, and magnesium. And that's why I'm so proud to have Element as a sponsor of today's episode. Now, I personally use Element because it has a science-backed ratio without the nasties and there's no preservatives. And I use the raw unflavored pack. It's the teal one and I add it to my coffee and also my water during the day, especially after a heavy workout. And if you prefer flavors, they have plenty of great ones to choose from. And right now, Element is offering my viewers this free sample pack on every order. So, you're going to get eight single servings of their most popular flavors to try for free. So, if you want this, just head to drinkelement.com/theprimal podcast.

I think it's really important to appreciate that if we are here today and we accept that a low carb diet is uh healthy for us, it's because of doctors or people like you that have fought the the fight when there's been so much backlash. And that's why I wanted you to share that story because that goes into your new 2026 study about carbohydrates. And this is so important so that people can understand that carbohydrates do not increase fat loss performance and your energy. And we are meant to be eating meat, eggs, and fat. So let's go into your new study published in January 2026 titled carbohydrate ingestion on exercise metabolism and physical performance. First question for you, who were the authors on that study?

Okay, so so I was the one who who worked on it. I did most of the work on it and the other guys then went through it to make sure I hadn't hadn't made any particular errors but the key person Jeff Ole who was the guy who wrote the book the the new Atkins for the new you who saved my life so I owe a lot to him and so he's one of the co-authors Dr. Dominic Dominique Agugustino is another one and Philip Prince who's a South African who's now who immigrated to America and it was crucial in this whole story because he went to school the opposite school in Cape Town. There were two schools right next to each other. I went to the one he went to the other. So we always been competing like that. And uh after my trial, I was at a conference Jeff Erlick had organized in America and Philip came up to me and he said, "Prof, you know, I'm ex South African. I'm just starting this lab. Would you help me and we'll talk about what research we should do?" I said, "Well, study exercise performance and a low carb diet." And we literally started at the absolute bottom. We took the simplest study you possibly could do and he did it magnificently and I didn't realize he really is his team is absolutely exceptional. So in the first trial we just had people run 5 kilometers on the treadmill as a time trial. So the key is that they it must be reproducible. So they must be able to run the 5ks within 5 seconds or 10 seconds. They can reproduce the performance and that they can do. Then you can measure an effect of an intervention and if it's going to make a larger effect than 5 seconds, you're going to detect it. So, we did the 5K and guess what? There was no difference in performance whether people ate a high-fat diet, high carbohydrate diet. And we were shocked. Let let's be absolutely certain. We did not know what the outcome would be. And we didn't do it because we knew there would be no difference. We absolutely assumed that the 5k would be worse if the people ate a high-fat diet. That was our assumption. So, okay. So, then Philip said, "What should we do next?" So, I said, "Well, now we must do a shorter distance. Let's try a mile repetition, mile race, tread time trial." So, we did that. And guess what? There was no difference. Now, we were really shocked. But the problem was the we knew what the people would say. Oh, but you see when you run a mile, you've got some glycogen in your muscles anyway, even on a low carb diet. So that will allow you to run the mile even though you've got less glycogen, you've got enough to run a good mile. So we said, okay, how do we deplete the glycogen completely? And the best way to do that is to do 800 meter intervals. And so we had the guys do six times 800 meter intervals on the treadmill and that's pretty tough. So they were exercising just over 2 and a half minutes or so time six and had a break and they get back on the treadmill and guess what performance was identical. Now we honestly thought that after the fourth interval they'd fall off the treadmill and say no please I can't do anymore. Not a word. They just cruised through it. But we did one other thing. We measured what their metabolism was like and we showed that they had the highest rates of fat use ever measured in humans in history. The highest rates of fat. Now that's point one and point two. This is when they're doing 800 meter repetitions. In other words, they're running very hard. And we showed that they were exercising at 86% of their maximum. Now the textbook which you can please go and check everyone who thinks I'm talking nonsense. It says at 85% of your maximum you cannot burn any fat during exercise. And we showed that at 86% by chance we got it 1% higher. 86% they had the highest rates of fat oxidation ever measured in humans. And what's more when we make that calculation and convert it to say a a 55 kg Kenyan athlete, they can run a sub2hour marathon just burning fat. That's the prediction. And so that completely destroys all the idea that you need lots of carbohydrate.

So now while we were doing this research and we were writing this I was writing this article, I eventually came to the conclusion that the that the metabolism of glucose in the body is regulated in two separate pools. And we've got this lovely slide which we're going to show and that slide reflects 50 years of research of my research. 50 years in one slide it tells the whole story. And in essence what the story story shows is that there are two pools in the body. Two glucose pools in the body. No one has ever said that before. And we did the research in the in the 1980s and 1990s. Andrew Bosch, John Hol, Sandy Welton did magnificent research, but we were trying to prove that glucose was critical for performance. And so we missed the story. But what we did was we measured muscle glucose and we measured liver glucose. And because we were sport scientists, we measured both. Diabetologists and endocrinologists don't they just measure blood glucose and liver, they don't think that the muscle is an important contributor to the whole story. So we showed then but we didn't recognize it and it it took me to write this article and then to revise my book law of running to finally okay now I fully understand. So the story is that the the large glucose pool are the muscles and they contain up to 800 grams of carbohydrate perhaps even more in some people. And the only function or sorry the major function of muscle glycogen is not as a metabolic fuel during exercise. And how do we know this? Well, a lot of reasons, but one that really piqued my interest was one of my PhD students. She measured people at rest and she wanted to see what they were metabolizing. And there were some athletes who at rest woke up in the morning and they were burning 100% carbohydrate. So I thought, but carbohydrate is a jet fuel which you spare for exercise because it's so important. You have to spare it. They were burning 100% carbohydrate. And the other people were burning 100% fat. So we had this incredible range and so she did she looked at what was the cause but we never understood it because it conflicted with our opinions and it turned out that the diet was crucial and the ones who were burning very high amounts of carbohydrate were eating a lot of carbohydrate their diet was full of carbohydrate and the people who were burning fat their diet was almost depleted of carbohydrate. So there there was the reason you you burn carbohydrates if it's in excess in the body. So I'll come back to that. Okay. So carbohydrate is stored in the muscles as a sink. It's a dump. You dump carbohydrate into the muscles when it's in excess in the bloodstream. And that's where insulin comes in because insulin drives the glucose into the fat cells and into the muscles. So that's so then so that's the first postulate that muscle glycogen is there as a sump to get rid of and protect your blood glucose and the blood glucose and the liver is a small glucose pool. Now already in the 1970s George Cahill gave the Banting lecture and he said the most important metabolic control in the whole body is the blood glucose concentration. Everything else fits around that. And so and I I was taught that but forgot it. And now I could start piecing it together. The small glucose pool has one function. Keep the blood glucose absolutely stable and don't let it go too high and don't let it go too low. And if it goes too high, you hypersecrete insulin which then takes the glucose out of the bloodstream and puts it in the muscles. And if it gets too low, then you've got to find glucose from somewhere. So that your liver might produce more glucose or you'll have to take it in orally. So the two glucose pool now tells us one thing. Okay, which is the more important pool for exercise? So we then did designed the experiment took us seven years to get to this point. Seven years of all these experiments and we finally got to the point that we could regulate the muscle glycogen content i.e. a large glucose pool, but we could also regulate the small glucose pool by fasting people and either giving them glucose during exercise or not. So, if we fasted them and didn't give them glucose, then they were likely to become hypoglycemic. And if hypoglycemia is important, as our review shows it clearly is, we'd be able to pick it up. So we finally did we did the definitive experiment where we had the athletes 10 athletes they did one component of the trial was eating a high carbohydrate diet they go off the diet and they eat for six weeks they eat a high carbohydrate diet or and and vice versa. So high carbs low carbs and then when we tested them we tested them under two conditions. One when they received a placebo drink. So, they thought it was a carbohydrate drink, but it wasn't. And when they received a real carbohydrate drink, but the key was we just gave them enough glucose to make sure the small glucose pool was filled at all times and the blood glucose didn't fall. So, now we were comparing is it muscle glycogen or is it blood glucose. So, we get to the experiments. When they took the placebo after having eaten a high carbohydrate or low carbohydrate diet which manipulates the large glucose pool. It's the muscle glycogen. There was zero difference in performance. The performance was identical over 2 hours of exercise. Identical performance although their metabolism was quite different. The carbohydrate after the carbohydrate diet they burnt lots of carbohydrate. After the high-fat diet, they burnt lots of fat, but the performance was identical. So, what that told us is what you eat before exercise has no impact whatsoever on your performance. None at all. Okay. So, now we get to the critical study. So, we've got the same athletes and this time low carbohydrate diet versus high carbohydrate, but now they're getting glucose. But instead of following the the crowd, the sheep who tell you you must take 120 grams of carbohydrate an hour, we said, "No, no, no. You cuz 120 grams is supposedly filling up the large glucose pool, which is what's keeping you going, apparently." We said, "No, we're not giving you 120 grams. We're giving you 10 to 20 grams, just enough to keep the blood glucose normal." And guess what happened? Performance in both groups went up 20% identical improvement and guess what happened? There was no hypoglycemia. So we prevented hypoglycemia and then the performance was improved. They didn't go on forever. They did stop exercising even though the blood glucose was normal. They stopped exercising but they had managed to put about 20% extra effort in. Now we've had this huge argument about is it the small glucose pool, large glucose pool, glycogen before etc. If you look at all the studies in which they compare high carbohydrate diets to low carbohydrate diet the difference in performance if there is any I don't believe there is but if there is any it's tiny it's like 1%. But we found a 20% difference. So so who's right? Who is it going to be that what you eat before exercise to fill up the large glucose pool or what you eat during exercise to fill up the small glucose pool? It's very obvious. It's the small glucose pool that's running the show. So now how important is the study? That's the question. To us it's h it's very important to everyone. It's very important for everyone. That's very important because we've been told that we need carbohydrates and even you said that we don't need carbohydrates prior to a workout and to this day people thinking if they're doing low carb they're probably going to have some fruit or something they don't need that because it's not going to affect the performance. It's very important but keep going. Yeah. So anyway, our paper showing this was published in the American Journal of Physiology, cellular physiology and it caused a fur and there were people writing on Twitter, oh this is rubbish. You didn't do this, you didn't do that, you didn't do the other, you weren't measuring performance, you weren't maximizing performance. We weren't, of course, we were doing an experiment to find out mechanisms. So there was a whole furor and about two months ago we received a letter from the American Journal of Physiology. It said you've been awarded the best impact paper in the journal in 2025. Best impact. Now this comes from a tiny little laboratory which is incredibly good laboratory. Let's let's face it. This isn't Harvard. It's not Yale. It's not Cambridge. It's not Oxford. It's a tiny little Pennsylvania un uh college. And the money that we paid for that trial came from departmental grants. There was no major funding grant from the NIH. And we outdid all these big laboratories studying cancer and all sorts of other things on sports science or sports nutrition which never gets any recognition whatsoever. And the people who reviewed the paper said it's revolutionary. It is paradigm shifting and that it is. And it'll take time for people to realize it, but I think that that we've got there.

That's fascinating. So the conclusion of this paper is to say that carbs are a safety net for the brain as you just outlined. It's not the primary fuel source for the body and that we can perfectly in in terms of if you're an athlete, if you're exercising, if you're running, you can perform quite well on fats and proteins and even you mentioned the 10 to 20 grams of carbohydrates intra workout. And I just want to uh say to people that 10 to 20 grams of carbohydrates is like a cup of blueberries, one cup of blueberries, not 10 bananas and not 10 slices of bread. So, it's a very small amount of carbohydrates that we need for elite athletes. I want to make this pertinent to the person watching right now. If they don't exercise, if they're sedentary, do you think they need carbohydrates?

Absolutely not. No. And now I'll tell you why. See, because now the big what we also showed which has never been shown before and this was because of the work of Sandy Welton and Andrew Bos in our laboratories 20 years ago and we didn't recognize it. But what they did, they wanted to explain why people got tired if they were eating a low carbohydrate diet and what caused fatigue with a low carbohydrate diet. And some of the experiments they injected insulin infused insulin and which was really interesting but most importantly they did did studies on low carbohydrate diets and they manipulated it with taking carbohydrate not etc. And what they showed was that the muscle glycogen regulates its own metabolism which is absolutely novel and it does it by controlling how much insulin is being secreted. So we normally say that your body will secrete insulin in response to a high carbohydrate intake which absolutely no one argues about that but no one questions. So what sets your insulin your resting fasting insulin and what we know is the fasting insulin is set by your muscle glycogen stores. That's the key that so the small the large glucose pool regulates how quickly it uses up its glycogen and what it does by setting the insulin and the insulin determines how much fat is released from the fat cells. So if the insulin is high, the fat cells don't release fat to be used by the muscles. And what happens? So the muscle has to use glycogen. Why would it do that? To me, it's obvious. The body doesn't like having too much glycogen in this large glucose pool. Because it's got less buffering. So when you take another high carbohydrate diet, the muscle can't accept more glucose because it's full. So it has to do other things with the glucose and turn it to fat amongst other things and fat in the liver by the way which we know is high driver of insulin resistance. So that's that's what's happening. So so we showed that now 20 years ago but we didn't put it together. So to summarize, the large glucose pool once it's full of glycogen will always cause your insulin to be elevated and that it will eventually cause insulin resistance. What keeps the muscle glycogen low apart from a low carbohydrate diet is lots of exercise. So if you asked if you're inactive, you're not burning muscle glycogen. So as soon as your muscles are full with 200, 300, 400 grams of carbohydrate, there's no more glucose to be stored there. Now you continue to eat your high carbohydrate diet. There's no, excuse me, for the glucose to go. It has to be converted to fat or used as a fuel. And what organ uses that glucose? It's the brain. But the brain only uses about 200 grams a day. So if you're sedentary and you're eating a high carbohydrate diet, there's no way your body can be in carbohydrate balance. And years ago, people spoke about carbohydrate balance being important. And then we it we just forgot it. It became fat balance. Oh, you're taking too much fat, that's why you're getting fat. No, no, no. You're not in carbohydrate balance. You're hypersecretory insulin and you're storing both carbohydrate and fat as a result of your high insulin concentrations. The point is if you if you're inactive, you've absolutely got no right to take in carbohydrates because you're going to have insulin resistance. You're going to have high insulin and you're only going to turn the carbohydrates and the fat you ingest to store it storage form. If you're inactive, there's no role for carbohydrates for you.

That's why I wanted to ask a question because most people are inactive and I'd say that they sit at a job and they're busy the whole day. They they're not walking around and exercising and you know just having carbohydrates of even 100 grams a day can be too much for most people. Now in your study you talk about that these athletes performed very well when they were fat adapted. So turning that now to somebody watching they need to be fat adapted to transition and feel great. What does that mean?

It means you have to adapt to a low carbohydrate diet so you get your muscles muscle glycogen levels are low so that your insulin is low and as soon as you get your insulin low but it has to be really low it has to be low below six units. Now, so when I was uh before I read the book and was we were in 1978, we were doing studies on ketosis. And we realized that if you exercised vigorously, ate a high-fat diet, you become ketotic. And so I was one of the experimental subjects. There were two of us. We have to go and run for two hours on a treadmill eating a low carb diet and then a high carb diet. When we eat the low carb diet, we've got this massive ketosis which and there wasn't much evidence at the time that the low carb diet would make you ketotic. So it was quite novel work but we also measured insulin glucose and in my case when I was eating the high carbohydrate diet my glucose was 30 30 units and it becomes dangerous above six. I was five times normal and that's how insulin resistant I was. Even though I was running 120 kilometers a week, I was running marathons, I was profoundly insulin resistant. So that to me was the genetic component. So that's what you have to get rid of. You have to get rid of insulin, but it has to be below five units. And to get below five units, you may need to go to 50 grams of carbohydrate a day. And that's how you become cobb fat adapted is by getting your insulin down and continuing to train on that low carbohydrate diet. That's the key. And it can happen quite quickly. Uh some studies show that within 5 days elite athletes can go from complete carbohydrate burners to complete fat burners. And that's my point. I think that the human is designed to burn fat, but it's hidden. Because if your muscle glycogen is always high, you're always going to have too much insulin and insulin is so strong, its effect on on muscle, sorry, on fat tissue. If the if your insulin's above six, you're just going to inhibit fat metabolism completely. But to get below six is hard. It's hard work. You've got to cut the carbohydrate dramatically.

Now, as we discussed, dropping the carbohydrates is only the first step. Staying on track is where the real work begins. Now, whether you're keto or full carnivore, you know that doing it alone can be really isolating or confusing. And that's why we created Go Carnivore. It is a sanctuary for those who need expert support without all the noise. We brought together a world-class team of experts and doctors, including the world-renowned Professor Tim Nos, to actually answer your toughest questions. Things like, "What's going to happen to my cholesterol? What about saturated fat? How much protein and fat should I be eating?" Now, this is a strictly zero judgment zone hosted entirely off social media to keep your focus where it belongs, on your health. And to make the journey even easier, we've just launched our new custom meal planner. Whether your goal is deep healing or fat loss, it tailors everything to your specific preferences from keto, keto-paleo to strict carnivore. And it completely takes away the guesswork of what to buy and how much to eat to hit your goals. So there's no more stress, just results. So if you're ready to level up your metabolic health and meet me personally on a live coaching call, just head to gocarnivore.com right now. We offer exclusive discounts for our new members who want to simplify their lifestyle and join a thriving tribe. I'll also link them in the description. See you inside on the next live meeting.

Well, I've got 10 foods I want to ask you about like a little game. But prior to that, one, if somebody starts this low carbohydrate diet and initially are asked about calories and carbs. So when they start low carb, what do you think?

They should track calories or something else in terms of how much to eat? Hunger and cravings. So the key to the modern diet is it's it's obviously ultrarocessed and it's designed to addict you to the food. And the addiction is because of the cravings. So whenever I walk around, I always get embraced by women who say, "You took all my cravings for food away. Thank you very much." And that's the key. That's the nicest compliment ever. It is.

And so I was heavily sugar addicted and most of us are. And you only realize it when you start eating a high-fat diet and remove the carbohydrate. So most people are sugar addicted and it's very difficult to get off the sugar addiction. That's the first thing. So what do you monitor? You monitor how much sugar you're eating and how much carbohydrates you're eating. And you'll soon notice as soon as you get rid of the cravings, you become fat adapted and you're fine.

And we noticed that we we did a study of I think 25 people who claimed they'd read Real Meal Revolution and they'd reversed their diabetes. But we didn't believe them because we mustn't believe them. So we studied them very carefully and 20 of them had indeed reversed their type 2 diabetes just by reading a book. Did just get that? Reading one book and following the dietary advice which was just basically a page. It was a page of green foods. You're allowed to eat these foods. Just by following that green page, they reversed their type 2 diabetes and we documented that they had reversed their type 2 diabetes. But the key was those who didn't reverse their type 2 diabetes continued to have cravings because they hadn't reduced, they hadn't got rid of the sugar addiction. So you have to get rid of the sugar addiction. So it's not calorie counting, it's sugar calories and carbohydrate calories you need to count. And you don't really need to do it because if you do it properly and you take the green list from the our book, The Real Meal Revolution, and you only eat those foods, your cravings will go and you will get hungry. You won't eat the the way you did.

So, you know, I would tell people, I want you to do an experiment. I want you to get up tomorrow morning, cook yourself a bacon, eggs, ham, whatever, sausages, cheese, but no grain grains. And I want you to eat as much as you can and go to work. And they suddenly come back and they say, you know, it's 5:00. I haven't eaten all day, and I never got hungry. And then you say, well, there you go. That's the only test you need to do to show you that the cravings are caused by the foods that you're eating. And the only way to stop the cravings is to get rid of those foods. Yeah. You you you can't get rid of the cravings eating less of those craving-causing foods. It doesn't work that way because the addictions are so powerful. You don't stop drink becoming, you don't reverse alcoholism by drinking just one glass a day. That doesn't work. It's it's either everything or it's nothing. You know, as someone said, if you've got an addiction, one is is too much and a thousand is not enough. Yeah. And that's that's the truth about addictions.

I would say that is so important to understand because sugars and carbs are very appreciated as this is normal. We just go out and eat sugars and carbs. If someone says I have a carb addiction, what are you talking about? That's not real. But you profess is saying absolutely that is real. People cannot moderate sugars and carbohydrates. It's a drug like heroin and alcohol. That might be hard for some people to hear, but it's important to appreciate so that you can cut the addiction and stop the the problem. And it comes from quitting the carbohydrates.

So talking about a success story because I'm sure that you've seen many people quitting the carbs and having amazing success. Can you think of one person that quit the carbs? Maybe that they lost a lot of weight that you could share. Yeah. Well, so the best story we had and we had shared, we included in The Real Meal Revolution was this guy who lives a few miles down the road here. So he is in Cape Town and he said he he was graced. He was 160 kg and he couldn't fit in the seat of the airplane. And he went on holiday to Zimbabwe and on the way back because he overflowed out of the seat, the lady sitting next to him complained. She said, "How can I sit here? I haven't even got any room to sit here." You see? So she made his life a misery for the two hours of the flight. And when he arrived back in Cape Town, he he phoned his doctor. He said, "I must see you." So he went to see his doctor and she said, "Okay, well, let's see. Your blood pressure is like 200. Your blood glucose is is whatever, age six or seven, you're diabetic. You must go directly to hospital. Do not you're not going home. You're going to hospital." So he said, "No, no, no. I'm going to sort this out myself. I'm going on the internet." So he goes on the internet and he finds our story about the low-carb diet. And we of course we'd only just been going for a year or two then. And so he sees the green list and he adopts the green list. And he lost 80 kg in 28 weeks. 80 kg in 28 weeks. And he did it because he controlled the sugar addiction from day one. That was the key. And I could not believe it. I mean, that to me was the best success. Cuz yeah, and then you talk to there was one endocrinologist who didn't like me and she once said, "Well, it's impossible. You can't lose more than 5 kg on a low-carbohydrate diet." And I said, "What about this guy who lost 80 kg?" That that just, it's like it doesn't exist. That just, no, that doesn't exist. Cuz in my her experience, she'd never seen treating diabetic patients for 40 years. She'd never seen any of them lose more than a few kilograms. So that that was one of the best stories. Amazing.

Just to appreciate for the audience, um, they might be thinking of the US metric. So if it's 80 kg in 28 weeks, that's probably about 160 odd pounds in 28 weeks. So that's a large amount of weight to lose just by doing one thing, not having so many sugars and carbohydrates. You mentioned green foods and people are going to kill me if I don't ask you what are the green foods. But before that, I want to play a game because we have to know what are the carbohydrates that we shouldn't eat. So I have 10 foods here and you tell me out of 10, how bad are they for blood sugar and insulin? 10 is really bad. One is like super good. Okay. What about oatmeal? How bad is oatmeal? 10. Sweet potatoes and potatoes. 10. Brown rice. 10. Professor, no, keto cookies. They're low carb. I would put them at five because I'll tell you why. Because they've usually got some sugar in them. They've also got some taste and that just keeps your addiction going. So, they're better than nothing. But you got to get rid of the sweet taste as well because a sweet taste will always just drive you back to your to your addiction. They're talking about sweet taste. Number five, stevia and monk fruit. Is that good? 10. Terrible. 10. As bad as oatmeal. Just. Are you sure? You can see I'm a black and white. Okay. No, but that's really important for people to understand. Yeah. And what I'm saying is that it may be for your blood glucose control, it might not be so bad, but for your addiction, it's a shocker. So you people have to re-educate their whole taste away from sweetness towards bitterness and so that you can accept bitterness. And you know, I I was absolutely addicted to sugary sweet and over the next for 12, 14 years, I've completely got rid of it. I can taste bitter stuff, it doesn't worry me anymore. You know, so I'm quite happy to have bitter coffee or bitter things. And it like lemons, I can eat lemons. People are going to hate you, Prof. No, can't have my stevia or monk fruit. Um, food number five, lentils and beans. How bad are they? The beans are okay because they got a bit more protein. So, they generally they're probably a bit better. But again, you've got to you've got to look at the carbohydrate content. And again, I'm trying to stress that if you're healthy and you're carbohydrate tolerant, then what I'm saying is nonsense. You can eat them, but we're talking about the people who are compromised, who are struggling with their weight. You've got to these things all have to go. If you are struggling to control your weight, you've got addictive behaviors, you've got cravings, they must all go 100%. There's no, you can't moderate at all. You you you can't fool with an addiction. People have to understand, as you said, this addiction is worse than every other single addiction there is. Well, that's why I have these list of foods that people can say don't have that because Prof says no. Uh, food number seven out of 10, how bad is sourdough bread? Jo, it's lovely. I mean, the thing I I was just my wife likes a bit of sourdough and I was in the shop, the the butcher the other day and the butcher is selling these beautiful oven just straight out of the oven sourdough rolls and they look unbelievable. But unfortunately, they also get a 10. Unfortunately. Um, food number eight, fruit. Bananas, blueberries, apples. People say to eat an apple a day. It's very healthy. If somebody has elevated insulin, out of 10, how bad is that for them? Okay, the blueberries scoring three or four, but the rest are 10. Okay, so we can have blueberries. Blueberries you can have. They're not quite as high in carbohydrate. But again, it's a tiny little handful that you're allowed. But that of all the fruits, blueberries are probably one of the safest, but bananas are a disaster. Oh, let's not have bananas. Um, food number nine, milk. How bad is that? Yeah, milk is like a two or a three. It does have a bit of carbohydrate in it, but it's otherwise it's pretty acceptable. Yeah. Okay, last question around the rating game. Vegetables. Um, you don't eat vegetables, do you? Hardly any. Yeah. Occasionally I'll have some lettuce and avocado, but by and large, not. Yeah. So, question. So, not relating to glucose or insulin, but do you think that if somebody's watching this, that they need vegetables to survive and be healthy? No, you don't. But I think you, you know, the whole gut story and the bike microbiome is still to me, it's still being solved and answered. And it may well be that eventually they'll work out that the gut microbiome does need some cellulose or resistant starch in it to be optimum. But I haven't yet seen those data. The problem with the microbiome research is it depends entirely what the researcher believes. If the researcher believes that meat is is the right thing, they will find a microbiome that is ideal and it's always the one that is promoted by meat. If you have vegans, vegetarians, they'll tell you the opposite. They'll say this is the perfect microbiome. And I don't know, I think people just have to monitor their own symptoms. I am a partially celiac intolerance of and so if I eat stuff, I get tremendous gut pain. If I have gluten, I get lots of gut pain and it it maybe I only day or two later. But I also had other gluten intolerance, signs of gluten intolerance and they I think they went. So so when you went to low-carb diet, firstly I fixed up my diabetes, but then the gluten intolerance got better and so that was also crucially important. And I lost all these sort of symptoms of sinus scientists and runny noses and all that and they all went. And so but if I were to reintroduce vegetables at a high concentration, I'm sure that they would return. I think that's an important question because there's a lot of controversy around do we need to eat vegetables? Are we meant to be eating vegetables? I think we know not to eat sugars and processed carbohydrates. But it's a fact that for some people, vegetables don't do well for them, their gut function, their bloating and their energy levels. So that was the foods that we should avoid. Let's talk about practical tips of what to eat now. What to do to have great energy, to lose fat and increase performance. Now you mentioned green foods. What are the green foods that we should eat to have a best way of living? So that's a list of the green food and I think if you go to Real Meal Revolution on the internet, you'll see the table that includes everything. So I'll tell you what I eat. So I eat meat mainly, chicken, fish, dairy, including lots of cheese, uh occasional nuts, and eggs. And that's it. And that's the diet. Now, it's you you could say it's monotonous, but it's not. It's very tasty because it gives you a lot of options of foods to eat, and none of those stimulate glucose and insulin. And so, as long as you can stick to that, you'll you'll be successful. But again, we make the point that that the things that you throw out, the breads and the sugars and the starches, are all highly addictive, and you have to move to these. And the first thing you need is to have comfort foods that aren't carbohydrates. And I use meat, bilong, which is a South African favorite, which is meat that is like jerky. I think in America, I eat a lot of bilong and that's and nuts. Those are and cheese. Those are the sort of things I fall back on. If I'm hungry and need food, those what I that's what I eat. Otherwise, it's eat a lot of food when you eat. Eat these good foods, have a large meal, and fast for most of the rest of the day. And you can only do it if you're eating those foods. If you're eating carbohydrates, you can't last more than three or four hours before you have to eat again.

So, if somebody's following your advice, they want to eat dairy, they want to eat meat, they want to eat butter, they want to eat all the good foods, but no carbohydrates, but they're not losing weight. It's stalled. What's your advice? Yeah. Okay. Then they have to look at how much protein's in the diet and how much fat. And it seems to me that and particularly amongst women, that they need to cut the fat and increase the protein intake. And that's difficult because it's very difficult to get high-protein foods. They're not easy. For example, the the meat usually comes with quite a lot of fat. The cheese is full of fat and so that and the nuts are have also got plenty of fat in them. So that's the problem with the diet. It works brilliantly if you can cope with high carb or high-fat diet. If you can't cope, you have to make it high protein. And so but the protein foods as I said, chicken and fish are about the or supplements like creatine and so on. That's the way you have to get your protein and that's a little more difficult. So a high-protein diet is probably the more difficult diet, whereas a high-fat diet is very easy to follow. So that so for women, they need to do that. And then fasting is also a possibility. It's not something I've ever done for more than 24 hours, but some people find that fasting can also help. And then the the third thing is they need to show are they actually sticking to the diet or are they still eating some carbohydrates. I would say that's the main thing. If they're sneaking in any sugars or carbohydrates, they first need to be mindful of that. The second step is if they're adding in things like nuts or extra fat or cheese and avocado, take that out. Then focus on your fatty cuts of meat, seafood, and eggs. And then maybe you want to switch the type of meat that you're eating. Maybe it's like slightly leaner cuz even Sean Baker, um, sometimes he does leaner cuts like salmon when he wants to lose some fat. So these are all the things that people like they always ask, okay, how can I lose fat or I'm not losing weight on a high-fat diet.

Another concern people have is when they do high fat, the LDL cholesterol can increase. And doctors are going to say, "If that keeps going, you're you're going to drop dead." Is that true? No, it's not. You know, I I've I've lived with this cholesterol story for for so long. And you know, in my trial, I presented all the evidence why the diet-heart hypothesis is nonsense. So the diet-heart hypothesis says that you eat fat, your cholesterol goes up and you die of heart disease. That is that is completely false. The the original argument was started on associational data. It wasn't clinical trials. When they've done the clinical trials, they've never been able to show that cutting changing your diet from from saturated fat to other fats is of benefit or cutting out the fat and increasing the carbohydrate. So in my trial, the one guy who they wanted to contest with me, I debated him and he was a South African who went to Washington DC and was put in charge of the Women's Health Initiative, a $700 million study. $700 million study. Now, how it happened that a South African could go to Washington DC and within two years behead of that trial, I'll never know. I don't know how why that happened. I mean, that just doesn't happen, but it happened. So, the Women's Health Initiative, they asked you to reduce your saturated fat intake and replace it with vegetables or un unsaturated fats, polyunsaturated fats. And they went for seven years and they reported the first study. They hid the data. They hid evidence for harm. And I didn't know it. I read the article. I read the abstract. It doesn't mention in the abstract. And you have to go down to one line where you saw the harm that was hidden. And fortunately, I was informed about this before my had a debate with him. And so my debate I showed, but you hid the data. It didn't make any difference. No one heard that side of the argument. So anyway, after my trial, I went back to the next bit of data coming out of the Women's Health Initiative. They finally reported their final data where they'd followed these women for 13 years and they hid that again. They hit the harm. Hid the harm. So what was the harm? The harm was if you started the trial, these were post-menopausal women. If you started the trial with established heart disease, in other words, you'd had a heart attack or you had angina or you had other symptoms suggestive of heart disease and you ate the low-fat diet, at the end of 13 years, you were at a 69% increased risk of developing another cardiac condition. 69%. So this diet that's meant to prevent heart disease exacerbated it in the people who at greatest risk. So when they looked at the healthy people, there was no benefit for the diet, but there was no harm. And that was because the diet only lasted 13 years. If you took it longer, you might have seen the harm. So I wrote a long article which is on the internet and it's called something hiding unhealthy outcomes or something like that in the Women's Health Initiative and uh I showed it and and a paper was published and not one person criticized it. Not one person from the Women's Health Initiative said, "No, no, this is wrong. It's completely wrong. We never hid anything." So what they did was they published the full data in one paper and then they published another paper when they took out the group that had suffered problems. They took out the group who'd been unhealthy at the start and they reported only for the healthy group and all they could say was didn't make it worse, didn't make it better. And that's a $700 million trial. So in my trial, I went through all these trials and they've also uh Nina Teicholz has written a book, The Big Fat Surprise. It's all there. The fact is they've tried repeatedly to show that a low-fat diet will reduce your risk of heart attack or development of coronary artery disease. None of them have shown it. Not one of them. But they've hidden all of them and they've over-interpreted them. But the evidence is very clear. So then so that's the that's the basis of the evidence. So it doesn't matter whether your cholesterol goes up or down on the diet. The the no no diet has yet been proven to prevent heart disease. And the low-fat diet particularly has not been shown. High-fat diets have not been studied for long enough. So we don't know. However, what people ignore is that diabetes is the cause of arterial the most common cause of arterial disease. And once again, you go back to Gary Taubes's book there. He goes to the people who first started injecting insulin to treat their patients. And they said, "If the patient lives 15 or 20 or 25 years, they will get arterial disease." Yeah. So this is diabetics treated with insulin, they will get diabetes within 20 years. Now, this is reported in by all these famous doctors who are the gold standard for diabetes care and this is the 1920s, 30s, 40s. And then we forget because along comes the cholesterol story and the cholesterol story is much more interesting because you can take a statin and that's a trillion-dollar industry.

Let me ask you a question about statins. There are millions of people right now watching this on a statin. Can a statin increase your CAC score, which means plaque buildup in the arteries? Well, it doesn't reduce it. That's the key. So, how does it work? So, what they do is it's so funny because if you take if you're not taking a statin and your CAC score goes up, the cardiologist says, "See, I told you you're getting worse." The studies I've seen show that the CAC score doesn't go down on a statin and it may go up. So what do they say? Oh, therefore the the artery stabilizing. It's got more calcium, which is stabilized the plaque and the plaque's not going to break off and cause you to have a heart attack. So but that's the problem when you have people who are driven by a model instead of the science. The model is cholesterol is a problem. So therefore, if the cholesterol comes down on a statin, everything must get better. But it doesn't. So my point is that no one should have the cholesterol measured. If you're really concerned, you have your CAC score. If you find that's elevated, then you might want to have a a test of uh the angiograms done with with special techniques, radiological techniques. You don't want to have them inject the dye down the arteries. that that you should spare for people who have got symptoms. But there are other non-invasive techniques where you can very clearly look at how much disease you have in the arteries. And because they're non-invasive, they're pretty safe and they can be done. They're not as widely used as they could be, but that's the test you need. It's just like you need your insulin measured, not your cholesterol. So I say forget about cholesterol. Look at what your coronary arteries look like. And your cholesterol cannot tell you that, despite what the doctors will tell you. Isn't that damn true?

Last question for you. If somebody quits the carbs tomorrow, will that start to drain the fat from their liver? Absolutely. That that's one thing that does happen very quickly. Literally within a week or two, it immediately starts. And there's a guy called Dr. Taylor, Professor Taylor, who's who talks about the personal fat threshold. And he believes that the fat is put in the liver and the pancreas. And when it reaches a certain level, which is personal, then you get diabetes. And if you reverse it, you reduce it, you can reverse it. I don't believe that's true. Cuz I'm a good example. I lost 20 kg and I couldn't reverse my diabetes. It's much better controlled, but it's not reversed. I still have to take metformin and other things. So that's I don't believe that theory. So, but you're quite right. The fat in the liver is a real problem because but but once it's been there for too long like in my case, then you get irreversible insulin resistance, irreversible type 2 diabetes. But lowering it, if you could lower it quickly early when you've only had been pre-diabetic for five or 10 years, I think you'll reverse the diabetes. But if it's been there for 30 or 40 years, unfortunately, you can take all that fat out and it's not going to reverse it. And that's where his theory falls down. It's not quite that simple. It's not quite that it's all about the fat in the liver and the fat in the pancreas. It's more complex than that. It's a it's a whole body disease and it's not just that. But if you never get the fat in the liver and never get the fat in the pancreas, you're not going to get type 2 diabetes.

So, someone says, "Profos, I really want to quit the carbs, but I like bread, chocolate, and wine. What is your best advice to give them to start today?" I'd say go to the hospital and look at the renal dialysis unit and see all the people there who are now dependent on renal dialysis for their life. And I say, "Well, that's what you're going to turn out to be. If you're pre-diabetic, that's where you'll die. Everyone who has diabetes dies of the disease and it's not a pleasant disease, not a pleasant death. You lose all your arterial function. So either your brain, you knock your brain out or you knock your kidneys out or you knock your heart out. It's going to be one of those three. If you knock your brain out, that's a problem. If you knock your kidneys out, you go on dialysis. And if you knock your heart out, you go into heart failure and get all those complications. And so people have to be realistic. And what motivates me more than anything was I watched my father die and he was an incredibly powerful, energetic, fantastic human being and he was shriveled away with his diabetes and that's that's what happens and no one worries about it. I mean, what's happening today? We're worrying about the Ebola virus and they estimate that for Americans, you've got a one in a billion chance of getting Ebola. But yesterday like 20 many thousand people, not many hundreds or thousands of people died of diabetes in the United States and no one worries about it. So we've got this completely wrong attitude. Yeah. Something that is completely arbitrary and not going to kill us becomes crucial and we have to do all these things. So, so that's where medicine has completely failed to to say, right, this is the problem. Obesity, diabetes, high carbohydrate diets, addictive eating, that's what we should focus on. And to his great credit, Robert Kennedy is doing that in the United States against much resistance, but he's doing it. And but it'll take a lot of other countries to to follow his lead.

Well, I think from this conversation, people are going to be very motivated from you, Professing with your studies and everything that you do. Thank you so much for your time. All the links are going to be in the description um for you, but thank you so much for your time. Pleasure. Lovely to chat to you again. It's always a a wonderful afternoon or wonderful period to be with you. So, thank you very much, Reena. I hope you enjoy this episode. Check out this one with Dr. Eric B. It is all about how to lose weight without counting calories and his best 61 tips. I'll see you guys next week.