>"That carnivore/hyper-carnivore is best for optimal human health and is ethically appropriate."
## Analysis
1. what does "carnivore/hyper-carnivore" mean? If this is an inclusive disjunction, whichever diet is "less" carnivorous than the other will be one being argued for.
- ""
2. what does "ethically appropriate" mean? What sort of ethics (rights, utility, rules?), Appropriate with regards to what?
- ""
## Clarified Proposition 1
>"Red muscle meat diet with some bone marrow and salt supplies the nutrients that humans need to develop."
## Clarified Proposition 2
>"Red muscle meat diet with some bone marrow and salt is not shame-worthy."
## Clarified Proposition 3
>"Red muscle meat diet with some bone marrow and salt lacks phytochemicals that cause damage to the human body."
## Line of Questioning:
### What's the evidence?
1. Animal nutrients not found in plants
- Lack of animal foods causes nutritional deficiencies
- Brain size decreases with agriculture **(not evidence)**
2. Phytochemicals in plants
- Pesticides in plants are carcinogenic **(not evidence)**
3. Limited adaptations for eating plants
- Don't see carnivores benefitting from plants
4. Plants want to defend themselves with chemicals
5. Many anecdotes count in favour of the carnivore **(not evidence)**
6. Blue zones eat a lot of meat and live the longest **(not evidence)**
7. Carnivorous animals don't thrive on herbivorous diets **(not evidence)**
8. The removal of fibre could help constipation
- We can only break down a small amount of the fibre
9. RCTs show that animal fat is superior to plant fat
- MCE, SDHS, WHI **(not evidence)**
10. Paleolithic humans had the same life span as modern humans despite not having access to modern medicine **(not evidence)**
- Maasi live to be over 100 **(not evidence)**
11. Harvard carnivore study **(not evidence)**
## Cherry on top
Whatever he says, ask him if he would accept the same for X diet
