Frank Tufano Raw Carnivore Diet Experience (+ Health Tips)

Frank Tufano Raw Carnivore Diet Experience (+ Health Tips)


(upbeat contemporary music) – Hello everyone, and welcome to BioHackers Lab. I’m your host, Gary Kirwan, and on today’s episode
I have Frank Tufano. Frank is known for following a raw carnivore diet on YouTube, and advocating for the importance of high vitamin animal foods. He has been following what he considers the healthiest diet for six years. This is one with the least
amount of inflammation, and only consuming foods that
our ancestors would have. Frank, thanks so much for coming on for an episode for today. – No, thank you, Gary. I’m excited to give
you guys my perspective on the carnivore diet
and what I’ve been doing for, I guess, what I
would like to consider my professional dietary career. – (laughs) I like it. You’re my first professional dieter on the show. (chuckles) So yeah, I actually had a previous guest, Bart Kay, and he dropped your name in here. Yeah, that sent me down a rabbit hole, and of course I’ve actually really enjoyed watching your videos. You do do very good YouTube videos, and I’ve enjoyed the content that you’ve produced there so far. And I’m pretty sure listeners
are gonna do the same today. So we mentioned the raw carnivore diet. We are gonna explore the topic a bit more. But I’d just be interested to find out how did you actually come across the carnivore diet in the first
place all those years ago? – So coming from a
bodybuilding background, and in hindsight, me taking the drug Accutane really ruined my digestive system. Ever since I took that drug I wasn’t able to follow
my old bodybuilder diet, but I was having these
symptoms, energy was low, was eating five pounds
of sweet potatoes a day, didn’t really know what to do, but all I knew was that
working out every day for two hours in the gym wasn’t healthy, and eating five pounds of sweet potatoes a day wasn’t healthy. So I literally started googling what’s the healthiest diet? I came across Paul Chek’s YouTube channel, and he’s a very successful
holistic nutritionist, has his own institute. But he turned me onto Weston Price, who was a dentist in the early 1900s that explored various indigenous groups. And then Paul Chek also turned me onto Nora Gedgaudas, who wrote the book Primal Body, Primal Mind. What I grasped from Weston Price’s book was the importance of the
nutrient density of animal foods, and what I grasped from
Nora Gedgaudas’ book was the importance of being
in a ketogenic metabolism. So I combined the two ideas, animal food nutrient
density and ketogenic, and it made sense to me because you could technically be on a Keto animal foods-based diet if
you only consumed animal fats. So I figured that a Paleo Keto
diet was the healthiest diet, but unfortunately a Paleo Keto diet based around animal foods, is technically pretty
much a carnivore diet. Because I didn’t really see any nutritional properties in plant foods. That was a little bit confusing to me, so I said let me do Keto Paleo. Is there any actual diet
that’s related to this? And I discovered the carnivore diet. It was called Zero Carb,
and it still is called Zero Carb at the time, back about six years ago. And I was actually looking at that diet, but I remember not
actually looking into it because I had read the brief
description of the diet, but the glaring issues for
me with the carnivore diet were they didn’t seem to
care about nutrient density, and they didn’t seem to
care about macronutrient ratios of fat to protein. And for me those two things
were pretty important, especially considering after I started reading
about the carnivore diet there were some very unusual beliefs that didn’t make sense to me, from things like you
shouldn’t salt your food. And there were a couple
things that were written in these anecdotes of people that had established that diet from before that didn’t really have any scientific or explanation behind
them, outside of anecdotes. So I was like, well,
this isn’t really for me. So I just did my own Keto Paleo thing for like three to four years until I started making YouTube videos. And then about two years
into making YouTube videos, the carnivore diet started
becoming more and more popular. So I decided to kind of market my videos towards the carnivore diet, and I got bunched in with the
rest of the carnivore dieters. Although, I wouldn’t say I follow a carnivore diet. And that’s why there tends
to be a bit of a discrepancy between the diet I follow, and what other people tend to do. It has to do with the original premise, and why I’m following
the diet I’m following. – Okay, so if you had to explain it then, you’re not on a strict carnivore diet? – Technically speaking, I am
on a strict carnivore diet, but the dietary beliefs that I follow aren’t necessarily carnivore. So for me the most important thing is that you have a base amount
of nutrients in your diet from these high-vitamin animal foods. And in most indigenous groups, that was like 65 to 75%
of their caloric intake. The other thing is the
removal of inflammatory foods, and there are plenty of plant foods. There are plenty of,
especially wild plant foods, that are not inflammatory to the body. The problem occurs with modern plant foods and unnatural access to food. And this doesn’t apply to only plant foods because you could follow a
carnivore diet that’s not good. If you were following a carnivore diet and only eating high Omega-6 meats like commercial chicken, commercial pork, commercially raised eggs, a bunch of processed meats,
sausages, charcuterie. The difference between
that and an Inuit Eskimo, who was eating caribou and wild fish, they might as well be on
two different planets. So just because someone’s
following a carnivore diet does not necessarily mean they are following a healthy diet. But for the most part, yeah. Most people on the carnivore diet are achieving the removal of inflammation. The only thing that I
want people to understand about me that I haven’t really
conveyed too well in the past is that I have no
problem with plant foods. What I have a problem with
is modern plant foods, and what people need to
understand about plant foods is that they were consumed for
energy and out of necessity. Humans were surviving. When they consumed grains, the role that grain plays in human history is replacing wild plant foods. So the animal foods have always
been present in our diet, but in the past few thousand years, instead of foraging for plants, these wild plant foods, depending on the climate we
decided to harvest wheat, harvest rye, make bread instead. But that’s only been for
the past few thousand years. I just don’t see anything inherently wrong with the wild plant foods our
ancestors used to consume. The issue I have is that
that apple in the supermarket is the equivalent of five apples that might have been in the wild. Not only that, it’s
much lower in nutrients. And you could literally
look-up wild plant foods and their vitamin C content. They’re literally hundreds of times higher in vitamin C than oranges. These plant foods were
much lower in sugar, much lower in calories, had higher vitamin and mineral content. They are nothing like what we are consuming now from supermarkets. That being said, are there
some acceptable plant foods? I think so, but at the end of the
day it will always be from an energy or a caloric perspective. There’s never going to be, even enjoyment, there’s nothing wrong
with eating something because you enjoy it, but you have to understand
that these plant foods don’t actually have any
vitamins or minerals that will contribute
to physical development and your overall health. When I was referring to vitamins and minerals in plant foods, what I mean is there might
be some electrolytes. There might be some
plant forms of vitamins, but their availability isn’t
comparable to animal foods. I can go further into that, but that’s just the overall
premise of what I do. Although I do follow a carnivore diet, I don’t necessarily advocate for it when I’m advising people on diet. It’s just something that, I’m probably unique in that sense. A lot of people in the carnivore community don’t really have this perspective. – So in this case, what I’m getting here is that if you were in a geolocation, somewhere in the world
where you had wild plants, you’d be okay if someone was forging. – Of course, but the other
thing to keep in mind is if the indigenous group had access to as much meat as they wanted, it tended to be like 75%
to 80% of their calories. So they would still consume maybe 20% of their calories from plants, but the only reason
that they would consume more calories from plants would be out of necessity. So you have the Inuit Eskimos and certain carnivorous tribes. The reason they were 95, 99% carnivore is ’cause they didn’t have
access to these plant foods. And if you have an indigenous group that’s in, I think there were
some South American jungles, they were consuming like 45 to 50% of their calories from animal foods. But they were much shorter than
the other indigenous groups. And the reason they did that was because of their lack of access to animal foods. They didn’t consume 55% plant
foods because they wanted to. It’s because they had to. Same thing if we look
at these blue zones now. Blue zones do have very
high life expectancy rates. And if you look at the
macronutrient ratios in their diets, blue zones actually have
the same as Americans. It is interesting. Both Americans and blue zones consume 30% of their calories from animal foods, and 70% of their calories
from plant foods. But when we look at plant
versus animal ratio in the diet throughout human history, it’s generally been
dependent on the location, the climate, and what foods
they have access to it. We’ve never actually had a choice, which, to me, is super interesting. But saying that we never had
a choice is somewhat incorrect because there were some
plains Indians that, as I said earlier, When they did get to choose they would opt for the heavily animal-based diet, and they would only eat
some foods out of enjoyment, whether it’s berries
or certain wild plants. But by no means where
they harvesting rye bread, or eating hundreds of
thousands of wild plants like some indigenous Aborigines were. It really is dependent on the
region and the climate, and how adept they were at hunting. It could even be an issue with season. Maybe it was unusually cold. Maybe it was unusually hot. Maybe something happened, who knows? – Okay, so when you were talking
about meat quality earlier, that seems like a big one for you, and that is quite a
heavily discussed topic in the carnivore community. Hey, can I just get any kind of meat because of the budget that I have versus maybe going for a
potentially more expensive meat, which is grass-raised or pasture-raised. In your case, then what
are the sources of meat or the types of meat that you find that you source? – Yeah, so the premise behind this is, from a logical perspective, indigenous people and our past ancestors only had access to high-quality meat. This new factory farming thing, the meat we have access to now, it’s unnatural in a way. It’s almost as unnatural as
that apple in the supermarket, you could argue. If someone decides to consume whatever meat they can
afford on a carnivore diet, granted it’s not high
Omega-6 inflammatory meats, they’re still going to reduce the inflammation in their diet. So if you only ate commercially grain-fed beef from the supermarket, you would remove most
inflammation from your diet. What you’re missing out
on is the nutrients, and there is also a possible
negative connotation with the antibiotics, whatever negative things were
in the feed of the animal. I did a video, and this was
maybe three, four months ago, comparing grain-fed to grass-fed steak. And if you actually taste
the fat on a grain-fed steak, when it’s raw, it’s essentially inedible. Once you cook the steak, once you cover it up with salt and pepper, it becomes edible. And if you taste the grass-fed steak raw, it actually tastes okay. This becomes more apparent
in fat of the animal, as the fat is where the toxins are stored, and this is very apparent in the liver. The reason a lot of
people don’t like liver is because it’s bitter, it’s astringent, it tastes weird, it tastes terrible. And they’re right, it does taste terrible because you’re buying
conventional grain-fed liver. Liver is supposed to
have little to no flavor. It is supposed to be mild and sweet, and the quality of the animal is not always indicated
in the muscular tissue. But the muscular tissue is
what most people are consuming. So this whole thing is hard for people to grasp and understand. And I remember one time I bought some grain-fed bone marrow and
some grass-fed bone marrow, to compare it. I put the grain-fed
bone marrow in my mouth and it tasted like acrid, acidic, corn, like play-doh, it was horrendous. The grass fed marrow was good. It was like mild, sweet, nutty. So for me having that
raw aspect in my diet and tasting these foods
and looking at them and understanding them, I’ve developed this
palatability oriented around – Let’s say if you had these animals in front of you in nature, and you started tasting the animal as it was when you slaughtered it, there’s a reason certain
parts of the animal taste as they do. This is going a little bit off-topic, but the food palatability in
the context of a wild animal is much different than a
modern grain-fed animal. So the marbling that we see
on these rib eye steaks, ground beef, these foods
never really existed. The parts of the animal
that we used to eat were the fat deposits,
the short rib section, the brisket, where the animal stored fat. The marrow, because wild animals don’t have marbled rib eyes. I’m sure plenty of you guys
have bought grass-fed rib eye. I’m sure plenty of you guys are hunters, and have hunted venison. You’ll notice that fatty deposits are only in certain parts of wild animals. So a big part of food
sourcing and food quality, and people not really
buying high-quality food, ties in with our disconnect from what animals are naturally
supposed to be like, especially the cuts of the animal, but to answer the question on what I do is I go to local supermarkets, I go to local farms, and I essentially just buy grass-fed meat. Now although the nutrients aren’t
stored in the muscle meat, they’re stored in the fat, muscle meat does contain fat. Let’s say you take a lean piece of meat from a grain-fed animal, and you pair it up with
a grass-fed piece of fat. That’s essentially the same thing as a fatty grass-fed rib eye steak. So since the nutrients of the animal are contained in the fat, what you want to prioritize in
your diet is the fat quality, not necessarily the muscle meat quality. And that’s the reason I tell people it doesn’t really matter what
muscle meat you’re eating, because the nutrients are contained in the fat and the organs. So, if someone was to buy
something like an egg, that is a concern, where
the egg does have fat in it. If someone was going to buy cheese, that’s where the quality does tie-in. Any dairy products, that’s
where the quality ties in. So for me, the most important thing is that the source of fat in your diet is coming from a high quality. Now, considering most
people on the carnivore diet tend to just buy steak,
I think, and ground beef, the difference between you eating two pounds of grass-fed ground beef and two pounds of grain-fed ground beef is completely dependent on the pasture. The animal could have been grass-fed, but it could have been
low-quality pasture. So maybe the vitamin content
in the grass-fed meat was only two to three times higher. But we’ve seen levels
of certain fatty acids, and this study was linked in my grain-fed versus grass-fed video, sometimes the linoleic acids in the meat can be 10 times higher. The vitamin E, the vitamin
A, the carotene content in the meat can be five times higher. But is this relevant when you can consume liver and get 200 times the amount of vitamin A that’s in muscle meat? That’s the issue with me. If you are concerned about the nutrient density in your diet, and that you can’t afford
the higher-quality meat, there’s essentially three nutrients that you’re missing out on by
only consuming grain-fed meat. It’s vitamin A in the form of retinol, and that’s mostly found in liver. It’s vitamin K2, and that is
in high-quality animal fats, but if the animal wasn’t on pasture, there’s vitamin K1 in grass. If the animal is not eating
grass or various wild things, like a pig could forage in the forest, the animal fat is not going
to have the K2 present. And the third thing is Omega-3
fatty acids, same thing. The animal needs to consume foods that its gut bacteria will
turn into these nutrients. If it’s being fed a commercial grain diet, that’s not going to happen. Now since you’re missing out
on these three nutrients, what are the alternatives? For vitamin A, you can take
a cod liver oil supplement. You can eat a little
bit of liver every week. For vitamin K2, there is some K2 in cod liver oil. There are also K2 supplements. K2 is very high in foods
like egg yolks, cheese, really any high-quality animal fat, and then for Omega-3s, I think just about half
the people in America are taking a fish oil supplement, and Omega-3s are also in cod liver oil. So interestingly enough, a food like cod liver, or
a lot of livers in general, can really knock out all of
your micronutrient requirements. So the difference
between someone consuming a grain-fat diet and adding
these supplements in, versus me, yes there are differences. The forms of the vitamins are different, but the goal can be achieved either way. Yeah, that’s a pretty
good way of explaining it, but the only concern here is are there negative
things about antibiotics, or possible altered
Omega-6 ratios in animals? If you are eating something like a large amount of grain-fed
eggs for vitamin K2, is there a downside to
consuming all of the Omega-6 from that low-quality egg source? And then of course we have the issue of the food volume, are you satiated? To me, if it really is a matter
of not being able to afford the higher-quality animal foods, it’s doable, but you could make it work. – So then, you brought up a
good topic, though, with eggs. Are you pro-egg? – Well, this brings in allergies. That’s the other concern. So if you have a product in the supermarket like Kerrygold Butter, Kerrygold Butter is pasteurized butter, and the difference between
pasteurized butter and raw butter is that the fat is oxidized in the pasteurized butter. That can cause allergic
reactions to people. That can be inflammatory. But the main issue here is whether or not you’re allergic to the casein. The main issue for eggs is how well you tolerate the high Omega-6, if you have an egg allergy. So although I am pro-dairy consumption and pro-egg consumption, for me it’s always a matter of, if you’re gonna buy eggs, I used to go buy, pay seven, $8.00 a dozen for soy-free, pasteurized duck eggs. For butter or dairy products, I used to go to the farm
and pay 12, $14.00 a pound for high-quality raw butter for my family. But personally I’m allergic
to both eggs and dairy. I can’t tolerate them. So for me it’s a little different in a sense that I usually just go buy foods that come
straight off the animal. Whether it’s fish or meat, working in New York City
as a personal trainer, bartender, doing all these things, if I go out to a restaurant I do focus on meat-based dishes, but if they put an egg on my steak tartar, I’ll probably eat it. For me, having one egg is
not too much of an issue. For me having a pat of butter on my steak isn’t too much of an issue. The issue is if I incorporate these foods I’m allergic to in large
amounts in my diet. So what you really have
to do is you have to gauge what is the source of the food? Is it high-quality? Why are you eating at? And is it causing a reaction? I know people that on
Keto that can tolerate a stick of green-fed butter every day. If I did that, I’d have a pizza face full of acne. So it really is dependent on the person. There are downsides to every single food. I can look at whatever food it is, think of the downsides, whether it’s having pasteurized
cheese versus raw cheese. There’s so many pros and cons, from the nutrient
concentration of the food, whether it has the vitamins that it’s naturally supposed to have, or whether or not there
is inflammatory aspects that are relevant to our
crazy, modern food system. But a lot of these things
can be answered with, and I really do hate having to use native diets and indigenous diets as examples for everything, although I do like looking
at the science behind, why is the vitamin content different when the cow’s fed grass versus grain? Why do people get allergic reactions from pasteurized cow’s
milk versus raw sheep milk? If you can look back at whether or not the food was obtainable
in a natural environment, that always answers your question. It really does. If we were gonna have animals that we were using for dairy products, 50, 100 years ago, they
would have been consumed raw. If we weren’t gonna go to the supermarket and buy ground beef 100 years ago, well, I don’t know about 100 years ago, but if we were hunting animals, we would have had whole cuts, fatty parts. Different parts of the animal
would’ve been prioritized. And just to sum up this question, I was reading a site the other day, I’ll try to provide it to you. It went over the animal foods
in Native American diets, and they literally had
about 100 different types of animal foods in their diet, and about 1000 different species. So if they consumed trout, there were maybe 10 different types of trout they would fish. If there were seven types
of salmon they would fish. There was literally hundreds of fish, hundreds of different types
of birds, ducks, geese, so many different types of land animals that these indigenous
people were consuming. The sheer variety of animal
foods in their diet was insane. And here I am eating beef all day. So there’s definitely something to be said about the variety of animal
foods they were eating, and the quality of animal
foods they were eating. And although we can’t, of course, replicate what we were doing back then, what they were eating can
help us answer questions about whether or not a product is truly, it should be looked at, in a sense. It’s not that since they didn’t do it we shouldn’t be doing it, but it’s more like the eggs they used to consume
were from wild animals. So let’s compare the wild
animal egg to the modern egg, and then that’s where we see the very apparent nutritional differences, the fatty acid ratio differences, the accessibility differences. Of course, something like eggs, if you’re eating more than
two or three eggs a day from a natural perspective, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. But I think that’s enough for that. (Gary laughs) I could go on and on and on. I really can, so. – Well, again, that’s why I’ve got you on. You’re a great speaker and you’ve got a lot of
good thoughts about things. So already we’re
exploring different things on the carnivore diets that maybe people
haven’t heard of already, which is great. I’d be interested on your thoughts then, talking about native tribes
and indigenous people, I remember watching a documentary, especially up with the
Eskimo kind of people, and they do a lot of cured foods, where they would take a carcass and they’d actually bury it for a while. So they’d never actually
have to eat the meat fresh, fresh, fresh. What are your thoughts on that? – I actually was planning on doing a video on indigenous foods soon. So I did a little write-up. Did you want me to read that for you? I can read some of that, ’cause it’s relevant. Not only is there incredible variance in how many animal foods these
indigenous tribes consumed, the preparation methods varied greatly, dependent on the animal and the tribe. One group of Inuits would only eat the fat between the intestines of a female bear, literally leaving the rest. And other tribes might have aged all the meat on a rack of a male bear, and most groups would roast,
boil, or stew the bear meat, and then they would render the fat. In some cases, if the animal was large, like a caribou, the hunter would eat some of the meat on the spot and bring back the prized parts, maybe sending tribe members to gather it. Some groups considered the head, the fermented contents of the stomach, and the droppings made
into soup delicacies, eating it with blubber. Roasted ribs were favored, boiled kidneys, they would even ferment the liver and the stomach under the
hot sun for several days. They ate the ends of the bones. Other groups may have
dried out stomach strips, and used it to flavor boiled meat. Some preserved bone marrow and tallow by stirring the fat on
sticks and drying it out. Some ate it raw. Even just one food like caribou I could literally talk
about for 20 minutes. The variety of preparation
they did on foods was, it was literally completely crazy. The same can be said
of all meats and fish, whether it was consumed raw, sun-dried, boiled, mashed with grease, baked, frozen, rotten, smoked, roasted over a fire, fermented, mixed with
the stomach contents, it seemed like there was no wrong way to consume animal products
in these indigenous groups, as long as it was that original heir of high-quality animal food. It really is amazing
the preparation methods, and how oddly specific these foods were. Because if you look at one food, salmon, maybe the Sockeye Salmon would be prepared differently from the King Salmon. And if you had 10 different
indigenous groups, they were prepare it 10 different ways. One indigenous group might feed the flesh of the salmon to the dogs, and feed the eggs to the woman. One group might smoke the meat, and then make the eggs into
a soup with whale blubber. And this can be said
about every single food. So every one of these
thousands of animal foods has dozens of different preparations, depending on the tribe. The pure variety, it’s
actually very overwhelming. It truly is. It makes sense as to why, food plays a large role
in people’s lives now, but as you can imagine,
food was our lives. Our goal was survival. If we have shelter, the
next thing we need is food, and that’s really all
humans are meant to do. If you think about it from
a nine-to-five perspective, humans’ whole nine-to-five
job was procuring food. That’s why they were so good at it, and there are so many methods to it. – And so, in your choice, then, you’ve decided to eat a
more raw way with your meat. Would you like to share
your thoughts with that one, and what you define as
raw then, to people? – Sure, I guess we have
to briefly go over what the benefits of being cooked
meat versus raw meat are. And when you do cook a meat product, you do compromise the vitamin
content to some degree. And this is if you cook it well-done. If you’re cooking your meat rare, and it’s mostly red in the middle, or mostly pink in the middle, you’re not losing as many
vitamins as I am stating now. If you braise the meat
in the oven for one hour, you will lose approximately
40 the 50% of the B vitamins, and 10 to 20% of all the other
fats that have the vitamins. And then there is a drastic
difference on digestion. The main thing to consider
is that every single indigenous group of people consumed both raw and cooked animal foods. So there is no better or worse, but what is safe to say is
that certain animal foods are better consumed raw
from a taste perspective, as well as a nutrient perspective. If you have something like
salmon eggs or salmon roe, that have a very high nutrient content, especially vitamin C, as with things like liver, those foods are better to consume in a lightly cooked to raw state to preserve most of the nutrition. The idea that raw is
better, cooked is better, and we see this in the
vegan community, too. I really don’t like it. That’s why I’m happy
that there is an example that we can look at in
the indigenous groups, that they did both. Let’s say, is there a concern if you are cooking all
of your meat well-done? Only usually in regards to vitamin C. In Vilhjalmur Stefansson’s
book, the Fat of the Land, it’s about an Arctic
explorer who went around, had many meals with Inuit Eskimos, and there’s a lot of reading
about scurvy in that book, and it didn’t matter how
many fruits and vegetables these people consumed,
they still got scurvy. To prevent scurvy you need fresh food. Doesn’t matter if it’s a lemon, doesn’t matter if it’s a piece of steak. If you cook the food extensively, you will remove the
anti-scorbutic properties. So that’s something else that
ties into raw versus cooked. But what I noticed on a raw diet, or primarily raw diet, is the digestion of the meat. So when you cook the meat more, your body produces more waste. The meat digests a little bit quicker. So to my understanding, the purpose of cooking
food in human society is not to extract more
micronutrients from the food, it’s to extract more
macronutrients from the food. And if you look at different climates in different parts of the world, one hypothesis I have about why the Inuits might
have been shorter people than the Maasai in Africa, the climate and the cold requirement could have been bottle
necking their ability to procure calories. So calories have always had this tie-in to surviving in natural environments. And that’s where I think
cooking plays a role. But in regards to my personal experiences, as I said, the digestion plays in, there is a nutrient concern
that we touched briefly on, and personally, the taste and the texture. Although I do prefer the
flavor of cooked meat, if I cook the meat past
red or raw, essentially, I don’t like the texture. And that’s something that happened as I progressed on the carnivore diet, consuming high-quality foods. But just to give you some context as to what meals I actually consume, I pretty much just take
some grass-fed steak. I’ll throw it on the grill for literally 20, 30 seconds on each side. The middle is still raw. People like to make jokes
like a good veterinarian could bring that back to life, you know? (Gary chuckles) Things like that. But the same thing with
jokes in the kitchen. Just wave the steak, don’t even put the steak in the pan, just put the pan on the burner and then put the steak on
the plate and send it out. Jokes like that. But the steak is literally raw. It’s just a crisp on the outside. Most people might know
it as black and blue. That’s how I prepare my meat. So although the meat is
seared on the outside, in regards to actual
percentage of how many calories are coming from cooked versus raw, it’s probably 97 to 95% raw. So although my diet is completely raw, I do sear the outside for flavor. And then the other foods that I consume, from liver to eggs, to salmon roe, off-cuts, fish. Most of the time, the
stuff like the liver, the salmon roe, I do raw. Sometimes fish I cook,
sometimes I do it raw. But to me it’s what I feel like. To me, I feel like I almost replicate the indigenous groups to some degree. Sometimes I feel like
pan-searing my steak. Sometimes I feel like
putting it on the grill. Sometimes I even feel like
smoking a brisket for 10 hours. Sometimes I feel like
boiling a beef tongue in some stock I made. And then maybe I’ll even just have some raw salmon roe, some raw liver. And eggs, people know eggs can be prepared a dozen different ways. So for me, as long as I know that the initial food quality is good, the cooking temperature, I
don’t think it matters too much. That being said, my personal preference is pretty much almost completely raw. – Yeah, and that’s
fascinating, too, to hear, ’cause again that’s one of the big debates when people are consuming
an all meat diet, is should I go cooked, should I go raw? What I’m hearing again
in your case here is yeah, it’s a majority raw, but there’s actually even a variety there. There’s times you cook. There’s times you don’t. And then especially there, you’re consuming a lot of different types of animal foods, too. – In my case, for the most part, I stick to fatty cuts of meat, like brisket, short rib, and that would be the
majority of my calories. I’ve been tapering off
liver to some degree in favor of other off-cuts, like brain, testicles, marrow. I’ve been trying to really
broaden the spectrum. Fish. But it’s not necessarily
consuming a variety of meat, so to speak. It’s just to make sure that you’re getting some nutritional completeness. And nutritional completeness
can best be summed up as in consuming nose to tail. And nose to tail can literally
mean eating an oyster. Because you’re technically
eating the whole animal. So what I’m trying to explain is that whole animals have all
the nutrients you need. So in the case of an oyster
or a crab or a lobster, the whole animal is much easier
to eat, compared to a cow, ’cause the cow has many organs,
many different components. But if you could shrink a cow down to the size a salmon egg and eat it, it’s essentially the same principle. Because muscle meat
might not have too much of any vitamin in particular, but the brain tissue of the
animal has DHA, primarily. The heart of the animal might
be higher in B vitamins. The liver has all vitamins, A, C, D, E, K2. The kidneys are also
very rich in vitamins. The fat of the animal is
very high in vitamin K2. Each part of the animal has different nutritional properties, and that’s part of the reason why these indigenous people
prized certain foods. They correlated nutritional properties to what would happen in their bodies. But if you consume an oyster, it’s essentially the same thing. So eating nose to tail in the
context of a ruminant animal might be more difficult, but if you could just crack an egg into your mouth for breakfast,
that’s the same thing. Same thing with salmon eggs. Salmon eggs are essentially
tiny, tiny salmon. That’s why they have all the
nutrients the body needs. So one big part of knowing what foods to incorporate into your diet, and whether or not you should cook them, ties back into understanding the nutrient profiles of various foods, maybe how indigenous people
would have consumed them, and also identifying where in your diet you might be going raw. – And what are your thoughts
on pork and chicken? ‘Cause that’s never discussed so much. – Yeah, this is a pretty
big topic in itself. And even pastured pork and chicken are an issue because hypothetically, worst-case scenario, it’s 100% grain feed, and hypothetically, best-case scenario, on a pastured chicken or pig, it’s still like 60 to 70% grain feed. So the Omega-6 ratios are still off. Pastured pork and chicken is miles better than commercial store-bought chicken. Pastured pork is literally red. It looks like beef. And the chicken actually
is deeper colored, too. I don’t know how many of you
guys have eaten game birds, or wild game birds, or geese, but the meat of the birds is red. That’s how it’s supposed to be. White meat is not natural, so to speak. Same thing with wild turkey. It’s a very different color
than commercial turkey. So if you were gonna consume pork, maybe you want to consume bacon for an enjoyment perspective. And if someone tells you
they enjoy chicken breast, I think they’re lying. (Gary chuckles) But for me the alternative is, look at those game meat alternatives. Instead of having pork bacon, you can have beef bacon
or wild boar bacon. Of course, there’s a lot of
grunt work associated with this, but then the question is, well, Frank, I like bacon. can I have two slices
of bacon in the morning? I’m not gonna say no, that’s definitely a lesser evil compared to what most people eat, especially considering
how unhealthy everyone is, but for me, I’m just analyzing it from the perfect perspective
of indigenous diets. Obviously, eating only bacon all day would be way healthier
than most Americans are, but from the perspective of
what indigenous people do, there is a scale, so to
speak, a measurement. On the topic of the chicken, not only are we concerned about the Omega ratios in the meat, we’re concerned about the antibiotics, how the animal was raised. And not only that, the nutrients
are missing in the food. Not only is there an inflammatory concern from the Omega-6 fatty acid ratios, but it doesn’t have
nutrients in the flesh. And the organs are pretty much inedible because of what the animal’s been fed. While that being said, I don’t think it’s too bad to have, if you have pastured pork or chicken and you’re paying out your ass for it, and you know it’s a high-quality source, yeah, I’d eat it two,
three, four times a week. I wouldn’t only eat it, unless you’re raising the animal yourself and you know what it’s eating. There was a farmer in Connecticut that had 100% pastured, essentially wild animals in the forest. He didn’t feed them anything. And he was charging, even the ground pork was $17.00 a pound. So a lot of times this can
be prohibitively expensive. Same thing with a farmer, they had some milk-fed veal. And there’s some misconceptions
about veal marketing. They’ll say it’s milk-fed veal, but they’ll actually feed a formula, and it won’t taste right. But milk-fed veal and formula-fed veal, it’s really interesting ’cause I’ve had ground veal
that I didn’t really like, and then I had actual
mother’s milk-fed veal, and I was like what the (bleep). How does this taste so good? I literally just put
this veal meat in a pan, seared it, put a little salt on it, and as I was eating it, I was like why does this taste so good? This is insane. And that feeling I get when I eat high-quality animal foods
in regards to the taste is something that I try to
replicate in all my meals. If I go to the supermarket and I buy a crappy quality grass-fed
steak from Australia, and I eat it, I’m like
this is pretty good. But once in a while, I’ll go to a farm and I’ll get this really nice deep yellow-orange grass fed beef fat. I’ll put that on the grill. I’ll take it off, I’ll
put some salt on it. I’ll take a bite out of that beef fat, and I’ll be like what the F, because the beef fat will
literally taste like butterscotch. If you guys haven’t eaten an animal food and said holy (bleep), why
does this taste so good? All I did was put it on a fire. You haven’t experienced
high-quality animal foods. And the easiest way I
think to do this would be buy a whole live crab, buy some live lobster. There is certain animal foods that really taste amazing
in their natural state. If you go fishing, if you go hunting, you might have experienced this, but if you haven’t tasted, and here’s an interesting thing, I compared bacon to lamb fat, and I gave a piece to my mother. And the lamb fat tasted 10
times better than the bacon. If you get really high-quality
meat, you will know it, 100%. If you haven’t experienced that, try to. – And then, I’m always interested when I speak to someone like yourself, have you ever come across anyone who’s predominantly seafood-based on a carnivore diet? – In indigenous groups, there were many that were seafood-based. Anecdotally now, it’s so – We’ll do a comparison of two tribes. So there’s the Maasai,
who most people know. They were cattle herders. They ate a lot of blood, meat, and milk. And some people don’t know, the Maasai did eat a pretty
fair proportion of plant foods, like 30, 35% of their calories. But the Maasai were very tall. They were known to be well over six foot. The men usually around six foot six. And then there was another
tribe, called the Neurs. It’s N-E-U-R-S. The Neurs had similar ratios, except they ate fish instead of meat. So it’s evident that, and even in Vilhjalmur
Steffanson’s Fat of the Land, the book we talked about earlier,
about the Arctic explorer. He examined skeletal remains of two different groups of people. One were the Inuit Eskimos, who ate primarily caribou, whale meat, very meaty animal foods, so to speak, and then he examined
coastal Florida Indians that only ate shellfish. And their skeletal structures
and their bone structures were both perfect. So it’s evident that we
can obtain fat-soluable vitamin nutrition from both
fish and ruminant animals. What comes up is what is the constituent of
following a fish-based diet versus a meat-based diet? And I think it’s the fuel, really. Because of you have access to fish, you’re missing fat, in a way. So when you’re eating fish, you have to eat everything of the fish. And this is something people don’t do. They usually throw out the guts. You have to eat the fish’s liver. You have to eat the fish’s intestines. I did have a video eating fish intestines, but I think it was deleted when I was gonna get rid of my channel. So I have to do that again in the future. It’s hard to get, large animals, large fish, they usually gut them on the boat so you don’t get the organs. And the problem with the small fish is they usually come in
frozen, and it’s all icky. It’s not good. So the problem with
having high-quality fish that you could eat the organs in is mainly accessibility. If I went fishing on
the Long Island Sound, and just ripped a fish out of the ocean, I would gut it and eat
the stuff on the spot. But then there’s the pollution concern, and this is the same thing
with grain-fed animals. The liver doesn’t taste good. It takes bitter; it tastes astringent. And some livers, fish livers, in these indigenous
groups, were delicacies. The indigenous people would talk about how much they loved fish liver, especially liver of certain animals, and they would boil it and they loved it. But I taste fish liver and it’s bitter. Definitely has to do with pollution, and what the animals are
being fed now, unfortunately. So one consideration to
have about pescatarians is if you’re consuming finned fish, to consume the organs, as well. And also that shellfish like mollusks, clams, oysters, crab, lobster, these foods played a
huge role in the diets of fishermen, as well. So you need to eat the whole animal, and that’s ideal for nutrient density. But yeah, whether you’re following a beef-based diet or a fish-based diet, I don’t think you can follow
a fish-based carnivore diet because I think these tribes, these groups of people,
did have other plant foods that they were consuming
for some sort of energy. The reason people are able
to follow a carnivore diet on red meat is because of its fat content, because of its calorie contents. ‘Cause fish has a higher moisture content, it’s lower in calories. It doesn’t have as much fat. It’s difficult to obtain
calories from fish versus the volume of
food you’re consuming. Whereas with red meat
it’s actually possible. So, hypothetically, if you did want to try a pescatarian carnivore diet, I’ve tried it myself, but I always, literally three days and then
I give up and eat a steak. (both laugh) To be honest, that’s
what’s happened every time. I’ve tried doing, unfortunately, my stomach is
still messed up from Accutane. I’ve never been able to digest
carbohydrates the same way. But I wanted to try, I’ve tried indigenous diets before. That was when I was trying
an Inuit Eskimo diet. I was like, all right, I’m only gonna eat fish for two weeks. And I was like, all right, screw this. I can’t do it; I only lasted three days. And I was like, all right,
let me try something else. So what about a Polynesian Islander diet, or like the Neur diet. So I got some wild plant food, not wild plant foods, but I got some sweet potatoes. I got some carbohydrate
plant-based sources that I deemed were acceptable, and then I was going to
consume that with fish. And my stomach just couldn’t digest it. I think that was because
of the previous problems I have from Accutane. So if my stomach was normal, I’d have a lot more
anecdotes to experiment with, but I’m sure that most people out there, if you do go pescatarian, if you do try pescatarian carnivore and you find out that it’s not working, try adding in some sort of high-quality plant carbohydrate source, and let me know how it goes. That would certainly be interesting, because in the context
of an indigenous group X amount of your calories
have to come from animal foods for nutrients and X amount of your
calories have to come from either carbohydrates or fat as energy. You can’t only consume protein for energy. You need fat and
carbohydrates in some way. And if the fish is not providing the fat, you need to get fat or
carbs from something else. – So, what’s interesting with you, too, I think you’ve also done some blood work, have you, over the years? – Yeah, so just to give some context. People are always concerned
about cholesterol, but my cholesterol’s been the
same since I was about 16. My LDLs been around 220
since I was about 16. On the carnivore diet
it didn’t really change. None of my blood work markers changed really over the past 10 years or so. And what also didn’t change is my doctor tried to put me
on a statin when I was 18, which I think it’s quack stuff, but I’m not gonna get too much into that. To me the most interesting thing is I was literally eating
chicken and rice every day, and my cholesterol was
the same as it is now. That’s what I think it’s crazy. And I’m sure there’s some vegan out there that’s gonna argue, “Oh, the
chicken was gonna kill you,” or something crazy like that. The interesting thing about my blood work might be my testosterone. I’ve always had low testosterone, and it got worse after I took Accutane, but there was some
irregularity in my blood work. ‘Cause my testosterone level
tripled when I did something. I got some blood work today, actually. I just got the blood taken, so I haven’t seen the results yet. So by next week I will know for sure what impact this has
had on my testosterone, and I’ll be able to talk
about that in depth. But did you have any specific, did I answer the questions
related to blood work? Did we wanna touch on
anything else specifically? Triglycerides, glucose, other blood markers like electrolytes? Kidney function, stuff like that? – Kidney function is one that, hopefully, I had Professor
Stuart Philip on, and he debunked the myth about protein causing kidney failure, but then a lot of people, after Dr. Shawn Baker’s results, when he shared his results that time, always go, well, if
you’re on a carnivore diet you’re basically gonna make
yourself Type II diabetic. – What’s the premise of Type II diabetes? Oh, it’s because he had
the high glucose, right? – Yeah, so it was just the glucose. I can’t remember if it
was the A1c, but yep. – To me, that sounds like he didn’t fast for the blood work long enough. – And he was also doing
a lot of work outs. So they were talking about
athletes who have higher glucose, responses due to the …
– That could be it, too. But generally speaking, an endurance athlete, the problem I have is I don’t know the whole context of everything he did. Okay, so I don’t wanna touch on Shawn Baker’s blood work because obviously there is
definitely conversations to be had about testosterone, and him being a world-class athlete. That’s a conversation that
can be had for someone else. But on this specific topic
of the glucose levels. – And your glucose levels, did they go up? – No, my glucose has
always been really low. One time I took it and it was 80, and the next week I took it it was 100. So there’s definitely a lot of variance, depending on the fasting. So this is what I was
getting into, though, we don’t know what he did. So I could fast for three weeks and my LDL could go up to 350, and then I can eat a meal
and my LDL will be 200. A lot of people don’t understand how much blood work can vary here. So although I would love to speculate on why his glucose was high, you can’t just go off one blood test. What you have to do is you have to say, “Okay Shawn, fast for two
days, get the blood work. “Then fast for one day,
get the blood work. “And then have a normal day
and have the blood work.” And then you can compare
those three things. And then if we do see something like, “Well, your glucose is high,” what was the exercise pattern? And Dave Feldman with Cholesterol Code, he does so much work on this. Dave Feldman, the guy probably
spent thousands of dollars in blood work over the past few years. And he’s experimented with anything from high-fat to low-fat diets. I think Dave Feldman recently
did something on exercise. So if you haven’t had
this discussion with Dave, I think he would be the person to go to. But my answer to that is there’s too much variance
in blood markers. It’s absolutely insane. And not only that, the main thing that I would
answer in regards to blood work, instead of going into
all this hypothesizing, and theorying, and me
really talking out my ass, is what’s the metric here? What are these standard
deviations we’re going by? What determined these deviations, and how is it applicable
to human health in general? Because one metric that I am
very comfortable talking about is vitamin D3. And the usual vitamin D3 scale is, the safe reference range is
30 nanograms per milliliter to 100 nanograms per milliliter, and if your D3 levels are
30 nanograms per milliliter, you get sun a couple days
of the year in the summer. It’s impossible to get 100, so I don’t know why it goes that high. I was in the sun for 10 hours a day, taking an incredibly high
vitamin D3 supplement dosage, and my blood levels were 75. And that was 10 hours a day in the sun as an Italian person,
taking 10,000 IU D3 per day. So for them to say that
it’s okay to get no sun, and okay to be a sun god, it doesn’t make sense, does it? So deficiencies of vitamin D3, most people are deficient. And if there is anything you guys are gonna learn from this podcast that would make an
impact on anyone’s life, that you should mention to other people, it would be the importance of vitamin D3 and how overlooked it is, and how almost everyone is deficient because, going back to indigenous
people, as always, their blood levels of D3, I have a study, it was actually done on an Arctic civilization. So keep in mind Arctic area D3 levels. Their D3 levels after the winter, when they depleted their
D3 source, were around 40. Which is higher than pretty
much everyone now in America, and these are Arctic
people after a long winter. In the summer, before the
winter, end of summer, their D3 levels were 65, 70. And that was the amount of D3 that was adequate to survive the winter. So their D3 would go from 65, the winter happens, goes down to 40, 35, summer comes back around, animals are on pasture,
animals are getting sunlight. These people are getting sunlight. They consume the high-quality animal foods that have vitamin D3. Their D3 blood levels go back
up to 65 over the summer, and the same thing happens
again in the winter. So humans have this
natural cycle of vitamin D3 that is going up and down. So how this ties into blood
work and human nature to me, we have a very clear example of what our blood levels
should be in nature, and the medical guidelines
are clearly incorrect. So to me, what other medical
guidelines are incorrect really becomes a question. That being said, I think
they’re pretty close, because when most people
do get their blood tested, most people don’t really
have any irregularities. But the D3 one stands out to me a lot as something that is incorrect. And to me, the cholesterol one, the cholesterol level
between people varies so much and I don’t know why people don’t talk about triglycerides more, for that reason. I will say glucose is a
very important indicator. It would be nice to be able to get all the blood work we want, but for most people it’s expensive, health coverage, things like that. You can’t just get your
doctor to write you scripts every two weeks. And especially where I am in New York, there is a lot of laws around – I can’t order blood work
from outside of New York. I have to get a doctor to write a script, and to get a doctor to write a script, it gets expensive. I can’t just go to my doctor and say I wanna test my testosterone
every two weeks. What I have to do is, I gotta go to that doctor and
get my testosterone tested. Then I gotta go to another doctor, and then I have to go to a first initial consultation visit, because I’ve never been
to that doctor before. It gets expensive. It’s difficult to get blood work. It would be nice to have
all this research done, but let’s just say there’s not a lot of money
in people being healthy. – Well, again, Frank, we’re coming up on our
time a little bit here. But you’ve just got so
many great opinions. I’ve really enjoyed
exploring some of them. I know we’ve only just
touched a little bit of what you have stored up there.
– Yeah, of course. No, I think we went over
some good stuff here. You can get a general idea. – So at this stage now,
if someone was to start following you, keep in touch with you, sort of see what you’re up to, what are the best places
for them to do that? – Sure, of course, my YouTube
channel, Frank Tufano. I’ve got hundreds of videos, seeing as I do them every day. If you guys wanna check some things out, that’s a great resource. I do have some videos that
are pretty general summaries. On my Instagram it’s really
just selfies of me and steak. You’re not gonna learn too much on my Instagram.
(Gary chuckles) On my Twitter, I do
post stuff on my Twitter from time to time about
studies and research. But most of the stuff is going
to be on my YouTube channel, and if you guys do want
to tune into live streams. I’m usually live streaming on Saturday, or you can look at the past live streams on my YouTube channel. A lot of questions come up. I am working on both a book and a video course. What do they call them? But I’m working on a video course that will explain all of these things in a two to three-hour
time period, hopefully. Because it really is a lot of information. And just to break it down for people, the four elements that I go by are your diet, which we spoke
about mostly in this, the sun, which we briefly
touched on with vitamin D3, we didn’t touch on exercise, and we didn’t touch on water. Water is a pretty big topic in regards to negative and positive. But those are the four principles I go by, so if you guys do wanna
know more about that, definitely check out my YouTube channel, youtube.com/c/franktufano. Frank Tufano on Instagram. Frank Tufan on Twitter. I do have a website, frankstufano.com. You guys can check that out, as well. But no, Gary, thank you
so much for having me. I hope you guys, as always, take everything with a grain of salt or a lot of salt, as long as it’s not Himalayan
pink salt, it’s okay. As long as you don’t
(mumbles) your steaks, you can follow my channel. – (laughs) Again, Frank, I think you’re gonna get quite
a few more followers from this episode. So thank you so much. – All right, thanks, Gary. (upbeat contemporary music)