Not Well Done: Layne Steaks a Claim on Carnivore

Dr. Layne Norton is one of the biggest personalities in the health and fitness space, with millions of followers across platforms, having appeared on Joe Rogan's and Andrew Huberman's podcasts, and having amassed his followers flexing his PhD in nutrition and branding himself as a rigorous, evidence-based, no BS BS crusher. But just how intellectually rigorous is Dr. Layne Norton really? Now, be warned, there will be drama in this video, as maybe you can already tell, but I won't raise my voice or get personal insofar as I'm not going to call Lane himself names, nor is it my objective to dunk on Lane for the sake of it. Although I'm touched that some of you think that I can actually dunk a basketball at 5'9" in shoes and with skin of this tone. Jokes aside, I'm simply going to assess in this video Lane's recent claims specifically relating to a carnivore diet and characterize his behavior with evidence. Call it constructive criticism. Because, you know, at the end of the day, data over feelings, am I right? And you'll want to watch this one all the way through because I'm also going to give you a concrete way to let Dr. Layne Norton know that you, like me, are going to hold his feet to the fire and keep him accountable for his claims. I'll also say upfront, while this might appear at first to be a defense of the carnivore diet, it's not. This video is not a defense of the carnivore diet. This video is inclusive and should be viewed by carnivores, omnivores, and vegans alike. It'll all wrap together at the end. You'll see, I promise you. Now, the instance that did motivate this video was Laine's recent diet tribe on the carnivore diet where he gave a evidence-based, heavy air quotes there, perspective on why it's a bad choice. He characterized it as an extreme form of a ketogenic diet and by definition almost zero carbohydrate, but then immediately goes on to cite not one but two studies that use 40% and 45% calories from carbs as threshold definitions for a low-carb diet. For context, that means someone on a 2,000-calorie diet could eat 200 grams of carbs, or an apple cider donut, a brownie batter donut, a chocolate frosted donut, and 6 munchkin donuts and still be under the threshold for low carb. I don't know about you, but that doesn't sound carnivore to me. Irrespective of your opinion on zero-carb carnivore diets, you need to admit that's a really poor citation choice. And frankly, it's par for the course for Layne. Layne has previously tried to dunk on me citing data where it's clear he either didn't process the implications of even Table 1 or Figure 1, or thought that I wouldn't. Now, this is a common influencer strategy. It's called citation bombing, where an influencer will drop a series of references—here, PubMed IDs or PMIDs—because it appears intellectually rigorous. However, this citation bombing tactic is a gamble, because if others with large enough profiles go digging, one can end up with egg on their face, as demonstrated by the video you're watching right now. Now, let me be fair and give Laine points for accuracy, or maybe a sincere attempt at such, where it's due, when he says that carnivore diet is not backed by any scientific evidence. His word choice actually wasn't precise, as any includes basic science and case series with metabolic mechanistic rationales on biological plausibility. These do exist, let me be clear. But let's be kind to Laine, be generous, give him the benefit of the doubt, and assume he actually meant there isn't any RCT, randomized randomized controlled trial level evidence for a carnivore diet. That would be true. However, any good scientist should know absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's true there aren't randomized controlled trials on carnivore diet for X, Y, or Z condition. But why? Because they haven't been funded and run. That's really important because it cuts to the heart and contradicts his claim, his assertion that a carnivore diet is unnecessary. That is an active claim. Now, unnecessary with respect to what, you may ask? To lose weight? Of course not. Whoever said it was? That's silly. But unnecessary period? Well, that can't be ruled out, and clinical reports and case series suggest that it might be uniquely beneficial for some patients suffering from autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, or mental health conditions. I've met and interviewed these patients, who attest that they suffered, in some cases for decades and through a harsh litany of treatments, medications, and surgeries until they found relief finally in their new carnivore lifestyle, which really brought them back to life. Now this does not— let me be clear— it does not imply a carnivore diet is optimal for your average person, nor that it's necessary for weight loss, nor that it's good for longevity, nor that broccoli is a conspiracy theory, or any of that. But unless hundreds to thousands of people are actively lying, it does raise the legitimate and scientific question of whether an animal-based keto cancerogenic elimination diet, a carnivore diet, could benefit select patients. And a curious man, PhD scientist or not, would want an answer to this question before mocking communities of patients. And let me tell you, let me promise you, people are hurt. Patients are hurt by Layne's behavior. Hence this video. That's why I'm doing this video. Now, this is not the first time I've responded to Layne to try to hold him to account. I did so previously when he misrepresented our research on cholesterol, making frank errors in physiologic mechanisms and ignoring randomized controlled trial level data that was in his scope of awareness. He subsequently declined to engage in a long-form discussion or take accountability for his frank errors and omissions. And I responded again when I further felt correction was warranted and he continued to harass and bully. In this second video, I also clearly delineated my personal 3 rules for fighting or starting an internet beef, and I expect everyone, all of you, to hold me to these rules. I hope you think they're fair. But the main points here are accountability and empathy. When you have a platform as large as Lanez, these are essential virtues that I will push him to demonstrate, even if it's beyond his capacity, because it's his responsibility. And you know I'm serious because I didn't even take this moment to quote Uncle Ben from Spider-Man. Now, the public can judge whether he, Layne, is stepping up or behaving hypocritically. For my part, I genuinely don't care how a person achieves good health, and I believe lifestyle is an ever ongoing personal journey, or that it should be. And if you achieve good health through a carnivore diet or a vegan diet or anything in between, I am happy for you. That is why I harp all the time on the power of n=1 science, because I want you to find your own best way. To that end, here's something you can do that will really let Lane Norton know that you, like me, are serious about holding him to account and potentially forcing his hand, if he's smart and if you feel that will be functional. I'm co-running a promotion on at-home lab testing kits via Cyfox at a 50% discount on 2 blood testing kits. Now this discount was chosen so they would just break even, not make money, with the main objective being putting your data in your hands so you can objectively test a dietary or lifestyle intervention on yourself. Now how does this relate to Lane and accountability for his intellectual rigor or lack thereof? Well, SiFox did offer me a revenue share, and if you sign up to get these labs 50% off and post a comment on this video saying as much, I will accept that post-discount revenue share and put it into promotions on this video and/or others holding Lane to account for bullying and misinformation. That means, depending on how passionate you feel about intellectual rigor and accountability and/or metabolic health and n=1 science, this video could get hundreds of thousands of views. Or more. But if it gets really brutal, I may apply the mercy rule and redirect profits to other metabolic health education efforts, like getting content CME accredited so doctors are inspired and motivated to learn more about metabolic health. Also, Lane can easily prevent this if he simply decides to have a serious, nuanced conversation with me about topics of mutual importance, or just corrects his errors publicly and sincerely apologizes to those patients and people who he has hurt with his behavior. And yes, I did just announce this social media judo move publicly because transparency. They say all press is good press. Well, let's find out. Finally, as a public service announcement, degrees are fine. I have a few myself. But if someone cites their degree as justification for their authority, unfollow them and find a better resource. Stay curious, stay nuanced, and let's see if Dr. Lane Norton steps up with accountability and empathy, or if he scurries away.