Hilarious Study “Proving” The Damaging Effects of Low Carb, High Protein Diets

Relevant Article: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-05/low-carb-diet-may-shorten-your-life-study-finds/5299284


I came across a recent news article on the ABC that illustrates the laughably high level of the incompetence and dogmatism that falls from the mouths of so called nutrition “experts” that mainstream media sources somehow feel justified in allowing them to spew their mediocrity inducing bullshit to the general public.

The article is regarding a study that Professor of geriatric medicine, David Le Couteur conducted at Sydney’s Anzac Research Institute regarding an experiment on mice that tracked the outcomes of different diets in which “the team put mice on 25 different diets, altering the proportions of protein, carbohydrates and fat”.

The conclusion made from this study was that mice who were on a low fat, low protein and high carb diet had longer lifespans than those who were given a high protein, high fat and low carb diet.

From here this Dave bloke proceeded to recommend that a diet that is low fat, low protein and high in carbohydrates is ideal for a longer life span.

The first point that needs to be addressed, and is indeed the only point necessary to dismiss any conclusion from this study as irrelevant, is that he is making dietary recommendations to us (humans) derived from a study on mice.

Yep, fucking mice.

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m not a fucking mouse. I doubt the target demographic of this study really cares about the findings and recommendations derive therefrom, because again, this study is relevant to mice, not humans.

However, Dave did acknowledge that “obviously we cannot extrapolate data from mice to humans”, which leads any intelligent individual to question why these people are acting as though this study is the least bit relevant to human nutrition and why it was conducted at all for reasons beyond curiosity among mice enthusiasts.

No one gives a shit about improving the life span of mice, not even the mice themselves. Why the fuck did this guy waste three years conducting such a useless study?

He then proceeds to claim that:

“we do know from human studies that high protein low carbohydrate diets have been associated with poorer health, poorer cardio outcomes, more diabetes and shorter lifespan.”

dickhead Dave

He conveniently fails to mention any specific human studies that have proven the above statement to be true, and simultaneously bases his recommendations on this irrelevant mice study that he stated in a manner that is just vague and casual enough to be overlooked by gullible and vulnerable individuals that this study doesn’t mean shit.

This guy is talking straight from his asshole, which I admit is to be expected from most figures that appear on mainstream media sources.

Remember, if you want to be on a national news broadcast that concrete evidence isn’t necessary, all that is needed is a strong conviction (no matter how weak its foundation), an important sounding title and that you deliver advice with an appropriate sense of vagueness that relinquishes you from all responsibility brought on by the consequences of your advice on others.

He also mentioned that studies on insects found that those on low fat, low protein diets experienced longer life-spans than those on high protein diets.


Again, we are human beings. We are not mice and we are not any kind of insect. You cannot make dietary recommendations for humans based on studies of fucking insects, when the evidence of his recommendations on our species are so overwhelmingly negative and obvious.

Lets look at a simple method of observing the concrete evidence of the outcomes of his recommended low fat, low protein high carb diet:

1. Determine that such diets are commonly spouted by mainstream media sources as the “correct way of eating”. The general consensus is that we should eat high carb, low fat and low protein as illustrated in the food pyramid below taken straight from NutritionAustralia.org.

Dumbass Diet

2. Now look at how this consensus has fared over the past 40 years. Walk into any shopping mall in the first world and you will find yourself amidst a sea of fatties, the same people who unquestionably take their advice from so called “experts” like this idiot.

You will find people who think that drinking a boost juice smoothie that is “low-fat” but has over 60 grams of sugar is good for them.

You will find people who think that eating a chicken teriyaki sub with reduced fat “fit chips” is “healthy”.

The obvious and irrefutable evidence of the outcomes of this diet lies within the people who follow it; and these are the people who are fat, diseased, waddling around the baked goods aisle in an insulin coma and dead from a heart attack before they’re 65.


According to Mr mice man, apparently high carb is the way to go because:

“The mice that ate a high-carbohydrate, low-protein diet lived about 50 per cent longer than those on the low-carb diet.”

Again, this doesn’t mean shit as we are not mice. We evolved hunting animals and eating them.

In what world would it make sense to claim relevancy from conclusions derived from a study on a species that is so low in the food chain it has no ability to kill or do anything worth two shits to the biological responses of the top predator in the world?

Using these finding to base your eating habits on is like a lion going out into the field and chewing on grass because gazelles live longer eating grass than meat.


“Professor Le Couteur says plenty of data in humans already exists that shows people who choose a high-protein diet have worse outcomes in terms of death and disease.”

Again, talking out of his ass. If he weren’t he would discuss specific and relevant human studies and stop talking about rodents and insects.


I eat 300+ grams of protein daily, whilst restricting carbohydrates to less than 30 grams and eating a high amount of saturated fats. I have been doing this for more than 12 months, whilst regularly getting my blood-work checked. The result is my blood-work has improved in all areas (to the docs surprise), that includes my cholesterol levels and blood pressure.

The next part is the most contradicting and hilarious of all. The only specific example ol’ mate Dave gives as to why high protein diets are so damaging is because:

“branch chain amino acids activate a number of aging pathways, for example insulin.”

His reason a high protein diet is damaging is because it can produce an insulin response.

An insulin response…

The only example this dumbass can provide as to why high protein diets are damaging is that it produces an insulin response.

Anyone with a basic knowledge in nutrition and hormonal response will know that carbohydrates produce an insulin response when ingested, much more efficiently than protein. If you’re unaware allow me to give you a simple lesson in human biology:

Insulin is a hormone that is released by the pancreas when blood-glucose levels rise, in order to mediate these levels and bring them back down to normal. Glucose is sugar in the blood that is used for energy by all of our cells. All carbohydrates are converted to glucose when ingested. Thus all carbohydrates trigger an insulin response to mediate this blood-glucose level.

So in essence, the complete contradiction that this idiot has spouted is that protein in high amounts is damaging for you because of the insulin response, but what he then recommends is a high carb diet that produces this insulin response that but with more efficacy.

While it is true that high amounts of protein in the absence of carbohydrates will trigger an insulin response (a process called gluconeogenesis). This occurs when a large amount of fast digesting protein is ingested in a very small time frame and your body has a limited amount of glucose from carbs to use for energy. Protein is then converted into glucose and used for fuel, which triggers insulin in the same way that carbohydrates do.

When done correctly, you can consume high amounts of protein AND inhibit gluconeogenesis (production of glucose from protein), by simply controlling timing and monitoring your intake.

How do I know this? Because I do it every single fucking day.

I consume over 300 grams of protein a day and still maintain ketosis, and for those of you who are unaware, ketosis occurs when there is an abscence of glucose in the blood stream and energy is being derived from fat (ketones).

Glucose is always given priority over ketones for energy use, so if I had eaten protein in a manner that would trigger gluconeogenesis I would not be able to maintain ketosis. Yesterday I undertook a protein spared modified fast, where I take in my normal amount of protein (300+ grams), but do not consume any fat or carbohydrates. I ate a bowl of cream with 50 grams of protein about an hour ago, just pissed on a ketostix and this is the result:


Pink mean ketones are present. Ketone production means I am in ketosis. Ketosis is only possible in the absence of any significant amount of glucose, which would be the case if I didn’t manage protein intake correctly.

The above proves that I have successfully avoided gluconeogenesis (in any significant amount) while consuming a large amount of protein in the last 24 hours.


Lastly, he says that:

“Vegetarian protein is probably better for health”.

.. “probably”?

Way to give a definite answer. Make sure you don’t get yourself into trouble by being precise about recommending specific actions that are only grounded in your dogmatic opinion. Leave room for interpretation mate, don’t be too far one way or the other, talk with authority, yet maintain vagueness and you will look important without getting into trouble.

From the above statement I will conclude conclusion that all we have here is a delusional ideologist who is more than happy to manipulate and pay attention to science in a way that only strengthens his ideals with complete disregard to all evidence to the contrary.

Or maybe he is actually a mice enthusiast who was just looking for a way to justify spending three years monitoring the eating habits of mice?

I’d prefer the latter to be true.


The point I’m making is, if you find yourself watching bullshit mainstream reports like this, make sure you read between the lines. Just because someone is given an important sounding title and speaks with conviction does not mean they know what they’re talking about.

Think for yourself, most people don’t know shit.

Share this around if you found it helpful, it sucks that people like this are being given the position to give such damaging dietary advice when they have no idea what they are talking about, spread the word yo!


– Ryan Kuchel

Like This Post? Stay Updated

Sign up below to receive email updates for new content on Aggressive Evolution. Enter your email below and hit SUBSCRIBE.

Your Email address is kept strictly confidential.


  1. says

    Hi Ryan,

    Thanks for the good laugh! We tend to complicate things and ignore common sense. I don’t drown myself in the details of a “perfect” diet. I just eat a little bit of everything and exercise. It works for me and I am fit as a fiddle. I sound like a broken record, but I will say it again:

    If you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight. If you consume more calories than you burn, you will gain weight. In addition, if you eat processed foods with little nutritional value, your body is not going to respond well. If you eat wholesome foods that are natural, your body is going to respond very well.

    And I don’t need a fancy degree to prove what I just said. It’s common sense.

    Top Dog

  2. says

    Hilarious! đŸ˜€ I just overheard some people talking about this study the other day. I asked them how the study was conducted and they didn’t know shit. People are so fucking stupid and believe everything the tell-a-vision tells them. Great post!

  3. says

    Hey there Ryan,

    I agree with you. These studies are pathetic. I doubt those scientists are ripped.

    “I eat 300+ grams of protein daily”

    –That’s quite a lot. How much do you weigh?

  4. Summer says

    The problem isn’t that they came to a conclusion based on research done on mice. That is completely fine as many other researches are done on mice as well. However, it is stupid at most and bull and least that they think a increased lifespan in mice may translate the same to humans. If in that case there are other methods to make mice live quadruple their normal lifespan which should directly apply to humans. Which it doesn’t.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *