Ketogenic diet, after unsuccessful carnivore phase I'm back to a fairly moderate amount of meat. And it did make a big difference for me. I was pretty much bedridden over a year ago, after a year of low carb and later keto I'm able to work again, albeit only part time. (I also could stop taking some drugs, no more heartburn, blood pressure is better, dropped 30 pounds, some issues like psoriasis are gone.)
Bugger. I thought I could resist to ramble, but I can't... Sorry for that. Continue reading at your own peril. Controversial views ahead
Dietary advise is confusing because most of it is based on faith and simple assumptions. Only a very small fraction of nutritional advise is based on actual science.
If you're ready to invest the time and check out the science that we have, you'll be introduced to a fascinating world where things start to make sense. (Watching or reading Gary Taubes is a good start. Check out Gary Fettke and Paul Mason on youtube if you want the connection to autoimmune diseases and possibly ME/CFS.) The carbohydrate insulin model explains so many macroscopic trends that contradict the lipid hypothesis, and it explains why we develop chronic diseases including systemic inflammation. But you'll have to learn some fundamentals and make up your own mind, because if you listen to 5 random nutritionists then you'll end up with 5 incompatible, often diametrically opposed opinions. But then, the science involved is not that difficult. In fact, I'd argue that we should learn the basics in high school.
One problem is that a lot of the observations that we see there are paradoxical. For example you can actually gain weight if you eat less (more precisely: you will lose weight at first, but gain it back and you may weigh more after 2 years or so) , and you might lose weight if you replace carbs with fat (and eat a lot more calories). The womens health study had one group of women cut their calories by roughly 15%. After 8 years, they lost indeed weight - a bit less than 2 pounds on average, to be precise. (300 less calories a day, or ~30g fat less. If you believe in "a calorie is a calorie", the difference in weight should have been 170 pounds.) Or you could say it made almost no difference.
Many people think that eating vegan is healthy, but there is not a single study that backs this. Oh, there are studies that vegan diet beats western crap diet (salad+whole grain bread is healthier than fries and candy bars), but there isn't a single long term study (5+ years) that a "clean" vegan diet is better than a "clean" meat containing high-fat diet (that is, salad, veggies and whole grain bread vs. salad, veggies and good quality meat/eggs/dairy), or even a "clean" vegan diet vs. a "clean" western diet (vegan vs. a diet based on the usual nutritional recommendations). And "better" means lower mortality or lower incidence of diseases or less obesity or something like that. There simply isn't any evidence. But we should be VERY concerned because a vegan diet is lacking in some important nutrients (omega-3, vitamin D, several amino acids). We can go a few years without them, but at some point we see inflammation and chronic diseases as result. We should also be concerned that ALL plants have chemical defenses against insects, called lectins, oxalates, isoflavones and so on. We can tolerate them in limited amounts, but there isn't a single study that shows that it's safe to eat a lot more, as we do with a vegan diet. (There
are animal studies that show that animals get very sick if they eat too much lectins. But we still have no trouble recommending a diet high in lectins for humans?)
Should we have faith that for some reason a vegan diet that is completely different from what our ancestors ate (as hunters and gatherers we got 65% of our calories from meat and pretty much 0% from grains) is healthy for us? Don't you think that we should have least a tiny bit of scientific evidence before we change our diet? Don't you think that the fact that we started to get sick at an astonishing rate roughly 50 years ago has something to do with the fact that we fundamentally changed our diet, starting, well, pretty much 50 years ago?
Get this: Everybody things that lowering cholesterol is good, and vegan diets lower cholesterol. That has to be good, or? Well, in one big cholesterol lowering study, the MRFIT study, the intervention group managed to lower their cholesterol. They received counselling for nutrition, fitness, many gave up smoking and everything ended up with a --
higher mortality. Get this: Replace all the presumably bad saturated fat with vegetable oils or carbs, quit smoking, cut junk food, you end up with lower cholesterol, and - you're dying earlier! But funnily enough, not a single major nutritionist questioned if the shift to low-fat may be responsible for the higher mortality, or if lowering cholesterol really is a good thing. One of the most expensive nutritional studies ever done, set out to prove the lipid hypothesis (sat fat -> high cholesterol -> instant death), actually proved that the lipid hypothesis is wrong, and so all mainstream nutritionists simply agreed to never mention the study again.
Ah, science is a beautiful thing.