Meat Only Diet, Blood Work, and the 15-AG Clue

A number that stood out in this blood work review was 15-AG = 10.9.

That is not a dramatic “red alert” value, but it is low enough to raise a practical question: could short-term glucose spikes and dips be happening even when more familiar markers look fine?

This discussion centers on a self-run, roughly 3.5 to 4 week carnivore-style, very low carb experiment designed to test a common accusation, that a meat-heavy diet automatically pushes someone toward diabetes. The results were not framed as proof that any one diet is universally safe or risky. Instead, the unique angle is about measurement, especially using 15-anhydroglucitol (15-AG) as a window into recent glucose variability.

Did you know? A large portion of US adults have suboptimal metabolic health. One commonly cited estimate is about 93%. That context is why adding more informative markers can be appealing when you are trying to understand your own risk profile.

A 4-week meat-only test, and the result people did not expect

The experiment compared two recent patterns.

From roughly July through October, the diet was higher carb than usual, with carbs coming from seasonal fruit and a lot of sourdough foods (bread, pancakes, pizza, crackers). Then came the short “reset” into a near-zero-carb, carnivore-style phase for about three and a half weeks.

The expectation many viewers bring to this topic is simple: more meat equals higher glucose problems and worse lipids. The data shared here did not follow that script in the short term.

The most important nuance is time.

A few weeks is long enough to see some changes, but not necessarily long enough for big shifts in every marker. That is why the discussion repeatedly returns to the idea that some biomarkers respond quickly, others slowly, and some may be confounded by training, sauna use, and day-to-day physiology.

The “lean mass hyper-responder” goal, and why it matters here

A secondary goal was to see whether a short, strict low-carb phase could shift the speaker into a “lean mass hyper-responder” pattern, a term popular in low-carb circles for a specific lipid response in lean, often athletic people.

That shift did not happen in this short window, and the plan mentioned was to repeat the test for a longer period (around 8 weeks) to see whether more time produces clearer lipid swings.

What changed in the lipid panel, and what barely moved

The lipid story in this video is surprisingly restrained.

After about 3.5 weeks of a carnivore-style diet, LDL cholesterol rose from 147 to 151 mg/dL, a change of 4 points. ApoB rose by about 6 points, and ApoA1 rose by about 2 points. HDL went down about 6 points.

Those are not trivial markers, but the short-term movement was small.

Triglycerides were also notable because they stayed low. During the higher-carb months, triglycerides were 49 mg/dL, and during the carnivore-style phase they rose slightly to 55 mg/dL. That is an increase, but still a low absolute value.

This framing pushes back on the idea that a short-term switch to meat-heavy eating automatically causes dramatic lipid deterioration. It also avoids the opposite claim, that meat-heavy eating is always benign. The practical point is that your response may be personal, and short-term labs can look steadier than online debates imply.

What the research shows: Population-level studies often find that higher red meat intake is associated with higher type 2 diabetes risk, especially processed meat. Harvard researchers summarize this association and possible mechanisms like weight gain and insulin resistance pathways in their coverage of the evidence on red meat and diabetes risk hereTrusted Source.

So how can both ideas be true?

Individual short-term self-experiments can show minimal change, while long-term, population-level data can still show risk associations. Differences in baseline health, body composition, activity level, food quality, and cooking methods can all matter. Some research also suggests that how meat is cooked may influence risk, with higher-temperature methods linked to more potentially harmful compounds, which Harvard discusses hereTrusted Source.

Glucose markers: why A1c can look calm while variability is not

The glucose section is where the video’s unique perspective really lives.

Fasting insulin dropped from 4.0 to 3.1 microIU/mL, roughly a 25% decrease. Hemoglobin A1c shifted from 5.5% to 5.4%.

A1c is slow.

It reflects average glucose over roughly 2 to 3 months, so a 3.5 week intervention often will not move it much. That small dip is not framed as a miracle, it is framed as “about what you would expect” given the timeline.

At the same time, the discussion highlights a blind spot: you can have a decent average while still having meaningful peaks and troughs. Averages hide volatility.

This is where the video argues for adding a different tool.

Pro Tip: If you are experimenting with diet changes, consider aligning your lab timing with what the test measures. A1c is a longer-term average, while some other markers can reflect shorter windows.

15-AG (GlycoMark) explained in plain language

15-AG (short for 15-anhydroglucitol) is described as a glucose analog used to infer recent glucose excursions.

Here is the simple model presented: when blood glucose rises high enough, the kidneys prioritize excreting glucose and, in the process, you lose more 15-AG in urine. Over time, serum 15-AG drops. Lower values can therefore suggest more frequent or more substantial glucose spikes.

In this framing, 15-AG reflects a shorter window, about 1 to 2 weeks, and is positioned as more sensitive to short-term changes than A1c, and even more responsive than markers like fructosamine and glycated albumin, which generally reflect about 2 to 3 weeks.

The threshold mentioned is practical: when 15-AG drops below 10, it can indicate more glycemic variability. The “typical” range cited in the video for healthy adults is broadly around 10 to 20 micrograms per mL, with a referenced healthy adult male range of 10.7 to 32.

The reported result was 15-AG = 10.9, which is just above that 10 cutoff.

That creates a tension that makes the discussion interesting: 15-AG looks low-normal, but fasting insulin is low, and A1c is not elevated.

The athlete angle: sauna and training as glucose disruptors

A key personal observation was that sauna sessions raise glucose, and exercise raises glucose.

That can sound counterintuitive if you only think of exercise as “lowering blood sugar.” In reality, intense training can temporarily raise glucose because the body releases stress hormones and mobilizes fuel to meet demand. Sauna and heat stress can also trigger hormonal responses.

The video notes that 15-AG has been studied mostly in people with diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance, and that there is less clarity about how it behaves in athletes. That is why the speaker is curious to see other athletic viewers’ 15-AG values.

Important: If you have kidney disease, are pregnant, have known diabetes, or take medications that affect glucose, do not interpret a single 15-AG value on your own. Discuss results with a clinician, because kidney handling of glucose and related markers can change how these tests behave.

Why you probably have not heard of 15-AG

The video also makes a cultural point: 15-AG was FDA-cleared in 2003 as the GlycoMark test, yet many people report that clinicians rarely mention it.

Whether that is due to cost, availability, guideline inertia, or limited familiarity, the practical takeaway is the same. If you are trying to “debug” metabolic health, you may need to ask specifically about tests that capture what you care about, like variability.

Resource callout: »MORE: Build a “metabolic lab checklist” for your next appointment. Include what each marker reflects (days, weeks, months), and what lifestyle factors might skew it (training load, sleep, alcohol, illness).

How to use this perspective to guide your next lab conversation

This is not a call for everyone to go carnivore.

It is a call to measure what you are trying to change, and to respect timelines.

Below is a simple, step-by-step way to apply the video’s logic without turning it into a one-size-fits-all plan.

How to run a safer, clearer self-experiment

One more nuance: diet quality still matters.

Even though this short-term experiment did not show dramatic deterioration, broader evidence still links higher meat intake, especially processed meat, with higher diabetes risk in many populations. Reviews discussing meat consumption as a risk factor for type 2 diabetes are available hereTrusted Source, and observational work has linked meat intake with higher fasting glucose in some cohorts hereTrusted Source. On the other side, dietary patterns emphasizing plant foods are often associated with better glycemic outcomes, as reviewed in a paper on plant-based diets and type 2 diabetes prevention and treatment hereTrusted Source.

This is where the balanced interpretation lands.

Short-term biomarkers can look stable in a motivated, active individual, while long-term risk patterns in the general population can still raise concerns. Your job is to find the most honest feedback loop for your body, and that often means combining labs, symptoms, and context.

Q: If my A1c is normal, do I even need to think about glucose spikes?

A: A1c is an average, so it can look normal even if you have big post-meal spikes and drops. Markers that reflect shorter windows, like 15-AG, or clinician-guided continuous glucose monitoring, may add context if you are trying to understand variability.

If you are considering extra testing, it is reasonable to ask a clinician which marker fits your goals and whether factors like kidney function, medications, or training could affect interpretation.

Jordan Smith, RD (Registered Dietitian)

Q: Does a meat-heavy diet automatically raise LDL and diabetes risk?

A: Not automatically, and not always in the short term. This blood work review showed small LDL and ApoB changes over about 3.5 weeks, alongside slightly improved insulin and A1c.

Over longer periods, research in large populations often finds higher diabetes risk with higher red and processed meat intake, so it is worth discussing your overall pattern, cooking methods, and cardiometabolic risk factors with a clinician.

A. Patel, MD (Internal Medicine)

Key Takeaways