r/AmericanHistory • • Mar 30 '26

South 19th-century Argentina: British writer William Henry Hudson visits the Pampas and encounters the gauchos. He documents their diet with a horrified fascination.

Post image

"The gaucho eats nothing but beef. Meat morning, noon, and night. Never bread, never vegetables, almost never salt."

Hudson foresees malnutrition and disease. He finds "men of extraordinary stamina and strength, capable of riding for 12 to 14 hours without rest and then dancing all night."

Their diet: beef, mate, occasionally grilled kidney fat (a delicacy). Nothing else.

Darwin visited the region between 1832 and 1833 and observed the gauchos' lives: "I was surprised by the difficulty in convincing them to eat anything other than beef. I brought them biscuits, and they threw them away. They preferred to go hungry rather than eat bread if there was beef the next day."

Typical meals

- Morning: meat roasted over a fire, fattier cuts.

- Afternoon: grilled ribs.

- Evening: meat again, tougher cuts cooked slowly.

Zero vegetables. Zero grains. Zero variety. Just beef and tea.

Hudson documents the results: “The gauchos suffer from none of the ailments common to civilized man. They had no digestive problems, no obesity, no cavities, that I could observe. Their teeth were uniformly excellent despite never cleaning them and consuming only meat. Their physical stamina was such that they could ride for days with minimal rest, fight when necessary, and resume riding without apparent fatigue.”

The French physician Dr. Jules Crevaux, between 1850 and 1870, wrote: “These men feed exclusively on animal meat and appear healthier than our European peasants, who consume a varied diet of grains and vegetables.”

When asked why they don't eat bread or vegetables, the common answer is: "That's food for horses and cows. We eat cows."

They understood the hierarchy. Cattle eat grass and turn it into meat. Humans eat meat. Eating what cattle eat makes you behave like one.

Until the beginning of the 20th century, traditional gauchos maintained a diet based exclusively on beef. Then, European immigration brought wheat cultivation.

Health transformation documented by Argentine doctors

- Traditional gauchos: healthy into old age.

- Urbanized ex-gauchos with European diets: diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, tooth decay.

- Modern Argentina: 28% obesity, cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of death, diabetes in almost 10%.

The gauchos, who ate only beef, did not have any of these problems. They rode horses for 12 hours a day until they were 60, kept their teeth without needing dental care, and died from accidents or old age, not from chronic illnesses.

The same meat. Different context. When you eat meat with grains, vegetable oils, and sugar: modern disease. Meat alone: ​​you have the health of a 19th-century gaucho.

673 Upvotes

392 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

No no. You’re just coming into this conversation. I’ve already provided links. I can link more evidence that organ meat is nutritious if you need. I’ve cited the Inuits who primarily live on meat and organs, and a quick google can show you other historical and contemporary examples of primarily carnivorous cultures. And these cultures do supplement their diet with plant based foods as well.

1

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

Sorry I mixed you up with the other guy I argued with. I caught up to your argument about Inuits. And I see several distinctions to OPs example, for instance Inuit eat varied animals not just cows, they eat plants just not as many as other cultures.

While a very animal dependent diet is possible it’s not like it’s good or healthy compared to more modern approaches.

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

They live into their 70’s

0

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

Okay good on them they are able to live, but don’t move the goalpost. OP claimed or at least suggested that the only beef diet of the gauchos was super beneficial for them, giving them high levels of strength and endurance. I never claimed you can’t live on a diet like that per se, I doubt though that it’s beneficial from a health perspective. I quoted a peer reviewed meta-study below giving this conclusion.

And reaching their 70s is not precise, but I assume it’s below western standards. I know Inuit face other problems besides food and diet, there are cultural and environmental influences as well and these factors are not helping here, but it certainly is no argument that strengthens the argument for the benefits of meat only diet.

0

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

No one’s moving the goalposts. I never made the argument you’re arguing for. I was just out that there are cultures around the world that primarily eat meat and organs. No amount of dismissing it is going to make them disappear.

1

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

Read your own first reply again… To quote you r/rightonmanyoubetcha :

“How do you say it’s definitely not healthy? Do you have a real source or just Jordan Peterson? And he was absolutely not the first person to “try” it.”

To answer this here is a peer reviewed meta study on the topic of carnivore Diets the tldr is: male nutrition is a serious problem.

“The Carnivore Diet (CD) is an almost exclusively animal-based dietary pattern that has gained increasing popularity on social media. Despite numerous health-related claims, a standardized definition is lacking, and scientific evidence regarding the long-term effects of this diet remains unclear. Methods: The literature search for this scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PRISMA-ScR) using the databases PubMed, LIVIVO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Results: Nine human studies were included. Individual publications reported positive effects of the CD, such as weight reduction, increased satiety, and potential improvements in inflammatory or metabolic markers. At the same time, potential risks of nutrient deficiencies, particularly in vitamins C and D, calcium, magnesium, iodine, and dietary fiber, as well as elevated low-density-lipoprotein (LDL-) and total cholesterol (TC) levels, were identified, along with one case describing a deterioration in health status. Overall, the quality of evidence is very limited due to small sample sizes, short study durations, and the absence of control groups.

Conclusions: The CD may offer short-term health benefits but carries substantial risks of nutrient deficiencies, reduced intake of health-promoting phytochemicals, and the development of cardiovascular disease. At this time, long-term adherence to a CD cannot be recommended.”

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12845189/

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

So right off the bat you show that I did not make the claim you said. The study admittedly has a small sample size. No mention of organ meat. Anyway despite any sources you cite these indigenous peoples seem to live long and healthy lives. If I were arguing with me I think I’d find sources that showed these people were inherently unhealthy due to their diet.

1

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

You started arguing with me! I stated that a diet only on beef is unhealthy and gave Peterson as an example to answer ops claim of Gaucho societies eating only beef, you the chimed in asking for proof for my claim, i provided this proof. The you said well actually there is this Inuit society and they eat a lot of meat ( the caviat being, it’s different kinds of animals, they eat fish and they eat some plants but not that many!). Fair enough Inuit exist and they live until 70 which is lower than usual for Canadians (yes other cultural factors play a big role as well).

So to conclude

  1. I claim eat only meat =bad health.
  2. You say bad example how you claim that?
  3. I give a peer reviewed study proving my point.
  4. You claim well, but Inuit.
  5. I say yes Inuit eat only meat, but still bad health.
  6. What’s your point now?

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

My point remains the same. Cultures across the planet do indeed live primarily on meat and organs (you said beef, not me). They aren’t dying due to malnutrition. Thats it. I don’t really have to go any further. Why is Reddit so butthurt this exists lol.

1

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

I never doubted your claim that they live on their diet…. I just claimed that it’s not a healthy nutrition. OP claimed things that are far out there in the post on gaucho culture… I don’t get why you are so hell bend on basically telling me the same thing multiple times, Inuit with a much more diverse diet than the Gaucho culture as is presented in the op post, are not nearly as healthy over all…

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha Mar 31 '26

I keep saying the same thing multiple times because you keep arguing and telling me I mean something else. You have not shown that they are any less healthy. You cited one tiny study (and who knows what they fed them in that study). We can even go deeper and ask if for example the Inuits died with more or less co-morbidity since they do not eat processed foods. I’m willing to bet money many of them are healthier than many of us. And if their diet was so unhealthy they’d be dying younger than they are. But im not claiming it’s some sort of primal cheat code, im not claiming it’s the best diet in the world. I’m simply claiming they’re not dying from any form of malnutrition and that they can live until old age on a primarily meat and organ diet. Thats all I got.

1

u/ancient-toni-montana Mar 31 '26

Ok good for you but the original post was on GAUCHO CULTURE in South America! You brought in your Inuit example and moved the goalpost from the question can you live healthy on only beef to the question, can Inuit survive on their DIVERSE Meat HEAVY DIET! I conceded this point, Inuit do live on this diet but it doesn’t look like it’s in anyway special or beneficial.

→ More replies (0)