We're not lions. We're omnivores. We need vegetables and fruit too.
En un momento en que las redes sociales amplifican cada nueva promesa dietética, el nutricionista Pablo Ojeda recuerda una verdad antigua: el cuerpo humano es el resultado de millones de años de adaptación omnívora, y no puede ser rediseñado en semanas por ninguna tendencia viral. Desde los estudios de Kiss FM hasta las pantallas de La Sexta, Ojeda advierte que las dietas carnívoras, los planes generados por inteligencia artificial y los procedimientos extremos como mallas linguales o sondas nasales comparten un mismo error de fondo: tratan un problema complejo como si fuera un mecanismo simple. La búsqueda de la solución rápida, señala, suele alejarnos precisamente de la salud que prometía acercarnos.
- Las dietas carnívoras están resurgiendo con fuerza en redes sociales, atrayendo a quienes buscan resultados inmediatos a costa de eliminar frutas, verduras y legumbres de su alimentación.
- Ojeda advierte que privar al organismo de alimentos vegetales genera déficits nutricionales que ninguna cantidad de carne puede compensar, cruzando la línea entre elección dietética y daño real.
- La irrupción de la inteligencia artificial en la planificación nutricional añade otro riesgo: los algoritmos pueden contar calorías, pero ignoran el contexto vital, médico y emocional de cada persona.
- Procedimientos como la malla cosida sobre las papilas gustativas o la dieta de sonda nasogástrica logran adelgazar a través del dolor y la privación, sin abordar las causas reales del sobrepeso.
- Ojeda insiste en que la pérdida de peso sostenible exige atención individualizada, conocimiento propio y la paciencia que ningún truco viral ni ningún implante pueden sustituir.
Pablo Ojeda lleva años siendo una de las voces más reconocidas de la nutrición en España, con presencia habitual en Kiss FM y en el programa nocturno de La Sexta. Su mensaje central no ha cambiado: la mayoría de las dietas funcionan en alguna medida, pero las que prometen transformaciones inmediatas suelen ser las más peligrosas.
Últimamente, Ojeda ha puesto el foco en las dietas carnívoras, que vuelven a ganar adeptos en redes sociales. Estas propuestas eliminan por completo los alimentos vegetales y lo reducen todo a carne, pescado y productos animales. El nutricionista rechaza esta lógica de raíz: los humanos somos omnívoros, no carnívoros estrictos, y nuestro organismo necesita la variedad que ofrecen frutas, verduras y legumbres. Distingue, eso sí, entre la dieta paleo bien planteada —que sí incluye vegetales— y la versión carnívora pura, que considera directamente dañina.
Ojeda también observa con preocupación cómo la inteligencia artificial ha entrado en el diseño de planes nutricionales. Un algoritmo puede calcular calorías a partir de unos pocos datos, pero desconoce los horarios laborales, la historia médica o la relación emocional con la comida de cada persona. Esos detalles, señala, son precisamente los que determinan si un plan es sostenible o no.
Aún más alarmantes son los procedimientos extremos que circulan como soluciones milagrosas: una intervención disponible en Madrid por unos 800 euros consiste en coser una malla sobre las papilas gustativas para hacer la ingesta dolorosa; otra propone alimentarse mediante una sonda nasogástrica que evita la comida sólida. Ambas generan pérdida de peso a través de la privación y el malestar, sin tratar las causas del problema y con riesgo real de malnutrición.
Lo que Ojeda combate, en el fondo, es la fantasía de la solución rápida. La respuesta real es más lenta y menos espectacular: conocerse a uno mismo, entender los propios hábitos y aceptar que ningún algoritmo ni ningún implante puede reemplazar la atención personalizada y el tiempo.
Pablo Ojeda sits in the Kiss FM studio most mornings, fielding questions about weight loss and nutrition from listeners who've heard about the latest diet trend circulating on social media. The nutritionist has become one of Spain's most visible voices on eating habits, appearing regularly on La Sexta's evening program and building a substantial following online. His message is consistent: most diets work, but many are dangerous, and the ones promising overnight transformation are almost always the latter.
Recently, Ojeda sounded an alarm about carnivore diets—eating regimens that have begun resurging in popularity. These diets strip away everything but animal products: no vegetables, no fruit, no legumes, nothing else. The logic appeals to people seeking simplicity and quick results. But Ojeda's objection is fundamental. Humans are omnivores, not lions. Our bodies evolved to process a wide range of foods. Restricting intake to only meat, fish, and animal products creates nutritional gaps that no amount of beef can fill. He acknowledges that paleo-style eating—which includes lean meats, fish, nuts, seeds, and crucially, fruits and vegetables—can work when done properly. But the carnivore version, stripped of plant foods entirely, crosses a line from dietary choice into potential harm.
The problem extends beyond just carnivore trends. Ojeda has watched artificial intelligence enter the diet-planning space, and he sees danger there too. Someone types into an AI tool: "I want to lose ten kilograms and I'm this tall." The algorithm generates a plan. But it has no idea about the person's work schedule, their family obligations, their relationship with food, their medical history, or the thousand other contextual details that actually matter when designing sustainable eating habits. An AI can count calories. It cannot understand a life.
Worse still are the extreme interventions gaining traction. There is a procedure—performed in Madrid, costing around 800 euros—in which surgeons stitch a mesh directly onto the taste buds on a person's tongue. The idea is simple and brutal: pain and numbness will make eating unpleasant enough that the person stops. Ojeda describes it plainly: it exists, it is technically legal, and it is a bad idea. Equally alarming is the feeding tube diet, where a thin tube runs through the nose into the stomach, delivering liquid nutrition in controlled amounts. The person carries a small bag of formula and feeds themselves slowly throughout the day, unable to eat solid food. Both methods achieve weight loss through deprivation and discomfort. Both risk malnutrition. Neither addresses why someone gained weight in the first place.
What Ojeda is really warning against is the fantasy of the quick fix—the idea that some new method, some extreme measure, some trick discovered on social media will solve a problem that took years to develop. The truth is slower and less exciting: sustainable weight loss requires understanding your own body, your own habits, and your own life. It requires vegetables. It requires fruit. It requires the kind of boring, individualized attention that no algorithm can provide and no mesh implant can replace.
Notable Quotes
We're not lions, we're omnivores—we need to eat vegetables and fruit too— Pablo Ojeda, nutritionist
Be careful with AI when you input 'I want to lose 10kg and I'm this tall'—it never accounts for the full context of your life, which is what really matters when defining an appropriate diet— Pablo Ojeda
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why do you think carnivore diets keep coming back? They seem to appeal to people who want simplicity.
Simplicity is seductive. Eat only meat, lose weight fast—there's a clarity to it. But our bodies aren't simple. We evolved eating a range of foods, and we need that range.
But some people say they feel better on carnivore diets. More energy, clearer thinking. Are they just imagining it?
Some people do feel better initially, often because they're eating more protein and fewer processed foods. But that doesn't mean the diet is complete. You can feel good for a while on an incomplete diet. The problems emerge later.
You mentioned AI-generated diets. What's actually wrong with letting an algorithm design your meal plan?
An algorithm sees data points. It doesn't see you. It doesn't know that you work nights, or that you have a family dinner every Sunday, or that you've struggled with restriction before. Context is everything in nutrition, and machines don't have context.
The tongue mesh procedure sounds almost medieval. How is that legal?
It is shocking. But technically, if someone consents to a medical procedure, it can be legal. That doesn't make it wise. You're creating pain to prevent eating. You're not solving anything—you're just adding suffering.
What would you tell someone who's desperate to lose weight and considering one of these extreme methods?
That desperation is understandable, but it's also when we make the worst choices. Real change takes time and attention. Find someone who will actually listen to your life, not just your weight.