Humans can be regarded as natural omnivores

[Guest guest]

Ooooo, boy, I think I found a gold mine on this site....Don you may have created a monster!!! ;-P;-) While I had this site bookmarked I never would have delved into it without being spurred on to look for further answers. I hope you will find other viewpoints interesting and not take any offense....none meant in the sending.

The following is not to dissuade anyone from V-ism or Raw Foodism, everyone must do what is best for themselves to achieve health and happiness. The following is one short piece of info from a very extensive site.

I never, ever have any problems with V-ism, etc....but I usually have huge problems with the reasoning behind why everyone should embrace it. Investigating this site has even opened my eyes!! Still, I don't believe meat should be a large part of the diet.

Home site:

Beyond Vegetarianism

Reports from veterans of vegetarian and raw-food diets,veganism, fruitarianism, and instinctive eating, plus new sciencefrom paleolithic diet research and clinical nutrition.

http://www.beyondveg.com/index.shtml

Enjoy,

Kit

SYNOPSIS OF THE PRIMARY EVIDENCE (CONCLUSIONS)

Humans can be regarded as natural omnivores, so long as one uses the common definition of the term: a natural diet that includes significant amounts of both plant and animal foods. (Humans might not qualify as omnivores if one uses the definition of omnivore as advocated by D.J. Chivers and associates, and discussed in earlier sections herein.)

To use terms that are linked to gut morphology, humans are either faunivores [meat-eaters] or frugivores with specific (evolutionary) adaptations for the consumption of animal foods. This, of course, means that humans are not natural vegetarians. A short summary of some of the evidence supporting this follows (the material below was discussed in depth in earlier sections of this paper).

The fossil record. Approximately 2.5 million years of human omnivory/faunivory are apparent in the record, with genetic adaptation to that diet the inevitable and inescapable outcome of evolution. The supporting evidence here includes isotope analysis of fossils, providing further evidence of consumption of animal foods.

Comparative anatomy of the human gut. The best scientific evidence available to date on gut morphology--analyzed using two different statistical approaches--shows evidence of adaptations for which the best explanation is the practice of faunivory. (Faunivory as an explanation is also supported by optimal foraging theory in hunter-gatherer tribes.) Further, the human gut morphology is not what might be expected for a strict vegetarian/fruit diet.

Comparative physiology (metabolism)

Intestinal receptors for heme iron. The existence of intestinal receptors for the specific absorption of heme iron is strong evidence of adaptation to animal foods in the diet, as heme iron is found in nutritionally significant amounts only in animal foods (fauna).

B-12 an essential nutrient. Similarly, the requirement for vitamin B-12 in human nutrition, and the lack of reliable (year-round) plant sources suggests evolutionary adaptation to animal foods in the human diet.

Plant foods are poor sources of EFAs. In general, the EFAs in plant foods are in the "wrong" ratio (with the exception of a very few exotic, expensive oils), and the low synthesis rates of EPA, DHA, and other long-chain fatty acids from plant precursors point to plant foods as an "inferior" source of EFAs. This strongly suggests adaptation to foods that include preformed long-chain fatty acids, i.e., fauna.

Taurine synthesis rate. The low rate of taurine synthesis in humans, compared to that in herbivorous animals, suggests human adaptation to food sources of taurine (fauna) in the human diet.

Slow conversion of beta-carotene. The sluggish conversion rate of beta-carotene to vitamin A, especially when compared to the conversion rate in herbivorous animals, suggests adaptation to dietary sources of preformed vitamin A (i.e., a diet that includes fauna).

Plant foods available in evolution were poor zinc and iron sources. The plant foods available during evolution (fruits, vegetative plant parts, nuts, but no grains or legumes) generally provide low amounts of zinc and iron, two essential minerals. These minerals are provided by grains, but grains are products of agriculture (i.e., were not available during evolution), and contain many antinutrients that inhibit mineral absorption. This suggests that the nutritional requirements for iron and zinc were primarily met via animal foods during human evolution.

Bitter taste threshold as a trophic marker. An analysis of the human bitter taste threshold, when compared to the threshold of other mammals, suggests that our sensitivity to the bitter taste is comparable to that of carnivores/omnivores.

There is no such thing as a veg*n gatherer tribe. And there are no records to indicate that any such tribes ever existed; also no evidence of any vegan societies either.

The actual diets of all the great apes includes some fauna--animal foods. Even the great apes that are closest to being completely vegetarian, gorillas, deliberately consume insects when available. Chimps and bonobos, our closest relatives, hunt and kill vertebrates and eat occasional meat.

Many of the ancillary claims made in comparative "proofs" of veg*n diets are logical fallacies:

The misinterpretation of animal studies using domesticated or feedlot meats to condemn all omnivore diets.

The misinterpretation of clinical studies showing negative results for the SAD/SWD as indicating negative results for all omnivore diets.

The misinterpretation of the results of the China Project to claim it "proves" vegan diets are best and all omnivore diets are bad.

McArdle, Ph.D., an anatomist and primatologist, a vegetarian, and scientific advisor to the American Anti-Vivisection Society, summarizes the situation clearly [McArdle 1996, p. 174]:

Humans are classic examples of omnivores in all relevant anatomical traits. There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet. For that reason, the best arguments in support of a meat-free diet remain ecological, ethical, and health concerns.

Veg*n diets are not the natural diet of humansThe data available on humanity's evolutionary diet leads to the conclusion that veg*n diets are not the natural diet of humanity, although a veg*n diet that excluded dairy, grains, and legumes could be described as a restriction of the evolutionary diet. The evolutionary or hunter-gatherer diet (discussed in earlier sections) consists of a diet of wild plant foods (fruits, nuts, some leaves/stems, starchy tubers--possibly cooked), insects, and the lean meat and organs of wild animals.

Note that grains, legumes, and/or dairy are generally not available to hunter-gatherers; such foods are provided in significant quantities only via agriculture, and have been a significant part of the human diet for only about 10,000 years or less. The extent of human genetic adaptation to such foods is a controversial point, but the majority view is that the genetic adaptation that has taken place in the last 10,000 years is quite limited. (See the discussions earlier herein regarding hereditary hemochromatosis, and the carnivore connection hypothesis.) Similarly, modern processed foods have been with us for only a few generations, and genetic adaptation in such a short period is highly unlikely.

GO TO NEXT PART OF ARTICLE(Failure to Thrive: Your Health is More Important than Raw/Vegan Dogma)

Return to beginning of article

SEE REFERENCE LIST

SEE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR:PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART 4 PART 5 PART 6 PART 7 PART 8 PART 9

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-9a.shtml

[Guest guest]

We never had to kill with bare hands, we had tools...and hunting

tools, spears, etc. for not having to run an animal down. We probably

started small anyway ....insects, grubs, etc.

Then fire making/maintaining...eureka! The discovery of cooked food.

Evidence? Hunting tools have been found at archeological

sites....also campfire litter, and food item dumpsites.

Oh..yes...and that nasty science of Paleonutrition and feces analysis.

#

Paleonutritional analyses using paleofeces have enabled us to

determine that prehistoric people ate a wide variety of plants and

animals, some which modern people would not consider as food, such as

flowers and rodents.

#

DNA analysis of paleofeces from Hinds Cave, Texas has revealed that

prehistoric people consumed 2-4 different animal species and 4-8

different plant species during a short period of time. The success

rate for retrieval of DNA from paleofeces is in strong contrast to

that from skeletal remains.

http://www.ume.maine.edu/iceage/Research/Contrib/html/12.html

Intereting it's the Climate Change Institute...I don't know who they

are funded by.

The evils of the Associations you mentioned, Don, are not really

pertinent to this topic. I do agree that they are not Assns. to be

trusted due to vested interests.

The beat goes on,

;-) Kit

>

> ==============================

> That is correct. However, you are totally incapable of running down

live

> game and killing it with your bare hands and I seriously doubt you

could

> eat it raw by ripping it to pieces with those incisors. Carnivores have

> huge canines and their molars are also shaped for cutting not

chewing as

> humans molars are. You, me and everyone else are frugivores. However, I

> shan't belabour this any longer as I agree with Kit we need to move it

> off list.

> We all get to choose how we wish to believe. If you wish to believe you

> are a carnivore that is you choice. If eating flesh makes you feel

> healthy than by all means go for it. However, evidence does not back up

> the omnivore/carnivore nor paleolithic diet. But there sure are a slew

> of folks out there who would love you to believe in it.

>

> Cattlemens Association

> Dairy Association

> Any science that is funded by pharma

> Any science that is funded by medicos

>

> --

> Peace be with you,

>

> Don " Quai " Eitner

>

> " Spirit sleeps in the mineral, breathes in the vegetable, dreams in

the animal and wakes in man. "

>

> Nearly all men die of their remedies, and not of their illnesses.

~Baptiste Molière, Le Malade Imaginaire

>

> The obstacle is the path. ~Zen Proverb

[Guest guest]

Don,

There's nothing I can say if you choose to ignore ALL science.

There is plenty to refute what you say....but one can only take a

horse to water one can't make him drink.

The water is there.

Kit

-

[Guest guest]

Like I already mentioned insects, grubs, small rodents and probably

scavenged dead animals.

Man, didn't always cook, either....and?

Your " When " ....and " until " ....all have to do with evolution.

Kit

> We never had to kill with bare hands

>

> I think you've hit on the crux of the discussion here. What did we

eat before tools? Can't use the word " never " because man did exist

before tools were invented. With tools came garbage because there

were parts of our food we could not eat, ie bones, hair, etc...

>

> When man ate exclusively fruits, nuts, and green matter there was no

garbage to leave behind. Until man started consuming animal products

there was only poop and maybe human bones and the animals probably ate

the bones too. After all we are raw when we die, at least for a

little while.

>

> Shari

[Guest guest]

This is an interesting debate.

Man has evolved as a tool user, a hominid back x million years

ago found picking up a rock and throwing it was a pretty easy way to

bag small game, a stick with a sharpened point made it a lot easier

to dig a tasty root out of the ground. We've evolved through time

with tools. In the primitive skills community there are a large

number of people who choose vegetarian lifestyles but freely

recognize the importance of knowing how to hunt, trap, and kill

critters to stay alive during certain times of the year. Some of

them do regularly go out and test the ancient skills in the

wilderness. Some of them do hunt and forage as our forefathers

did. What is eaten during these trips sounds a lot like the

paleolithic diet the science dweebs came up with by studying feces.

Lots of plants, a few critters now and then, some bugs. I tell my

students that they'll get far more food with a digging stick and a

basket than they will ever get with a throwing stick. But, that

doesn't negate the value of the hunt. Animals have lots of tasty

nutrients locked inside a small package (their hide). Here we get

back to Traditional Foods is Your Best Medicine again.

A racoon or bear is an omnivore. They freely eat plants or

animals depending on what's available and their needs at the time.

Racoons are enormously successful in a wide range of habitats. We

can debate ethics and spiritual reasons all we want but the racoon

doesn't. He or she is an opportunivore and eats what is available

and is happy to get it. I don't think we're all that different.

Just as there is a big difference in health properties between

chemically grown agricultural products and healthy organic produce

grown with love in a sustainable manner, so is there a big

difference between factory meat and what comes from a small scale

producer raising animals in a healthy, sustainable manner. There's

a similiar change in hunted foods, deer meat that was harvested

horribly (think city hunter scum showing off a trophy and bragging

about the size of the exit wound his rifle produced) is very

different from that harvested through the ethic of the Sacred Hunt.

Perhaps it's a matter of conciousness, one side is filled with

negativity and the other is filled with care, respect, and love.

The food we eat in a sense conveys certain vibrations into our

system, eat negatively and one will experience negative effects.

Eat positively and one will experience positive effects. It's our

choice which way to live and which way to eat.

I would love to master the sun gazing siddha that HRM

describes (on an alternative website) and be a breatharian. Certain

medicine folk here in north america used something similiarly to

travel large distances quickly over extreme conditions and heresay

has it the Tibetans used it too. As we evolve maybe we will get

there en masse. Then again, I still like eating pizza every now and

then. I'll skip the pepperoni though, make it the vegetarian

please. Pass the swedish bitters while you are at it. Tommorow

I'll do a salad instead. Looking back at the way I use to eat I

shudder in horror, maybe 2 decades from now I'll look back onto

today's diet in the same way. But growth is occurring and as they

say, different strokes for different folks.

I am choosing to eat more raw foods and that does feel

healthier. So please keep posting the Hygienist materials, Don and

when the conversation comes around to primitive diets and living

I'll keep posting my view. We all have ideas to be tested out and

that is what distinguishes doers from critics. Critics make useless

talk while doers test ideas out, debate issues with aquaintances,

and integrate new ideas into their lives. It's that choice thing

again, do we choose negative or do we choose positive? A teacher

said there was a third choice, to not do anything at all. I very

much enjoy interacting with the group community here and find it to

be thought provoking.

[Guest guest]

Nice piece prayerful....well put, thanks. Esp. the positive vibe aspect.

Breatherianism is fascinating...and science thinks it's going to be

able to teleport a small mass in the near future....man, how bout them

quatum physicists. There's are large spectrum, eh? ;-)

I treated a guy that came in thinking he could cure an eye problem by

solar gazing...it wasn't good. I know nothing about the practice but

it looked like he did something wrong.

Kit

> This is an interesting debate.

> Man has evolved as a tool user, a hominid back x million years

> ago found picking up a rock and throwing it was a pretty easy way to

> bag small game, a stick with a sharpened point made it a lot easier

> to dig a tasty root out of the ground. We've evolved through time

> with tools. In the primitive skills community there are a large

>