Let me repost something I wrote in another thread - it's actually more relevant to this one. There are a LOT of misconceptions regarding evolution and
From this thread:
The China Study is the largest epidemiological study ever conducted on human nutrition. It is quite famous in nutrition science and finding info on it
is not difficult.
First of all, dairy was not a common food staple until very recently in our history. Until domestication of animals, also very recently in our
history, consumption of meat was quite rare. Our physiological adaptation to consuming them has been minimal, but even that is a moot point because of
my following point.
Second of all, humans evolved to procreate. We adapt to our environments only to the extent that a species can optimize its rate of procreation, so as
to maximize its competitiveness in the wild. So even though we have a couple adaptations which aid in digesting animal products, evolution and natural
selection only "care" about whether that adaptation aids procreation.
So you see, there is no "natural" diet for humans, as far as evolution is concerned. (Sorry, paleo/primal dieters) It could very easily be that the
healthiest diet involves some food mixture that nobody's even conceived of yet. But for now, the only way to truly peer into what can give us vitality
into old age is the field of Epidemiology. It is basically the art of taking every piece of data relevant to the subject being studied, and checking
for statistically significant correlations.
That is what makes epidemiology studies so unique - they can be weak and thus meaningless if not done correctly. But if done properly, they can reveal
unexpected results. Many forget that epidemiology studies are what convinced the public of the dangers of tobacco. Since there are countless
environmental factors which combine to determine the health of any individual, you need to study a LOT of people over a LONG period of time, for any
kind of meaningful result.
Back to the China Study, it examined millions of Chinese over 20 years. They are still collecting data, even. Furthermore, the study specifically used
animal products from remote villages in China that hadn't changed their lifestyles and farming practices in generations. That means none of the
poisons used in modern Western farms. No rBGH or antibiotics. The result? Strong association with disease.
And just take a step back and think about it. Do you really want to be drinking concentrated hormone soup specifically tailored for infant cows which
need to pack on hundreds of pounds within a matter of months? And people wonder why America has an obesity epidemic. And you think fluoride makes you
passive and docile? Yeah, milk does that too, but much more effectively.
edit on 20-1-2013 by Son of Will because: (no reason given)