It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Carnivore, Omnivore or Herbivore?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I've been reading everything i can about this subject and what effects certain foods have on the human body. I know red meat can cause cancer, but that other meats we can tolerate. I've also read that most herbivores can tolerate meat if force fed. Grains and legumes don't seem to be healthy for us at all and contain something called anti-nutrients.

What I'm most curious about is, what are we supposed to be? Carnivore, omnivore or herbivore?

Please don't just make an empty statement either. I would prefer if participants could link me to some compelling scientific research to prove their own opinions. I'm on the fence right now and I'm no good at searching with google.




posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Technically We're omnivores. Which we can eat both meats and vegetables. From chewing the food to digesting it that's what our body finds conferable with food that can turn into energy. If human's never had sharp teeth then we would only be able to eat various vegetation.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
Technically We're omnivores. Which we can eat both meats and vegetables. From chewing the food to digesting it that's what our body finds conferable with food that can turn into energy. If human's never had sharp teeth then we would only be able to eat various vegetation.


I don't think tooth structure is an accurate measure of what a species diet should consist of as there are many herbivores who have very prominent and large canines for either show or defense.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


When zookeepers develop diets for animals, they examine the animal's dental pattern.

The percentage of canine to molar to incisor teeth determine the proportions of meats, grains, and fruits.

Don't have a link handy, but you can look it up. So humans are 4 canines, 8 incisors, 12 molars and so on. You can figure from that we are made to eat 4/32= 1/8 meat.

So it's 'omnivore'.



[edit on 29-4-2010 by Chakotay]



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chakotay
reply to post by sirnex
 


When zookeepers develop diets for animals, they examine the animal's dental pattern.

The percentage of canine to molar to incisor teeth determine the proportions of meats, grains, and fruits.

Don't have a link handy, but you can look it up. So humans are 4 canines, 8 incisors, 12 molars and so on. You can figure from that we are made to eat 4/32= 1/8 meat.

So it's 'omnivore'.



[edit on 29-4-2010 by Chakotay]


Gorilla's have larger canines, also equaling four. They don't eat meat, so does this mean they're being rebellious due to what you said?

I really don't think teeth are all that accurate. By what your saying, gorilla's should be eating meat as well.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
This is the best article I've read thus far. I know herbivores can eat meat, but eating meat causes problems and I know a red meat based diet causes problems with humans and I've also read a high protein diet can also cause problems with humans. I'm starting to wonder if maybe we are indeed supposed to be herbivores. I know there is the whole b12 argument and where are we supposed to get it if we don't eat meat, but primates who are also herbivores also eat insects and they don't always wash the food they eat. I know unwashed fruits and vegetables have a supply of b12 and termites that most primates eat are high in b12.

Maybe we're doing it wrong? IDK. Read the article and tell me what you think.

curezone.org...



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Why do you ask this question ?

What is your own current personal opinion ?
And have you tried google yet ?



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
Why do you ask this question ?

What is your own current personal opinion ?
And have you tried google yet ?


I asked because I'm curious of what everyone's opinions are and what drove them to that opinion other than indoctrination.

My personal opinion is wavering right now between omnivore and herbivore, but the more I read about human anatomy compared to herbivore the more I start to wonder if we really were indeed meant to be herbivores.

I can't readily or rightfully deny the many similarities we share with other herbivorous species. We're the only species that HAS to cook raw meat to make it palatable to us, no other omnivore cooks their meat to make it palatable. And from what I've also read, all omnivores have bodily adaptations to allow them to tear through flesh, but we're the only one's that don't possess such adaptations.

If we more closely resemble herbivores, then shouldn't we be herbivores? Like I said, I read something that said herbivores can consume meat if forced to, but that they develop problems if they do, just like humans do. Red meats cause inflammatory diseases and a high protein diet also causes problems from what I've read.

I know chimpanzees are our closest primate relatives, and I looked into their hunting practice and it turns out they mainly hunt for social reasons, not dietary reasons. That and their diet is composed primarily 90% vegetarian and most of their protein come's from insects with only 3% being derived from social hunts.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
If you look at humans at the genetic and biochemical level, you will find that we possess enzymes for digesting carbohydrates (including complex sugars in fruit and some fibers in grains), proteins (specifically, proteins found in animal meats), and fats normally associated with animal meat, both legged and otherwise.

These enzymes didn't develop as a result of our diet, our diet developed as a result of the enzymes, as it would have taken far too long (and we would have gone extinct) had we needed to wait the tens of thousands of years it would take to develop new biochemistry to suit a diet we weren't meant to eat.

What we *don't* have the enzymes to digest are highly processed, artificially sweetened, stereochemically modified junk. I'm just as guilty as the next person of enjoying these foods from time to time, but you simply can't go wrong with a nice green salad and a few ounces of chicken, steak, or fish. Not to mention, some lovely fruits as a desert (my personal favorites are raspberries and strawberries...mmm).



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


From everything I've managed to find, we don't possess the enzymes in our saliva to pre-digest meat, but carnivores and omnivores both do. I'm also still puzzled why we find raw meat unpalatable if we're supposed to be true omnivores and why some meats are carcinogen.

I would also have to argue against this:


These enzymes didn't develop as a result of our diet, our diet developed as a result of the enzymes, as it would have taken far too long (and we would have gone extinct) had we needed to wait the tens of thousands of years it would take to develop new biochemistry to suit a diet we weren't meant to eat.


Grains and legumes weren't part of our diet prior to the invention of agriculture. Even to this day grains and legumes also cause a host of health related problems. We even have to process them, especially with grains to the point of depleting all the nutritious qualities out of them only to add them back so they are more easily digested and somewhat healthier.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


From everything I've managed to find, we don't possess the enzymes in our saliva to pre-digest meat, but carnivores and omnivores both do.


You're right, we don't have proteinases in our saliva. What we do have, however, is a more specialized and wide-spectrum digestive tract than a good deal of animals. The sheer breadth of our enzymatic armory shows that we are equiped to digest just about anything we can find naturally.


I'm also still puzzled why we find raw meat unpalatable if we're supposed to be true omnivores and why some meats are carcinogen.


I don't find raw meat unpalatable in some settings. Pate is quite yummy, as is a nice plat eof carpaccio. These are both incredibly common foods (though, I'll admit, more common on European tables like my family's than on an American table). Plenty of cultures eat raw fish (like sushi), as well.

As for the carcinogenic effect, the large majority of carcigenicity related to meats is due to the cooking (or rather, over-cooking).


Grains and legumes weren't part of our diet prior to the invention of agriculture.


Not true. Nomadic tribes in Russia (I don't know about other nations, just my home) routinely ate wild legumes in ancient eras, and they made some forms of flat bread from wild grains, as well as kashi, a grain-based cereal. They obviously did not have any sort of planting strategy, being a nomadic, herdin, non-agrarian civilization.


Even to this day grains and legumes also cause a host of health related problems. We even have to process them, especially with grains to the point of depleting all the nutritious qualities out of them only to add them back so they are more easily digested and somewhat healthier.


Again, not true. Allergies to wheat and legumes are exceedingly rare when you look at the percent of the population that DOES eat these items safely. The only reason they get so much attention is that these allergies are much more severe than others, owing to the fact that they act on internal GI tissues where there is a higher concentration of mast cells to release histaime, leading to anaphylaxis and hypovolemic shock in some instances.

[edit on 4/29/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Ok I understand your doubts.

We used to be gatherers probably on an occasional hunt.

After moving from the Forrest to a Savannah fruit and vegetables became more scares and hunting became truly a part of the game.
Migrating North a colder climate meant less insects and a demand for more high powered energy to stay warm and insulate. The Inuit almost exclusively lived on a diet of fish and seal. The most healthy people alive a century ago.

Red meat will only cause health problems when you eat to much of it.
There lies the key.

Everything that you eat or drink TO much will eventualy cause health problems.

That's what wrong in the world today. We eat to much of about everything and what we eat is less nutritious then its supposed to be. We digest enough because we eat to much.

Fact is that our teeth and our digestive system is adapted for eating both meat but mostly fruit and veggies. We could not even live of grass.

The bacteria that help cows digest the grass are when they are done along with the grass digested by the cow. With it the proteins it needs.

We get sick from raw meat because of our digestive system needs longer and is more efficient to retrieve what's in the food. But that's just a guess

I recommend to eat as various as possible Like two days fish, two meat, but as an extra not as prime dish. The rest vegetables and fruit and nuts.

I learned today, Rabbit is full of vitamin D



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 



Ok I understand your doubts.

We used to be gatherers probably on an occasional hunt.

After moving from the Forrest to a Savannah fruit and vegetables became more scares and hunting became truly a part of the game.
Migrating North a colder climate meant less insects and a demand for more high powered energy to stay warm and insulate. The Inuit almost exclusively lived on a diet of fish and seal. The most healthy people alive a century ago.


That's the typical story of how it is, but then why are we the only omnivorous species that doesn't possess omnivorous bodily traits like claws and jaw structure? That's just stuff I've been reading and can't quiet understand. You don't evolve to invent tools and fire to procure meat and cook it for if that were true, then shouldn't all omnivorous species be doing the same if that were truly natural? I get we're intelligent and all and are capable of inventing thing's, but we also came up with heroin, '___', ecstasy, but that doesn't mean we should consume those thing's either. Or does it?


Red meat will only cause health problems when you eat to much of it.
There lies the key.

Everything that you eat or drink TO much will eventualy cause health problems.


I read something that said people who eat meat 5 times a day are 4% more likely to develop cancer than people who eat meat 1 time a month. That's pretty sparingly for an omnivore.


That's what wrong in the world today. We eat to much of about everything and what we eat is less nutritious then its supposed to be. We digest enough because we eat to much.


I couldn't agree with that more. I've been trying to figure out how much we should eat and how often. From what I've read, we're better off eating 5 times a day and roughly 300-400 calories per meal. Given that those meals contain the proper amount of nutrients of course. In between each meal we should keep ourselves hydrated, but only then as drinking water during meals lowers the acidity of the stomach causing it to produce more acid than it should in order to digest the meals.


Fact is that our teeth and our digestive system is adapted for eating both meat but mostly fruit and veggies. We could not even live of grass.


I don't know of any primate that eats grass other than bamboo, which we can also do quiet easily. Of the great apes, humans and chimpanzees are the only one's that hunt meat, but chimpanzees only do it for social reasons.


The bacteria that help cows digest the grass are when they are done along with the grass digested by the cow. With it the proteins it needs.


Primates don't eat grass other than bamboo. Herbivorous doesn't mean grass eating only.


We get sick from raw meat because of our digestive system needs longer and is more efficient to retrieve what's in the food. But that's just a guess


I don't understand what your saying there. Our digestive tract needs to be longer? Or is long enough and efficient enough to digest meat? Either way, everything I've read about the human digestive tract seems to point at an herbivorous diet. This is why I was hoping for scientific articles linked to so I can learn more as everything I've managed to find scream herbivorous, but I don't want to completely change my diet unless I'm extremely sure what it *should* be rather than what I've been indoctrinated into.


I recommend to eat as various as possible Like two days fish, two meat, but as an extra not as prime dish. The rest vegetables and fruit and nuts.

I learned today, Rabbit is full of vitamin D


I already eat a primarily vegetarian diet, I don't care too much for most meats unless they've been heavily seasoned with herbs and spices. I also heard that #ake mushrooms contain a significant amount of vitamin D, but that the best source of bio-available vitamin D is from our own skin, we just need to get outside more. It's a complete myth that we need cows milk for it.

So far I'm still up in the air over this, but still leaning towards herbivorous.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Well... Whatever makes you happy.

Personally I need a piece of meat.

If we were to eat bamboo would only sleep an spend the rest of the day eating.

That's why the Inuit can live on a diet deprived of any fruit or vegetables.
In the Arctic the body burns around 6000 cal. a day, while doing nothing, just to keep warm.

Before they were forced to abandon their way of life and had to adjust to western ways. They had the lowest heart disease rate in the world.

They usually ate their meat raw.

We do not posses claws because we use to hunt for fun remember.
We have never evolved claws because we had far more useful hands which could, among others yield a weapon.

I've never met someone who eats meat 5 x a day.

We can eat anything. A herbivore can't eat meat just like that. A carnivore vice verse. A carnivore can eat whatever it likes.
Only our digestive system is long and capable of the best. any meat will stay longer and could be sick making.

I can tell you anyway that you are going to do die anyway possible because of cancer. Food ( any food does and never will cause cancer. Cancer comes from the body itself. A lack of oxygen and nutritions.

Or it's sparked by the Chernobyl event ore one of the many nuclear explosions that have happened.

You should not forget that the average lifespan only a few centuries ago was around 40 years.
This means your body would have not have 40 years extra to develop something.

Please believe me and just eat what makes you feel good.

A life of caution is a waste when you get hit by a bus.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 



Well... Whatever makes you happy.


I don't think it's about what makes you happy, but more about what makes you healthier in to old age.


Personally I need a piece of meat.


Do we though? From what I've read, our gastric acid isn't strong enough to readily digest meats and that it has to produce more in the presence of meats. Strong gastric concentrations lead to ulcers and other problems. If we needed meat, then wouldn't our stomach and saliva possess the correct adaptations to predigest and digest full all meats like all other omnivores?


If we were to eat bamboo would only sleep an spend the rest of the day eating.
If we were to eat bamboo would only sleep an spend the rest of the day eating.

I didn't say we were supposed to sustain ourselves on bamboo alone, but that out of the grasses bamboo is the most nutritious for us. From what I've read though, all species of grass are completely edible to humans.


That's why the Inuit can live on a diet deprived of any fruit or vegetables.
In the Arctic the body burns around 6000 cal. a day, while doing nothing, just to keep warm.

Before they were forced to abandon their way of life and had to adjust to western ways. They had the lowest heart disease rate in the world.

They usually ate their meat raw.


They did develop osteoporosis though. This article also seems to imply that the Inuits aren't quiet as healthy as one might think and that studies on their declining health are mostly done on young populations consuming our western junk diets. www.diseaseproof.com... html


We do not posses claws because we use to hunt for fun remember.
We have never evolved claws because we had far more useful hands which could, among others yield a weapon.


A species doesn't evolve to high tool use to procurer food that was unavailable to it prior to high tool use. Even chimpanzees have the necessary bodily adaptations to hunt the primarily infant and juvenile species it hunts for social reasons. We don't even possess that much. If a species was supposed to evolve to high tool use to catch thing's it wasn't bodily adapted to catch, then why are we the only one's who evolved such traits in all of the history of every species that has ever lived?


I've never met someone who eats meat 5 x a day.


My wife's uncle. My landlord. My sister and her husband. I know more people than that, list is rather lengthy for me.


We can eat anything. A herbivore can't eat meat just like that. A carnivore vice verse. A carnivore can eat whatever it likes.
Only our digestive system is long and capable of the best. any meat will stay longer and could be sick making.


We can also invent the tools to produce heroine. Does that mean we should take heroine? If not, then why is that different than consuming anything else we're not bodily adapted to? Our digestive system is long enough to digest plant material, but too long to handle meats. If we were meant to eat meat,I don't think it would be one time a month like that cancer research suggests.


I can tell you anyway that you are going to do die anyway possible because of cancer. Food ( any food does and never will cause cancer. Cancer comes from the body itself. A lack of oxygen and nutritions.

Or it's sparked by the Chernobyl event ore one of the many nuclear explosions that have happened.


Can you provide any sources for that? Everything I've read about human diet implies differently.


You should not forget that the average lifespan only a few centuries ago was around 40 years.
This means your body would have not have 40 years extra to develop something.


The average lifespan also had mostly to do with diseases and hazards of work and medical knowledge at the time. Medical knowledge has substantially increased and as a result birth mortality rates have substantially dropped leading to an overall average increase in life expectancy.


Please believe me and just eat what makes you feel good.

A life of caution is a waste when you get hit by a bus.


A life of caution would avoid that bus. I don't want to be old and invalid due to faulty information about diet and nutrition, which everything I've read implies that diet is the number one cause of many health problems. You are what you eat!



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 



I don't think it's about what makes you happy, but more about what makes you healthier in to old age.


My great grand father lived on a diet of mostly meat and bacon.
He just dropped dead after never being sick for 94 years.

There are far to many possible ways to become a physical wreck with old age. The key is not to eat to much of anything. As long as you get everything you need.


Do we though? From what I've read, our gastric acid isn't strong enough to readily digest meats and that it has to produce more in the presence of meats. Strong gastric concentrations lead to ulcers and other problems. If we needed meat, then wouldn't our stomach and saliva possess the correct adaptations to predigest and digest full all meats like all other omnivores?


Yes as long as you don't eat to much of it.
Everybody I know eats more meat then what is good for them.
I've never heard a single one of them had an ulcer.
I do know an ulcer can develop because of an irregular diet and is caused by a bacteria.


If we were to eat bamboo would only sleep an spend the rest of the day eating.

I didn't say we were supposed to sustain ourselves on bamboo alone, but that out of the grasses bamboo is the most nutritious for us. From what I've read though, all species of grass are completely edible to humans.


Of course we can eat grass and bamboo. Panda bears live on it.
The nutritional value of bamboo is in it's core and a panda has to keep easting all day to sustain itself.
Other grasses we can eat but it has the nutritious value of a grain of sand for us.



Cattle have one stomach with four compartments. They are the rumen, reticulum, omasum, and abomasum, the rumen being the largest compartment. Cattle sometimes consume metal objects which are deposited in the reticulum, the smallest compartment, and this is where hardware disease occurs. The reticulum is known as the "Honeycomb." The omasum's main function is to absorb water and nutrients from the digestible feed. The omasum is known as the "Many Plies." The abomasum is like the human stomach; this is why it is known as the "true stomach".
Cattle are ruminants, meaning that they have a digestive system that allows use of otherwise indigestible foods by repeatedly regurgitating and rechewing them as "cud". The cud is then reswallowed and further digested by specialised microorganisms in the rumen. These microbes are primarily responsible for decomposing cellulose and other carbohydrates into volatile fatty acids that cattle use as their primary metabolic fuel. The microbes inside of the rumen are also able to synthesize amino acids from non-protein nitrogenous sources such as urea and ammonia. As these microbes reproduce in the rumen, older generations die and their carcasses continue on through the digestive tract. These carcasses are then partially digested by the cattle, allowing it to gain a high quality protein source. These features allow cattle to thrive on grasses and other vegetation.


Wiki link



This is why we don't eat grass.



A species doesn't evolve to high tool use to procurer food that was unavailable to it prior to high tool use. Even chimpanzees have the necessary bodily adaptations to hunt the primarily infant and juvenile species it hunts for social reasons. We don't even possess that much. If a species was supposed to evolve to high tool use to catch thing's it wasn't bodily adapted to catch, then why are we the only one's who evolved such traits in all of the history of every species that has ever lived?


The ability to use tools is probably why us humans are such a weak animal. We use our brains to survive.
Along with the killing instinct, and what the human body is designed to do.
Running.
Humans have the ability to keep running. When properly trained we have the stamina to outrun wolves and the wild dog. However not in speed what suggest it was used to stalk prey. A very useful talent when you hunt prey which is faster and, bigger and stronger.

Human Origins / Human Evolution Born To Run



My wife's uncle. My landlord. My sister and her husband. I know more people than that, list is rather lengthy for me.


5 times a day !? I don't even eat 5 times a day. Let alone meat.
Only with dinner and maybe a slice on a sandwich.



We can also invent the tools to produce heroine. Does that mean we should take heroine? If not, then why is that different than consuming anything else we're not bodily adapted to? Our digestive system is long enough to digest plant material, but too long to handle meats. If we were meant to eat meat,I don't think it would be one time a month like that cancer research suggests.


With every talent comes the possibility to use it for something else.
Producing heroine is in fact nothing else then cooking.
I also suggest it's a good thing we can do so. Heroine comes from Opium which is harvested from the poppy plant and used in all sorts of medical anesthetics.
Anesthetics that make you survive surgery. And so prolong life.


Can you provide any sources for that? Everything I've read about human diet implies differently.


A source for what exactly ?


Cancer is a class of diseases or disorders. It is when the body has no control over cells that begin to split. In cancer, body cells copy their contents. They then make new cells with these copies. These cells are able to go into other tissues. They go into other tissues by growing into them. They can also go into other tissues by putting themselves into far away places by metastasis. Metastasis is the stage in which cancer cells move through the bloodstream or lymphatic system. Cancer can affect anybody at any age. People are more likely to get it as they get older. This is because DNA damage becomes more apparent in older DNA. An exception is testicular cancer. It is more common in young men. Cancer is one of the biggest and most researched causes of death in developed countries.

Causes :
Cancer is a leading cause of death. It causes about 12.5% of all deaths worldwide. This is according to the World Health Organization. There are some things that can be causes or triggers of different types of cancer. They include tobacco (smoked or smokeless), marijuana[needs proving], lots of sunlight, radiation (including X-rays in large or many doses and exposure to radiation in a nuclear power plant), chemicals used in building and manufacturing (for example, asbestos and benzene), high-fat or low-fiber diets, air and water pollution, people who eat very little fruits and vegetables, obesity, not enough physical activity, drinking too much alcohol, and household use of some chemicals. Some cancers can also be caused by viruses.



Wiki link

These causes don't have to cause cancer with everyone.
It also depends on a persons immune system and it can also can be inherited genetically.
Still it is a reaction from the body because some parts of it go out of control and are no longer under control.

A high - fat or low - fiber diet along with pollution, alcohol, obesity and so on will cause a less healthy immune system. Our biggest defense against all diseases including cancer.
Radiation is the only thing that will cause direct cellular damage as it destroys DNA.



The average lifespan also had mostly to do with diseases and hazards of work and medical knowledge at the time. Medical knowledge has substantially increased and as a result birth mortality rates have substantially dropped leading to an overall average increase in life expectancy.


You are right.
One key factor you don't mention is our diet. The medical knowledge you speak of has also opened our eyes to our hygiene and so caused a clean way of life and diet and prevents disease for a bigger portion then it is used for treatment.


A life of caution would avoid that bus. I don't want to be old and invalid due to faulty information about diet and nutrition, which everything I've read implies that diet is the number one cause of many health problems. You are what you eat!


People get killed by things they do not expect. Or an unfortunate turn of events.
To think about a healthy diet is smart. To worry about it is a waste of time.

Of course we are what we eat. That's why we have got to eat various diets to be overall protected.

Face it. Every thing that is to much will cause problems.
You can even die from an overdose of water.

I do understand your issue here. There is however no evidence why we should not eat meat. As long as we don't eat to much of it of course.

And...
As long as it is not polluted with all those human crap they put in these days.


Edit.
Size up the pictures.

[edit on 4/30/2010 by Sinter Klaas]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The length and way our digestive tract is setup we are designed to digest nutrient dense fast absorbing foods. This includes anything that can fall under that category, cooked food, animal foods, hybridized fruits, fermented foods etc. We aren't herbivorous and too many vegetables can do a lot of harm to you body due to the fiber content.

Usually vegans will come in and claim we are some how ill equipped to digest meat or animal foods but most the time these people are just regurgitating propaganda they heard from a second source and have absolutely no idea what there talking about.


all species of grass are completely edible to humans.


No species of grass is edible to humans in its whole form. GO try to eat your front lawn and then come back and tell us how edible it is.


If a species was supposed to evolve to high tool use to catch thing's it wasn't bodily adapted to catch, then why are we the only one's who evolved such traits in all of the history of every species that has ever lived?


Why are we the only species who uses computers, why are we the only species who has a language, why are the only species that has trade based economies? Humans aren't like other species, trying to compare us to them is futile.


We can also invent the tools to produce heroine. Does that mean we should take heroine? If not, then why is that different than consuming anything else we're not bodily adapted to? Our digestive system is long enough to digest plant material, but too long to handle meats. If we were meant to eat meat,I don't think it would be one time a month like that cancer research suggests.


Humans can do whatever they want, if you choose to become a heroin junkie you have that choice. Tats the way of live. Our digestive system isn't equipped to handle large amounts of plant fiber. Just because observational studies correlate red meat eating with cancer doesn't prove red meat causes cancer, it just proves most people who eat lots of red meat live toxic life styles. Not to mention the fact that at least 90% of cow meat in the USA is fed a totally unnatural diet, so most people in this study will be consuming meat that is significantly different in nutrient content then grass fed meats.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join