4 ms·

My understanding is that damn near anything (at least among mammals) will eat meat if they can get it in bite-sized bits. Ruminants may not have the teeth to te

My understanding is that damn near anything (at least among mammals) will eat meat if they can get it in bite-sized bits. Ruminants may not have the teeth to tear chunks off a carcass, but they'll crunch up baby birds given the opportunity. Someone else has already done all the hard work of converting plant matter into the stuff that meat is made of, so it's high-density protein with very little metabolic cost. Even an herbivore would be foolish to pass that up.

burfog 8y ago
I find it astonishing that the disease risk doesn't lead to a strong aversion to having contact with other animals for any purpose other than reproduction. This is especially true for cannibalism. In the wild, antibiotics are not provided. Worms can get in the heart, lungs, and brain. Even external parasites are risky. Disease means death. The situation is slightly more understandable with some of the dedicated meat eaters. Vultures for example, have unusually strong stomach acid to deal with the infectious agents. Snowshoe hares and ruminants don't have that.
- dtech 8y ago
  Clearly the evolutionary (survival and procreation) benefit of getting the easy protein is greater than the risk of acquiring a disease. Your point is probably valid for cannibalism, which is why it's rare, and even rarer outside of young. The latter not yet having had an opportunity to acquire disease.
- make3 8y ago
  starvation is likely a more imminent threat for wild animals than for humans, making this a better trade-off (raw meat) for them
- CamperBob2 8y ago
  Rabbits in the wild don't generally live long enough to die of parasite infections.
porpoisely 8y ago
To add to your point, herbivores eat meat all the time. It's called insects. They'll even eat small rodents, birds, etc when given the opportunity. Sure, the prominent diet of herbivores are vegetation, but the idea that they only eat vegetation is simply not true. And every vegetarian on earth eats animals too. It's called insect parts. It's almost impossible for a salad or any vegetarian meal to be completed devoid of insect or rodent parts ( however minuscule ).

burfog 8y ago

I find it astonishing that the disease risk doesn't lead to a strong aversion to having contact with other animals for any purpose other than reproduction. This is especially true for cannibalism. In the wild, antibiotics are not provided. Worms can get in the heart, lungs, and brain. Even external parasites are risky. Disease means death. The situation is slightly more understandable with some of the dedicated meat eaters. Vultures for example, have unusually strong stomach acid to deal with the infectious agents. Snowshoe hares and ruminants don't have that.

dtech 8y ago
Clearly the evolutionary (survival and procreation) benefit of getting the easy protein is greater than the risk of acquiring a disease. Your point is probably valid for cannibalism, which is why it's rare, and even rarer outside of young. The latter not yet having had an opportunity to acquire disease.
make3 8y ago
starvation is likely a more imminent threat for wild animals than for humans, making this a better trade-off (raw meat) for them
CamperBob2 8y ago
Rabbits in the wild don't generally live long enough to die of parasite infections.

porpoisely 8y ago

To add to your point, herbivores eat meat all the time. It's called insects. They'll even eat small rodents, birds, etc when given the opportunity. Sure, the prominent diet of herbivores are vegetation, but the idea that they only eat vegetation is simply not true. And every vegetarian on earth eats animals too. It's called insect parts. It's almost impossible for a salad or any vegetarian meal to be completed devoid of insect or rodent parts ( however minuscule ).