4 ms·

I think the most important info is in the second chapter: Humans and mountain gorillas (say) do not have the same digestive system. We are not herbivores, and w

by zwaps 7y ago

I think the most important info is in the second chapter: Humans and mountain gorillas (say) do not have the same digestive system. We are not herbivores, and we do not have the capacity to extract nutrients only from raw vegetables and leafs. Instead, our digestive system can be classified either as omnivore or faunavore with adaptation to eating plants. Even the apes who east mostly plants will eat meat and insects if they can. For that reason, I do not see veganism as something that fits to human nature as such. It may be, however, possible to do this in a healthy manner, and the motivation may instead be that it is better for the environment. But I think the argument can not be, that we are somehow meant to be vegans.

cageface 7y ago
Humans are physically much closer to herbivores than true omnivores and, of course, carnivores. If anything we're opportunistic primates that evolved to take advantage of calories where we found them. But I'm not sure these arguments are really that relevant to the present. We have radically reshaped nature to suit our needs and that includes everything we eat, both animal and vegetable. These appeals to nature generally ignore the fact that the things we ate over the millennia don't exist now.
- hprotagonist 7y ago
  >Humans are physically much closer to herbivores than true omnivores and, of course, carnivores. Where can I read more about this? >If anything we're opportunistic primates that evolved to take advantage of calories where we found them. That sure sounds like "omnivore" to me. >These appeals to nature generally ignore the fact that the things we ate over the millennia don't exist now. They also fail the other way: for example, humans have evolved new metabolic pathways for adult consumption of lactose at least twice in the last 100,000 years, and they're different pathways! (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048992/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048992/) homestasis doesn't mean "everything is constant", it means "everything's moving all the time, and the set point doesn't change a lot if things are going well because we're always compensating"
  - cageface 7y ago
    I think we agree that what humans ate as we evolved doesn’t really dictate what we should eat now, particularly when the plants and animals we ate along the way are so different from what we eat now. As for humans being closer to herbivores, our dentition, stomach acid and saliva composition, and digestive tract are much more like those of herbivores than carnivores. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancestors-were-nearly-all-vegetarians/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancest...
    - TheCraiggers 7y ago
      After reading that article, that doesn't seem to be what they're claiming (despite the title / URL). It says that we were opportunistic, and what opportunities presented changed over the years (and our guts with them). I disagree that our teeth and guts are more akin to herbivores, and so does the article you link. Hell, if you google image search for "omnivore teeth" the first result is literally a human mouth. Do some omnivores mouths look different? Sure, some have evolved to eat more live prey than others- some canines are bigger than others because of this. But the same teeth are present; most herbivores literally do not have canines. The ones that do, such as elephants, aren't used for eating but instead for defense or manipulating their environment so I don't think that counts.
      - cageface 7y ago
        Most people have small or even non existent canines. Not much use for the jobs real carnivores need them for. Again I’m not claiming that humans are pure herbivores. Just that we’re closer to that side of the omnivore spectrum.
        inawarminister 7y ago
        >Most people have small or even non existent canines. Not much use for the jobs real carnivores need them for And smaller jaws generations by generations... I believe anthropology concluded this adaptation was caused by cooking. Certainly, gorillas who are almost obligate herbivores have proportionally bigger fangs than us. Incidentally, human guts don't ferment plants at all, so I'd argue we are closer to the carnivore half of the omnivore spectrum. Or perhaps we outsource the fermentation to our tools and storages, which is actually a valid animal feeding tactics.. [0] https://ucdintegrativemedicine.com/2016/03/youre-not-cow-gorilla-dont-eat-like-one-either/ https://ucdintegrativemedicine.com/2016/03/youre-not-cow-gor...
- zwaps 7y ago
  Hm, the article in the op states the opposite - we are much closer to omnivores than herbivores. Who is right?
  - cageface 7y ago
    Obviously humans can and do eat so I don’t think we can claim that humans are pure herbivores. But omnivorism is a spectrum and, like our primate cousins, we’re much more geared to lie on the plant eating side of that spectrum.
    - SEJeff 7y ago
      One of the more reasonable theories about why Neanderthals went extinct was due to Homo Erectus and then Homo Sapiens having much more plentiful and common access to protein. The book Born to Run mentions Endurance Hunting[1] where tribes literally run down game animals such as elk or gazelles until they overheat as proof of this. There are tribes that . Virtually no other mammal on the planet can sweat while on the move. Big dogs and cats have to stop and pant or find shade to sweat and cool down. If they don't, they'll overheat and die. There are evil still tribes[2] that do this today. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o
  - SEJeff 7y ago
    Well how many herbivores have a set of canine teeth meant for ripping? All homo sapiens do. Most herbivores that have incisors tend to have small ones (deer only have incisors on the bottom and press them against the hard upper palate to rip vegetation). Virtually no herbivore has sharp incisors (compared to a lion or homo sapien). Many herbivores have overdeveloped incisors that are used for defense such as an elephant's tusks Herbivores tend to use premolars and molars to grind and crush vegetation. Carnivores use sharp incisors to cut food and canines to tear food (like flesh from bones). There is no need for a herbivore to ever have canines. Homo Sapiens have both, but our premolars and molars are less pronounced than herbivores. It is logical and seems to be scientifically accurate to deduce Homo Sapiens are evolved to be Omnivores.

by zwaps 7y ago

cageface 7y ago

Humans are physically much closer to herbivores than true omnivores and, of course, carnivores. If anything we're opportunistic primates that evolved to take advantage of calories where we found them. But I'm not sure these arguments are really that relevant to the present. We have radically reshaped nature to suit our needs and that includes everything we eat, both animal and vegetable. These appeals to nature generally ignore the fact that the things we ate over the millennia don't exist now.

hprotagonist 7y ago
>Humans are physically much closer to herbivores than true omnivores and, of course, carnivores. Where can I read more about this? >If anything we're opportunistic primates that evolved to take advantage of calories where we found them. That sure sounds like "omnivore" to me. >These appeals to nature generally ignore the fact that the things we ate over the millennia don't exist now. They also fail the other way: for example, humans have evolved new metabolic pathways for adult consumption of lactose at least twice in the last 100,000 years, and they're different pathways! (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048992/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048992/) homestasis doesn't mean "everything is constant", it means "everything's moving all the time, and the set point doesn't change a lot if things are going well because we're always compensating"
- cageface 7y ago
  I think we agree that what humans ate as we evolved doesn’t really dictate what we should eat now, particularly when the plants and animals we ate along the way are so different from what we eat now. As for humans being closer to herbivores, our dentition, stomach acid and saliva composition, and digestive tract are much more like those of herbivores than carnivores. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancestors-were-nearly-all-vegetarians/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancest...
  - TheCraiggers 7y ago
    After reading that article, that doesn't seem to be what they're claiming (despite the title / URL). It says that we were opportunistic, and what opportunities presented changed over the years (and our guts with them). I disagree that our teeth and guts are more akin to herbivores, and so does the article you link. Hell, if you google image search for "omnivore teeth" the first result is literally a human mouth. Do some omnivores mouths look different? Sure, some have evolved to eat more live prey than others- some canines are bigger than others because of this. But the same teeth are present; most herbivores literally do not have canines. The ones that do, such as elephants, aren't used for eating but instead for defense or manipulating their environment so I don't think that counts.
    - cageface 7y ago
      Most people have small or even non existent canines. Not much use for the jobs real carnivores need them for. Again I’m not claiming that humans are pure herbivores. Just that we’re closer to that side of the omnivore spectrum.
      - inawarminister 7y ago
        >Most people have small or even non existent canines. Not much use for the jobs real carnivores need them for And smaller jaws generations by generations... I believe anthropology concluded this adaptation was caused by cooking. Certainly, gorillas who are almost obligate herbivores have proportionally bigger fangs than us. Incidentally, human guts don't ferment plants at all, so I'd argue we are closer to the carnivore half of the omnivore spectrum. Or perhaps we outsource the fermentation to our tools and storages, which is actually a valid animal feeding tactics.. [0] https://ucdintegrativemedicine.com/2016/03/youre-not-cow-gorilla-dont-eat-like-one-either/ https://ucdintegrativemedicine.com/2016/03/youre-not-cow-gor...
zwaps 7y ago
Hm, the article in the op states the opposite - we are much closer to omnivores than herbivores. Who is right?
- cageface 7y ago
  Obviously humans can and do eat so I don’t think we can claim that humans are pure herbivores. But omnivorism is a spectrum and, like our primate cousins, we’re much more geared to lie on the plant eating side of that spectrum.
  - SEJeff 7y ago
    One of the more reasonable theories about why Neanderthals went extinct was due to Homo Erectus and then Homo Sapiens having much more plentiful and common access to protein. The book Born to Run mentions Endurance Hunting[1] where tribes literally run down game animals such as elk or gazelles until they overheat as proof of this. There are tribes that . Virtually no other mammal on the planet can sweat while on the move. Big dogs and cats have to stop and pant or find shade to sweat and cool down. If they don't, they'll overheat and die. There are evil still tribes[2] that do this today. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o
- SEJeff 7y ago
  Well how many herbivores have a set of canine teeth meant for ripping? All homo sapiens do. Most herbivores that have incisors tend to have small ones (deer only have incisors on the bottom and press them against the hard upper palate to rip vegetation). Virtually no herbivore has sharp incisors (compared to a lion or homo sapien). Many herbivores have overdeveloped incisors that are used for defense such as an elephant's tusks Herbivores tend to use premolars and molars to grind and crush vegetation. Carnivores use sharp incisors to cut food and canines to tear food (like flesh from bones). There is no need for a herbivore to ever have canines. Homo Sapiens have both, but our premolars and molars are less pronounced than herbivores. It is logical and seems to be scientifically accurate to deduce Homo Sapiens are evolved to be Omnivores.