3 ms·

The "we" in the sentence is homo sapiens. Neanderthals and Denisovans were not the same species as us. > "Unlike Neanderthals and Denisovans, who had only two

The "we" in the sentence is homo sapiens. Neanderthals and Denisovans were not the same species as us. > "Unlike Neanderthals and Denisovans, who had only two diploid copies, [homo sapiens] carry up to 20 copies of the AMY1 gene, which produces salivary amylase. "

arcticbull 7y ago
Doesn't that mean we've evolved to eat a lot of starch so the more natural thing for humans to eat is therefore starch, if you follow this line of reasoning? And therefore, we've "evolved beyond" the keto diet? FWIW, I do not think this is good reasoning.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- akiselev 7y ago
  OP is not making a claim here, he is pointing out counter evidence to someone else's claim, which is that keto diets are optimal for homo sapiens because that is what our genetic ancestors evolved to eat. The presence of significantly more genes for amylase provides strong (although far from conclusive) evidence that homo sapiens have evolved to eat a much more varied diet than paleo proponents assert.
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    Paleo diet mainly prohibits wheat and refined carbs but allows for specific starches such as sweet potatoes. It's different than keto. At any rate, the existence of enzymes does not indicate that starches should make up a large portion of one's diet either, as we must admit the past century of relative plenty in the Western world has led to all sorts of dietary diseases.
- gumby 7y ago
  I meant that I find a low fat ketogenic diet works well for me due to specific health issues of mine. I see no reason why it might be good (or not!) for the population at large, so I laughed at people who thought it might be so based on fanciful evolutionary theories. Theories which appear to be confounded by the discoveries in the paper. Apologies if I was too terse in my original comment.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    I was just curious the reasoning, I feel that keto and also fasting would make the general population much healthier.

arcticbull 7y ago

Doesn't that mean we've evolved to eat a lot of starch so the more natural thing for humans to eat is therefore starch, if you follow this line of reasoning? And therefore, we've "evolved beyond" the keto diet? FWIW, I do not think this is good reasoning.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
akiselev 7y ago
OP is not making a claim here, he is pointing out counter evidence to someone else's claim, which is that keto diets are optimal for homo sapiens because that is what our genetic ancestors evolved to eat. The presence of significantly more genes for amylase provides strong (although far from conclusive) evidence that homo sapiens have evolved to eat a much more varied diet than paleo proponents assert.
- chrisco255 7y ago
  Paleo diet mainly prohibits wheat and refined carbs but allows for specific starches such as sweet potatoes. It's different than keto. At any rate, the existence of enzymes does not indicate that starches should make up a large portion of one's diet either, as we must admit the past century of relative plenty in the Western world has led to all sorts of dietary diseases.
gumby 7y ago
I meant that I find a low fat ketogenic diet works well for me due to specific health issues of mine. I see no reason why it might be good (or not!) for the population at large, so I laughed at people who thought it might be so based on fanciful evolutionary theories. Theories which appear to be confounded by the discoveries in the paper. Apologies if I was too terse in my original comment.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  I was just curious the reasoning, I feel that keto and also fasting would make the general population much healthier.