3 ms·
Totally agree. Each diet may affect different pathways; we probably want to engage in all of them to a degree. Recently I have been pondering how we should eat
by jjallen 7y ago
Totally agree. Each diet may affect different pathways; we probably want to engage in all of them to a degree.
Recently I have been pondering how we should eat if higher protein increases all-cause mortality and higher carb diets increase all-cause mortality, so I've come up with my seasonality hypothesis: basically we would experience periods of lower carb or lower protein diets historically, which would engage each of these various beneficial pathways we have.
For instance, and this is my hypothesis: we wouldn't eat wooly mammoth for breakfast lunch and dinner every day, we would eat nothing but it for three days, once a month. Dense carbs would come sporadically ("yay, we found a bee hive" twice a year) and fruits (carbs) would blossom in either only spring or fall.
- tsimionescu 7y agoWhile you are possibly correct that those may be somewhat realistic historic diets, why do you think they would be favorable to a longer, healthier life? Evolution doesn't generally optimize for longevity, it only optimizes for reproduction. The lifespan of most animals in the wild is much shorter than what can be achieved with a carefully controlled diet.
- visarga 7y agoHumans have a long childhood and even the availability of the grandparents can increase the chances of survival of the child. So we adapted to live longer.
- tsimionescu 7y agoIs there any proof that more primitive humans (ones who ate a more natural diet, I mean) lived longer or had other benefits (e.g. seem younger at older ages)?
- Nasrudith 7y agoReminds me of cephalopods and their outright suicidal reproduction in contrast. It involved a specific gland and when removed they would starve themselves to death anyway. Granted it is a very different niche in the ecosystem but it hints that it is a matter of self-perpetuation where longer lifespan in this case is a side effect.
- johnkpaul 7y agoFat. Why not consider the third macronutrient?