>However, liver eating is a moot point regardless, because evolutionary theory would suggest eating toxins would have a bad taste/smell, so that organ would sim

>However, liver eating is a moot point regardless, because evolutionary theory would suggest eating toxins would have a bad taste/smell, so that organ would simply be avoided, while eating the rest. So it has no bearing on whether cannibalism happens or not. yes, this is why evolutionary theory is the softest of hard sciences and the hardest of soft sciences. We have nothing but confirmation bias and little time to test anything macro. However, we do have contra-positives and the like; in this case, we (ourselves) avoid Liver in some animals, and notice the M.A.D-avoidance agreement among more socially-complex systems. You shouldn't eat your young, you should eat your rival tribes young. Especially because the young hand't accumulated much toxins yet, relative to the adults. And it is easier to bash babies over rocks than grown adults. (per Carl Sagan)