3 ms·
This doesn’t pass a basic sniff test. We mostly don’t eat food to replace our physical form. We mostly eat food to fuel the processes of our physical form. Big
by bobro 2y ago
This doesn’t pass a basic sniff test. We mostly don’t eat food to replace our physical form. We mostly eat food to fuel the processes of our physical form. Big difference. Like trying to put steel, rubber, and plastic into a car’s gas tank.
- nlitened 2y agoIf cars were constantly 3d-printing themselves from the inside to replace every single part with a new one every day (as living multi-cellular organisms do), I'm pretty for them consuming other running cars as a source materials would be best (as cars would contain the necessary rubber and steel in proportions that are perfect for cars). You don't even need to consume fuel separately — your car would re-cycle fuel from the consumed car's tank — sorry for continuing your metaphor.
- bobro 2y agoAfter I posted, I wished I hadn’t added the car metaphor. You’re right that it doesn’t map to the body well. That said, it’s still true that most of what food is doing is fueling activity and not replacing parts of the body. Carbs work really well.
- nlitened 2y agoCarbs do work well as a powerful supplement, but as a single source of nutrients, animals are the best. You can healthily live for years just consuming cow parts (see "carnivore diet" — it works for most). If one just eat potatoes or some other single plant, most are likely to lose their health in the long run.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]