3 ms·
> It seems even more unlikely, given that China has had so much interaction with the nomad peoples from Mongolia, Manchuria, and central Asia, who lived mostly
by xiaq 12y ago
> It seems even more unlikely, given that China has had so much interaction with the nomad peoples from Mongolia, Manchuria, and central Asia, who lived mostly off of their herds and milk-products.
Dairy products never really made it into Chinese diet.
The next question to ask is why diary products didn't make it into Chinese diet despite the interactions with the nomad peoples :)
- douche 12y agoThat is a very interesting question. The most obvious answer is that most of south-central China is just more suited to rice production than cattle/sheep/goats. I still find it interesting, since many of the more successful Chinese ruling dynasties have central/north asian roots (Tang, Yuan, Qing). Considering that Genghis Khan is probably an ancestor to most of the eastern half of eurasia, once might expect those lactose-tolerant genes to be more prevalent.
- xiaq 12y ago> Considering that Genghis Khan is probably an ancestor to most of the eastern half of eurasia, This is simply wrong. Maybe some 16 million. But that has also been more of a hypothesis. See http://clubtroppo.com.au/2012/10/15/why-genghis-khan-wont-have-had-16-million-descendants/ http://clubtroppo.com.au/2012/10/15/why-genghis-khan-wont-ha... for one of the refutations for instance.
- jobposter1234 12y agoJust to make sure the HN record is balanced, I point out for future readers that Wikipedia currently records that some research suggests he is a critical ancestor to approximately 0.5% of the world's population. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_Genghis_Khan#DNA_evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_Genghis_Khan#DNA_e...) I do this not to participate in the argument but to point uninvolved readers to objective sources.