Carnivore diet.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
Interesting just reading about genetic studies of neolithic hunter-gatherers first in Sweden then another study in Spain compared to the distinct genetic lineage of early farmers that migrated into both regions later from Fertile Crescent/Levant and supplanted and absorbed the HGerers. Then I found a more recent article and it appears the last glacial maximum separated European and Asian hunter gatherers-and there was a bottleneck in European hunter explaining why all so similar and small pop sizes found in Spain and Sweden studies. The farming in Levant was hunter-gatherers that adopted farming-likely due to loss of megafauna and game from climate change. The European hunter gatherers are actually related to the early farmers of Levant-likely loss of fauna forced migration to Europe for some and others adopted farming. Likely loss of megafauna forced more vegetative diet with farming and domesticating plants and animals. Though hunter-gatherers always ate a huge variety of vegetation-more variety than farmers-tubers, onions, seeds, nuts various wild greens. In Spain genetic evidence indicates they had blue eyes, dark skin tone, dark straight hair (but likely in Sweden the same because so genetically similar- and bottleneck-though different studies), but all had similar selection for immune related genes. The same is true of modern hunter gatherers with a selection for immune related genes so environments with lots of pathogens seems to be selective in these populations. The early farmers basically supplanted and absorbed the hunter gatherers. I never realized how many hunter-gatherer tribes still exists across globe till I found this https://www.survivalinternational.org/galleries/hunters. With exceptions in Northern hemisphere (like Inuits) most hunter-gatherers tribes past and present eat a larger variety of plants than farming societies. I think I read African rainforest pygmies get majority of calories from wild tubers, animal protein then nuts, fruits, large variety of plants. Early farming cleared huge lots of land, spread seed by hand with little return for land mass used. The beginning of practices that drive climate change ironically-hunter-gatherers lived more in tune to natural resources than farming with domesticated plants and animals. I bet the diversity of plants and animal protein and physical demands of lifestyle explain why the hunter gatherers larger framed and the data suggest that farming produced poor nutrition (likely not realizing most plants lack certain amino acids so you have to balance plant sources), mineral and vitamin deficiencies, so then increased disease (and zoonotic viruses), and other problems that plagued early farming peoples more than their hunter-gatherer predecessors -it outweighed any benefits from stability of farming apparently. That's wild farming has killed us and the planet. Kill the vegans LOL. Just kidding-people do what floats their boat and we know how to balance plant diets now. It's interesting because I was recently reading a paper on how US adopting these different diet trajectories and farming practices could allow a larger maximum population size by increasing carrying capacity with more vegan (so more than double from tops of 400 million Americans to 800 million). I tend to believe those scenarios not likely and we are maxing out because fresh water aquifers drying up in US.

It is very clear from archeological studies what happened when grains entered as the staple food. Not just bone density, but crooked teeth, with too little space, the wisdom teeth thing that's almost the norm today,so we still have that problem.
 
Last edited:

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
. Not going to raise a word about diet, most of those guys I knew lived on Marlboros, Mountain Dew, McDoubles, Monster Energy, Marijuana, and (can't think of a cheap beer that also begins with M).

Miller
 

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
Even gut microbiome different in hunter-gatherer populations. "Eat like a hunter-gatherer and you'll be healthier—so goes the thinking behind so-called paleo diets. But a new study suggests that humans who live in industrialized societies don't have the guts to stomach a real hunter-gatherer diet. Compared with hunter-gatherers, industrialized peoples' intestines have fewer kinds of microbes—and are missing at least one major group of ancient bacteria.

There's a good chance that changes with your diet, but not in a day. Certainly other things to look into and chlorinated water is probably on the top of that list, but modern humans to quite a few tings to destroy our gut microbiome. It is an area of great interest these days, but so far we don't understand much. Some individual strains have been researched as well as one can at this point, but probiotic products are also a sort best guess thing.

Yet even with all of these extra micro
bes, hunter-gatherers have fewer gut ailments, such as Crohn's disease, colitis, and colon cancer."

Yes, these are conditions that so far seem to be helped by this diet. Just getting rid of the fiber is probably the deal there.

Fiber hasn't come up much yet, but we do poop. :D Just less.
 

Chris Whitten

Silver Member
I don't think religion is driving people to vegetarianism or veganism.
Don't forget, the major thing that is driving deforestation of The Amazon is cattle farming. For that reason alone people should eat meat once or twice a week.
 

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
I don't think religion is driving people to vegetarianism or veganism.
Don't forget, the major thing that is driving deforestation of The Amazon is cattle farming. For that reason alone people should eat meat once or twice a week.

That's local economic interests. The meat I eat is locally produced, mind you in terrain not really conducive to anything but grasing. The solution there is of course, if you want some plants, grow them yourself in your own garden where you would otherwise grow things just because they're pretty to look a an smell nice. I do, but it's more for safety and experimentation than something I rely on for food. I have a green house, two actually and the last couple of years I've filled the garden with those few edible plants that can take care of themselves in this environment. My family doesn't follow this diet and all these things used to be an interest to me, so when we have family gatherings I have all the stuff.

The question though is if you think growing crops is a better long term strategy to preserve and enrich the soil.

We also have the question of national self-sufficiency and the environmental impact of transporting food. Luxury water products would be one place to start because that's just completely insane.

Some religions drive people to veganism, but that's sort twisting things around because veganism is the religion. It's a lot of not wanting to do harm to animals, which is fine, but if they think production of their food isn't causing harm to animals and nature, they conveniently ignore a lot of very obvious things. They're only looking on the surface.

Don't buy beef from Brazil. Support your local farmer. If you don't like how they do things, hey, go somewhere else and if you have the balls, tell them why you did.
 

Chris Whitten

Silver Member
Some religions drive people to veganism, but that's sort twisting things around because veganism is the religion.
You post a lot of highly personal opinion which isn't THAT factual.
Of course veganism is a lifestyle choice. You label it a religion because it supports your prejudice.

In the winter how is your Norwegian cattle fed? It might be from soya bean or corn grown in a more ecologically sensitive part of the world.
Farmers are on a budget. Sadly, eating 100% locally grown, ethically produced meat is too expensive for most people. So they buy KFC, McDonalds etc - ALL of which is contributing to miles of The Amazon disappearing every week.
 

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
You post a lot of highly personal opinion which isn't THAT factual.
Of course veganism is a lifestyle choice. You label it a religion because it supports your prejudice.

In the winter how is your Norwegian cattle fed? It might be from soya bean or corn grown in a more ecologically sensitive part of the world.
Farmers are on a budget. Sadly, eating 100% locally grown, ethically produced meat is too expensive for most people. So they buy KFC, McDonalds etc - ALL of which is contributing to miles of The Amazon disappearing every week.


What are examples of these things that are just my personal opinion and not THAT factual?

What are my prejudices?

Dude.

This is a discussion. For some reason you take great issue when something doesn't align with your own beliefs. I didn't really ask for any of this. I sense a lot of anger in you, young jedi.
 

Chris Whitten

Silver Member
What are examples of these things that are just my personal opinion and not THAT factual?

What are my prejudices?
That health advice and science in general is largely corrupted by money. It's both not a fact and a personal prejudice of yours.
Saying 'don't eat meat from Brazil' is just silly. Most meat eaters will grab a burger from McDonalds, or from a railway station cafe or airport lounge. You have NO idea where that meat originated, or if the meat didn't come from Brazil, whether it was fed by produce farmed in cleared Amazon forest.
You still didn't answer how your local cattle is fed over winter. The grass doesn't grow, the cattle will be brought indoors, away from the harsh weather. It's probably fed on cattle feed imported from outside Norway.
No anger at all, but you are making sweeping judgements on what I regard as honourable professions (science and health) and so it deserves proper questioning.
 

GetAgrippa

Diamond Member
I was referring plant-based eating is deeply rooted in three of the prominent religions practiced in India – Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. All these religions believe in the concept of Ahimsa, which means kindness and non-violence towards all living things. That was my reference to religion- not vegan is a religion.
 

Chris Whitten

Silver Member
Agreed.
These religions have been around for many hundreds of years, and yet Veganism was a tiny group of people until recently. It's become a bit of a health fad, like gluten free.
Being vegetarian or vegan is a personal choice. But the simple fact is, back when humans lived more sustainably, like The First Australians and in the Sicilian fishing villages - animal protein was a luxury, respected. We know now that the more meat we eat, the more the planet gets trashed. Worth cutting back on consumption alone.
 

GetAgrippa

Diamond Member
Humans have been raping resources for global trade for 10k years. Ironically going green is just changing resources to address problem. Hardwood trees of most places raped as European settlers did so in North America where they were cut and sold globally -and that had a huge impact on climate because how carbon dioxide rises and falls with deciduous trees seasonally in northern hemisphere-instead of up and down it became like a step ladder for up with loss of biomsss. I don’t understand why climate scientist don’t account for loss of biomass (due to extinction we’ve been in for 10k in carbon cycle budgets)- if the life isn’t there to sequester carbon it stays in atmosphere- a 50% reduction in ocean phytoplankton is a huge chuck out of carbon fix for food chain. Just the estimates of 50% loss of plant and 80% animal would be 500 Gt of carbon not sequestered from my calculations from published earth biomass estimates. . I’ve read all of human activity history has added 950-1200 Gt of carbon dioxide so a good fraction is just from how we have driven this Holocene extinction event we’ve been in as well as industrialization more recently. Like a perfect storm of mankind out of balance with nature- we set ourselves outside of it as gods to rule and play with nature. Humans are delusional lol.
 

Odd-Arne Oseberg

Platinum Member
That health advice and science in general is largely corrupted by money. It's both not a fact and a personal prejudice of yours.

One actual example. Just one.

Saying 'don't eat meat from Brazil' is just silly. Most meat eaters will grab a burger from McDonalds, or from a railway station cafe or airport lounge. You have NO idea where that meat originated, or if the meat didn't come from Brazil, whether it was fed by produce farmed in cleared Amazon forest.
You still didn't answer how your local cattle is fed over winter. The grass doesn't grow, the cattle will be brought indoors, away from the harsh weather. It's probably fed on cattle feed imported from outside Norway.
No anger at all, but you are making sweeping judgements on what I regard as honourable professions (science and health) and so it deserves proper questioning.

I know very well where my meat originated from. it's branded very clearly. Anything else would be quite illegal. Even McDonalds in Norway uses, guess what? Says so proudly on the menu. ;)

You still didn't answer how your local cattle is fed over winter. The grass doesn't grow, the cattle will be brought indoors, away from the harsh weather. It's probably fed on cattle feed imported from outside Norway.

Farmers actually cut their fields and store grass in winter. Additional food has absolutely nothing to do with winter which tells me you are generalizing about stuff you seem to know very little about. Just because you saw something on TV, one example in person, or even that's the norm where you live it doesn't mean it's all like that. It's about fattening the cows up which is done to a lesser degree all the time, but especially in the period leading up to slaughter, thus the term grain finished, which mostly means oats and barley. If you live in "corn country" I guess some use corn.

With other animals like pigs and chickens, the monogastric omnivores, you have choices. Waste from the fishing industry would be one thing. Yes, there would be soy in some of that, individual farmer's choice, but I don't really east pork and choose my eggs very carefully. I happen to have local organic pig farmer who doesn't use any of that stuff.

No anger at all, but you are making sweeping judgements on what I regard as honourable professions (science and health) and so it deserves proper questioning.

That is probably the crux of the issue. Probably the main difference between us. It's true, you don't don't score any points with me with credits and public education. You score points by being someone who's interested in continuous growth, new knowledge and just wanting to do a good job

This is proper questioning. My sources are also doctors and scientist. There is a difference, though. They are independent. They don't blindly follow outdated protocols.

Not much difference in concept from outdated music teachers that also do a lot of harm, for the same reason.

There's none here claiming to know everything. There are simply many things have been disproved even though the establishment takes a long time to catch on, which is how things have always been.

You're talking about money, but by supporting my local farmers I'm not really supporting any big industry. The fish I catch myself certainly isn't. It's also not very high profit business. What is high profit is junk food and Kellogg's Corn Flakes. Another product with an interesting story. That's also when you can really start looking and the money, some rather large sums going the way of corrupt public servants etc.. All the four and sugar crap is where you find the crazy profit margins. Cheap to produce, shelf stable and since cheap, relatively speaking, noon asks questions about very small and slow price increases. It's not really worthy of being called food anyway, but whatever.


You say I have prejudices. I'd reality like to know what those are.

Then you say most of what I say is opinions and has no factual basis.

If it's so important to you, then the burden of proof is also really on you. The money argument does not speak in your favor.


All athletes have the same diet, grass doesn't grow in winter, I don't know where my meat comes from....... What is this?

When we get to doctors. No, they don't all learn the same. Just as in any other field every institution it's attitudes and traditions that often resist any type of change. The story of Ignas Semmelweis is reflected in concept all the time in most fields of study. The cholesterol hypothesis and indiscriminate use of statins is the biggest current one affecting the most people and doing the most harm while making the most money. There is new type now, but is it better, do we need it? Well, at least the patent on the two main types rain out, so it helps to have something new to sell. Do they cut the chances of having an event in half, well, they do, but only if look att he research in a very specific way ignoring everything that's actually relevant. The also, so called, almost non-existing side effects are quite severe and very well known to anyone who's used them. It's quite common to just stop taking them, without telling your doctor, just because you're tired of arguing. Then they have already started or start doing their own research something they at that point would quite motivated to do. Doctors are not by virtue of their choice of profession excluded from general human weaknesses of ego, ignorance, limited self reflection and the will and balls to question the norm when things don't add up. Stressful and demanding job, little time to put that effort in, yes, but it doesn't really change anything.

I've been studying these things quite deeply for a long time. As a kid it just started slowly by dropping the margarine and going back to real butter, actually inspired by a vegetarian married to an older friend, while just trying to over time learn more. It's a big part of my life. I challenge my "beliefs" all the time, but this one is not changing anytime soon because it just looks worse all the time. I would actually consider myself more or less without beliefs, it's completely fluid, which makes the prejudice argument quite silly to me and frankly just ends up looking like pure projection. Me, prejudices? Most people who know me would just laugh. I would be mr. anti-prejudice, even to much for some. Much to talk about there, but would be very long and completely off topic, not really in concept, but whatever. It's not about my diet.

Should mention that everything mention here is stuff I've done long term. That includes being a raw vegan and everything in between. Apart from these things there's also deep studies of TCM (the main reason I went to university to study Mandarin), Ayurveda, our own folk medicine, North and South American medicine and I did not read a magazine buy capsules. This started a long time before that was possible. Then we can talk metaphysics and psychology. This quite a full circle thing. When I'm not practicing or teach music or go out in the woods for recreation this what I do. I went to school to become a music teach. Is that were I learned most of what I know about that jhob today. No, not even close.
 
Last edited:

GetAgrippa

Diamond Member
Oh funny you mentioned Sicily I was reading this article last night about hunter-gatherers in Sicily. Mainly because I was curious why hunter-gatherers didn't have much fish in diet-I figured those near mediterranean would-but it appears it was minimal in areas (mollusk, marine mammals)-they ate mainly terrestrial mammals. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3509116/
 

GetAgrippa

Diamond Member
Well for over a million years archaic humans were hunter-gatherers and very successful, then Modern humans last 300k years we've been hunter-gatherers till last 12-25k years with farming. The domestication of plants and animals in farming was the worse mistake humans took in our evolutionary history (though now we've trumped that with CRISPR-cas) -because hunter-gatherers were much healthier than us farming-industrial populations. So after millions of years of human activity the most modern screws it all up the last 10,000 years. If I could go back in time-I'd form a hunter-gatherer tribe to kill off all the early farmers and I would save the planet LOL. Archaic and Modern humans would build obelisk in my honor that would be standing to this day. ROFL.

hqdefault.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top