4

votes

How much meat have we evolved to eat?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created July 28, 2012 at 4:34 AM

Current paleo diet serves large quantities of animal protein and fat every day on the assumption that we have been successful hunters long enough to adapt to the "steak every day". Is there some scientific evidence showing that we need and are capable of digesting that amount of meat with no negative health effects? Or should our animal food consumption be more modest, limited to couple of insects every day and fish or fowl once a week after a good deal of physical activity? Pig or cow once a year preceeded or followed by an extended period of fasting? Are we overfeeding ourselves with meat?

Specifically asking after seeing couple of anti meat pro vegan science supported videos from nutritionfacts.org e.g. nutritionfacts.org/video/uprooting-the-leading-causes-of-death/

alt text

Medium avatar

(10601)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

Like you say we can survive on VLC. If we have to. For me it's enough that we've always eaten meat when we could get it.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 22, 2012
at 06:11 AM

A little vegan goes a long way to sustainability.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 31, 2012
at 09:11 AM

"Not only does diet induce immediate changes in DNA activation but it changes its genomic expression by altering the organism’s hormonal status to change the genomic body plan. This is how epigenetics controlled the growth of the human brain, spine, gut, and hind limbs." ?? ... Epigenetic modifications do not mediate evolution. Genetic changes do.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on July 30, 2012
at 04:04 AM

Carrots, beets, celeriac and parsley are root plants.

091423a30c0188fbff51e39397e7e056

(384)

on July 30, 2012
at 02:55 AM

God forbid we watch videos containing the opinions of people we disagree with us, dialetic is the worst of the Neolithic poisons.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 30, 2012
at 02:31 AM

It's unlikely that the Hazda are unchanged from Paleo times. The Inuit and Amerinds are both regressed Neolithic, or at best late Paleolithic Asiatics who readapted to the food available. In some areas this meant a nomadic diet high in meat, in others food was abundant enough that they stopped moving and became civilized. What they ate was not a set formula. But contrary to the OP's vegan video, it ALWAYS included meat.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:49 PM

See your sort of saying a similar thing to what I am speculating. That the 30% odd carb intake would have been mostly "quick carbs" - berries, baobab fruit, honey etc, with only some smaller amount of beans and lilly roots....makes sense, if your low in energy, you want high gi foods. And quick carbs taste better too.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:45 PM

"1) modern HGs ARE nomadic" - good to know, i hadnt read much about them. " However, you do say that "roots" exist, which are essentially the same things- carbs/starchy plant matter. " - I was simply observing that in NE africa, it tended to be a certain kind of root. Its lower in starch than a sweet potato or potato (as are the tzi beans). Probably their carb content came significantly from the baobab fruit. Being the cradle of civilisation, I think thats interesting, because paleo sometimes shuns fruit, and favours high starch, low gi foods. This would seem to question that logic..

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:44 PM

and my apologies VB for commandeering your post.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:42 PM

At least among the Hadza in Africa, the most preferred food source is unanimously honey by both men and women, and starchy tubers are the least preferred food source. In between lies meat, baobab fruit, and berries, and the degree of preference depends on sex. For instance, men prefer meat over both berries and baobab fruit, but women prefer berries and baobab fruit over meat. The amount of game in the diet varies seasonally, and at least among the Hadza, body fat declines when starch displaces meat.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:41 PM

Well, IDK about VLC not being an ancestral diet. If you consider physiological insulin resistance as a phenomena, and ketosis, its pretty clear we adapted to a low carb diet during the ice age. We probably drank a little blood tho. How adapted is another matter, but clearly some evolutionary pressures favoured genes which could at least survive on VLC. Its likely insulin resistance in general has some connection to this.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:35 PM

exists in their diet, but that would vary as well. However, you do say that "roots" exist, which are essentially the same things- carbs/starchy plant matter. From everything I've read and watched, true HGs (both past and present) eat a lot meat/fish, bugs/insects, nuts (seasonally), berries. They rely on a few sources of starch for calories. Honey is liquid gold when found, and they go to great lengths seeking it out.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:32 PM

@ Jamie- Some of what you write is spot on, but some is misinformed. I didn't read it all but here are some; 1) modern HGs ARE nomadic. Once they deplete the resources in the area, they move on and them repopulate so they can come back to the area in the future. 2)When studies are done on the content of food hunted and the content of food gathered and the proportion of their diet, there is a bias towards gathered foods. Gathered foods include bugs, insects, eggs, etc- all animal products. As you can see, then, more animal products make up the diet than expected. 3) you say not a tuber...

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 29, 2012
at 04:29 AM

How far back does the archeological evidence need to go to confirm that we have evolved and adapted to eat meat? We all agree that the archeological evidence on grains from 10000 years ago is not old enough, how far back we accept for meat? Does the presence of archeological evidence mean the animal proteing and fat was an easy food to get and survive until offspring is raised or does it also confirm that large quantities of meat are optimal for health and longevity?

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 29, 2012
at 04:25 AM

How far back does the archeological evidence need to go to confirm that we have evolved and adapted to eat meat? We all agree that the archeological evidence on grains from 10000 years ago is not old enough, how far back we accept for meat?

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 29, 2012
at 03:06 AM

In the French caves they didn't paint the animals unattractively, so they appear to be something. Catalhoyuk shows a reverence for the auroch, with the giant skulls plastered, painted and prominently displayed in the houses. Hunting of aurochs is depicted, and involves many hunters. A lot of the bones are from smaller sheep and goats, which had already been domesticated.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 29, 2012
at 01:52 AM

Not all our ancestors lived in caves. Also not all the symbols painted necessarily implied abundance of what was depicted - on the contrary they may have painted because of its rarity.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:59 PM

Though VLC is a bit older than leptin reset, which dates from an recent landing by aliens.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:57 PM

VLC isn't an ancestral diet. VLC is Atkins on amphetamines, an innovation even newer than a vegan's hemp sandals.

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:43 PM

survive perhaps, but what is optimal for a healthy adult?

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 02:41 PM

At Catalhoyuk there are bones and grain everywhere. Before 9000 BC, probably more bones.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 02:38 PM

Is animals red for eating red meat? Or for eating blood sausage? Either way it's making me hungry. The 50:50 ratio depicted doesn't look too bad. But no, I won't be watching the video. I didn't evolve to wear hemp.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:39 AM

^ (Baobab). http://www.biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/chemicalandnurientanalysisofbaobabfruitandseed.pdf … I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. And its seed is a protein source. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise. Looks like a reasonable portion of there 30 odd percent carbs would be sugars from this fruit.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:37 AM

^ (Baobab). biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/… I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. And its seed is a protein source. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise..

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:36 AM

^ (Baobab). http://www.biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/chemicalandnurientanalysisofbaobabfruitandseed.pdf I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, boabab seed, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:31 AM

Rich in nutrients, and alot of sugars. More vit c than an orange, loads of calcium, and 72.6% carbohydrate by weight, rich in sucrose, glucose and fructose. Youd think that would make it sweet, but aparrently its acidic content makes it a little tart.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:20 AM

Baobub fruit: Analysis of Baobab Fruit Pulp (mg/100 g) Protein 2.3 Lipids 0.27 Soluble and insoluble Fibers 52.0 Carbohydrates 75.6 Ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) 280-300 (to compare: 51 in oranges**) Calcium 293 (to compare: 125 in milk**) Potassium 2.31 Phosphorus 96-118

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:15 AM

Both the root and the beans have some starch carbs, but not as much as potatos etc...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:14 AM

Heres "lotus root" which is most probably similar to the lilly root (closely related plant): http://skipthepie.org/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/lotus-root-raw/

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:13 AM

Now to find the nutritional value of the fruit :P

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:12 AM

Hmmm, looks like tsi beans are a seed, found in the pod of a runner plant: http://archive.samj.org.za/1969%20VOL%20XLIII%20Jul-Dec/Articles/12%20December/3.4%20THE%20NUTRIENT%20COMPOSITION%20AND%20DIETARY%20IMPORTANCE%20OF%20SOME%20VEGETABLE%20FOODS%20EATEN%20BY%20THE%20KUNG%20BUS.pdf Its got carbs and minerals.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:42 AM

Myself? I am not trying to fully emulate. I eat a fair bit more meat, alot more veg and regular fruit, and I am probably in the ballpark if I can get my exercise together, and vary my meat a bit. If I wanted to totally emulate africa id be doing alot more research, but it would probably be slightly less meat, slightly more fruit(baobab anyone?) and roots (I think I can get lotus root at my chinese supermarket, lol). Maybe one day Ill think about that. Then again, theres heritage to consider. I am lactose tolerant, so what else is different...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:34 AM

Theres also the question of how even grassfed meat relates to actual game meat. My earlier research suggests that there is more polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fat, and less saturated fat in wild animals. Certainly I am not sure the profile of a primarily beef diet, fat wise or otherwise, really matches up to wild animals. I think a diet that includes more type meat variety, some actually game meats, some fish, some poultry, some small mammals, is probably going to be closer to emulating stone age nutrition.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:24 AM

Then again....are they nomadic? Seems like most modern hunter-gatherers would be settled, not nomadic. Its something I would like to research more actually, both modern HG in africa, and the local fauna and flora in europe that one could eat. Combine that with archeology, and you might be able to take some better guesses.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:20 AM

If we use that as a basis, the carb portion of a 30-35% carb diet is probably significantly made up of that fruit, along with the lilly root, and the beans. No traditional tubers in sight, and probably a fair bit of fructose...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:19 AM

No idea what a "tsi-tsi bean" is tho...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:18 AM

Apparently plant wise they ate alot of "tsi-tsi beans, baobab fruit & water lily roots", which would have made up their carb intake. Baobab fruit apparently still has fans in africa. Water lilly's botanical cousin, the lotus is eaten in the east, including its root.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:16 AM

The estimate given is "Protein 25-30%, Carbohydrate 30-35%, Fat 40-45%". "About 55 percent of nutrients would have come from animal and fish sources, while about 45 percent, on average, would have been of vegetable origin." A fair bit more protein and fat than the standard diet, but a little less than the standard "low carb paleo".

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:12 AM

The estimate given is "Protein 25-30%, Carbohydrate 30-35%, Fat 40-45%". "About 55 percent of nutrients would have come from animal and fish sources, while about 45 percent, on average, would have been of vegetable origin." A fair bit more protein and fat than the standard diet, but a little less than the standard "low carb paleo". Its interesting, I remember researching that north-east african tribe, and finding they eat a significant amount of a certain tree fruit, which along with standard vegetation, probably makes up most of their carb intake..

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:02 AM

I had breifly read about some huntergatherers living in eastern africa. Heres the article I was reading: http://www.answers.com/topic/stone-age-nutrition-the-original-human-diet. Its definately more meat than the standard american diet, but possibly not as much as some eat on paleo.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:56 AM

The comparison of ancient are with modern art is a bit poor. Paleo man was animist, they beleived in sympathic magic. Their art was done in a sacred manner. Our art is generally not. I infer the importance of animals however more from the prevelance of bones, and shells found than simply their art. Theres really no doubt they ate alot of animals IMO (and also plants)

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:54 AM

Some of them do live in areas we evolved (Africa) and they are still hunter-gatherers. http://books.google.ru/books?id=5eEASHGLg3MC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=%22hunter-gatherers+in+africa%22&source=web&ots=E_mo4LKabm&sig=T4eX0Dtijua9OAew5hijyDrGLvE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22hunter-gatherers%20in%20africa%22&f=false

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:51 AM

"If you think that Paleo is meat, meat and nothing but meat - no, that's not Paleo, that's close to Inuit." - I dont. As for modern hunter gatherers, if they lived in areas we evolved, AND they were nomadic and not settled AND they used only simple processing, then id be very interested in how that relates to our dietary evolution.

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12672)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:23 AM

Jamie, basically yes. Mostly using epidemiological surveys, which as we all know is the best type of study that there is. Also correlation is causation. Oh and vitamin B12 isn't an essential nutrient. Yay, go vegan!

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:02 AM

BTW i cant be arsed watching the video, but am curious. Are they saying meat is the leading cause of death?

  • C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

    asked by

    (358)
  • Views
    2.1K
  • Last Activity
    1552D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

7 Answers

6
Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 05:30 AM

Based on the archeological evidence, id say quite alot of meat. They didn't paint pictures of cucumbers on their walls, and there are so many bones you could make a castle.

However, I dont think they would have eaten large game everyday, based on what I have heard speculated, and much of evidence of traps, id suggest that the majority of meat was small mammals, birds and fish. Those are more reliable than large game hunts, even though the return is less, you wouldnt want to starve pinning all your hopes on something so difficult.

As for only eating animals after activity??... We should be more active in general. But fish and birds dont take alot of energy to catch. More thinking and effort. You set a dozen or so traps across the bush, you'll get something each day of trap re-setting 8 times out of 10.

They certainly wouldnt have eaten beef everyday. They would have eaten a large variety of meats, with probably little resemblance to cows.

Having watched a few docos now about the stone age, and really thought about it more, I cant beleive anyone is anti-meat. It makes no sense, given we have clearly survived on it as our staple since our inception, and most hunter gatherers still do. We didnt make spears and bows and arrows to hunt potatoes!

Perhaps meat is unhealthy in the context of grain fed animals, vegetable oils, and a sea of acellular processed grain carbohydrates? Maybe even beef isnt the idea meat for us to eat? (I dont really eat it myself). IDK, all i know is that humans are supposed to eat lots of meat and also plenty of veg.. I cant see how that could be untrue if its been a central part of our diet for so long.

There may well be some wisdom in one idea- the occasional meat free meal, or low meat meal.

The large game hunt was very unreliable. Sometimes the small game traps would come up empty. If one didnt live on the coast, there would be no shellfish to gather. That only leaves bugs for "meat", which arent often too palatable, and veg.

The occasional meat low meal, or fat low meal is not out of the question evolution wise IMO.

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 29, 2012
at 04:29 AM

How far back does the archeological evidence need to go to confirm that we have evolved and adapted to eat meat? We all agree that the archeological evidence on grains from 10000 years ago is not old enough, how far back we accept for meat? Does the presence of archeological evidence mean the animal proteing and fat was an easy food to get and survive until offspring is raised or does it also confirm that large quantities of meat are optimal for health and longevity?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 29, 2012
at 01:52 AM

Not all our ancestors lived in caves. Also not all the symbols painted necessarily implied abundance of what was depicted - on the contrary they may have painted because of its rarity.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 02:41 PM

At Catalhoyuk there are bones and grain everywhere. Before 9000 BC, probably more bones.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 29, 2012
at 03:06 AM

In the French caves they didn't paint the animals unattractively, so they appear to be something. Catalhoyuk shows a reverence for the auroch, with the giant skulls plastered, painted and prominently displayed in the houses. Hunting of aurochs is depicted, and involves many hunters. A lot of the bones are from smaller sheep and goats, which had already been domesticated.

2
5dd50f78f47b8848d93724d6eb38d4c1

on July 29, 2012
at 07:32 AM

I seriously doubt we evolved eating cooked meat 3 times a day. I'm sure meat consumption was more periodic. It takes years to deplete our b12 stores which might suggest we had meat free periods during out evolution.

2
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 29, 2012
at 01:48 AM

This is a very important question.

The prevailing view in the paleo community appears to be that animal products should be the predominant food in the paleo diet.

If we consider the variation in geography and climate where our ancestors existed we would find a similar variation of plant and animal life and subsequently in the availability of plant to animal food.

Given that calories were not as easily obtained those days, one can consider the effort in terms of economics - how many calories would have to be invested in order to obtain the next parcel of calories? Was it easier to obtain plant or animal food?

It is likely that the further from the equator our ancestors lived, the greater the dependance on animals for food.

The reality is that paleo may not be a single type of diet but composed of a subset of diets with an emphasis either on a) mainly plants, b) a balance of plants and animals or c) mainly animal products.

Determining ones paleo sub-type may be a matter of considering genetic ancestry and APOe gene status.

2
F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:38 AM

Based on the archeological evidence, id say quite alot of meat. They didn't paint pictures of cucumbers on their walls, and there are so many bones you could make a castle.

I really hope future archaeologists are not going to make any assumptions about current nutrition based on modern work of art. Because there is something else we eat besides little green circles and blue triangles.

Why guess when you can read about modern hunter-gatherers?

Most tribes are over-researched by anthropologists. There are books/articles on what they eat and how they prepare it. They eat whatever they can hunt/fish and gather - whatever is found in their environment. They eat some protein each day, depending on what they kill/catch. I doubt they go a day without protein. But a lot of meat? It depends on a tribe and still I highly doubt it.

If you think that Paleo is meat, meat and nothing but meat - no, that's not Paleo, that's close to Inuit. And even then it would be fat, fish, blubber, meat, berries, bulbs, etc.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:15 AM

Both the root and the beans have some starch carbs, but not as much as potatos etc...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:16 AM

The estimate given is "Protein 25-30%, Carbohydrate 30-35%, Fat 40-45%". "About 55 percent of nutrients would have come from animal and fish sources, while about 45 percent, on average, would have been of vegetable origin." A fair bit more protein and fat than the standard diet, but a little less than the standard "low carb paleo".

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:34 AM

Theres also the question of how even grassfed meat relates to actual game meat. My earlier research suggests that there is more polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fat, and less saturated fat in wild animals. Certainly I am not sure the profile of a primarily beef diet, fat wise or otherwise, really matches up to wild animals. I think a diet that includes more type meat variety, some actually game meats, some fish, some poultry, some small mammals, is probably going to be closer to emulating stone age nutrition.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:37 AM

^ (Baobab). biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/… I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. And its seed is a protein source. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise..

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:12 AM

The estimate given is "Protein 25-30%, Carbohydrate 30-35%, Fat 40-45%". "About 55 percent of nutrients would have come from animal and fish sources, while about 45 percent, on average, would have been of vegetable origin." A fair bit more protein and fat than the standard diet, but a little less than the standard "low carb paleo". Its interesting, I remember researching that north-east african tribe, and finding they eat a significant amount of a certain tree fruit, which along with standard vegetation, probably makes up most of their carb intake..

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:24 AM

Then again....are they nomadic? Seems like most modern hunter-gatherers would be settled, not nomadic. Its something I would like to research more actually, both modern HG in africa, and the local fauna and flora in europe that one could eat. Combine that with archeology, and you might be able to take some better guesses.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:20 AM

If we use that as a basis, the carb portion of a 30-35% carb diet is probably significantly made up of that fruit, along with the lilly root, and the beans. No traditional tubers in sight, and probably a fair bit of fructose...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:02 AM

I had breifly read about some huntergatherers living in eastern africa. Heres the article I was reading: http://www.answers.com/topic/stone-age-nutrition-the-original-human-diet. Its definately more meat than the standard american diet, but possibly not as much as some eat on paleo.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:19 AM

No idea what a "tsi-tsi bean" is tho...

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 29, 2012
at 04:25 AM

How far back does the archeological evidence need to go to confirm that we have evolved and adapted to eat meat? We all agree that the archeological evidence on grains from 10000 years ago is not old enough, how far back we accept for meat?

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:18 AM

Apparently plant wise they ate alot of "tsi-tsi beans, baobab fruit & water lily roots", which would have made up their carb intake. Baobab fruit apparently still has fans in africa. Water lilly's botanical cousin, the lotus is eaten in the east, including its root.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:54 AM

Some of them do live in areas we evolved (Africa) and they are still hunter-gatherers. http://books.google.ru/books?id=5eEASHGLg3MC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=%22hunter-gatherers+in+africa%22&source=web&ots=E_mo4LKabm&sig=T4eX0Dtijua9OAew5hijyDrGLvE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22hunter-gatherers%20in%20africa%22&f=false

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:13 AM

Now to find the nutritional value of the fruit :P

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:56 AM

The comparison of ancient are with modern art is a bit poor. Paleo man was animist, they beleived in sympathic magic. Their art was done in a sacred manner. Our art is generally not. I infer the importance of animals however more from the prevelance of bones, and shells found than simply their art. Theres really no doubt they ate alot of animals IMO (and also plants)

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:14 AM

Heres "lotus root" which is most probably similar to the lilly root (closely related plant): http://skipthepie.org/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/lotus-root-raw/

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:20 AM

Baobub fruit: Analysis of Baobab Fruit Pulp (mg/100 g) Protein 2.3 Lipids 0.27 Soluble and insoluble Fibers 52.0 Carbohydrates 75.6 Ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) 280-300 (to compare: 51 in oranges**) Calcium 293 (to compare: 125 in milk**) Potassium 2.31 Phosphorus 96-118

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:45 PM

"1) modern HGs ARE nomadic" - good to know, i hadnt read much about them. " However, you do say that "roots" exist, which are essentially the same things- carbs/starchy plant matter. " - I was simply observing that in NE africa, it tended to be a certain kind of root. Its lower in starch than a sweet potato or potato (as are the tzi beans). Probably their carb content came significantly from the baobab fruit. Being the cradle of civilisation, I think thats interesting, because paleo sometimes shuns fruit, and favours high starch, low gi foods. This would seem to question that logic..

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:36 AM

^ (Baobab). http://www.biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/chemicalandnurientanalysisofbaobabfruitandseed.pdf I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, boabab seed, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 07:51 AM

"If you think that Paleo is meat, meat and nothing but meat - no, that's not Paleo, that's close to Inuit." - I dont. As for modern hunter gatherers, if they lived in areas we evolved, AND they were nomadic and not settled AND they used only simple processing, then id be very interested in how that relates to our dietary evolution.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:12 AM

Hmmm, looks like tsi beans are a seed, found in the pod of a runner plant: http://archive.samj.org.za/1969%20VOL%20XLIII%20Jul-Dec/Articles/12%20December/3.4%20THE%20NUTRIENT%20COMPOSITION%20AND%20DIETARY%20IMPORTANCE%20OF%20SOME%20VEGETABLE%20FOODS%20EATEN%20BY%20THE%20KUNG%20BUS.pdf Its got carbs and minerals.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 30, 2012
at 02:31 AM

It's unlikely that the Hazda are unchanged from Paleo times. The Inuit and Amerinds are both regressed Neolithic, or at best late Paleolithic Asiatics who readapted to the food available. In some areas this meant a nomadic diet high in meat, in others food was abundant enough that they stopped moving and became civilized. What they ate was not a set formula. But contrary to the OP's vegan video, it ALWAYS included meat.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:39 AM

^ (Baobab). http://www.biomega.eu/grobritannien-uk/downloads/chemicalandnurientanalysisofbaobabfruitandseed.pdf … I would guess looking at the other two, that this is a major source of carbs. Kinda runs against traditional paleo wisdom, the slow carbs are not that high in starch (lilly root, and tsi beans) but the commonly eaten fruit is just packed with sugars. And its seed is a protein source. Theres alot of mineral content there too, nutrient wise. Looks like a reasonable portion of there 30 odd percent carbs would be sugars from this fruit.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 08:42 AM

Myself? I am not trying to fully emulate. I eat a fair bit more meat, alot more veg and regular fruit, and I am probably in the ballpark if I can get my exercise together, and vary my meat a bit. If I wanted to totally emulate africa id be doing alot more research, but it would probably be slightly less meat, slightly more fruit(baobab anyone?) and roots (I think I can get lotus root at my chinese supermarket, lol). Maybe one day Ill think about that. Then again, theres heritage to consider. I am lactose tolerant, so what else is different...

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 28, 2012
at 09:31 AM

Rich in nutrients, and alot of sugars. More vit c than an orange, loads of calcium, and 72.6% carbohydrate by weight, rich in sucrose, glucose and fructose. Youd think that would make it sweet, but aparrently its acidic content makes it a little tart.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:32 PM

@ Jamie- Some of what you write is spot on, but some is misinformed. I didn't read it all but here are some; 1) modern HGs ARE nomadic. Once they deplete the resources in the area, they move on and them repopulate so they can come back to the area in the future. 2)When studies are done on the content of food hunted and the content of food gathered and the proportion of their diet, there is a bias towards gathered foods. Gathered foods include bugs, insects, eggs, etc- all animal products. As you can see, then, more animal products make up the diet than expected. 3) you say not a tuber...

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:35 PM

exists in their diet, but that would vary as well. However, you do say that "roots" exist, which are essentially the same things- carbs/starchy plant matter. From everything I've read and watched, true HGs (both past and present) eat a lot meat/fish, bugs/insects, nuts (seasonally), berries. They rely on a few sources of starch for calories. Honey is liquid gold when found, and they go to great lengths seeking it out.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:44 PM

and my apologies VB for commandeering your post.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on July 30, 2012
at 04:04 AM

Carrots, beets, celeriac and parsley are root plants.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:42 PM

At least among the Hadza in Africa, the most preferred food source is unanimously honey by both men and women, and starchy tubers are the least preferred food source. In between lies meat, baobab fruit, and berries, and the degree of preference depends on sex. For instance, men prefer meat over both berries and baobab fruit, but women prefer berries and baobab fruit over meat. The amount of game in the diet varies seasonally, and at least among the Hadza, body fat declines when starch displaces meat.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:49 PM

See your sort of saying a similar thing to what I am speculating. That the 30% odd carb intake would have been mostly "quick carbs" - berries, baobab fruit, honey etc, with only some smaller amount of beans and lilly roots....makes sense, if your low in energy, you want high gi foods. And quick carbs taste better too.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 31, 2012
at 09:11 AM

"Not only does diet induce immediate changes in DNA activation but it changes its genomic expression by altering the organism’s hormonal status to change the genomic body plan. This is how epigenetics controlled the growth of the human brain, spine, gut, and hind limbs." ?? ... Epigenetic modifications do not mediate evolution. Genetic changes do.

0
6bce08b072e3cea49b292658b9d5d197

on July 28, 2012
at 04:40 PM

I've seen studies that discuss the fact that we humans can survive exclusively on proteins and animal fats, based on the fact that our bodies can produce approximately 150g of glucose per day to fuel the parts of the brain that cannot function with ketone bodies.

Also, another anecdotal story of a man with a colostomy bag discussed how meat was the only food he ate that did not have partially un-digested chunks left over (gross I know)

I know I eat a VLC paleo diet and my blood work, mood, and general well being have greatly improved.

www.jbprimal.com

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:59 PM

Though VLC is a bit older than leptin reset, which dates from an recent landing by aliens.

Medium avatar

(10601)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:57 PM

VLC isn't an ancestral diet. VLC is Atkins on amphetamines, an innovation even newer than a vegan's hemp sandals.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on July 29, 2012
at 11:41 PM

Well, IDK about VLC not being an ancestral diet. If you consider physiological insulin resistance as a phenomena, and ketosis, its pretty clear we adapted to a low carb diet during the ice age. We probably drank a little blood tho. How adapted is another matter, but clearly some evolutionary pressures favoured genes which could at least survive on VLC. Its likely insulin resistance in general has some connection to this.

C8586fa2188272d5474d22aa8a500619

(358)

on July 28, 2012
at 06:43 PM

survive perhaps, but what is optimal for a healthy adult?

Medium avatar

(10601)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

Like you say we can survive on VLC. If we have to. For me it's enough that we've always eaten meat when we could get it.

-2
C4f1a0c70c4e0dea507c2e346c036bbd

on July 29, 2012
at 10:50 PM

What's more dangerous animal meat or GMO crops? Lol at vegan propoganda.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 22, 2012
at 06:11 AM

A little vegan goes a long way to sustainability.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!