Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > Paleolithic & Neanderthin
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 12:26
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kallyn
We have starch-splitting enzymes in our spit (salivary amylase).


I was actually going to offer up that one as a better arguments for omnivore, but didn't want to play too much "devil's advocate" against myself Though it clearly works against our tooth enamel, so I'm not sure if it's also just a useless vestigial remnant.

Quote:
We have the ability to taste sweet (obligate carnivores do not have this). http://www.npr.org/templates/story/...storyId=4766556


It's not a taste, it's a poison detector

Quote:
We see in color.


I'm not sure that one convinces me one way or the other, some carnivores have more acute/superior eyesight than others, ditto herbivores; anyway, it's food for thought.


Quote:
We have bacteria in our digestive tracts who thrive on plant matter,


I've been curious about intestinal flora/fauna; especially mine. I think my digestion has improved greatly in the absence of plants, I could go into gross details, but I almost kind of wonder/suspect if what people accept as "their" bacteria, aren't just "alien" invaders and a result of the food they eat. It's an area I hope to study more, I used to make my own Kefir and Yoghurt and I do wonder if there isn't such a thing as "beneficial" bacteria.


Quote:
Our gut size and bowel length are longer than that of carnivores', our stomachs empty slower, and our food has a longer transit time than that of carnivores (in order to extract more nutrition of out hard to digest plant foods).


Yeah, I've been reading more about that lately, I wonder if it's not just another vestigial throwback to a distant herbivore ancestor; But it's worthy of consideration.

Quote:
Whenever ancient camp sites are found in the fossil record, along with all the remains of butchered bones, there is ample evidence for the use of plant food as well. Cast off nut and seed shells, concentrated pollen just to name two. Sometimes digging sticks are also found, which were used to help dig up tubers.

On the rare occasion that we find fossilized human excrement, plant matter is present. http://www.scirpus.ca/dung/human.htm and http://www.archaeologyexpert.co.uk/...teAnalysts.html




I'm not trying to be argumentative on this one, it's just whenever someone posts a link to a dig like that... it invariably seems to be upper-paleo or neolithic. On the other hand, I'm not convinced there aren't older sites that wouldn't support it, I like to keep an open mind, and I'd like to see some specific examples.


Quote:
Fossilized human remains can be chemically analyzed for their carbon and nitrogen isotope content which determines whether the owner's diet was meat or plant based. Usually, the bones show evidence of varying levels of dietary plant matter. http://www.nature.com/nature/journa...s/319321a0.html and http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~rtykot/Bone.html


I've found ones that claim we're at about the same levels as carnivores; but I'll go through these when I have some time, it is exactly what I was asking for.

Quote:
Everyone who has come in contact with a living hunter-gatherer group and has reported on their diet mentions at least some kind of plant food (inuit and far northern american indians being exceptions due to their extreme environments).


Yeah, the modern HG arguments are tricky, it's easy for both sides to cherry pick and use the groups that suit them. Perhaps, it's because I'm north american that I tend to identify the most with those groups, I can be as biased as anyone I suppose.

Quote:
Plant food is very easy to gather and provides an easy source of calories ...


I'm still inclined to see that the other way around, but there are obviously places on our planet where either case could be made.

Quote:
Now, I don't think anyone here disagrees that we need meat/fat as a large staple part of our diet for good health. In fact, our brain:gut ratio absolutely requires it (see my favorite paper ever, the expensive tissue hypothesis, here: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid...pt=sci_arttext). ...


Yeah, it's an argument I liked from "The Hunting Hypothesis" for Carnivorism. But it still works, even if one allows some vegetation into the mix... it's certainly the common ground I stand on with most of the people in here. It even falls in line with some definitions of carnivorism to allow a small percentage of vegetable input. It's kind of a semantics game, but I thought one interesting definition from wikipedia carnivore entry is:

Quote:
"An obligate or true carnivore is an animal that must eat meat in order to thrive"


Which I do believe applies to us; I don't think vegans can "thrive" whereas pure meat eating humans can and do. Anyway, it all kind of dwindles down to a "give it a name" thing... so I don't want to get too mired in hair-splitting arguments about our classification.

Quote:
(I was going to provide a link for each point, but then I realized I had been working on this post wayyyyyy too long and I gave up).


I really do appreciate the magnum opus of links and thoughts you assembled here. I'll make sure I devote more time to going over each of them, I'm sure I'll find all of them useful and informative. Thanks again Kallyn, for being your usual helpful self, and for the taking the time to do this.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #77   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 13:33
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
It's not a taste, it's a poison detector

Actually, tasting bitterness is the poison detector since poisons (found in nature) are generally bitter.

Quote:
I've been curious about intestinal flora/fauna; especially mine. I think my digestion has improved greatly in the absence of plants, I could go into gross details, but I almost kind of wonder/suspect if what people accept as "their" bacteria, aren't just "alien" invaders and a result of the food they eat. It's an area I hope to study more, I used to make my own Kefir and Yoghurt and I do wonder if there isn't such a thing as "beneficial" bacteria.

I've been mulling on this. We have lots of bacteria in our mouth too. When we eat carbs those bacteria secrete acids that ruin our teeth. I'm not convinced we're actually supposed to have a thriving colony of those bacteria in our mouths. I suspect the same thing for a lot of our gut bacteria.
Reply With Quote
  #78   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 13:53
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Actually, tasting bitterness is the poison detector since poisons (found in nature) are generally bitter.


There are exceptions of course, don't forget honey
Reply With Quote
  #79   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 14:10
gcarradine's Avatar
gcarradine gcarradine is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 321
 
Plan: Atkins-ish.
Stats: 192.5/157/148.5 Female 64"
BF:Start 1-22-08
Progress: 81%
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
Default

Nothing to add in this extremely interesting and scholarly discussion, apart from the observation that my golden retriever voluntarily ate wild blackberries, straight off the vines, on our mountain property in western WA while I was a kid. I often marveled at her ability to navigate the thorns without getting her longish hair tangled. My cat also ate plants (many of the more tender varieties), although it could be argued that she only consumed them for the digestive benefits of fiber. I certainly don't see either of those animals as having the grinding capability with their molars for eating hard wheat berries or quantities of tough, fibrous grasses (as would grazing herbivores) but plentiful, soft fruits and plants seemed to be something they sought and enjoyed on their own on a semi-regular basis, in season and in complement to their otherwise meaty diet. I found my dogs eating plant foods more often than my cats, that's for certain. I always thought dogs were closer in heritage to bears than cats, and most bears are omnivorous too, aren't they?
Reply With Quote
  #80   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 14:35
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcarradine
...I always thought dogs were closer in heritage to bears than cats, and most bears are omnivorous too, aren't they?


Dogs and bears certainly seem to have a special relationship:



The taxonomy question is a little trickier... again from the wikipedia:

Quote:
"The word "carnivore" sometimes refers to the mammalian Order Carnivora, but this is misleading. Although many Carnivora fit the first definition of being exclusively meat eaters, not all do. For example, bears are members of Carnivora that are not carnivores in the dietary sense, and pandas are almost exclusively herbivorous. Likewise, some full-time (dolphins, shrews) and part-time (humans, pigs) predatory species among mammals, let alone all carnivorous non-mammals, are not members of Carnivora.



P.S.: Yes, I saw what it says about humans... I didn't say it was perfect.
Reply With Quote
  #81   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 17:42
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I think cats eat grass to make themselves barf. At least, I always seem to find grass in cat barf.
Reply With Quote
  #82   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 17:47
gcarradine's Avatar
gcarradine gcarradine is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 321
 
Plan: Atkins-ish.
Stats: 192.5/157/148.5 Female 64"
BF:Start 1-22-08
Progress: 81%
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
I think cats eat grass to make themselves barf. At least, I always seem to find grass in cat barf.


Yeah, they aren't physiologically able to digest veggies, I heard.
Reply With Quote
  #83   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 17:52
Thinny Thinny is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 152
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 300/225/150
BF:
Progress: 50%
Location: BC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankly
I still have yet to see anyone show any evidence from the lower to middle paleolithic, of human ancestors, that had any indicators they ate plants at all; but I would love to see it.


I think fossilized dung from paleo people might shock you too much, Frank, but I'm sure archeologists have found some, else they couldn't tell us what paleoman ate.
Quote:
P.S.: Though, even if someone manages to find it, I'll just feel sorry for the poor creatures, having to adapt to eat such a pathetic replacement for food.


Ah, so it matters not what proof we bring to the table, it's your preferences that matter. Right! Now that I understand the rules, I don't think I'll play any longer. Thanks anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #84   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 18:08
gcarradine's Avatar
gcarradine gcarradine is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 321
 
Plan: Atkins-ish.
Stats: 192.5/157/148.5 Female 64"
BF:Start 1-22-08
Progress: 81%
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
Default

Nancy, after I posted last, I couldn't get this outta my head:

"Next, on Animal Planet, feline bulimia: Has this pandemic affected your beloved pet? Tune in to find out."

Reply With Quote
  #85   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 18:12
Wifezilla's Avatar
Wifezilla Wifezilla is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,367
 
Plan: I'm a Barry Girl
Stats: 250/208/190 Female 72
BF:
Progress: 70%
Location: Colorado
Default

My Irish Setter used to eat black berries too! I just thought she was insane
Reply With Quote
  #86   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 21:54
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinny
I think fossilized dung from paleo people might shock you too much, Frank, but I'm sure archeologists have found some, else they couldn't tell us what paleoman ate.


As long as you're sure Thinny, that's good enough for me.


Quote:
Ah, so it matters not what proof we bring to the table, it's your preferences that matter. Right! Now that I understand the rules, I don't think I'll play any longer. Thanks anyway.



My body, my preferences, I'm not telling you how to eat Thinny. Anyway, you are very welcome; thanks for coming out.
Reply With Quote
  #87   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 22:22
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
They do? I've never peered into the pie hole of a panda.


Reply With Quote
  #88   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 22:38
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kallyn
We have the ability to taste sweet (obligate carnivores do not have this). http://www.npr.org/templates/story/...storyId=4766556


Every link I've found about the missing sweet gene is specifically about cats, have you seen any that generalize it to all obligate carnivores. There are chickens that can't detect "sweet" either, so I'm not sure that it means much. It's interesting that there's a tieback to the feline diabetes, in that not being able to detect carbs/sweet seems to tie into why they'll overeat the carbohydrate laden kibble many people feed them.
Reply With Quote
  #89   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 22:56
Tarlach's Avatar
Tarlach Tarlach is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 445
 
Plan: ZC Warrior | +40K Paleo
Stats: 200/180/180 Male 180cm
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Perth, Australia
Default Great info kallyn

Thanks kallyn for a very informative post. I was aware of most of those factors, but you did bring up a few I had never heard of. I didn't want to write a mega post like yours, as I'm a bit lazy

I had always wondered if the ability to taste sweet was purely a "ripeness detector". However our dog seems to like sweet stuff, so I was a bit confused...

Sorry my post seems to get a bit lost. As an Aussie I miss out of the most active discussion time

...and after being here one day, I think I get frankly. He just loves to stir up us hardcore paleo's
Reply With Quote
  #90   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-08, 23:21
frankly's Avatar
frankly frankly is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,259
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 295/220/160 Male 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 56%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kallyn
On the rare occasion that we find fossilized human excrement, plant matter is present. http://www.scirpus.ca/dung/human.htm and http://www.archaeologyexpert.co.uk/...teAnalysts.html


The second link doesn't seem to say anything other than what coprolite analysis is. The first link doesn't seem to have anything about paleo dung that indicates plant eating.

example 01: 8300 yr BP, lower levels, to around 500 yr BP,
example 02: 890 - 950 AD.
example 03: 5200-5300 yr BP and doesn't say anything about plants.
example 04: 1650 AD
example 05: doesn't say anything about time or plants
example 06: 675-1700 AD
example 07: 13th-15th centuries
example 08: romans
example 09: 1475 ± 50 AD
example 10: doesn't say anything about time or plants
example 11: no date indicated
example 12: 2500 BC - 500 AD.
example 13: 9,500 - 1600 yr BP

....

I continued down and went through every single one, the oldest that indicates humans eating plants is example 13. I couldn't find anything in there that would indicate paleo peoples eating plants. You can give it another skim, maybe I missed one.



P.S.: Sorry Thinny, nothing shocking, your blind faith was exactly that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:33.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.