Spartacus
Veteran
Paleontological evidence says different things for different timeperiods. As Drew pointed out, we started out as gatherers/vegetarians, than came scavenging, than hunting, than farming.Paleontological evidence says no.
Homo Neanderthalensis - a close cousin species, the 'Neanderthals' - were just about obligate carnivores.
Cro-Magnons - a branch leading to us, Homo Sapiens - were omnivores.
Even if at some point of time during the ice age, humanoids had to rely mostly on meat, those times were harsh and average lifespan was low.
At best this period shows the adaptiveness of humanoid (still not todays humans) digestion to extreme conditions, not the ideal way of today´s human nutrition.
And of course: The Neanderthals DIET OUT.
Our dentition doesn´t even come close to resemble that of a carnivore. Try biting off a dead mouse´s head for a proof.We're omnivores not by some kind of conscious choice, but by virtue of having the dentition and metabolic ability to consume and benefit from meat as well as vegetable nutrients.
The way our digestiv system is layed out also implies that we are not meant to heavily rely on the digestion of meat: Low stomic acid, which makes it imposible to break down bones and long bowels, which is very problematic for getting rid of ptomanie/cadaveric poison.
So "omnivore" again simply acknowledges the fact, that we CAN digest meat, not that we MUST.
If you quote literature from the 60s, yes.Not to mention that on an evolutionary time-scale the available evidence demonstrates that human cooperation developed to support hunting, not farming.
Modern resarch, in an overhaul of a lot of research that was kind of bound to a patriarchic biased paleontology, emphazizes the importance of a more sustainable way of providing food for the clan/family.
Everybody who ever tried hunting down a boar with a spear will agree, that this isn´t the best way to asure constant availability of food.
(Well, John Rambo CAN of course...)
So most likely gathering and agriculture played the more important role to ensure constant nutrition, for the hunters on their hunt and for the women and children while waiting for their return.
This also lead to a high level of interdependency and cooperation, much more time consuming and complex than organising a hunt...
No, most people can "get by" with an all plant based diet, without "relentless supplementation and dietary monitoring".Yes, some people can get by quite well and be very healthy as vegans (with relentless supplementation and dietary monitoring). It's not baseline-normal for everyone.
"Supplements" are mostly for people on the so called "Standard American Diet" (SAD - no pun intended), who still believe by eating some pills, they can enjoy steak/burger/hot dogs/ fries all day long.
"Dietary monitoring" is needed for the majority of this people on a SAD, who are obese and/or have diabetes and/or heart disease.
Why are you defaming sth even the pretty conservative ADA (American Dietetic Association) has the following to say about:
"It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes."
Do you have other research on this...?
The baseline for me is: since I don´t need animal products to sustain a healthy AND tasty diet, why should I inflict all that pain and suffering to animals?