http://www.bizarro.com/vegan/vegan_carnivores.htm
Well, of course an animal rights activist would be biased. but are some of the facts at least accurate?
The vast majority of the human population eats both animal and plant matter, ergo, as a species, we’re omnivorous.
The human diet is variable which has been a great benefit to the success of the species. Where meat is limited we can survive on vegetable matter (and a wide variety at that). When plants are limited (such as in the Arctic) we can switch to be almost carnivorous.
We are designed as omnivores but can easily survive at either extreme.
The author is a vegetarian and is trying to convince people to follow his beliefs. But he isn’t using the facts to do so. He makes the logical fallacy of the excluded middle. After passingly acknowledging the existence of omnivores, he then spend the rest of the article comparing herbivores and carnivores and points out that humans aren’t anatomically designed to be carnivores. His implication is that we must therefore be herbivores.
Which is false. He could just as easily flipped his argument over and pointed out that we are not anatomically designed to be herbivores and arrived at the false conclusion that we must be carnivores. The reality is that humans are not carnivores or herbivores - we’re omnivores and human anatomy is designed for an omnivorous diet. Our anatomy is comparable to wild species that are naturally omnivorous.
That said, it is true that humans eat a much higher percentage of meat than any wild species of omnivores would naturally be able to eat and it would be healthier for most people to eat less meat.
I’m pretty sure we aren’t designed at all. At the very least, it is not the default assumption. Can you provide support for this design, and by extension, the designer?
They not only ignore the role tools play in humans’ daily life, they spread false information about it. Since chimps also use tools, we can infer that our common ancestor did, too. That was about 5 or 6 million years ago. But even without that, the fossil record tells us we’ve been using stone tools for over 2 million years. In fact, that is a key defining point for the genus Homo. As for fire, we don’t know exactly when it was harnessed, but that was probably at least 500,000 years ago, and could as far back as 1.5 million years.
I’m not aware of any primitive society (ie, non farming) that is vegetarian. That alone tells us something. Vegetarianism is a modern “luxury”.
Human intestines are about 25 feet long (small + large intestines), for a full grown man. That’s less than 5x a man’s height-- within the carnivore range in the article.
“Humans” or Americans? 
Just loose with my words.
You guys don’t miss a beat.
The Master speaks:
Are humans meat eaters or vegetarians by nature?
There’s really no question that from a biological point of view the human digestive system is adapted to a mixed diet of plant matter and meat.
I also wasn’t trying to claim that any intelligent design went into human anatomy. I even considered added an addendum to that effect but it seemed silly of me to nitpick my own post.
Hardly any need to bother. The rest of us are happy to nitpick for you!
If by nothing else, humans were designed by Nature, the way a geyser is designed by the rocks it rushes through.
There are several primitive societies that consumed pulses, grains, pseudograins, or tubers as the primary dietary staple, but even in this case the diet was supplemented where possible with meat or animal byproducts. I don’t know of any primitive diet that would fit within the constraints of modern veganism. Protein and animal fats are just too precious a source of concentrated calories and some vitamins to eschew.
The human small intestines (intestinum tenue) are actually 19-23 feet long at maturity (the length of the colon and rectum shouldn’t be counted because it has little function in regard to digestion or absorption of solid material). Given a ~3 ft mouth-to-anus distance (which is a better measure than fully body height) this gives about 6:1 to 7:1 ratio of functional digestive tract to height, placing humans squarely in the middle between obligate carnivores (~3:1) and true herbivores (>12:1). It in fact puts us in the same range as rodents, ursines (bears), and procyonidae (raccoons and olingos), almost all of which, except those adapted to extreme environments, are foraging omnivores for whom meat (mostly in the form of insects, grubs, mussels, but occasionally fish or large game) is a very moderate but implicit part of their diet.
It is very clear that hominids are not adapted to be pure herbivores; quite aside from the inability to digest cellulose, our dentation, limited protein synthesis, and micronutrient needs clearly indicate a dependance upon some amount of animal matter in our diets. While it is possible today to eat a purely vegetarian diet and get all required nutrients and complete proteins, it would not have been possible for foraging hominids in Africa who lacked full protein cultivars like soya or quinoa. It also goes without saying that in areas where only seasonal growth occurs, the need for animal or animal byproducts to provide fats and perishable nutrients in non-growth seasons is required. Humans are not evolved to be exclusive vegetarians, and only the modern development of diverse agriculture permits this lifestyle.
Western diets in general contain more proteins that are necessary (or even possibly healthy) and the high concentrations of saturated fats that come with domesticated animals. Protein requirements are 2-4 oz per day of complete proteins (found in almost all animal tissue) for the average person, and even athelets looking to build muscle mass can only use 8-10 oz per day; the rest is removed by the kidneys and excreted. Modern diets in general have too much material that is readily digestable; whereas “natural” diets tend to include a lot of unprocessed grains and pulses with cellulose and non-starch structural polysaccharides that are not digestable (thus leading to a sense of “fullness” with low caloric density), modern diets made from processed grains, simple sugars, saturated fats, cultivars with higher amounts of “sweet” carbohydrates, et cetera, that tends to digest quickly, requiring more frequent consumption to maintain suitable blood sugar levels and an overall feeling of satiation. Saturated fats–used for cooking, flavoring, condiment, et cetera–are probably the biggest curplit in excess caloric content; aside from their high caloric density most people tend to gorge on saturated fats by instinct because they don’t last long in nature and are necessary to early growth development.
Stranger
Yes.
This is correct, although perhaps high by some standards, but I find people are often confused by one issue.
Two ounces of protein doesn’t mean the same thing as two ounces of meat.
Most steak, for examples, has about 30 grams of protein for every 100 grams of total weight. 30 grams is just over one ounce; 100 grams is about 3.5 ounces.
Therefore to get 2-4 ounces of protein, you would need to eat 7-14 ounces of steak.
Other foods have lower protein ratios, so you would need to eat more of them to get the daily totals.
Hard Cheese: 20-25 grams of protein per 100 grams total.
Bread: 10 grams per 100.
Chicken eggs: 6 grams per 100.
Fish: 15-25 grams per 100.
Vegetables: 1-3 grams per 100.
All numbers are approximate since there is so much variation in each category.
I believe flour has roughly 10 grams per 100 of protein. Bread, having water as well would have less protein.
I’ve always heard that increased protein consumption is one of the reasons we have a bigger brain.
I found this article which has some interesting things to say about meat in the human diet. It even mentions that we might be eating too little protein.
Surely it’s simple carbohydrates - e.g. high-fructose corn syrup - that have this ignominy.
The article also poses the question:
I don’t mind the smell of fresh meat. On the other hand, presumably we’ve evolved to find the smell of rotten/rotting meat dislikeable to warn us off eating carrion we cannot stomach.
The fanatical vegetarian in your link uses ‘science’ to prove his case.
‘Put a 2 year old in a playpen with a rabbit and an apple. If he eats the rabbit, humans are carnivores.’ :smack: :rolleyes:
If he eats the rabbit, he’s a goddamned furvert. Kill him for great justice.