Tuna salad anyone? Death of a Tuna and Deathof a Whale

Rodney Long wrote:

The first tools man made were spear points, and knives to kill, and
"butcher" meat, and each other. There is no history of the western world
where man did not eat meat, no site where there were not tools for
killing and eating meat, let's see that's about what ? 20,000 years,,
some say 50,000 years


Such is the pretentiousness of our species. If we were meant to eat
meat, then perhaps we wouldn't need tools for killing. Like primates,
we have learned to mimick carnivorous animals when required for
survival. However, modern packaging and shipping methods have
eliminated the need to eat meat for survival.

Besides, if we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of
meat ? :-)

That's the point. Meat was necessary for survival when winter frost
prevented crops from growing. It kept people from starving, although
it wasn't necessarily healthy. Now that we can ship vegetables in from
warmer locations and eat them from a can, there is really no point to
eating meat.

wrote:
Rodney Long wrote:

The first tools man made were spear points, and knives to kill, and
"butcher" meat, and each other. There is no history of the western world
where man did not eat meat, no site where there were not tools for
killing and eating meat, let's see that's about what ? 20,000 years,,
some say 50,000 years


Such is the pretentiousness of our species. If we were meant to eat
meat, then perhaps we wouldn't need tools for killing. Like primates,
we have learned to mimick carnivorous animals when required for
survival. However, modern packaging and shipping methods have
eliminated the need to eat meat for survival.

The high protein of meat is what made our brains develop to what they
are today, if we had never eating meat, we would still be swinging from
the trees. Now chimps have started eating meat, in a couple hundred
thousand years, they will come out of the trees

Besides, if we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of
meat ? :-)

That's the point. Meat was necessary for survival when winter frost
prevented crops from growing. It kept people from starving, although
it wasn't necessarily healthy.


The top medical people are now saying some "meat" is necessary in "many"
people's diets, true some can live without it, but the majority need
"some" for proper health . There are finally some real research that has
been done, since vegetarian diets, by enough people to study, have only
been done for half of the last century
Now that we can ship vegetables in from
warmer locations and eat them from a can, there is really no point to
eating meat.

For one reason, I like it

--
Rodney Long,
Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread,
Boomerang Fishing Pro. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures,
Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot
http://www.ezknot.com

"Rodney Long" wrote in message ...
wrote:
Rodney Long wrote:

The first tools man made were spear points, and knives to kill, and
"butcher" meat, and each other. There is no history of the western world
where man did not eat meat, no site where there were not tools for
killing and eating meat, let's see that's about what ? 20,000 years,,
some say 50,000 years


Such is the pretentiousness of our species. If we were meant to eat
meat, then perhaps we wouldn't need tools for killing. Like primates,
we have learned to mimick carnivorous animals when required for
survival. However, modern packaging and shipping methods have
eliminated the need to eat meat for survival.

The high protein of meat is what made our brains develop to what they
are today,

'There is a popular notion that anthropology can offer useful
insights for forming the basis of a dietary philosophy.
Anthropology is a science which is only just starting to mature,
previously having been little more that a systematic, but lose,
body of "say-so" information which attempted to explain our
species history and origins. With advances in dating methods,
including DNA analysis and more fossil finds, the science is
now embarking on its integration with biology. Previously,
anthropology was a pseudo-scientific marriage of traditional
views attempting to link the findings of robust sciences, such
as geology, palaeontology and archaeology. However, even
though anthropologists like Richard Leakey are aware that
their 'science' is often "based on unspoken assumptions"
(The Making of Mankind, p. 82, R. Leakey), they show that
they will persist in making them.

Anthropologies 'Man The Hunter' concept is still used as a
reason for justifying the consumption of animal flesh as food.
This has even extended as far as suggesting that animal foods
have enabled or caused human brain enlargement. Allegedly
this is because of the greater availability of certain kinds of
fats and the sharing behaviour associated with eating raw
animal food. The reality is that through natural selection, the
environmental factors our species have been exposed to
selected for greater brain development, long before raw animal
flesh became a significant part of our ancient ancestors diet.
The elephant has also developed a larger brain than the human
brain, on a diet primarily consisting of fermented foliage and
fruits. It is my hypothesis that it is eating fruits and perhaps
blossoms, that has, if anything, contributed the most in allowing
humans to develop relatively larger brains than other species.
The ability of humans to develop normal brains with a dietary
absence of animal products is also noted.
...
Given a plentiful supply of fruits the mother does not have to
risk expending much of her effort obtaining difficult to get foods
like raw animal flesh, insects, nuts and roots. Furthermore, fruits
contain abundant supplies of sugars which the brain solely uses
for energy. The mother who's genes better dispose her for an
easy life on fruits would have an advantage of those who do not,
and similarly, the fruit species which is the best food for mother
and child nutrition, would tend to be selected for. There is now
little doubt amongst distinguished biologists that fruit has been
the most significant dietary constituent in the evolution of humans.
...
What are the essential biochemical properties of human metabolism
which distinguish us from our non-human primate relatives? One, at
least, is our uniquely low protein requirement as described by Olav
T. Oftedal who says:

"Human milk has the lowest protein concentration (about 7% of
energy) of any primate milk that has been studied. In general, it
appears that primates produce small daily amounts of a relatively
dilute milk (Oftedal 1984). Thus the protein and energy demands
of lactation are probably low for primates by comparison to the
demands experienced by many other mammals." The nutritional
consequences of foraging in primates: the relationship of nutrient
intakes to nutrient requirements, p.161 Philosophical Transactions:
Biological Sciences vol 334, 159-295, No. 1270

One might imagine that given our comparatively 'low protein' milk,
we would not be able to grow very fast. In fact, as the image on the
right shows, human infants show very rapid growth, especially of
the brain, during the first year of life. Human infants are born a full
year earlier than they would be projected to, based on comparisons
with other animals. This is because of the large size their brains
reach. A human infant grows at the rate of 9 kg/year at birth, falling
to 3.5 kg/year a year later. Thereafter its growth rate is about half
that of a chimpanzees at 2 kg/year vs. about 4.5 kg/year. Humans
are relatively half as bulky as the other great apes, thus allowing
nutrients to be directed at brain development and the diet to be less
demanding. The advantages of such an undemanding metabolism
are clear. Humans delay their growth because they 'catch up' later,
during puberty as seen on the graph. Even so, the growth rate never
reaches that of a newborn infant who grows best by only eating
breast milk.
....
According to Exequiel M. Patiño and Juan T. Borda 'Primate milks
contain on the average 13% solids, of which 6.5% is lactose, 3.8%
lipids, 2.4% proteins, and 0.2% ash. Lactose is the largest
component of the solids, and protein is a lesser one'. They also say
that 'milks of humans and Old World monkeys have the highest
percentages of sugar (an average of 6.9%)' and when comparing
human and non human primate milks, they have similar proportions
of solids, but human milks has more sugar and fat whereas the non
human primate milks have much more protein. They continue 'In
fact, human milk has the lowest concentration of proteins (1.0%)
of all the species of primates.' Patiño and Borda present their
research in order to allow other primatologists to construct artificial
milks as a substitute for the real thing for captive primates. It is to
be expected that these will have similar disasterous consequences
as the feeding of artificial bovine, and other false milks, has had on
human infants.

Patiño and Borda also present a table which compares primate
milks. This table is shown below and identifies the distinctive
lower protein requirements of humans. [see link]

Undoubtedly these gross metabolic differences between humans
and other mammals must have system wide implications for our
metabolism. They allow us to feed heavily on fruits, and may
restrict other species from choosing them. Never the less, many
nutritional authorities suggest that adult humans need nearly double
(12% of calorific value) their breast milk levels of protein, although
it is accepted that infant protein requirements for growth are triple
those of adults. The use of calorific values might also confuse the
issue since human milk is highly dilute (1% protein), and clearly
eating foods that might be 25 times this concentration, such as
meat, are massive excesses if constantly ingested. Certainly the
body might manage to deal with this excess without suffering
immediate problems, but this is not proof of any beneficial
adaptation. It also needs to be pointed out that berries, such as
raspberries, may yield up to 21% of their calorific value from
protein, but are not regarded as 'good sources' of protein by
nutritional authorites. There are millions of fruits available to wild
animals, and blanked generalisations about the qualities of certain
food groups, need to be examined carefully, due to some
misconceptions arising from the limited commercial fruits which
we experience in the domestic state.

The weaning of a fruigivorous primate would clearly demand the
supply of a food with nutritional characteristics similar to those
of the mothers milk. We must realise that supportive breast
feeding may continue for up to 9 or 10 years in some 'primitive'
peoples, and this is more likely to be representative of our
evolutionary history than the 6 month limit often found in modern
cultures. This premature weaning should strike any aware
naturalist as being a disasterous activity, inflicting untold damage.
However, what we do know of the consequences is that it
reduces the IQ and disease resistance of the child, and that the
substitute of unnatural substances, like wheat and dairy products,
is pathogenic.

Finally we need to compare some food group compositions with
human milk in order to establish if any statistical similarity exists.
This would demonstrate that modern humans have inherited their
ancient fruigivorous metabolism. This data is examined below in
the final sections of the article.
.....'
http://tinyurl.com/dahps

'BBC - Test The Nation - Results [IQ]

Studio groups
-------------------------------
Vegetarians 113
Public Schools 111
Butchers 105
Celebrities 105
Estate Agents 104
Footballers' Wives 101

UK Average - 109.25

http://www.bbc.co.uk/testthenation/i...ts/index.shtml

'VEGGIE CHAMPIONS!!!

The Vegetarians win BBC's Test the Nation IQ battle.

Vegetarianism. the intelligent choice!

We are THRILLED to announce that the 40-strong team
of vegetarians came out top as the studio team winners of
Saturday night's hugely popular BBC National IQ contest.
And, proving that vegetarianism is clearly an intelligent
choice, the individual contestant with the highest overall
IQ was a vegetarian too!

Wearing green t-shirts, the vegetarians competed against
six other teams including butchers, estate agents, public
school pupils, state school pupils, footballers' wives and
celebrities.

The veggie team was made up of vegetarians and Society
members from around the UK, including five members of
VegSoc staff. As the results were announced, the veggie
team was consistently in the top three but not the obvious
victors. However, when the final scores were tallied,
including IQ variations for age differences, we were
delighted to be declared the winners - with an overall IQ
of 113. Interestingly, The Butchers came joint fourth! For
a full break-down of the scores please go to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/testthenation/i.../results.shtml

Top-scoring contestant Marie Bidmead, 68, a mother-of-five
from Churcham, Gloucester said: "It was great fun. The veggie
team was so united and jolly, regardless of winning. We all
went along for a bit of fun and were up against these highflying
students and stars. I was in absolute shock when I got the top
score! I failed my 11-plus and I've never considered myself to
be a brain-box. I think it shows that we veggies are good
'thinkers' - we think about what we eat with intelligence for a
start!"

September 2006

http://www.vegsoc.org/news/2006/testnation.html

if we had never eating meat, we would still be swinging from
the trees.

'We' left the trees about seven million years ago, without meat.

Now chimps have started eating meat, in a couple hundred
thousand years, they will come out of the trees

See other post.

Besides, if we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of
meat ? :-)

That's the point. Meat was necessary for survival when winter frost
prevented crops from growing. It kept people from starving, although
it wasn't necessarily healthy.


The top medical people are now saying some "meat" is necessary in "many"
people's diets, true some can live without it, but the majority need
"some" for proper health .

'Analyses of data from the China studies by his collaborators and
others, Campbell told the epidemiology symposium, is leading to
policy recommendations. He mentioned three:

* The greater the variety of plant-based foods in the diet, the greater
the benefit. Variety insures broader coverage of known and unknown
nutrient needs.

* Provided there is plant food variety, quality and quantity, a healthful
and nutritionally complete diet can be attained without animal-based
food.

* The closer the food is to its native state - with minimal heating,
salting and processing - the greater will be the benefit.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicl..._Study_II.html

"China Study I is now regarded as the most comprehensive study
of diet, lifestyle and disease ever completed. Data from the study was
first published in an 896-page monograph (1990) and resulted in more
than 50 scientific publications."

"Planned since 1987, China Study II was designed to resurvey the
same mainland Chinese population as China Study I, in addition to a
few new sites in mainland China and a new population of 16 counties
in Taiwan. China Study II was directed by the three collaborators in
the first study and by Dr. Winharn Pan" ..

"Both surveys afford an opportunity to investigate the effect of
dietary change from the typical plant-based diet of rural China to a
Western-style diet that includes more animal-based foods, as
consumed in urban China and in Taiwan. "Even small increases in
the consumption of animal-based foods was associated with
increased disease risk," Campbell told a symposium at the
epidemiology congress, pointing to several statistically significant
correlations from the China studies:"
.....'
http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicl..._Study_II.html

There are finally some real research that has
been done, since vegetarian diets, by enough people to study, have only
been done for half of the last century

'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are appropriate
for all stages of the lifecycle, including during pregnancy, lactation,
infancy, childhood and adolescence. Appropriately planned vegetarian
diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate and provide health benefits in
the prevention and treatment of certain diseases.' These 'certain diseases'
are the killer epidemics of today - heart disease, strokes, cancers, diabetes
etc.

This is the view of the world's most prestigious health advisory body,
the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada, after a
review of world literature. It is backed up by the British Medical
Association:

'Vegetarians have lower rates of obesity, coronary heart disease,
high blood pressure, large bowel disorders, cancers and gall stones.'
....'
http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/mediareleases/050221.html

Now that we can ship vegetables in from
warmer locations and eat them from a can, there is really no point to
eating meat.

For one reason, I like it

'The big problem we have before us in the meat industry is to
how to reduce the levels of fat in meat without leaving it dry
and tasteless when we eat it. Fat contributes a lot of taste to
meat, particularly those flavours that allow us to recognize
one species from another. Without it, we may end up with
just a bland, general meaty taste. '
http://www.aps.uoguelph.ca/~swatland/ch2_4.htm

'Measuring Brain Activity In People Eating Chocolate Offers
New Clues About How The Body Becomes Addicted

CHICAGO --- Using positron emission tomography scans to
measure brain activity in people eating chocolate, a team of U.S.
and Canadian neuroscientists believe they have identified areas
of the brain that may underlie addiction and eating disorders.

Dana Small, assistant professor of neurology at Northwestern
University Medical School, and colleagues found that individuals'
ratings of the pleasantness of eating chocolate were associated
with increased blood flow in areas of the brain, particularly in
the orbital frontal cortex and midbrain, that are also activated
by addictive drugs such as cocaine.
...
According to Small, a primary reinforcer is a stimulus that an
individual doesn't have to learn to like but, rather, is enjoyed
from birth. Addictive drugs can be viewed as primary
reinforcers. Fat and sweet also are primary reinforcers, and
chocolate is chock full of fat and sweet, Small said.
...
Small explained that studying the brain's response to eating a
highly rewarding food such as chocolate provides an effective
"in-health" model of addiction. "
...'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0829082943.htm

"The combination of fat with sugar or fat with salt seems to
have a very particular neurochemical effect on the brain,"
Ann Kelley, a professor at the University of Wisconsin (search)
who co-authored the unpublished study, said on the Fox News
Channel. "What that does is release certain chemicals that are
similar to drugs, like heroin and morphine."
...'
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93031,00.html

Rodney Long wrote:

The first tools man made were spear points, and knives to kill, and
"butcher" meat, and each other.

'The way chimpanzees in West Africa use stone tools to crack
open nuts for food and pass on the trick to their offspring has
been revealed in an intriguing study published in the journal
Science.
...
During their expedition to the Tai Forest last year, the scientists
recovered 479 stone pieces, chips of granite, laterite, feldspar
and quartz broken from the hammers.

Another lead researcher, Dr Julio Mercader, also from George
Washington University, said the study could help us better
understand the behaviour of human-like species from several
million years ago.

"We do not say that [old hominid] sites look like our chimp
sites. What we do say is some of the flakes we found in some
of the pieces of shatter resemble those found at some of the
technologically simplest [hominid] sites in East Africa," he said.

"The implication is that older hominids practised nut-cracking
like the chimps."
...'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2006309.stm

pearl wrote:


"We do not say that [old hominid] sites look like our chimp
sites. What we do say is some of the flakes we found in some
of the pieces of shatter resemble those found at some of the
technologically simplest [hominid] sites in East Africa," he said.

"The implication is that older hominids practised nut-cracking
like the chimps."

Could be true,, but "Modern" man was a hunter, and killer from the get
go, so was Neanderthal Man, they both ate meat and veggies,, so do I :-)


--
Rodney Long,
Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread,
Boomerang Fishing Pro. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures,
Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot
http://www.ezknot.com

"Rodney Long" wrote in message ...
pearl wrote:


"We do not say that [old hominid] sites look like our chimp
sites. What we do say is some of the flakes we found in some
of the pieces of shatter resemble those found at some of the
technologically simplest [hominid] sites in East Africa," he said.

"The implication is that older hominids practised nut-cracking
like the chimps."

Could be true,, but "Modern" man was a hunter, and killer from the get
go,

How?

'Brown says that pushing the emergence of Homo sapiens from
about 160,000 years ago back to about 195,000 years ago "is
significant because the cultural aspects of humanity in most cases
appear much later in the record - only 50,000 years ago - which
would mean 150,000 years of Homo sapiens without cultural stuff,
such as evidence of eating fish, of harpoons, anything to do with
music (flutes and that sort of thing), needles, even tools. This
stuff all comes in very late, except for stone knife blades, which
appeared between 50,000 and 200,000 years ago, depending on
whom you believe."

Fleagle adds: "There is a huge debate in the archeological literature
regarding the first appearance of modern aspects of behavior such
as bone carving for religious reasons, or tools (harpoons and things),
ornamentation (bead jewelry and such), drawn images, arrowheads.
They only appear as a coherent package about 50,000 years ago,
and the first modern humans that left Africa between 50,000 and
40,000 years ago seem to have had the full set. As modern human
anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes
evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of
the modern skeleton and 'modern behavior.'"
...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0223122209.htm

so was Neanderthal Man, they both ate meat and veggies,,

"COLUMBUS, Ohio - The bands of ancient Neanderthals
that struggled throughout Europe during the last Ice Age
faced challenges no tougher than those confronted by the
modern Inuit, or Eskimos.
...
[..] the short lifespans of Neanderthals and evidence of
arthritis in their skeletons suggests that their lives were
extremely difficult.
...
Guatelli-Steinberg has spent the last decade investigating
tiny defects -- linear enamel hypoplasia -- in tooth enamel
from primates, modern and early humans. These defects
serve as markers of periods during early childhood when
food was scarce and nutrition was low.

These tiny horizontal lines and grooves in tooth enamel
form when the body faces either a systemic illness or a
severely deficient diet. In essence, they are reminders of
times when the body's normal process of forming tooth
enamel during childhood simply shut down for a period
of time.

"Looking at these fossilized teeth, you can easily see these
defects that showed Neanderthals periodically struggled
nutritionally," she said. "But I wanted to know if that
struggle was any harder than that of more modern humans."
...
"The evidence shows that Neanderthals were no worse
off than the Inuit who lived in equally harsh environmental
conditions," she said, despite the fact that the Inuit use more
advanced technology.

"It is somewhat startling that Neanderthals weren't suffering
as badly as people had thought, relative to a modern human
group (the Inuits)."
...'
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/neander.htm

The Neanderthals ..... ?? The Inuit don't fare very well either..

'American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 27, 916-925, 1974
Bone mineral content of North Alaskan Eskimos
Richard B. Mazess Ph.D.1 and Warren Mather B.S.1
1 From the Bone Mineral Laboratory, Department of Radiology
(Medical Physics), University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison,
Wisconsin 53706
Direct photon absorptiometry was used to measure the bone
mineral content of forearm bones in Eskimo natives of the north
coast of Alaska. The sample consisted of 217 children, 89 adults,
and 107 elderly (over 50 years). Eskimo children had a lower
bone mineral content than United States whites by 5 to 10% but
this was consistent with their smaller body and bone size. Young
Eskimo adults (20 to 39 years) of both sexes were similar to whites,
but after age 40 the Eskimos of both sexes had a deficit of from
10 to 15% relative to white standards. Aging bone loss, which
occurs in many populations, has an earlier onset and greater
intensity in the Eskimos. Nutritional factors of high protein,
high nitrogen, high phosphorus, and low calcium intakes may
be implicated.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/9/916

'First Nations people and Inuit have higher rates of injury,
suicide and diabetes.'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/index_e.html

'Combined, circulatory diseases (23% of all deaths) and injury
(22%) account for nearly half of all mortality among First Nations.
In Canada, circulatory diseases account for 37% of all deaths,
followed by cancer (27%).
...
For First Nations aged 45 years and older, circulatory disease
was the most common cause of death.
...'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/pub..._profil_e.html

'Ethnographic parallels with modern hunter-gatherer communities have
been taken to show that the colder the climate, the greater the reliance
on meat. There are sound biological and economic reasons for this, not
least in the ready availability of large amounts of fat in arctic mammals.
From this, it has been deduced that the humans of the glacial periods
were primarily hunters, while plant foods were more important during
the interglacials. '
http://www.phancocks.pwp.blueyonder..../devensian.htm

'Anthropologically speaking, humans were high consumers of calcium
until the onset of the Agricultural Age, 10,000 years ago. Current
calcium intake is one-quarter to one-third that of our evolutionary diet
and, if we are genetically identical to the Late Paleolithic Homo sapiens,
we may be consuming a calcium-deficient diet our bodies cannot adjust
to by physiologic mechanisms.

The anthropological approach says, with the exception of a few small
changes related to genetic blood diseases, that humans are basically
identical biologically and medically to the hunter-gatherers of the late
Paleolithic Era.17 During this period, calcium content of the diet was
much higher than it is currently. Depending on the ratio of animal to
plant foods, calcium intake could have exceeded 2000 mg per day.17
Calcium was largely derived from wild plants, which had a very high
calcium content; animal protein played a small role, and the use of
dairy products did not come into play until the Agricultural Age
10,000 years ago. Compared to the current intake of approximately
500 mg per day for women age 20 and over in the United States,18
hunter-gatherers had a significantly higher calcium intake and
apparently much stronger bones. As late as 12,000 years ago,
Stone Age hunters had an average of 17-percent more bone density
(as measured by humeral cortical thickness). Bone density also
appeared to be stable over time with an apparent absence of
osteoporosis.17

High levels of calcium excretion via renal losses are seen with both
high salt and high protein diets, in each case at levels common in the
United States.10,11
..
The only hunter-gatherers that seemed to fall prey to bone loss were
the aboriginal Inuit (Eskimos). Although their physical activity level
was high, their osteoporosis incidence exceeded even present-day
levels in the United States. The Inuit diet was high in phosphorus
and protein and low in calcium.20
...'
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/full...alcium4-2.html

so do I :-)

'Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases:
perspectives from China. Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59(5 Suppl):
1153S-1161S.
A comprehensive ecologic survey of dietary, life-style, and mortality
characteristics of 65 counties in rural China showed that diets are
substantially richer in foods of plant origin when compared with
diets consumed in the more industrialized, Western societies. Mean
intakes of animal protein (about one-tenth of the mean intake in the
United States as energy percent), total fat (14.5% of energy), and
dietary fiber (33.3 g/d) reflected a substantial preference for foods
of plant origin. Mean plasma cholesterol concentration, at
approximately 3.23-3.49 mmol/L, corresponds to this dietary
life-style. The principal hypothesis under investigation in this paper
is that chronic degenerative diseases are prevented by an aggregate
effect of nutrients and nutrient-intake amounts that are commonly
supplied by foods of plant origin. The breadth and consistency of
evidence for this hypothesis was investigated with multiple intake-
biomarker-disease associations, which were appropriately adjusted.
There appears to be no threshold of plant-food enrichment or
minimization of fat intake beyond which further disease prevention
does not occur. These findings suggest that even small intakes of
foods of animal origin are associated with significant increases in
plasma cholesterol concentrations, which are associated, in turn,
with significant increases in chronic degenerative disease mortality
rates.

http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives...in-health.html

pearl wrote:




'Brown says that pushing the emergence of Homo sapiens from
about 160,000 years ago back to about 195,000 years ago "is
significant because the cultural aspects of humanity in most cases
appear much later in the record - only 50,000 years ago - which
would mean 150,000 years of Homo sapiens without cultural stuff,
such as evidence of eating fish, of harpoons, anything to do with
music (flutes and that sort of thing), needles, even tools. This
stuff all comes in very late, except for stone knife blades, which
appeared between 50,000 and 200,000 years ago, depending on
whom you believe."

Fleagle adds: "There is a huge debate in the archeological literature
regarding the first appearance of modern aspects of behavior such
as bone carving for religious reasons, or tools (harpoons and things),
ornamentation (bead jewelry and such), drawn images, arrowheads.
They only appear as a coherent package about 50,000 years ago,
and the first modern humans that left Africa between 50,000 and
40,000 years ago seem to have had the full set. As modern human
anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes
evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of
the modern skeleton and 'modern behavior.'"

So this proves that man's "intelligence" did not mature (the making of
tools, not just killing and butchering tools) until he started eating
meat. This also is a good theory why vegetarians today, are loosing
their cognitive thinking ability, they are also actually loosing their
"basic survival" instinks
..
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0223122209.htm

so was Neanderthal Man, they both ate meat and veggies,,

"COLUMBUS, Ohio - The bands of ancient Neanderthals
that struggled throughout Europe during the last Ice Age
faced challenges no tougher than those confronted by the
modern Inuit, or Eskimos.
..
[..] the short lifespans of Neanderthals and evidence of
arthritis in their skeletons suggests that their lives were
extremely difficult.
..
Guatelli-Steinberg has spent the last decade investigating
tiny defects -- linear enamel hypoplasia -- in tooth enamel
from primates, modern and early humans. These defects
serve as markers of periods during early childhood when
food was scarce and nutrition was low.

These tiny horizontal lines and grooves in tooth enamel
form when the body faces either a systemic illness or a
severely deficient diet. In essence, they are reminders of
times when the body's normal process of forming tooth
enamel during childhood simply shut down for a period
of time.

"Looking at these fossilized teeth, you can easily see these
defects that showed Neanderthals periodically struggled
nutritionally," she said. "But I wanted to know if that
struggle was any harder than that of more modern humans."
..
"The evidence shows that Neanderthals were no worse
off than the Inuit who lived in equally harsh environmental
conditions," she said, despite the fact that the Inuit use more
advanced technology.

"It is somewhat startling that Neanderthals weren't suffering
as badly as people had thought, relative to a modern human
group (the Inuits)."

And in both cases their "primary" source of food, if not their total
source, was MEAT !
..'
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/neander.htm

The Neanderthals ..... ?? The Inuit don't fare very well either..

'American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 27, 916-925, 1974
Bone mineral content of North Alaskan Eskimos
Richard B. Mazess Ph.D.1 and Warren Mather B.S.1
1 From the Bone Mineral Laboratory, Department of Radiology
(Medical Physics), University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison,
Wisconsin 53706
Direct photon absorptiometry was used to measure the bone
mineral content of forearm bones in Eskimo natives of the north
coast of Alaska. The sample consisted of 217 children, 89 adults,
and 107 elderly (over 50 years). Eskimo children had a lower
bone mineral content than United States whites by 5 to 10% but
this was consistent with their smaller body and bone size. Young
Eskimo adults (20 to 39 years) of both sexes were similar to whites,
but after age 40 the Eskimos of both sexes had a deficit of from
10 to 15% relative to white standards. Aging bone loss, which
occurs in many populations, has an earlier onset and greater
intensity in the Eskimos. Nutritional factors of high protein,
high nitrogen, high phosphorus, and low calcium intakes may
be implicated.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/9/916

'First Nations people and Inuit have higher rates of injury,
suicide and diabetes.'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/index_e.html

'Combined, circulatory diseases (23% of all deaths) and injury
(22%) account for nearly half of all mortality among First Nations.
In Canada, circulatory diseases account for 37% of all deaths,
followed by cancer (27%).
..
For First Nations aged 45 years and older, circulatory disease
was the most common cause of death.
..'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/pub..._profil_e.html

'Ethnographic parallels with modern hunter-gatherer communities have
been taken to show that the colder the climate, the greater the reliance
on meat. There are sound biological and economic reasons for this, not
least in the ready availability of large amounts of fat in arctic mammals.
From this, it has been deduced that the humans of the glacial periods
were primarily hunters, while plant foods were more important during
the interglacials. '
http://www.phancocks.pwp.blueyonder..../devensian.htm

'Anthropologically speaking, humans were high consumers of calcium
until the onset of the Agricultural Age, 10,000 years ago. Current
calcium intake is one-quarter to one-third that of our evolutionary diet
and, if we are genetically identical to the Late Paleolithic Homo sapiens,
we may be consuming a calcium-deficient diet our bodies cannot adjust
to by physiologic mechanisms.

The anthropological approach says, with the exception of a few small
changes related to genetic blood diseases, that humans are basically
identical biologically and medically to the hunter-gatherers of the late
Paleolithic Era.17 During this period, calcium content of the diet was
much higher than it is currently. Depending on the ratio of animal to
plant foods, calcium intake could have exceeded 2000 mg per day.17
Calcium was largely derived from wild plants, which had a very high
calcium content; animal protein played a small role, and the use of
dairy products did not come into play until the Agricultural Age
10,000 years ago. Compared to the current intake of approximately
500 mg per day for women age 20 and over in the United States,18
hunter-gatherers had a significantly higher calcium intake and
apparently much stronger bones. As late as 12,000 years ago,
Stone Age hunters had an average of 17-percent more bone density
(as measured by humeral cortical thickness). Bone density also
appeared to be stable over time with an apparent absence of
osteoporosis.17

High levels of calcium excretion via renal losses are seen with both
high salt and high protein diets, in each case at levels common in the
United States.10,11
..
The only hunter-gatherers that seemed to fall prey to bone loss were
the aboriginal Inuit (Eskimos). Although their physical activity level
was high, their osteoporosis incidence exceeded even present-day
levels in the United States. The Inuit diet was high in phosphorus
and protein and low in calcium.20
..'
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/full...alcium4-2.html

so do I :-)

'Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases:
perspectives from China. Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59(5 Suppl):
1153S-1161S.
A comprehensive ecologic survey of dietary, life-style, and mortality
characteristics of 65 counties in rural China showed that diets are
substantially richer in foods of plant origin when compared with
diets consumed in the more industrialized, Western societies. Mean
intakes of animal protein (about one-tenth of the mean intake in the
United States as energy percent), total fat (14.5% of energy), and
dietary fiber (33.3 g/d) reflected a substantial preference for foods
of plant origin. Mean plasma cholesterol concentration, at
approximately 3.23-3.49 mmol/L, corresponds to this dietary
life-style. The principal hypothesis under investigation in this paper
is that chronic degenerative diseases are prevented by an aggregate
effect of nutrients and nutrient-intake amounts that are commonly
supplied by foods of plant origin. The breadth and consistency of
evidence for this hypothesis was investigated with multiple intake-
biomarker-disease associations, which were appropriately adjusted.
There appears to be no threshold of plant-food enrichment or
minimization of fat intake beyond which further disease prevention
does not occur. These findings suggest that even small intakes of
foods of animal origin are associated with significant increases in
plasma cholesterol concentrations, which are associated, in turn,
with significant increases in chronic degenerative disease mortality
rates.


I eat MEAT three times a day, I'm 53 years old, my cholesterol
level,,,,,, ""91"" ,,,,, which is lower than most vegetarians. There is
a whole lot more involved in cholesterol levels than just eating, or not
eating meat

Every morning I have two eggs and four strips of bacon, for lunch their
will be either ground beef or chicken, for dinner, Steak, pork, chicken
or fish , with about 40 venison meals through the year. I also consume
at least 1/2 lb of "real" butter a week

I have ZERO heart disease, but I still had them do an echo cardiogram at
my last physical, it was perfect.

My Doctor says that all this is impossible, because of my diet. No, Not
really, I eat huge quantities of powdered GARLIC, I eat it on, and in
everything. I have for my whole life.

I have lost 115 lbs over the last two years, and kept it off, what I
stopped eating was bread and sugar or anything made with processed
flour, and processed sugar,, those are the two things that will kill
you, not meat



--
Rodney Long,
Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread,
Boomerang Fishing Pro. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures,
Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot
http://www.ezknot.com

"Rodney Long" wrote in message ...
pearl wrote:


restore

"The implication is that older hominids practised nut-cracking
like the chimps."

Could be true,, but "Modern" man was a hunter, and killer from the get
go,

How?

end restore

'Brown says that pushing the emergence of Homo sapiens from
about 160,000 years ago back to about 195,000 years ago "is
significant because the cultural aspects of humanity in most cases
appear much later in the record - only 50,000 years ago - which
would mean 150,000 years of Homo sapiens without cultural stuff,
such as evidence of eating fish, of harpoons, anything to do with
music (flutes and that sort of thing), needles, even tools. This
stuff all comes in very late, except for stone knife blades, which
appeared between 50,000 and 200,000 years ago, depending on
whom you believe."

Fleagle adds: "There is a huge debate in the archeological literature
regarding the first appearance of modern aspects of behavior such
as bone carving for religious reasons, or tools (harpoons and things),
ornamentation (bead jewelry and such), drawn images, arrowheads.
They only appear as a coherent package about 50,000 years ago,
and the first modern humans that left Africa between 50,000 and
40,000 years ago seem to have had the full set. As modern human
anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes
evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of
the modern skeleton and 'modern behavior.'"

So this proves that man's "intelligence" did not mature (the making of
tools, not just killing and butchering tools) until he started eating
meat. This also is a good theory why vegetarians today, are loosing
their cognitive thinking ability, they are also actually loosing their
"basic survival" instinks

Evolution happens over very, very long periods of time, not overnight.
A history of millions of years of progressive adaptation and learning
brought primates to hominids to man to the point where more complex
tasks could be devised and carried out, and necessity in a cold climate
presented new challenges which drove technological advance - in the
making of tools and weapons for *needed* food in the form of meat,
warm clothing *needed* to survive in colder conditions, and houses.
It was not meat and hunting per se that brought about technological
advance, - environmental conditions demanded change in the culture.
And, when stuck indoors with others, rather than foraging in loose
groups in the big outdoors, you'll understand that there is a lot more
time to sit and communicate ... stories and legends are born.. making
carvings, paintings, and so on ... there's time to imagine and visualize ..

..
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0223122209.htm

so was Neanderthal Man, they both ate meat and veggies,,

"COLUMBUS, Ohio - The bands of ancient Neanderthals
that struggled throughout Europe during the last Ice Age
faced challenges no tougher than those confronted by the
modern Inuit, or Eskimos.
..
[..] the short lifespans of Neanderthals and evidence of
arthritis in their skeletons suggests that their lives were
extremely difficult.
..
Guatelli-Steinberg has spent the last decade investigating
tiny defects -- linear enamel hypoplasia -- in tooth enamel
from primates, modern and early humans. These defects
serve as markers of periods during early childhood when
food was scarce and nutrition was low.

These tiny horizontal lines and grooves in tooth enamel
form when the body faces either a systemic illness or a
severely deficient diet. In essence, they are reminders of
times when the body's normal process of forming tooth
enamel during childhood simply shut down for a period
of time.

"Looking at these fossilized teeth, you can easily see these
defects that showed Neanderthals periodically struggled
nutritionally," she said. "But I wanted to know if that
struggle was any harder than that of more modern humans."
..
"The evidence shows that Neanderthals were no worse
off than the Inuit who lived in equally harsh environmental
conditions," she said, despite the fact that the Inuit use more
advanced technology.

"It is somewhat startling that Neanderthals weren't suffering
as badly as people had thought, relative to a modern human
group (the Inuits)."

And in both cases their "primary" source of food, if not their total
source, was MEAT !

Yes.

..'
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/neander.htm

The Neanderthals ..... ?? The Inuit don't fare very well either..

'American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 27, 916-925, 1974
Bone mineral content of North Alaskan Eskimos
Richard B. Mazess Ph.D.1 and Warren Mather B.S.1
1 From the Bone Mineral Laboratory, Department of Radiology
(Medical Physics), University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison,
Wisconsin 53706
Direct photon absorptiometry was used to measure the bone
mineral content of forearm bones in Eskimo natives of the north
coast of Alaska. The sample consisted of 217 children, 89 adults,
and 107 elderly (over 50 years). Eskimo children had a lower
bone mineral content than United States whites by 5 to 10% but
this was consistent with their smaller body and bone size. Young
Eskimo adults (20 to 39 years) of both sexes were similar to whites,
but after age 40 the Eskimos of both sexes had a deficit of from
10 to 15% relative to white standards. Aging bone loss, which
occurs in many populations, has an earlier onset and greater
intensity in the Eskimos. Nutritional factors of high protein,
high nitrogen, high phosphorus, and low calcium intakes may
be implicated.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/9/916

'First Nations people and Inuit have higher rates of injury,
suicide and diabetes.'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/index_e.html

'Combined, circulatory diseases (23% of all deaths) and injury
(22%) account for nearly half of all mortality among First Nations.
In Canada, circulatory diseases account for 37% of all deaths,
followed by cancer (27%).
..
For First Nations aged 45 years and older, circulatory disease
was the most common cause of death.
..'
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/pub..._profil_e.html

'Ethnographic parallels with modern hunter-gatherer communities have
been taken to show that the colder the climate, the greater the reliance
on meat. There are sound biological and economic reasons for this, not
least in the ready availability of large amounts of fat in arctic mammals.
From this, it has been deduced that the humans of the glacial periods
were primarily hunters, while plant foods were more important during
the interglacials. '
http://www.phancocks.pwp.blueyonder..../devensian.htm

'Anthropologically speaking, humans were high consumers of calcium
until the onset of the Agricultural Age, 10,000 years ago. Current
calcium intake is one-quarter to one-third that of our evolutionary diet
and, if we are genetically identical to the Late Paleolithic Homo sapiens,
we may be consuming a calcium-deficient diet our bodies cannot adjust
to by physiologic mechanisms.

The anthropological approach says, with the exception of a few small
changes related to genetic blood diseases, that humans are basically
identical biologically and medically to the hunter-gatherers of the late
Paleolithic Era.17 During this period, calcium content of the diet was
much higher than it is currently. Depending on the ratio of animal to
plant foods, calcium intake could have exceeded 2000 mg per day.17
Calcium was largely derived from wild plants, which had a very high
calcium content; animal protein played a small role, and the use of
dairy products did not come into play until the Agricultural Age
10,000 years ago. Compared to the current intake of approximately
500 mg per day for women age 20 and over in the United States,18
hunter-gatherers had a significantly higher calcium intake and
apparently much stronger bones. As late as 12,000 years ago,
Stone Age hunters had an average of 17-percent more bone density
(as measured by humeral cortical thickness). Bone density also
appeared to be stable over time with an apparent absence of
osteoporosis.17

High levels of calcium excretion via renal losses are seen with both
high salt and high protein diets, in each case at levels common in the
United States.10,11
..
The only hunter-gatherers that seemed to fall prey to bone loss were
the aboriginal Inuit (Eskimos). Although their physical activity level
was high, their osteoporosis incidence exceeded even present-day
levels in the United States. The Inuit diet was high in phosphorus
and protein and low in calcium.20
..'
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/full...alcium4-2.html

so do I :-)

'Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases:
perspectives from China. Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59(5 Suppl):
1153S-1161S.
A comprehensive ecologic survey of dietary, life-style, and mortality
characteristics of 65 counties in rural China showed that diets are
substantially richer in foods of plant origin when compared with
diets consumed in the more industrialized, Western societies. Mean
intakes of animal protein (about one-tenth of the mean intake in the
United States as energy percent), total fat (14.5% of energy), and
dietary fiber (33.3 g/d) reflected a substantial preference for foods
of plant origin. Mean plasma cholesterol concentration, at
approximately 3.23-3.49 mmol/L, corresponds to this dietary
life-style. The principal hypothesis under investigation in this paper
is that chronic degenerative diseases are prevented by an aggregate
effect of nutrients and nutrient-intake amounts that are commonly
supplied by foods of plant origin. The breadth and consistency of
evidence for this hypothesis was investigated with multiple intake-
biomarker-disease associations, which were appropriately adjusted.
There appears to be no threshold of plant-food enrichment or
minimization of fat intake beyond which further disease prevention
does not occur. These findings suggest that even small intakes of
foods of animal origin are associated with significant increases in
plasma cholesterol concentrations, which are associated, in turn,
with significant increases in chronic degenerative disease mortality
rates.


I eat MEAT three times a day, I'm 53 years old, my cholesterol
level,,,,,, ""91"" ,,,,, which is lower than most vegetarians. There is
a whole lot more involved in cholesterol levels than just eating, or not
eating meat

Every morning I have two eggs and four strips of bacon, for lunch their
will be either ground beef or chicken, for dinner, Steak, pork, chicken
or fish , with about 40 venison meals through the year. I also consume
at least 1/2 lb of "real" butter a week

I have ZERO heart disease, but I still had them do an echo cardiogram at
my last physical, it was perfect.

My Doctor says that all this is impossible, because of my diet. No, Not
really, I eat huge quantities of powdered GARLIC, I eat it on, and in
everything. I have for my whole life.

I have lost 115 lbs over the last two years, and kept it off, what I
stopped eating was bread and sugar or anything made with processed
flour, and processed sugar,, those are the two things that will kill
you, not meat

Anecdotal evidence. Hmm to that. Sorry.

'Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S
Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease,
and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California
Seventh-day Adventists.
Fraser GE. Center for Health Research and the Department of
Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Loma Linda University, CA USA.

Results associating diet with chronic disease in a cohort of 34192
California Seventh-day Adventists are summarized. Most Seventh-day
Adventists do not smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and there is a wide
range of dietary exposures within the population. About 50% of those
studied ate meat products 1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians. Multivariate analyses
showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal
ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for
subjects who ate beef or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians],
significant protective associations between nut consumption and fatal
and nonfatal IHD in both sexes (RR approximately 0.5 for subjects
who ate nuts or =5 times/wk compared with those who ate nuts
1 time/wk), and reduced risk of IHD in subjects preferring whole-grain
to white bread. The lifetime risk of IHD was reduced by approximately
31% in those who consumed nuts frequently and by 37% in male
vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Cancers of the colon and
prostate were significantly more likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88
and 1.54, respectively), and frequent beef consumers also had higher
risk of bladder cancer. Intake of legumes was negatively associated
with risk of colon cancer in nonvegetarians and risk of pancreatic
cancer. Higher consumption of all fruit or dried fruit was associated
with lower risks of lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancers.
Cross-sectional data suggest vegetarian Seventh-day Adventists have
lower risks of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and arthritis than
nonvegetarians. Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat. - PMID: 10479227'