Ye Olde Hearte Attacke Waiting to Happene

[el_flesh]

I don't care. They're thick. They're singed just right on the outside, and are so deliciously good that I love them enough to marry them. Mon Oncle bought a SIDE of beef just for my bro's visit from Australia. Korisu was there, as well as Braddo, our cousins Nina and Dannu, and a number of chix.



That's my uncle's BBQ apron. Heh.

[Big Bene]

They look great. Really wished I were there...

Ye Olde Hearte Attacke Waiting to Happene

Why? Flesh ... er, meat ... is the most healthy food there is.
No joke. The human digestive system is build for meat as the main energy source. Humankind has sustained mainly on meat for millions of years. They collected some berries and roots, which were enough to provide vitamins and other micronutrient stuff, but were not even close to sufficient in energy level. Only after agriculture was invented (around 8000 BC) it was possible to produce enough vegetable food to base he diet on carbs. I'm not speaking as a meat fan, telling you my reasoning, I'm speaking as an archeologist, telling you proven scientific facts.

[Sjeng]

awesome apron man!

[Big Bene]

awesome apron man!

I second that.
...

gives him four arms...

[el_flesh]

Our digestive system isn't optimized for meat; neither are our teeth. We certainly aren't carnivores. That's a scientific fact! Our very ancient ancestors switched from herbivory to omnivory and it worked - and let me tell ya, it SURE works for me! Thanx to Australopithecines or older!

[Big Bene]

It's optimized for a meat based mixed diet. We're not carnivores, we're omnivores.

Very ancient? What's very ancient to you?
The first true terrestrial vertebrae (as opposed to the water-bound amphibians) were the anmiotes, from them the Synapsides class were the ancestors of mammals. They very probably were carnivorous.
The most primitve mammals of today (like the Platypus) are carnivorous, but marsupials already have divided into carnivorous, herbivorous and omnivorous.

Primates developed from small tree-living insectivorous (=carnivorous) animals (that's debated, but at least there's still no better theory - and if another animal will turn out as the missing link, chances are it was also carnivorous or omnivorous). They adapted the ability to eat herbal food, but in general remaind ominvorous, only very few developed into real herivores.
From the Hominidae (great apes) only the Gorilla is more or less stricly herbivorous, but even gorillas eat termites. The hominidae generally live in tropical jungles and can sustain themselfes on a broad base of carbs, eating mainly fruit (but still need animal protein - they collect eggs, eat ants and termintes and on opportunity even hunt smaller mammals).
But when the australopitheci developed upright walking and left the jungle for the savannae, they simply couldn't get enough calories from carbs. Upright walking (running) itself is an adaption to hunting. Plants just don't have a very high nutrition value, if you don't have the multiple stomaches of a cow (except of course for fruits, which the plat produces for the very purpose of being eaten). This became even more relevant as they developed into the first true human species and started to colonize the rest of Eurasia, including relatively cold climates.

Most plants also produce toxines to repell eaters and must be cooked or otherwise processed to be eadible for unspecialised omnivores such as humans. Only after inventing the use of fire and other cultural technices our ancestors could somewhat broaden the range of their herbal diet. Our cultured plants of today have been bred to reduce toxines, but this is relatively new.

The "primitive" cultures of today - those who didn't adapt agriculture yet - actually have a meat-based diet. Of course they eat a broad variant of herbal food, too, if they find it, but the mass of the calories comes from meat. There is not one traditional culture that knows vegetarian diet for other than religious reasons. On the other hand, Innuit, when hunting in the ice, life for months without herbal food (they rely on liver for vitamins).

[drathe]

In the words of comedian Jim Gaffigan, "If I see a cow in the field, I don't want to run up and bite it. But if you drain its blood, chop it up and throw it on the grill... I get hungry!"

[el_flesh]

I was talking about Austraopithecines and maybe a touch earlier in terms of 'very' ancient ancestors - in terms of us Humans. Going further back to even possible arboreal insectivores seems a bit wild in terms of evolutionary potential, to speak nothing of the first amniotes of the Pennsylvanian period. (I'd like to mention Hylonomus, found here in Canada, as the earliest definite Amniote, but I said to speak nothing of it, and so should follow my own directions).

As per what you mentioned, I find it somewhat suprising - perhaps I'm unaware of the % of actual carnivory in hominid diets. I understood going after meat in a major way to be a Homo thing to do.

So apparently our closer kin, Chimpanzee Orangutan and Gibbon species eat alot more meat than herb? I didn't know I was misinformed about this...
I understood them to be by and large herbivores, and humans the abberants that exploited free hands and growing intelligence to access the meat our common ancestors merely dabbled in. Our teeth certainly are designed for crushing in place of tearing, and our guts designed for lonnnnnggg digestion instead of the short carnivore setup. Perhaps I'm out of touch with current theory?
My inherited setup worx for me; Rare red meat steax, baked potatoes, Ceasar salad and RED wine, here we go.

You know, I actually hated meat as a kid. Then my hormones kicked in. Now I go for pink FLESH whenever I can. And medium rare steaks afterwards.

[ken]

"You know, I actually hated meat as a kid. Then my hormones kicked in. Now I go for pink FLESH whenever I can. And medium rare steaks afterwards". Said Flesh. You must learn to control these primitive urges, you will suffer from them in the long run.

[Big Bene]

This somehow developes into an argument I never indented to start - just wanted to say you may enjoy those great steaks without worrying.

But alas...
The point was the healthynes of meat for the homo sapiens, who prior to the invention of agriculture definitely sustained on a mixed diet that was broadly based on meat as the energy source. The around 10.000 years of agriculture are hardly relevant in terms of evolution, so we're fitted very well for meat.
Going so much further back was of course a joke, after you brought in "our vey ancient ancestors". But even if primates would be fully herivorous (which they are by no means) and only the australopitheci had started to evolve into omnivores, this would still leave around 3 million years for the homo sapiens to adapt to the meat-based mixed diet he had before the raise of culture.

But still, the diets of hominides can at least throw some light on our nutrition background. Plus, it was your statement "our .. ancestors switched from herbivory to omnivory..." that I could'nt agree with.
We're talking about the point in evolution when the line of australopithecus and homo branched from the other hominides. They adapted upright walk, went from the jungle to the savanna, and switched their diet to include more meat. That's what you said and what I said. Only difference is that you say they switched from herbivorous to omnnivorous, while I say they were omnivorous all the time, and merely switched the main energy source of their diet from fruits to meat. And in this aspect, I think I'm right.
I too don't know the exact percentage of meat in the diets of recent hoinides, but Orangs eat insects, eggs, and small vertebrae, Chimpanzees, in addition to this, also actively hunt smaller animals for meat, mostly monkeys, but also duikers (forest antelopes) and others (just an example). Gorillas are the most specialized hominides and can sustain largely on leafs, which have zero nutrial value, exept for micronutritions, for chipms or humans. They still eat termites, actively searching the nests.

Our teeth are typical omnivorous, neither carnivorous nor herbivorous. Just compare the teeth of a true herbivore (as a horse) to human teeth. Our intestines, unlike these of true herbivorous, lack the ability to digest cellulose, so the only parts of plants we can actually make any nutritional use of are those that are filled with carbs (fruits, seeds, and some roots, if the plant use them to store energy), which are rather small, if existing at all, in most plants. The length of the digestion process is no indicator of it's complexity - serpents can take weeks to digest meat. True carnivores have a rather simple digestive system, true herbivores a very complex one -they sport multiple stomaches, ruminate or eat their feces a second time. Omnivores like ourselfes are somewhat in-between. We have the means to digest (some) vegetables, but this doesn't mean that these have to be our main energy source.

Rare red meat steax, baked potatoes, Ceasar salad and RED wine, here we go

Sounds like a really healthy meal (I mean it). And tasty too .

you will suffer from them in the long run

No he won't. That's what I'm trying to say with all my sermon...