* Human ancestral diets changed substantially approximately four to five million years ago with major climatic changes creating open grassland environments.
* We developed a larger brain balanced by a smaller, simpler gastrointestinal tract requiring higher-quality foods based around meat protein and fat.
Journal Human Evolution The human adaptations to meat eating: a reappraisal Hladik C. M. 1 and Pasquet P. 2 (1) Laboratoire d'Ecologie, Éco-Anthropologie, CNRS (FRE 2323) and Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 4 avenue du Petit Château, 91800 Brunoy, (France) (2) Dynamique de l'évolution humaine CNRS (UPR 2147) 44, rue de l'Amiral Mouchez, 75014, France Received: 10 April 2001 Accepted: 28 December 2001
Abstract
In this paper we discuss the hypothesis, proposed by some authors, that man is a habitual meat-eater. Gut measurements of primate species do not support the contention that human digestive tract is specialized for meat-eating, especially when taking into account allometric factors and their variations between folivores, frugivores and meat-eaters. The dietary status of the human species is that of an unspecialised frugivore, having a flexible diet that includes seeds and meat (omnivorous diet). Throughout the various time periods, our human ancestors could have mostly consumed either vegetable, or large amounts of animal matter (with fat and/or carbohydrates as a supplement), depending on the availability and nutrient content of food resources. Some formerly adaptive traits (e.g. the "thrifty genotype") could have resulted from selective pressure during transitory variations of feeding behaviour linked to environmental constraints existing in the past.
'Frugivory is an intellectually demanding feeding behaviour demanding the development of strategic planning, whereas the folivores feeding behavior engages relatively simple tactics. According to Caroline E. G. Tutin et al. 'Allometric analyses suggest a relation between brain size (relative to body mass) and diet, with frugivores having relatively larger brains . . . Maintaining a frugivorous diet presents huge intellectual challenges of memory and spatial mapping compared with the relative ease of harvesting abundant foliage foods. .. 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. Patińo 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.' Patińo 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.
Patińo 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 'rimitive' 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
* Anthropological evidence from cranio-dental features and fossil stable isotope analysis indicates a growing reliance on meat consumption during human evolution.
See below.
* Study of hunter-gatherer societies in recent times shows an extreme reliance on hunted and fished animal foods for survival.
'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.co.uk/naturalhistory/devensian.htm
* Optimal foraging theory shows that wild plant foods in general give an inadequate energy return for survival, whereas the top-ranking food items for energy return are large hunted animals.
'It has long been held that big game hunting is THE key development in human evolutionary history, facilitating the appearance of patterns in reproduction, social organization, and life history fundamental to the modern human condition. Though this view has been challenged strongly in recent years, it persists as the conventional wisdom, largely for lack of a plausible alternative. Recent research on women's time allocation and food sharing among tropical hunter-gatherers now provides the basis for such an alternative.
The problem with big game hunting
The appeal of big game hunting as an important evolutionary force lies in the common assumption that hunting and related paternal provisioning are essential to child rearing among human foragers: mother is seen as unable to bear, feed and raise children on her own; hence relies on husband/father for critical nutritional support, especially in the form of meat. This makes dating the first appearance of this pattern the fundamental problem in human origins research. The common association between stone tools and the bones of large animals at sites of Pleistocene age suggests to many that it may be quite old, possibly originating with Homo erectus nearly two million years ago (e.g. Gowlett 1993).
Despite its widespread acceptance, there are good reasons to be skeptical about the underlying assumption. Most important is the observation that big game hunting is actually a poor way to support a family. Among the Tanzanian Hadza, for example, men armed with bows and poisoned arrows operating in a game-rich habitat acquire large animal prey only about once every thirty hunter-days, not nearly often enough to feed their children effectively. They could do better as provisioners by taking small game or plant foods, yet choose not to, which suggests that big game hunting serves some other purpose unrelated to offspring survivorship (Hawkes et al. 1991). Whatever it is, reliable support for children must come from elsewhere.
The importance of women's foraging and food sharing
Recent research on Hadza time allocation and foraging returns shows that at least among these low latitude foragers, women's gathering is the source (Hawkes et al. 1997). The most difficult time of the year for the Hadza is the dry season, when foods younger children can procure for themselves are unavailable. Mothers respond by provisioning youngsters with foods they themselves can procure daily and at relatively high rates, but that their children cannot, largely because of handling requirements. Tubers, which require substantial upper body strength and endurance to collect and the ability to control fire in processing, are a good example.
Provisioning of this sort has at least two important implications: 1) it allows the Hadza to operate in times and places where they otherwise could not if, as among other primates, weaned offspring were responsible for feeding themselves; 2) it lets another adult assist in the process allowing mother to turn her attention to the next pregnancy that much sooner. Quantitative data on time allocation, foraging returns, and changes in children's nutritional status indicate that, among the Hadza, that other adult is typically grandmother. Senior Hadza women forage long hours every day, enjoy high returns for effort, and provision their grandchildren effectively, especially when their daughters are nursing new infants (Hawkes et al. 1989, 1997). Their support is crucial to both daughters' fecundity and grandchildren's survivorship, with important implications for grandmothers' own fitness. .... http://www.cast.uark.edu/local/icaes/conferences/wburg/posters/oconnell/oconnell.html
* Numerous evolutionary adaptations in humans indicate high reliance on meat consumption, including poor taurine production, lack of ability to chain elongate plant fatty acids and the co-evolution of parasites related to dietary meat.
'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.
Anthropologists have long recognised that the diets of palaeolithic and recent hunter-gatherers (HGs) represent a reference standard for modern human nutrition and a model for defence against certain Western- lifestyle diseases. Boyd Eaton of Emory University (Atlanta) put this succinctly: 'We are the heirs of inherited characteristics accrued over millions of years, the vast majority of our biochemistry and physiology are tuned to life conditions that existed prior to the advent of agriculture. Genetically our bodies are virtually the same as they were at the end of the palaeolithic period. The appearance of agriculture some 10,000 years ago and the Industrial Revolution some 200 years ago introduced new dietary pressures for which no adaptation has been possible in such a short time span. Thus an inevitable discordance exists between our dietary intake and that which our genes are suited to'. This discordance hypothesis postulated by Eaton could explain many of the chronic 'diseases of civilisation'. (1) This review presents an anthropological perspective on what HG populations may have actually eaten.
'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/fulltext/calcium4-2.html
Contrary to views that humans evolved largely as a herbivorous animal in a 'garden of Eden' type of environment, historical evidence indicates a very different reality, at least in the last four to five million years of evolutionary adaptation. It was in this time frame that the ancestral hominid line emerged from the receding forests to become bipedal, open grassland dwellers. This was likely
Note.
accompanied by dietary changes and subsequent physiological and metabolic adaptations. The evolutionary pressure for some primates to undergo this habitat and subsequent diet change involving open grassland, foraging/scavenging, related directly to massive changes in global climatic conditions, primarily drier conditions followed by worldwide expansion of the biomass of temperate climate (C4) grasses at the expense of wetland forests, (2) accompanied by a worldwide faunal change, (3) including the spread of large grazing animals. Thus, the foods available to human ancestors in an open grassland environment were very different from those of the jungle/forest habitats that were home for many millions of years.
"Studies of frugivorous communities elsewhere suggest that dietary divergence is highest when preferred food (succulent fruit) is scarce, and that niche separation is clear only at such times (Gautier-Hion & Gautier 1979: Terborgh 1983). - Foraging profiles of sympatric lowland gorillas and chimpanzees in the Lopé Reserve, Gabon, p.179, Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences vol 334, 159-295, No. 1270
ANCESTRAL DIETS: ANTHROPOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
The lines of investigation used by anthropologists to deduce the evolutionary diet of our evolving hominid ancestors are numerous: (i) changes in cranio-dental features; (ii) fossil isotopic chemical tracer methods; (iii) comparative gut morphology of modern humans and other mammals;
Journal Human Evolution The human adaptations to meat eating: a reappraisal Hladik C. M. 1 and Pasquet P. 2 (1) Laboratoire d'Ecologie, Éco-Anthropologie, CNRS (FRE 2323) and Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 4 avenue du Petit Château, 91800 Brunoy, (France) (2) Dynamique de l'évolution humaine CNRS (UPR 2147) 44, rue de l'Amiral Mouchez, 75014, France Received: 10 April 2001 Accepted: 28 December 2001
Abstract
In this paper we discuss the hypothesis, proposed by some authors, that man is a habitual meat-eater. Gut measurements of primate species do not support the contention that human digestive tract is specialized for meat-eating, especially when taking into account allometric factors and their variations between folivores, frugivores and meat-eaters. The dietary status of the human species is that of an unspecialised frugivore, having a flexible diet that includes seeds and meat (omnivorous diet). Throughout the various time periods, our human ancestors could have mostly consumed either vegetable, or large amounts of animal matter (with fat and/or carbohydrates as a supplement), depending on the availability and nutrient content of food resources. Some formerly adaptive traits (e.g. the "thrifty genotype") could have resulted from selective pressure during transitory variations of feeding behaviour linked to environmental constraints existing in the past.
(iv) the energetic requirements of developing a large ratio of brain to body size;
Fructose and carbohydrate.
(v) optimal foraging theory; (vi) dietary patterns of surviving HG societies; and (vii) specific diet-related adaptations. Findings from each of these fields reveal a changing dietary pattern away from low-quality/highly fibrous, energy-poor plant stables to a growing dependence on more energy-rich animal foods, culminating in palaeolithic Homo sapiens being top-level carnivores. (4)
Changes in cranio-dental features
Early hominid fossil remains already show clear cranio-dental changes which indicate a move away from a specialised structure suited to coarse foliage mastication to a more generalised structure indicative of dependence on fruits and hard nuts but also incorporating changes that indicate meat consumption. Such changes included a decrease in molar teeth size, jaws/skull became more gracile, front teeth became well buttressed and shearing crests appearing on teeth, all indicative of less emphasis on grinding and more on biting and tearing of animal flesh. (5)
Sure... Humans tear into bloody still-warm-from-the-kill animal flesh all the time.... (I can just see it now, ball, you and the squirrel....
'Natural selection dictates that primate tooth shape should reflect the mechanical properties of foods. As shown by numerous workers, variations in tooth shape are a means of adapting to changes in the internal characteristics of foods such as their strength, toughness, and deformability (Lucas and Teaford, 1994; Spears and Crompton, 1996; Strait, 1997; Yamashita, 1998). Clearly, foods are complicated structures; thus it is impossible to describe all of the internal characteristics that might have confronted the earliest hominids' teeth. However, another approach is to describe the capabilities of those teeth.
For example, tough foods are sheared between the leading edges of sharp crown crests whereas hard, brittle foods are crushed between planar surfaces. As such, reciprocally concave, highly crested teeth have the capability of efficiently processing tough items such as insect exoskeletons and leaves, whereas rounder and flatter cusped teeth are best suited for a more frugivorous diet. Kay (1984) has devised a "shearing quotient" (SQ) as a measure of relative shear potential of a molar tooth. He and colleagues have demonstrated that more folivorous species have the longest crests, followed by those that prefer brittle, soft fruits. Finally, hard-object feeders have the shortest crests and bluntest molars (Kay, 1984; Meldrum and Kay, 1997).
Shearing crest studies have been conducted on early Miocene African apes and middle to late Miocene European apes. Such studies show a considerable range of diets very much consistent with microwear results for these same taxa. For example, Rangwapithecus and Oreopithecus have relatively long shearing crests suggesting folivory, Ouranopithecus has extremely short crests suggesting a hard-object specialization, whereas most other Miocene taxa studied, such as Proconsul, and Dryopithecus have the intermediate length crests of a frugivore (Kay and Ungar, 1997; Ungar and Kay, 1995). Thus, shearing crest study results suggest that Miocene apes, especially those from the later Miocene of Europe, show a substantial range of diets.
As for the early hominids, Grine (1981) has noted differences between Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus in molar form, such that the "gracile" species had more occlusal relief than did the "robust" form, suggesting a dietary difference. While no shearing crest length studies have been conducted on early hominids, all australopithecines have relatively flat, blunt molar teeth and lack the long shearing crests seen in some extant hominoids (e.g., Kay, 1985). By itself, this indicates that the earliest hominids would have had difficulty breaking down tough, pliant foods, such as soft seed coats and the veins and stems of leaves -- although they probably were capable of processing buds, flowers, and shoots.
Interestingly, as suggested by Lucas and Peters (in press) another tough pliant food they would have had difficulty in processing is meat. In other words, the early hominids were not dentally preadapted to eat meat - they simply did not have the sharp, reciprocally-concave shearing blades necessary to retain and cut such foods. By contrast, given their flat, blunt teeth, they were admirably equipped to process hard brittle objects. What about soft fruits? It really depends on the toughness of those fruits. If they were tough, then they would also need to be precisely retained and sliced between the teeth. Again, early hominids would be very inefficient at it. If they were not tough, then the hominids could certainly process soft fruits.
In sum, Miocene ape molars show a range of adaptations including folivory, soft-fruit eating and hard-object feeding. This range exceeds that of living hominoids, and especially the early hominids. While comparable shearing crest length studies have not been conducted on early hominids, australopithecines certainly have relatively flat molar teeth compared with many living and fossil apes. These teeth were well-suited to breaking down hard, brittle foods including some fruits and nuts, and soft, weak foods such as flowers and buds; but again, they were not well-suited to breaking-down tough pliant foods like stems, soft seed pods, and meat. ...' http://www.cast.uark.edu/local/icaes/conferences/wburg/posters/pungar/satalk.htm
Remember..
'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. - Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases: perspectives from China. Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59 (5 Suppl):1153S-1161S.'
It could be said that there are two kinds of people in the world—those who eat meat and those who don’t.
But not many decisions in life are that black and white, including the why’s and why not’s about the consumption of animal protein.
It’s generally known that if you don’t eat meat, but include eggs, cheese, and milk in your diet, you’re a vegetarian. If you say “no” to meat and dairy products, it’s “V for vegan.”
And if you’re a bit of an extremist and don’t eat meat or dairy products, and your diet is uncooked and cold, then welcome to the “raw food vegan” club, where a cup of hot soup on a cold day is never realized.
Worldwide studies have been conducted on the benefits of eliminating meat and dairy products from the daily menu. And if done right, and in combination with other aspects of a healthy lifestyle, vegetarianism stands out as a key player in longevity.
Some people give up animal protein for love of their four-legged friends; others because of faith. Some may carve out a meat-free life half-time while others willingly trade a cold glass of cow’s milk for a quarter cup of seaweed all the time.
The number of vegetarians and vegans in Canada is relatively small. A recent study estimated only about 250,000 vegetarians and 100,000 vegans are out there.
Cliff Marsh of Devlin pursues a vegetarian lifestyle because of medical necessity and out of respect for his service to a higher power. He admits it’s not always easy to say “No thanks” to the part of a meal that includes animal protein, but he’s doing his best.
“[My vegetarianism] was probably initiated as long as 10 years ago,” Marsh, 54, recalled last week by phone from his business “Northwest Solar” in Devlin.
Marsh and his wife, Roxanne, spent 30 years in the British Columbia interior where he was a meat-cutter. His wife had food sensitivities and allergies, which prompted a food cull of sorts.
But it wasn’t until his own health started to deteriorate did he make some drastic changes to his diet.
“In being a meat-cutter for many, many years, I had consumed many herds of cattle on the barbecue and it led to ‘Irritable Bowel Syndrome,’” March revealed.
“We had to start figuring out what was the problem and started doing research on natural remedies, and was eventually led to vegetarianism without any spiritual prompting,” Marsh added, referring to his membership in the Seventh Day Adventist Church, which advocates a vegetarian lifestyle, including abstaining from pork, alcohol, and tobacco.
In fact, studies have documented that Seventh Day Adventists live about seven years longer than other people.
Upon carving out a vegetarian lifestyle to recoup his intestinal health, Marsh was strict with his diet for about three years—until he and his wife moved back to Rainy River District and came in closer contact with their families and the occasional meat meal.
But at home alone, they maintain a meatless diet and claim the greener lifestyle changed everything.
“Undoubtedly, absolutely [I feel better] and I have more energy,” touted Marsh. “For sure I have no bowel trouble at all when I am sticking to my [vegetarian] diet and, in fact, I can consume a little bit of meat protein on a limited basis without causing any trouble.
“When you get on to [vegetarianism], you don’t want to eat meat because you know what you feel like afterwards—it makes you slow down.
“It’s not surprising that carnivorous animals, after they eat the wildebeest, they go and lie down for 24 hours,” Marsh reasoned with a chuckle.
Meanwhile, Pat Kozik of Fort Frances has had a close relationship with vegetarianism most of her life. She was raised as a Seventh Day Adventist and remains a member of the church.
Although she admitted to “falling off the vegetable wagon” during intermittent periods in her life, Kozik, now 81, has spent at least the last three years of her life animal protein-free.
“It’s just a way of life. It isn’t a religion as much as it is a way of life,” she stressed earlier this week.
True vegetarians give up the beef steak, chicken breast, and pork chops for other sources of protein, such as beans, peas, or lentils, tofu, soy milk, nuts, seeds, and eggs.
Rooksana Randeree, a dietitian with Riverside Health Care Facilities, Inc. here, stressed the need for vegetarians to be mindful that they are receiving all the nutrients necessary for optimum health, and especially so for vegans who choose to cut out both meat and dairy products from their diet.
Randeree also noted that while she rarely sees adult vegetarians referred to her office by their doctor, she does counsel teenagers on the subject.
Much of the time, the young teens&mdashrimarily female—have come from their doctor with deficiencies in iron levels because they’ve approached vegetarianism without all the facts and need nutritional advice.
“I see a lot of teenagers who come through my office who have been to the doctor and been diagnosed with iron deficiency [and yet] they say they are vegetarian,” Randeree explained during an interview at her office last week.
“They come in here and when I ask them ‘What does a vegetarian diet mean to you,’ they say they’ve cut out all the meat and all they are eating are the vegetables and the potatoes, pasta, rice that their parents are making for them at supper time.
“They have excluded the meat [protein portion] but they haven’t supplemented it,” she stressed.
While Randeree deemed a well-balanced vegetarian diet healthy and safe for teenagers, she also said young women sometimes choose vegetarianism for the wrong reasons.
They cut out the protein and dairy products from their diet to lose weight.
“Some of these teenagers could have eating disorders, and often with eating disorders the protein portion of their food is the first thing to go,” she noted.
“A lot of young girls think [protein] is the higher calorie food, so they exclude it and start picking at the vegetables, and then you see the milk going—another protein source—so that basically they are just living on vegetables.
“If [teenagers] want to become true vegetarians, they can do it in a very, very healthy way,” Randeree continued. “The misconception is that you can go on a vegetarian diet and you can lose weight.
“Our bodies are so sophisticated that if you don’t meet your energy requirements, you may lose weight for a short period of time, but your body will adjust to what you are eating and then you will stop losing weight.
“In fact, some people who go through the cycle of under-eating and then over-eating, which is the ‘yo-yo’ diet cycle, actually end up being overweight because of that system where your body learns to conserve and preserve energy rather than utilize it,” Randeree remarked.
Melanie Béchard, a staff writer with the Fort Frances Times, has been a vegetarian for half of her life, taking that path for the four-legged creatures of the world.
It wasn’t easy switching to a healthy food plan minus the meat, but now at 32 years old, she’s a veteran at an alternative, balanced approach to nutrition.
“I consider myself a vegetarian, not a vegan. I did try veganism for about three months but couldn’t do it anymore,” Béchard noted last week.
“This is going to sound silly, but we always had dogs when I was growing up and I didn’t see the difference between killing a cow and eating it and killing my dog and eating it.
“I just didn’t see the difference—and I decided that I thought I could live without [meat],” she remarked.
“I think I cheated twice the first year [and] the hardest thing to give up was Kentucky Fried Chicken,” she chuckled.
“I was a bad vegetarian the first several years, I would say, because I was probably not getting the protein that I needed and if I was hungry after supper, I would have chips and ice cream,” Béchard laughed.
For the vegans of the world who cut out dairy products as well as animal protein, the risk for Vitamin B12 deficiency goes way up. It’s only present in animal products and if those sources of food aren’t included in one’s diet, supplements are in order, Randeree warned.
“Vitamin B12 [deficiency] is mainly associated with anemia because it’s necessary in the formation of red blood cells.
“And of course, protein is the building blocks of our cells, so we need it for the regular wear and tear of red blood cell formation—all the repair that goes on within our body and for muscle development, as well,” she reiterated.
Green leafy vegetables (like “Popeye’s” spinach) are sources of iron, but not the same kind of iron as found in animal protein. Called “non-heme” iron and vegetable-based, it is not as well-absorbed by the human body as that found in the “heme iron” in animal protein.
Anyone journeying into a vegetarian lifestyle also must be aware of their continued need for calcium. This is especially important for teenagers.
“If they just suddenly decide to become vegetarian and start cutting out the meat and then [as vegans] the dairy products, and are only eating vegetables, they are not going to be meeting their calcium requirements,” Randeree noted.
“During the teen years, that’s when the bone density is actually reaching its peak and that’s very, very important because what teenagers [consume in calcium] when they are 15 years old is going to affect them, in terms of osteoporosis, when they are 60.
“But they can’t see that relationship because they think they’ll never get old,” she smiled.
And what about the raw food vegan approach? Brrr!
Randeree believes it’s probably a better idea to cut out the fast food, high fat, processed products in our diet than opt for eating a cold, raw meatless, diary-less diet.
“Even something a simple as your kidney bean. Well, a kidney bean is cooked [when you eat it] so being a raw food vegan really limits you,” she said.
“There’s always extremes, but I think research has shown that moderation ‘middle of the road’ is where to be,” Randeree concluded.
In an article published in the November, 2005 issue of National Geographic entitled “The Secrets of Living Longer,” three groups of people around the world were deemed to be among the longest living on Earth—each with its own core of centenarians.
And although each group has its own set of beliefs, they all share in the enjoyment of a vital—an active existence well into their 90s.
The hot spots of longevity include Sardinia, Italy, where they drink red wine, share the workload with their spouse, and eat pecorino cheese, in Okinawa, Japan, where they eat small meals, have purpose, and nurture friendships, and in Loma Linda, Calif. among the Seventh Day Adventists, who rely heavily on faith, nuts, and beans, and observe the Sabbath.
Only a third of the world is meat-eating and two-thirds vegetarian.
“When you look at the big picture, why wouldn’t you want to prolong your life? Why wouldn’t you want to live into your 70s, 80s, and 90s and still have a good mind, still go hiking, riding your bike, and enjoy a quality of life instead of being in your 50s and 60s and starting to feel the rigors of your lifestyle and be restricted,” Marsh challenged.
For more information on vegetarian food guidelines, go to www.nutrispeak.com
April 26 - Since 2000, America's agribusiness firms have donated over 140 million dollars to candidates running for Congress and the Presidency. In 2004 alone, the McDonald's Corporation gave 77% of its political donations to Republicans; the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, 81%; National Restaurant Association, 90%. In return the Bush administration and the Republican majority in Congress have worked hard to serve these private interests at the expense of public health.
WORLD MEAT[sic] CONGRESS 2006 TO WELCOME INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS
Nov 25 - More than 500 of the world's most influential players in the global meat[sic] industry will descent upon Brisbane for next year's World Meat[sic] Congress.
A number of notable speakers were this week confirmed to address the world's biggest meat[sic] industry conference, to be held on April 26-29.
President of the Terrestrial Animal[sic] Health Code Commission in the World Organisation for Animal[sic] Health (OIE), Dr Alex Thiermann, will be arguing the importance of international animal[sic] health standards in global trade and presenting an insight into the trade policy needed to sustain the industry towards 2020.
"The importance of international standards in the trade of animals[sic] and animal[sic] products cannot be overstated," Dr Thiermann said.
"The emphasis in the Terrestrial Animal[sic] Health Code has shifted from a strict focus on country disease freedom to risk-based recommendations on the safety of commodities traded and dependent on credible surveillance and monitoring systems - the key to a safe and sustainable international meat[sic] industry."
Also speaking at the World Meat[sic] Congress will be president of the OIE Animal[sic] Welfare Working Group, Dr David Bayvel.
Dr Bayvel will discuss key issues and trends in community expectations within the animal[sic] welfare arena.
Chairman of the 2006 World Meat[sic] Congress, Mark Spurr, says the key themes of the 2006 World Meat[sic] Congress will focus on the consumer, the community, supply and trade policy.
"This is the biggest and most important meat[sic] industry event on the calendar," Mr Spurr said.
"It will gather the key decision makers in one place, at one time, to discuss current and future issues facing the world's meat[sic] industries."
The 2006 World Meat[sic] Congress is conducted by the International Meat[sic] Secretariat and hosted by Meat[sic] & Livestock[sic] Australia, the Australian Meat[sic] Industry Council and Australian Pork[sic] Limited.
It is held every two years in a leading meat[sic] producing nation.
The sun in the North is a
temporary guestWho brings
with him much warmth and
light when he comesFor a
few precious months every
year he keepsUs company
through night and day He
makes the trees green, he
makes flowers bloomHe
makes the birds sing, and
...
The largest genocide in
human history happened
where? Most people would
answer Germany, and the
Jewish Holocaust.
Actually though, the
largest genocide happened
in the USA, with the
native American Indians,
with estimates of 19
million to 100 millio...
Official Nuclear
Radiation Study; Tokyo
University
Hayno, R.S., et al
(2013) Internal
Radiocesium Contamination
of Adults and Children 7
to 20 Months After the
Fukushima NPP Accident as
Measured by Extensive
Whole-Body-Counter
Surveys, Proc. Jpn....
Toxic radiation
accumulates in water
supplies after nuclear
accidents. Radiation
bioconcentrates in fish
that live in fresh water
and salt water. Runoff of
fresh water from land
which has been
contaminated ends up
contaminating oceans, and
salt wate...
66 Atomic Bombs were
exploded on the Bikini
Island Atolls. Hundreds
of islanders were removed
from the islands, but not
from harms way. One
hydrogen bomb exploded
near the islands, and the
children played with the
dust from the bomb, as it
fel...
"Under our current law,
a suspected terrorist on
the FBI's No-Fly List
can't board an airplane
-- but they can still
legally purchase guns and
explosives.
This loophole, known
as the
âTerror
Gap,â
is ...
Germany added more
solar panels in one
month, than the US did in
ONE YEAR. Nearly 1/3 of
Germany power output is
handled by bottoms up
solar energy during the
middle of the day. The
transition to a 100%
renewable energy nation
is in process. T...
http://www.upworthy.com/
/the-top-8-ways-to-be-tra
ditionally-married-accord
ing-to-the-bible?c=upw1
According to the Old
Testament, which defines
all of the 'rules' of
traditional marriage, the
above examples are all of
the ways that couples can
be ...