We have evolved to be able to survive without food for three weeks and without water for three days basing this fact on need it would seem that water was plentiful and food not so plentiful which to my mind points toward hunting rather than gathering.
Its wild how much people think humans are omnivores. It takes about 60 seconds of critical thought to realise we're actually carnivores and we can just tolerate a small amount of plants, but they're in no way optimal for us other than in survival situations for calories.
Really. On what basis do you believe your 60secs of thought is so superior to so many others including 1000s of years of Ayurvedic and tcm that both say amongst other things that food prescriptions need to be specific the the persons general constitution and current condition and age. But they must be wrong! Or perhaps you might be when you mandate there is only one correct way f eating for the whole of humanity…
Try eating into a raw animal (fur, skin, blood, nerves and all) then see how carnivore we are. Early humans probably ate some raw meat and survived but we only thrived once we discovered fire. We are the only species that cooks its food.
I think people would have a much healthier worldview if they understood how our ancestors had to struggle and essentially tame the world we live on. Modern ideology is enabled by an extremely privileged perspective.
I do very well on dairy. Grains distroy me. So do lumgumes. Based on my ancestors that is reasonable. Also do great with lots of meat.Need to limit fruit.
@@defeqel6537because you need to cook most of the vegetable matter first to make it edible and the caloric dense plant foods we have now are rare or nonexistent in nature. Meat can be eaten raw
The diet of our ancestors depended on where they were living (trying to survive), they were not eating what was most healthy for them. Dogs are omnivores as well; put them on a grain diet, and their health will decline rapidly. Add some fish and meat, and their health will be back to normal. Most dogs do best on mostly on a 90% meat diet.
Yes; and they ate whatever they could dig up, kill or harvest. That’s going to include bugs, roots, fish, shell fish, snails, greens, berries, nuts etc; but not everywhere at the same time. Even recently you had people who nearly only ate coconuts and people who nearly only ate seals, whale and fish. Ancient peoples ate everything they could eat wherever they lived.
@westb1028 Unless, of course, it spans for 100 000s or millions of years. Some organisms evolve in real-time, but their life cycle is incredibly short, like viruses, bacteria, and such.
You are correct. That was following the period when many megafauna species had already gone extinct. That had been the staple of the human diet during the Paleolithic era. The loss of the blubbery megafauna was probably what soon after turned humans to agriculture.
From my point of view doesn't matter, I eat what works best for me and I'll also add supplements that were not available to ancient humans if it can improve my life. As someone who enjoys history's mysteries it's interesting though. As someone who has spent a lot of time in the outdoors I can tell you it's extremely rare to find a garden to feast on in nature, rare as in never. The fruits & vegetables we eat today have been bred over hundreds or thousands of years by humans and didn't exist for humans to eat............If you don't feel good eating your current diet my first suggestion is try cutting out grains or at least wheat and see what that does for you.
Ancient humans didn't have to take supplements because they got all of the nutrients - which is being stolen from our food by the food processing industry - from their diet. And supplements are sold to you by the pharmaceutical industry. Do you know that the same men who are on the Boards of Directors of the food processing companies are on the Boards of Directors of the pharmaceutical companies?
My blueberry foraging skills have improved with six years living in the country. First year 4 hours for less than 1/4 cup. Last year 2 hours for a whole cup. You half to beat the bears to them. And watch for bears while picking. I have planted a few bushes in my yard. Nothing yet, but hoping it works out better in the long run over my foraging. I would be dead if I need to rely on foraging. I rely on the meat in the freezer instead.
My caveman ancestors must not have had green thumbs, only diet that has been sustainable for me is meat heavy. Wish people would stop treating nutrition and diets like politics.
Climate activism is one of a number of reasons for the anti meat rhetoric because of methane emissions. Absolute nonsense to be sure. Love a great steak. Stay well and healthy. 👍
It’s not political. It’s tribal. And you are just as guilty of this as anybody. You can tell by your cock sure attitude that meat is good. You’re in the meat tribe. You’re not open minded. Therefore you’re being just as “political” about nutrition as anyone else. What you really mean is “ I wish people would believe what I believe and get on board and not challenge my opinions on things.” Everyone get into your tribe because your tribe is right because it’s YOUR tribe. So if you really want to see this change why don’t you start by doing it yourself?
Thanks Mike. I would also point out that people living in the Levant in prehistory certainly had a different diet than someone living in the Great Northern forests.
@@julienfroidevaux1143yet you keep ignoring animals that YOU kill by eating only vegetables. An inconvenient truth. Animals die no matter what you're eating.
humans ate plants for 1 reason - we already killed and ate all the animals in the area. it happened everywhere we went. we are facultative carnivores. plants were starvation food when we were starving. 4+ MILLION years. 15,000 years ago was yesterday
I believe it's the other way around.humans back then ate mostly plants,because animals aren't as easy to catch & prepare for consumption as gathering plants & preparing them to eat.when humans ate most of the edible plants in an area,they were competing with the animals for consuming the plant life,while also eating some of the animals they were able to catch.so the animals would move towards other areas where the plant life was more abundant...constant nomadic life like animals.but always gravitating where there was water & plant life.
Wrong...humans ate plants WHILE HUNTING....because if you're out hunting for 6 hours and you can grab some snacks that just grow for free....that's a wise choice.
Should the focus of ancestral diets, which varied greatly depending on climate and environmental availability factors, really be a meat vs. vegetable argument? Perhaps it would be more constructive to focus instead on what ancient ancestors absolutely did NOT eat. Such as anything GMO, refined sugar, highly processed grains, bleached enriched anything, herbicides, pesticides, seed oils... the list is far too long for this comment section but I've got the gist of it across here. Diets don't need dogmatism. A standardized diet will only work for standardized people which, to my knowledge, don't exist.
The focus shouldn’t be an ancestral diet at all. Period. It tells us nothing. What we need is health outcome data. Evolution via natural selection isn’t trying to make you live a long and healthy life. All it does is select against traits that severely hinder your ability to replicate your genes. So analyzing what our ancestors did only tells us that such behavior was good enough to get to reproductive age and have kids. It does not imply that such behavior will get you to 100 without nursing care. It very well could mean you die at 65 from heart disease. If your goal is to live to 90 and be healthy the whole way you are outside the bounds of what evolution “cares” about. What we need is health outcome data, like we have with smoking. Nobody cites natural selection to argue for or against smoking. We shouldn’t be doing it with food either. Nobody wants to actually read Darwin though. They just act out tribal instincts and will say whatever they think sounds good to prove that thier tribe is right.
Humans also didn't eat any of the modern cultivars of plant foods. Wild grains, fruits, etc tend to be smaller and have less carbs. That is why pre-agricultural humans ate so few plants. It was hard to get much nutrition from them. They were seasonal foods as available or survival foods during hard times. Try to survive on only local, seasonal wild plants in your area and you'll likely starve to death before long. But you could thrive on nothing other than wild animal foods, assuming you know how to hunt, trap, and fish.
@@MarmaladeINFP true, also in commercial agriculture plants are selected and grown for maximum production and tonnage yield per land acre and not for nutritional content whatsoever
Israel is a crappy example. It’s very resource-challenged. I find it funny when I see the imagery of Jesus with lambs in a green pasture that looks like a set for a lucky charms commercial; literally no part of Israel looks like that, or ever has. Or the cornucopia imagery, not only is it a pagan object, it’s often depicted as brimming with fruits and vegetables that are not grown there, some from continents not discovered in biblical times. Dates, pomegranates, figs, olives, apples, grapes, grain, sunchokes, not much else. Feedlots weren’t typically a thing, shepherds had to traverse long journeys just for their livestock to have bits to graze along the way. It should go without saying that meat was scarce in a region like that. Man, I’m so beyond tired of vegans yelling over their juicer with more horsepower than my muscle car how veganism is the most ancient ancestral diet on earth🤦🏻♀️
Up until agriculture era, humans didnt have carbs and sugar on a regular daily basis. The amount is very limited in number and only in cerrain seasons and area. So mostly humans depended on hunting, hence more meat than plants
And during the agriculture era grains were seasonal for a lot of folks. i.e. industrial elevators were not a thing, and there were no means of transporting grains safely.
We evolved in a tropical climate like other great apes - plenty of fruit and vegetation year-round. Our AMY1 gene increases salivary amylase and greatly improves starch digestion. That sets us apart from other great apes and made us human.
@@aagfnv - Yeah. For most of agriculture, grains weren't a dependable food. They simply gave some extra calories. But they weren't a staple for most populations. And often they were stored for hard times. They were a backup food. Not something to be eaten daily with every meal.
@ ebirch90 - I dream of a day when most people are informed. In the wild, plant foods are seasonal. And these seasons are often short, often with long periods with few plant foods at all. For example, even near the equator, fruit is typically only available for 2-3 months. The fruit in the tropics, like bananas and pineapples, have been as altered from their original wild form as have grains. Yes, humans have the capacity to digest carbs. That is because humans evolved from primates that once ate more fruits. But that was millions of years ago.
@@MarmaladeINFP "For example, even near the equator, fruit is typically only available for 2-3 months." This is false. In tropical regions near the equator, different fruit species can be available throughout the year due to the continuous growing season. The diversity of plant species means that while any single fruit species may have a limited season, other fruits will be available at different times.
Omnivores makes sense. Meat heavy makes sense. Only need to be 70% meat for technical carnivore. We were moving away from vegitarian because shorter intestines. We had to eat anything to survive. High stomach acidity to be able to eat anything including carrion. Neanderthals had plants detected in their teeth too. Yet they were carnivorous.
Humans are omnivores. Our digestive tract and teeth prove this without a shadow of a doubt. We'd eat whatever we could find mostly, though it was when we started getting a more meat based diet that our brains got bigger and our cognitive abilities improved immensely.
@@powerguiller - We are obligate hyper-carnivores in the sense that without plenty of animal foods humans become malnourished, stunted, and sickly. But one can survive for a time as a skinny and weak shadow of a human like John McDougall did.
Been to the US 6 times and could not eat the bread and pastries with its high sugar content. Also, access to healthy food was tricky. Love the people though. 👋🏻🇦🇺
It would have been nearly impossible to obtain all the nutrients a human needs from the plants available in any region never mind North Africa. Most people are ignorant of the fact that probably NONE of the plants we eat today existed back then in the current form, being small bitter or sour and in small quantities and more importantly NOT LOCALLY AVAILABLE. Not all plants will grow everywhere. Most need very specific conditions such as soil type, temperature range etc. At best, these people were likely either supplementing their diet or at worst (most likely) eating to survive due to lack of anything else. Lets face it, they died eating plants ;) Most animals that are herbivores actually eat fibre and nothing else and their gut bacteria produce saturated fat and the protein comes from the dead bacteria. This is the diet of cows and gorillaz etc and most ruminant and hind gut fermenters. Humans mostly eat non fiberous plants like tubers because of the directly available carbohydrates but unless you farm them, there are never enough growing wild to satisfy nutritional needs. Folks should try growing all their own food and will quickly realize that without modern farming methods including everything from plough to fertilizer and pesticide we cannot thrive on plants. And if you don't use pesticide (even food labelled organic uses it) then the bugs will eat everything. I challenge you. If you live in a coldish climate you might be lucky, but cats and plagues of locust were not uncommon in Egypt for no reason.
The correct definition of an omnivore is an organism that can sustain life on more than one trophic level. It does not mean that they thrive on "a little of this, and a little of that". Get educated, please!
@@JulioMacarenawhat are you basing this claim on? Have you done studies that show this? Or are you just saying stuff that sounds good to bolster your tribal world view?
@@JulioMacarena - It's funny that the ignorant will challenge you on your informed statement. But instead of being dismissive, they could spend their time educating themselves.
I don't get how so few people seem to understand a point as simple as this. Do people really think the food in their grocery store represents an evolutionary-consistent diet?
Native Americans from where I’m at didn’t really have to hunt because they walk down to the shore and gather all the fish, shellfish they could consume. But they did hunt for game too needing skins and other products.
West coast of BC. Mostly seafood. They got a special fish oil they traded with others on the interior. And a little hunting on the trip of course. CBC, before being totally corrupted by the WEF agenda did a documentary based on a study going on their. Dr. Wortman was in charge of running it.
Mozambique, Africa: Starch grains found on ancient stone tools at the Ngalue cave site in Mozambique indicate that early humans were processing wild sorghum around 100,000 years ago
By the late Stone Age humans had already wiped out all the mega fauna When we developed spears the ave weight of a mammal on earth fell from 100kg to 10kg
Megafauna were definitely large. A single kill could feed a band of humans for months or longer. But it wasn't only meat. Megafauna were as blubbery as whales. And could you imagine the nutrient-density in the bone marrow, brains, and organ meats.
Would humans have a multi-chambered digestive system similar to a cow ( megafauna) if we were designed to eat vegetarian ? I was shocked to find out that human stomach acid is stronger than the wolf's. I think we're at least 75% Carnivore.
Do bonobos and chimps have multi-chambered digestive systems? And before you say it, insects and small animals make up a miniscule part of their diet, and they only resort to such when other plant-based foods are scarce.
Why are people so confused in US the original inhabitants lived on buffalo on prairie and in alaska lived on wild game haha yes omnivores is correct we eat meat and plants
This study only identifies that specific population at that specific point in time. It cannot extrapolate to any other population. Also, 4000 years isn't long enough ago. These people were unlikely to be wholly pre-agricultural which makes the conclusions drawn highly questionable.
I had serious bloating and other gastro problems, multiple testing with no diagnosis. Began research and ended up with an all fatty meat diet. Almost eliminated all symptoms and other positive things resulted like loss of bodily inflammation. Haven't ate a vegetable in two and a half years.
The time period for this research does nothing to debunk the other 3 million years worth of data we have showing humans and hominids ate a 90% or thereabouts meat based diet (carnivore).
4-2 million years ago - Australopithecus afarensis ("Lucy"), had a diet that included a mix of fruits, leaves, seeds, nuts, tubers, and possibly small animals. Dental morphology and wear patterns, as well as isotopic analyses, suggest they consumed a combination of C3 plants (typical of wooded environments) and C4 plants (associated with more open, grassy environments).
@@MarmaladeINFPThe general timeframe for the extinction of many megafaunal species is around 10,000 to 15,000 years ago, which coincides with the end of the Pleistocene epoch and the beginning of the Holocene epoch...........
15,000 years ago is too close to the mass extinction of mega-fauna and the dawn of agriculture to be considered truly ancestral. Radio isotope studies from before this confounding factor have already been done and confirmed we’re obligate carnivores (when available) but of course we’re somewhat flexible thanks to our omnivorous ancestors, you don't lose a feature unless there’s evolutionary pressure to do so. Worth noting that true herbivores have gut structures and microbes that turn fiber into fatty acids and amino acids so even they don't live off carbs, which we of course lack. Additionally, fruit makes much more sense in an evolutionary context as a drug, in this case fructose which is 5x sweeter than even glucose, and which is synthesized by plants to manipulate animals into transporting and fertilizing their seeds. There's nothing about that transaction that requires fruit to be healthy, it just can't be deadly, otherwise the animals wouldn't make it far and that would limit the spread of the species. It also needs to trigger a release of neurotransmitters like any other drug to get repeat customers. It's well understood that fructose is even more damaging to blood vessels and decreases mitochondrial health. Carbs are just long chains of sugar, less bad maybe, but not optimal. All that being said, live your life, have treats if you like, enjoy your time on this earth. Just don't start ingesting species inappropriate food on a regular basis because some obviously biased group produced a flawed study with the aim of keeping the unhealthy status-quo.
To ommit such a basic and important fact seems either ignorant or dishonest. How was the prior million years of evolution not relevant to the discussion? How was most of the Paleolithic era diet of blubbery megafauna not significant?
I’d be interested to see a set of geography-specific isotope analyses lined up on a chart and broken down by food groupings. It seems only logical that-if we set all the BS food politics aside-so much would have depended on *where* a group of people lived. The diets of equatorial folk would have differed quite a bit from those in higher latitudes.
Part of my ancestors are Irish, which have the highest celiac rates in the world. A trace of gluten and I am down for a week. However, I do great on dairy and meat. The Inuit were very healthy until western foods were introduced. Then diabetics and related diseases went threw the roof. And even in different areas of Africa the diet varies from mostly animal based to mostly plant based. I like your idea. Especially if it is set up to be added to as more data becomes available. We could learn a lot.
@@hugoanderkivi I think you’re right. Meat was probably the default and plants were survival food. Hunt went bad? Ok…guess we have to eat some roots and greens for a while, kids.
@@dawnelder9046 According to the DNA tests, my ancestry is around 80% northern British Isles. Rough split of half/half between the Munster region of Ireland and the Argyll region of Scotland. The remainder of my line comes from Belgium and the Netherlands. So for me, meat, fish, eggs, and dairy work beautifully. Fruits and vegetables are iffy, with some mixed experiences. But grains are a nightmare-I blow up like a balloon within a few short months and my GI tract is a mess. Took me a long time to learn this through trial and error, but now that I know, there’s no going back to those foods.
😂DR AL DANENBERG A CARNIVORE… died at like 75… You people are a carnivore channel that can’t ignore the facts that plants are good for you… necessary… I’m done… this is sad
The way I see plants is that, plants are inferior source of nutrients and energy than meat, so when meat is available, we don't need plants. We can however tolerate plants when we don't have enough meat. Today, we have so much meat availability so there is no need to eat plants.
The same was true during most of the Paleolithic era. But then the megafauna died off. This study is looking at that period of meat scarcity that led humans to agriculture.
Well, we should read more. "Dr McDougall pursued a healthcare career after suffering from a stroke aged 18. He was left with a lifelong disability as a result of the stroke,"
So, his having had a stroke at age 18 is why he was so skinny, weak, and sickly looking more than a half century later? That must've been one helluva stroke!
This takes no account of optimal diet. People would eat what they could get, which may well not have been what they would have preferred. Also, given the location and the fact that it was only 15,000 years ago, early agriculture may have been evolving there. Real paleo is beyond 20,000 years ago. HomoSapiens have been around for at least 250,000 years. What were they eating?
Even a greater bulk of wild plant foods is less essential nutrition than a smaller amount of animal foods. That is because wild plants are largely inedible fiber. And they lack numerous essential nutrients. There is a reason most humans have always prioritized animal foods. It's the most nutrition for the least effort.
15000 years ago people ate anything to survive. This study doesn’t say how good or bad that food was for humans . In 15000 years research will show that people of 20th century ate a lot of sugar and processed food. Does it mean sugar is really good for our health
Confused about the location, the study say Morocco which is no where near Israel. Humans may of under estimated how long ago we started to become omnivores with plant agriculture. If the same result where 30,000 year ago well that would be interesting but for me to state that human are naturally omnivores you have to prove it with evidence for more than 100,000 years.
And this tells us absolutely nothing about how to achieve good health outcomes at an age way beyond what evolution tends to care about. Once you’ve replicated your genes you more or less a useless vessel that has already served its purpose. From natural selections point of view anyway. That’s why the ancestral diet arguments are stupid. What we need is health outcome data. We don’t make claims about smoking by saying our ancestors did or did not do it. Or that evolution designed us to do or not do it. It’s a dumb argument only made by people who haven’t, and probably couldn’t, read Dawkins.
They ate whatever they could find lool people are dumb that think this age of abundance was the norm just look at the chinese they eat everything that moves or doesn't
Yes. A young girl I work with had a few before age 20. She was plant based. But I do not think Adventist like John McDougal. Switched to veganism after the strokes. Had open heart surgery in her late 20s. Such a horrible diet for growing bodies.
@@dawnelder9046 - The thing is McDougall wouldn't likely have been so skinny, weak, and sickly looking a half century after his stroke if he had been eating an animal-based diet that whole time.
Gorillas have massive guts and long digestive tracts. Humans don't. The digestive system of humans is in between that of an alpha predator and a carrion eater. And the acidity of the human stomach is higher than many predators like wolves. Our teeth are also designed for tearing meat. Would you like any further education?
Just b/c our ancestors ate plants doesn't mean they were beneficial: fructose was just as detrimental then as it is now. Plants were likely ingested b/c meat was unavailable, and humans introduced plants, minerals, spices, and fermentation out of necessity.Thus, our bodies learned to detoxify, absorb, and convert select phytonutrients, and were/are only able to do so when a meat-based diet allows for these neutralizing processes to counteract the poisonous antinutrients. Fruit gave our ancestors liver damage, and greens destroyed kidneys with oxalates in the past just as it does now.
The period under study was after the megafauna died off and right before agriculture. The prior million years of evolution consisted of a mostly meat-based diet.
The big problem is the animals today for the most part are the same as in the past maybe more fat today. Plants on the other hand have been altered that they are no where near what they use to be. Plants have a lot more sugar and starch than before. The only way humans would benefit from carrying that much fat as most have now is the lived in the sea. I remember when an apple was sour without all the sugar they have today. Too much gene tampering to compare today's food with food from the past. Just look at the birth rate today in most developed countries and say diet don't have something to do with it.
Actually, animals aren't more fat today. During most of the Paleolithic era, the favorite food of humans was megafauna. They were as blubbery as whales.
Two things. That advice applies to everyone on any diet. Humans were evolved to be active, not sedentary. The other point is that, actually, studies of hunter-gatherers shows they aren't all that intensely active. It's more that they move around a lot, not sitting in one position for hours.
this is the problem with human brains, IQ is getting lower and lower and AI is getting stronger, this guy is talking about diets of people thousands of years ago across the world like his great great relative told him, right now we just do not know what is going on in current wars or other things...current things we do not and this guy is talking about things centuries ago..that also of diets??? I know AI will take over shortly for sure....
Seasonal is how I eat,went back to how we ate in my childhood. Treats only for birthdays and major holidays I like Tuesdays show and moxcience products
The meat we consume is probably lower in nutrients too. Depends on what the animals graze on. A farmer I know refuses to eat bacon because he knows what the animals consume during their short lives.
I can’t believe we are still fighting over this. Let them eat to be weak and frail and we eat to be strong and healthy. Eventually they won’t be here for us to worry about. 👍
This isn’t true at all. I agree that fighting about it is dumb. Be we are evolved to be extremely tribal primates so the fighting will continue. The truth is every modern diet is good enough to get you to middle age and have lots of children. Therefore it’s all acceptable by evolution’s standard. Natural selection cannot alter this because if it works to replicate genes then it’s good enough. All it can do is select out traits that fail to reproduce the genes. Unless you are implying that the strong are going to murder the weak. But in the age of technology that’s not gonna happen either. I don’t care if carnivores or vegans or omnivores want to believe what thier tribe tells them to. But when dumb people who would fall asleep two pages into Dawkins start erroneously throwing around evolutionary concepts to prove thier point, I get annoyed.
Another obvious flaw in us somehow always eating a bit of everything is our digestion. Eating a plate full of meat, fat, carbs and fibre would not have happened. If you killed an animal all of it was eaten. If you didn’t have meat then you’d eat whatever you could find. If it was fruit season you’d eat them until you burst. Nobody was eating three square meals a day or planning a 7 course meal. That made digestion far easier and it was less likely to activate the Randal cycle as happens when eating fat and carbs together.
The difference is fruit season, even near the equator, typically is only 2-3 months. Most plant foods are seasonal. Whereas most animal foods are available year round. So, eating whatever is available tends to lead to more animal foods, at least until agriculture. Not to mention early humans preferred animal foods, as the scientific evidence indicates. But of course that changed with the megafauna die-off. The study in this video describes that later period of meat scarcity right before the agricultural revolution.
@@MarmaladeINFP yep and wild fruit nowhere near like todays. If we ate fruit exclusively our teeth would have been rotten from acid and sugars, never seen any reports of skulls with no teeth left. In Spain 10k years ago just across from Morocco where these plant poo’s were found they found human bone fragments in fossils poo. In other words cannibalism, so fits in with declining prey numbers.
He has been ill for a good 10 years. You can see the dementia in interviews in his early 70s. And a fall in the house from standing was enough to break bones when just past 70.
I mean, we're honestly glorified scavengers. Inuits eat rotten whale that's been cured. Certain places in Cambodia eat fermented shrimp paste. We literally eat what we had to. There are some crazy foods out there. We're opportunists at the core, in terms of diet.
This is the area that basically.invented agriculture 10k years ago. The idea that people in the levant were stone age hunter gatherers is farcical in the extreme. Also at least 500 years into the bronze age. We also have plemty of evidence of health declines due to deficient agriculture at these times. People CAN eat plants and grains but it is in no way THRIVING. COULD IS.NOT SHOULD
I'll bet it also depended on the hunting skills of your ancestral tribe (including tool making, ability to know where the game is, track them down, and bring home the bacon ;^). I am grateful my grandfather was a hunter and fisher and pass these skills down the line. Speaking of pesicides, check out Maready's book The Moth in the Iron Lung.
The time period in this study is RIGHT before the agricultural revolution. Indeed, the study describes it as “during the transition to agriculture”. And of course - they were eating the most unadulterated sources of plants possible - prior to selective breeding and gmo and herbicides and nutrient-depleted soils etc etc. We no longer have access to the plant foods they were eating. The consensus I’ve seen seems to be that human ancestors were predominantly hunters for 2M years, and began transitioning to more and more plant foods and agriculture starting 85,000 years ago, snd especially 12,000 years ago as agriculture really kicked off and began being a main source of food. Now it’s Doritos los tacos. Really appreciate the myriad advice on this channel. But keto carnivore is an absolute godsend for SO many people. It seems to be the optimal diet for a lot. Probably some plants are fine for most - but it seems the evidence is pointing to us being adapted to thrive mostly on meat.
It is irrelevant to try to figure out when humans started to eat meat to survive harsh winters. Fact is that we are original plant eaters like all our relatives the primates. We should stop abusing animals unnecessary and destroying our planet, don’t you think? Why still trying to find excuses and be blind for the obvious things.
How is plant agriculture better? You need a lot of pesticides , insecticide, chemical fertilizers. Plus without ruminant animals to renew the topsoil you would eventually not be able to grow plants.
@@janedough6575 plant agriculture is not better, but it should be better. We should not use pesticides, fertiliser or manure, damaging soil and groundwater, rivers and oceans. 70-90% of agriculture is to make crops for feeding farm animals. So by stop eating meat, we already reduce up to 90% of the damage and monocrops and deforestation. Then we have to teach farmers to use compost instead of manure. It is just a matter of education as most people think we need manure to grow plants, that’s how bad habits work. People don’t know better. All being conditioned. Thinking breastfeeding from a cow is healthy and natural. It is difficult to change bad habits, even when they are damaging our environment and our knowledge that rape, slavery, exploitation and murder is wrong. Especially women should fight for the right of other females being abused every day in a holocaust, being raped, children kidnapped and breast milk forced being stolen and finally being murdered. Don’t you think?
Your channel is amazing❤ keep up the good work of breaking down these analysis and explain. There is a lot of nonsense publications in the academia with full of vegan bias. Looks like vegans create a lot of bullshit (or veganshit?)
Europeans also experience the same problems from wheats, vegetables, etc. as Americans. Same Metabolic issues. Pesticides are sprayed on food in Europe:
I love the simplicity of our zoo's Dinosaur exhibit. They have placards showing how plant-eating dinosaurs' eyes are on the sides of their heads so they can be watching for predators. Carnivore predator dinosaurs' eyes are on the front of their heads so they can hunt their prey. Not much has changed. Horses, cows, rabbits, etc. all have eyes on the side to watch out for predators. Lions/big cats, bears, dogs and humans all have eyes in the front. Exceptions are many primates for sure...but perhaps they are supposed to be predators and have chosen to forego their true nature. Plants are toxic for those not designed for that kind of digestion. Gut fermentation for a non ruminant animal is less than ideal. There are plenty of human societies whose teeth had dental caries once they began to rely on agricultural foods for sustenance. Looking at bones of ancient humans may show they ate plants but it will not tell you why or if they were eating that because they had to in order to survive when animal foods were scarce.
In fairness, McDougall did have a stroke at 18, it's possible that contributed to his decline, no telling if vegan helped him actually live longer or not.
29:01 Oxalate content is reduced when food is cooked. Consuming more water and calcium also reduce the negative effects of a potentially high oxalate intake. This information always seems to be left out. 🤔
c'mon … the 'evidence' offered by the new study is rather ridiculous. teeth were an important tool in prehistoric man, and they were utilized for more than just eating. chewing is a mechanical process useful for crafting purposes for parts of clothes, tools, weapons, practically everything that needed to be made softer and more elastic. in addition, it is known that prehistoric man also cleaned his teeth, and they certainly did not do this with mammoth bones. in other words, just because something was in the mouth or left a mark in the tooth enamel does not necessarily mean that it was involved in the digestion; not everything in the mouth is necessarily food. it is analogous to the claim that chewing gum, if some advanced civilizations were to investigate us, is the food on which numerous generations of humans were raised. the 'new study' is barely an unconvincing speculation, with the only role of being used in the propaganda of the plant-based ideology, not really worth anyone's time.
We had some wild apple trees in the field next to our house. The township came and cut them down as if they were a hazard. So no more free, untainted apples for us common folk😮💨
If the hunt was unsuccessful, or animals are in short supply, you gotta eat something, and that something is plant matter. Animal meat and fat is nutrient dense and fruit and veggies are available seasonally fattening humans up for winter
Today's fruits and vegetables are not the same 4,000 years ago.
Youre right. Theyve been bred to be more digestible. More sweet too of course
@@bannanaizationlike the meat which is bred to be fast growing
The meat today is certainly not the same either
GMO products.
doesnt matter, we bred them to be superior, carnivore diet is stupid and is the reason your body looks how it does
Going by evolutionary standards why would we develop the NEED for B12 if we were only eating plants ??
Change “thrive” on vegetables to able to “survive” and we can agree. We thrive on meat, not plants.
Just look at indias health crisis.!
We have evolved to be able to survive without food for three weeks and without water for three days basing this fact on need it would seem that water was plentiful and food not so plentiful which to my mind points toward hunting rather than gathering.
Human teeth are an omnivore's teeth. End of discussion.
Its wild how much people think humans are omnivores. It takes about 60 seconds of critical thought to realise we're actually carnivores and we can just tolerate a small amount of plants, but they're in no way optimal for us other than in survival situations for calories.
Really. On what basis do you believe your 60secs of thought is so superior to so many others including 1000s of years of Ayurvedic and tcm that both say amongst other things that food prescriptions need to be specific the the persons general constitution and current condition and age. But they must be wrong! Or perhaps you might be when you mandate there is only one correct way f eating for the whole of humanity…
Try eating into a raw animal (fur, skin, blood, nerves and all) then see how carnivore we are. Early humans probably ate some raw meat and survived but we only thrived once we discovered fire. We are the only species that cooks its food.
Ancient Humans very likely ate whatever their could get their hands on.
I think people would have a much healthier worldview if they understood how our ancestors had to struggle and essentially tame the world we live on. Modern ideology is enabled by an extremely privileged perspective.
But what would we choose to eat if we could? How would everything be ranking?
Yes, we have the luxury to debate. Our ancestors main aim was to not starve to death.
This is precisely true...and it's the reason why humans are better true Omnivores than any other animal....
I do very well on dairy. Grains distroy me. So do lumgumes. Based on my ancestors that is reasonable. Also do great with lots of meat.Need to limit fruit.
I doubt they woke up looking for apples and salads. They probably looked for meat
They had to go out and chase down animals and kill them.
Early humans had vegetable matter growing on the bushes everywhere.
@@susanmercurio1060 you can go to a forest and there is vegetable matter everywhere, so why pay for groceries, just start eating..
@@defeqel6537because you need to cook most of the vegetable matter first to make it edible and the caloric dense plant foods we have now are rare or nonexistent in nature. Meat can be eaten raw
@@defeqel6537 Yes and almost all of it are more or less poisonous.
@@martinsvensson6884💯
The diet of our ancestors depended on where they were living (trying to survive), they were not eating what was most healthy for them.
Dogs are omnivores as well; put them on a grain diet, and their health will decline rapidly. Add some fish and meat, and their health will be back to normal. Most dogs do best on mostly on a 90% meat diet.
Bramble the Border Collie disproves this.
15000 thousand years in evolutionary terms is like talking about something that happened a couple of hours ago
Yes; and they ate whatever they could dig up, kill or harvest. That’s going to include bugs, roots, fish, shell fish, snails, greens, berries, nuts etc; but not everywhere at the same time. Even recently you had people who nearly only ate coconuts and people who nearly only ate seals, whale and fish. Ancient peoples ate everything they could eat wherever they lived.
@soylentgreenb Don't be so sure they ate everything they could. Stable isotope shows they were picky.
yes, 10k is even worse, grains were the downfall of humanity
And evolution in any term is asinine.
@westb1028 Unless, of course, it spans for 100 000s or millions of years. Some organisms evolve in real-time, but their life cycle is incredibly short, like viruses, bacteria, and such.
They found an area in which, at that time, meat was scarce.. makes sense given the region.
The middle east we know today wasn't a desert that it is now
You are correct. That was following the period when many megafauna species had already gone extinct. That had been the staple of the human diet during the Paleolithic era. The loss of the blubbery megafauna was probably what soon after turned humans to agriculture.
From my point of view doesn't matter, I eat what works best for me and I'll also add supplements that were not available to ancient humans if it can improve my life. As someone who enjoys history's mysteries it's interesting though. As someone who has spent a lot of time in the outdoors I can tell you it's extremely rare to find a garden to feast on in nature, rare as in never. The fruits & vegetables we eat today have been bred over hundreds or thousands of years by humans and didn't exist for humans to eat............If you don't feel good eating your current diet my first suggestion is try cutting out grains or at least wheat and see what that does for you.
Ancient humans didn't have to take supplements because they got all of the nutrients - which is being stolen from our food by the food processing industry - from their diet. And supplements are sold to you by the pharmaceutical industry.
Do you know that the same men who are on the Boards of Directors of the food processing companies are on the Boards of Directors of the pharmaceutical companies?
My blueberry foraging skills have improved with six years living in the country. First year 4 hours for less than 1/4 cup.
Last year 2 hours for a whole cup. You half to beat the bears to them. And watch for bears while picking.
I have planted a few bushes in my yard. Nothing yet, but hoping it works out better in the long run over my foraging.
I would be dead if I need to rely on foraging. I rely on the meat in the freezer instead.
My caveman ancestors must not have had green thumbs, only diet that has been sustainable for me is meat heavy. Wish people would stop treating nutrition and diets like politics.
Everything is political to people of a certain type.
Cavemen weren't farmers. They were hunter-gatherers.
What you eat today has nothing to do with what they are then.
Climate activism is one of a number of reasons for the anti meat rhetoric because of methane emissions. Absolute nonsense to be sure. Love a great steak. Stay well and healthy. 👍
Vegan groups get massive funding due to the earning potential of the ultra processed products. It is very hard to become a billionaire producing beef.
It’s not political. It’s tribal. And you are just as guilty of this as anybody. You can tell by your cock sure attitude that meat is good. You’re in the meat tribe. You’re not open minded. Therefore you’re being just as “political” about nutrition as anyone else. What you really mean is “ I wish people would believe what I believe and get on board and not challenge my opinions on things.” Everyone get into your tribe because your tribe is right because it’s YOUR tribe.
So if you really want to see this change why don’t you start by doing it yourself?
Thanks Mike. I would also point out that people living in the Levant in prehistory certainly had a different diet than someone living in the Great Northern forests.
Vegans can eat whatever they want, but they need to stop telling everybody else what they can eat.
How about you stop harming animals and this wouldn't be a issue ?
They will tell you it’s not about food, it’s about ethics… -ideology, cult etc.-
@@aagfnv Of cause they would veganism isn't a diet .
@@julienfroidevaux1143 what ? plants also have life , its unethical to eat them too 😂
@@julienfroidevaux1143yet you keep ignoring animals that YOU kill by eating only vegetables. An inconvenient truth. Animals die no matter what you're eating.
humans ate plants for 1 reason - we already killed and ate all the animals in the area. it happened everywhere we went. we are facultative carnivores. plants were starvation food when we were starving. 4+ MILLION years. 15,000 years ago was yesterday
nope, they eat it for health
I believe it's the other way around.humans back then ate mostly plants,because animals aren't as easy to catch & prepare for consumption as gathering plants & preparing them to eat.when humans ate most of the edible plants in an area,they were competing with the animals for consuming the plant life,while also eating some of the animals they were able to catch.so the animals would move towards other areas where the plant life was more abundant...constant nomadic life like animals.but always gravitating where there was water & plant life.
Wrong...humans ate plants WHILE HUNTING....because if you're out hunting for 6 hours and you can grab some snacks that just grow for free....that's a wise choice.
100% correct
@@soez_strg6166 Not for health but medicine maybe. If sick.
Should the focus of ancestral diets, which varied greatly depending on climate and environmental availability factors, really be a meat vs. vegetable argument? Perhaps it would be more constructive to focus instead on what ancient ancestors absolutely did NOT eat. Such as anything GMO, refined sugar, highly processed grains, bleached enriched anything, herbicides, pesticides, seed oils... the list is far too long for this comment section but I've got the gist of it across here. Diets don't need dogmatism. A standardized diet will only work for standardized people which, to my knowledge, don't exist.
The focus shouldn’t be an ancestral diet at all. Period. It tells us nothing. What we need is health outcome data. Evolution via natural selection isn’t trying to make you live a long and healthy life. All it does is select against traits that severely hinder your ability to replicate your genes.
So analyzing what our ancestors did only tells us that such behavior was good enough to get to reproductive age and have kids. It does not imply that such behavior will get you to 100 without nursing care. It very well could mean you die at 65 from heart disease.
If your goal is to live to 90 and be healthy the whole way you are outside the bounds of what evolution “cares” about.
What we need is health outcome data, like we have with smoking. Nobody cites natural selection to argue for or against smoking. We shouldn’t be doing it with food either.
Nobody wants to actually read Darwin though. They just act out tribal instincts and will say whatever they think sounds good to prove that thier tribe is right.
Humans also didn't eat any of the modern cultivars of plant foods. Wild grains, fruits, etc tend to be smaller and have less carbs. That is why pre-agricultural humans ate so few plants. It was hard to get much nutrition from them. They were seasonal foods as available or survival foods during hard times. Try to survive on only local, seasonal wild plants in your area and you'll likely starve to death before long. But you could thrive on nothing other than wild animal foods, assuming you know how to hunt, trap, and fish.
@@MarmaladeINFP true, also in commercial agriculture plants are selected and grown for maximum production and tonnage yield per land acre and not for nutritional content whatsoever
Israel is a crappy example. It’s very resource-challenged. I find it funny when I see the imagery of Jesus with lambs in a green pasture that looks like a set for a lucky charms commercial; literally no part of Israel looks like that, or ever has. Or the cornucopia imagery, not only is it a pagan object, it’s often depicted as brimming with fruits and vegetables that are not grown there, some from continents not discovered in biblical times. Dates, pomegranates, figs, olives, apples, grapes, grain, sunchokes, not much else. Feedlots weren’t typically a thing, shepherds had to traverse long journeys just for their livestock to have bits to graze along the way. It should go without saying that meat was scarce in a region like that.
Man, I’m so beyond tired of vegans yelling over their juicer with more horsepower than my muscle car how veganism is the most ancient ancestral diet on earth🤦🏻♀️
Up until agriculture era, humans didnt have carbs and sugar on a regular daily basis. The amount is very limited in number and only in cerrain seasons and area. So mostly humans depended on hunting, hence more meat than plants
And during the agriculture era grains were seasonal for a lot of folks. i.e. industrial elevators were not a thing, and there were no means of transporting grains safely.
We evolved in a tropical climate like other great apes - plenty of fruit and vegetation year-round. Our AMY1 gene increases salivary amylase and greatly improves starch digestion. That sets us apart from other great apes and made us human.
@@aagfnv - Yeah. For most of agriculture, grains weren't a dependable food. They simply gave some extra calories. But they weren't a staple for most populations. And often they were stored for hard times. They were a backup food. Not something to be eaten daily with every meal.
@ ebirch90 - I dream of a day when most people are informed. In the wild, plant foods are seasonal. And these seasons are often short, often with long periods with few plant foods at all.
For example, even near the equator, fruit is typically only available for 2-3 months. The fruit in the tropics, like bananas and pineapples, have been as altered from their original wild form as have grains.
Yes, humans have the capacity to digest carbs. That is because humans evolved from primates that once ate more fruits. But that was millions of years ago.
@@MarmaladeINFP "For example, even near the equator, fruit is typically only available for 2-3 months."
This is false. In tropical regions near the equator, different fruit species can be available throughout the year due to the continuous growing season. The diversity of plant species means that while any single fruit species may have a limited season, other fruits will be available at different times.
Omnivores makes sense.
Meat heavy makes sense.
Only need to be 70% meat for technical carnivore.
We were moving away from vegitarian because shorter intestines.
We had to eat anything to survive.
High stomach acidity to be able to eat anything including carrion.
Neanderthals had plants detected in their teeth too.
Yet they were carnivorous.
We are obligate hyper-carnivore but we choose to be an oppurtunistic oxymorons🤣
Humans are omnivores. Our digestive tract and teeth prove this without a shadow of a doubt. We'd eat whatever we could find mostly, though it was when we started getting a more meat based diet that our brains got bigger and our cognitive abilities improved immensely.
@@powerguiller - We are obligate hyper-carnivores in the sense that without plenty of animal foods humans become malnourished, stunted, and sickly. But one can survive for a time as a skinny and weak shadow of a human like John McDougall did.
Been to the US 6 times and could not eat the bread and pastries with its high sugar content. Also, access to healthy food was tricky. Love the people though. 👋🏻🇦🇺
Thanks. Too bad that the American people are so misled.
Unfortunately our food needs to be a lot healthier . I wish it had the same European standards.
I went to Lebanon and their pastries were just as bad, if not worse.
@@rogersepedacan’t agree more
@@JillCao we have ingredients that no living thing should consume. I wish someone would make it law to change this .
It would have been nearly impossible to obtain all the nutrients a human needs from the plants available in any region never mind North Africa. Most people are ignorant of the fact that probably NONE of the plants we eat today existed back then in the current form, being small bitter or sour and in small quantities and more importantly NOT LOCALLY AVAILABLE. Not all plants will grow everywhere. Most need very specific conditions such as soil type, temperature range etc.
At best, these people were likely either supplementing their diet or at worst (most likely) eating to survive due to lack of anything else. Lets face it, they died eating plants ;) Most animals that are herbivores actually eat fibre and nothing else and their gut bacteria produce saturated fat and the protein comes from the dead bacteria. This is the diet of cows and gorillaz etc and most ruminant and hind gut fermenters. Humans mostly eat non fiberous plants like tubers because of the directly available carbohydrates but unless you farm them, there are never enough growing wild to satisfy nutritional needs. Folks should try growing all their own food and will quickly realize that without modern farming methods including everything from plough to fertilizer and pesticide we cannot thrive on plants. And if you don't use pesticide (even food labelled organic uses it) then the bugs will eat everything. I challenge you. If you live in a coldish climate you might be lucky, but cats and plagues of locust were not uncommon in Egypt for no reason.
Can they get the teeth from the worker slaves when the Pharoh switched them to to a vegan diet?
That might be interesting.
I'll bet you that if you spend a little time on the Dark web, you can get your hands on some "slave teeth"....hahaha....enough tk make a necklace!
My ancestors were to lazy to plant a garden they had to be Carnivores .
If they were carnivores they weren’t probably that lazy LOL 😂
The correct definition of an omnivore is an organism that can sustain life on more than one trophic level. It does not mean that they thrive on "a little of this, and a little of that". Get educated, please!
Exactly. And humans cannot thrive on plants alone. This is what makes us facultative carnivores.
@@JulioMacarenawhat are you basing this claim on? Have you done studies that show this? Or are you just saying stuff that sounds good to bolster your tribal world view?
@CarlYota humans cannot eat only plants in natural form and survive. There is no B12, for starters.
@@JulioMacarena - It's funny that the ignorant will challenge you on your informed statement. But instead of being dismissive, they could spend their time educating themselves.
@@CarlYota B12
There’s a study out there that supports every theory.
Especially if you twist it hard enough.
It's just like the covid sh0t; if people refuse to do research and just want to believe the vegan/vegetarian lies (and ruin their health) --LET THEM.
Love it. I understand food-elimination diets work for some but for thr majority being omnivore is awesome.
Then why has health deteriorated since people ate less meat.
6:00 so isotope analysis says meat for protein, and researchers say starchy plants to get cavities...
Fruits and vegetables were not as abundant and were not shipped from across the world for year round eating.
I don't get how so few people seem to understand a point as simple as this. Do people really think the food in their grocery store represents an evolutionary-consistent diet?
People had no food. They ate whatever they managed to find.
Native Americans from where I’m at didn’t really have to hunt because they walk down to the shore and gather all the fish, shellfish they could consume. But they did hunt for game too needing skins and other products.
West coast of BC. Mostly seafood. They got a special fish oil they traded with others on the interior. And a little hunting on the trip of course. CBC, before being totally corrupted by the WEF agenda did a documentary based on a study going on their.
Dr. Wortman was in charge of running it.
A civilization that was largely built around corn, and the three sisters
We didn't eat grains until a couple thousand years ago.
Mozambique, Africa: Starch grains found on ancient stone tools at the Ngalue cave site in Mozambique indicate that early humans were processing wild sorghum around 100,000 years ago
Were you alive for all of human history to verify these beliefs of yours?
@@ebirch90 doesn't mean it was eaten. Could have been used for shelter
By the late Stone Age humans had already wiped out all the mega fauna When we developed spears the ave weight of a mammal on earth fell from 100kg to 10kg
False information, human population also droped at younger dryas.
Yes everything died out…
Megafauna were definitely large. A single kill could feed a band of humans for months or longer. But it wasn't only meat. Megafauna were as blubbery as whales. And could you imagine the nutrient-density in the bone marrow, brains, and organ meats.
thank you for your service ❤ people are confused and mislead by many well intended people ❤ aloha from big island 🏝️
Would humans have a multi-chambered digestive system similar to a cow ( megafauna) if we were designed to eat vegetarian ? I was shocked to find out that human stomach acid is stronger than the wolf's. I think we're at least 75% Carnivore.
Do bonobos and chimps have multi-chambered digestive systems? And before you say it, insects and small animals make up a miniscule part of their diet, and they only resort to such when other plant-based foods are scarce.
Why are people so confused in US the original inhabitants lived on buffalo on prairie and in alaska lived on wild game haha yes omnivores is correct we eat meat and plants
This study only identifies that specific population at that specific point in time. It cannot extrapolate to any other population. Also, 4000 years isn't long enough ago. These people were unlikely to be wholly pre-agricultural which makes the conclusions drawn highly questionable.
That was precisely the period after the megafauna die-off and the shift toward cultivating plants.
We’re indigenous Alaskans eating a lot of veggies?
Rarely. Only in summer and if the hunt failed.
I had serious bloating and other gastro problems, multiple testing with no diagnosis. Began research and ended up with an all fatty meat diet. Almost eliminated all symptoms and other positive things resulted like loss of bodily inflammation. Haven't ate a vegetable in two and a half years.
The time period for this research does nothing to debunk the other 3 million years worth of data we have showing humans and hominids ate a 90% or thereabouts meat based diet (carnivore).
There is no such data. Our closest primate relatives, the chimps, eat a 6-10% meat diet.
4-2 million years ago - Australopithecus afarensis ("Lucy"), had a diet that included a mix of fruits, leaves, seeds, nuts, tubers, and possibly small animals. Dental morphology and wear patterns, as well as isotopic analyses, suggest they consumed a combination of C3 plants (typical of wooded environments) and C4 plants (associated with more open, grassy environments).
Looking at the period after the megafauna die-off and treating that as most of human evolution would be dishonest.
@@MarmaladeINFPThe general timeframe for the extinction of many megafaunal species is around 10,000 to 15,000 years ago, which coincides with the end of the Pleistocene epoch and the beginning of the Holocene epoch...........
Y'all ever eaten a crab apple, a fruit unmodified by humans. You won't eat too many of them!
Id love to see you debate Bart Kay about us being omnivores. 🍿
Bart Kay, the dude who eats an omnivore diet?
15,000 years ago is too close to the mass extinction of mega-fauna and the dawn of agriculture to be considered truly ancestral. Radio isotope studies from before this confounding factor have already been done and confirmed we’re obligate carnivores (when available) but of course we’re somewhat flexible thanks to our omnivorous ancestors, you don't lose a feature unless there’s evolutionary pressure to do so. Worth noting that true herbivores have gut structures and microbes that turn fiber into fatty acids and amino acids so even they don't live off carbs, which we of course lack.
Additionally, fruit makes much more sense in an evolutionary context as a drug, in this case fructose which is 5x sweeter than even glucose, and which is synthesized by plants to manipulate animals into transporting and fertilizing their seeds. There's nothing about that transaction that requires fruit to be healthy, it just can't be deadly, otherwise the animals wouldn't make it far and that would limit the spread of the species. It also needs to trigger a release of neurotransmitters like any other drug to get repeat customers.
It's well understood that fructose is even more damaging to blood vessels and decreases mitochondrial health. Carbs are just long chains of sugar, less bad maybe, but not optimal.
All that being said, live your life, have treats if you like, enjoy your time on this earth. Just don't start ingesting species inappropriate food on a regular basis because some obviously biased group produced a flawed study with the aim of keeping the unhealthy status-quo.
To ommit such a basic and important fact seems either ignorant or dishonest. How was the prior million years of evolution not relevant to the discussion? How was most of the Paleolithic era diet of blubbery megafauna not significant?
I’d be interested to see a set of geography-specific isotope analyses lined up on a chart and broken down by food groupings. It seems only logical that-if we set all the BS food politics aside-so much would have depended on *where* a group of people lived. The diets of equatorial folk would have differed quite a bit from those in higher latitudes.
They were free to roam the earth which where they lived.
Part of my ancestors are Irish, which have the highest celiac rates in the world. A trace of gluten and I am down for a week. However, I do great on dairy and meat.
The Inuit were very healthy until western foods were introduced. Then diabetics and related diseases went threw the roof.
And even in different areas of Africa the diet varies from mostly animal based to mostly plant based.
I like your idea. Especially if it is set up to be added to as more data becomes available. We could learn a lot.
Why not? But I'd bet it would show a very high reliance on animal foods first and foremost, and some plants.
@@hugoanderkivi I think you’re right. Meat was probably the default and plants were survival food. Hunt went bad? Ok…guess we have to eat some roots and greens for a while, kids.
@@dawnelder9046 According to the DNA tests, my ancestry is around 80% northern British Isles. Rough split of half/half between the Munster region of Ireland and the Argyll region of Scotland. The remainder of my line comes from Belgium and the Netherlands.
So for me, meat, fish, eggs, and dairy work beautifully. Fruits and vegetables are iffy, with some mixed experiences. But grains are a nightmare-I blow up like a balloon within a few short months and my GI tract is a mess. Took me a long time to learn this through trial and error, but now that I know, there’s no going back to those foods.
😂DR AL DANENBERG A CARNIVORE… died at like 75…
You people are a carnivore channel that can’t ignore the facts that plants are good for you… necessary…
I’m done… this is sad
We thrive on animal products..
The way I see plants is that, plants are inferior source of nutrients and energy than meat, so when meat is available, we don't need plants. We can however tolerate plants when we don't have enough meat. Today, we have so much meat availability so there is no need to eat plants.
The same was true during most of the Paleolithic era. But then the megafauna died off. This study is looking at that period of meat scarcity that led humans to agriculture.
Well, we should read more.
"Dr McDougall pursued a healthcare career after suffering from a stroke aged 18. He was left with a lifelong disability as a result of the stroke,"
So, his having had a stroke at age 18 is why he was so skinny, weak, and sickly looking more than a half century later? That must've been one helluva stroke!
@@MarmaladeINFP it was just an important variable, that is the only thing I wanted to say, that's all.
This takes no account of optimal diet. People would eat what they could get, which may well not have been what they would have preferred. Also, given the location and the fact that it was only 15,000 years ago, early agriculture may have been evolving there. Real paleo is beyond 20,000 years ago. HomoSapiens have been around for at least 250,000 years. What were they eating?
Hyper omnivores. Ate everything. There is no way that hunter gatherers were able to scrounge up more edible plants than meat in the long term.
Even a greater bulk of wild plant foods is less essential nutrition than a smaller amount of animal foods. That is because wild plants are largely inedible fiber. And they lack numerous essential nutrients. There is a reason most humans have always prioritized animal foods. It's the most nutrition for the least effort.
15000 years ago people ate anything to survive. This study doesn’t say how good or bad that food was for humans . In 15000 years research will show that people of 20th century ate a lot of sugar and processed food. Does it mean sugar is really good for our health
Confused about the location, the study say Morocco which is no where near Israel. Humans may of under estimated how long ago we started to become omnivores with plant agriculture. If the same result where 30,000 year ago well that would be interesting but for me to state that human are naturally omnivores you have to prove it with evidence for more than 100,000 years.
1500BCE or 2,000BCE tells us nothing about the ancestral diet...Go back 8,000+ yrs BP.
Why Rome imperium colapse? Maybee because free bread in Rome and industrial farming in Egypt?
And a Stable Isotope test can show what was eaten through their life. Which on early man, show 99% animal proteins.
We eat what is available. back then food is scarse or hard to acquire it takes a lot of work. we could not be picky eaters.
And this tells us absolutely nothing about how to achieve good health outcomes at an age way beyond what evolution tends to care about. Once you’ve replicated your genes you more or less a useless vessel that has already served its purpose. From natural selections point of view anyway.
That’s why the ancestral diet arguments are stupid. What we need is health outcome data. We don’t make claims about smoking by saying our ancestors did or did not do it. Or that evolution designed us to do or not do it. It’s a dumb argument only made by people who haven’t, and probably couldn’t, read Dawkins.
They ate whatever they could find lool
people are dumb that think this age of abundance was the norm just look at the chinese they eat everything that moves or doesn't
Here is what we have in common with true herbavores:
Our liver makes all the glucose we need.
We both get sick eating sugars and starches.
John McDougal had a stroke at aged 18 which impacted his life somewhat
Yes. A young girl I work with had a few before age 20. She was plant based. But I do not think Adventist like John McDougal.
Switched to veganism after the strokes. Had open heart surgery in her late 20s.
Such a horrible diet for growing bodies.
@@dawnelder9046 - The thing is McDougall wouldn't likely have been so skinny, weak, and sickly looking a half century after his stroke if he had been eating an animal-based diet that whole time.
No cave paintings of salads.
Also the thing people don’t know is that agriculture was used to deed the animals we ate
Gorillas have one stomach, how do they do it 😂😂😂 “we are not ruminants”… wow… got em😂😂😂😂… many herbivorous are not
Gorillas eat their 💩to obtain a lot of their nutrients, I’ll pass, thanks.
Gorillas have massive guts and long digestive tracts. Humans don't. The digestive system of humans is in between that of an alpha predator and a carrion eater. And the acidity of the human stomach is higher than many predators like wolves. Our teeth are also designed for tearing meat. Would you like any further education?
Just b/c our ancestors ate plants doesn't mean they were beneficial: fructose was just as detrimental then as it is now. Plants were likely ingested b/c meat was unavailable, and humans introduced plants, minerals, spices, and fermentation out of necessity.Thus, our bodies learned to detoxify, absorb, and convert select phytonutrients, and were/are only able to do so when a meat-based diet allows for these neutralizing processes to counteract the poisonous antinutrients. Fruit gave our ancestors liver damage, and greens destroyed kidneys with oxalates in the past just as it does now.
The period under study was after the megafauna died off and right before agriculture. The prior million years of evolution consisted of a mostly meat-based diet.
@@MarmaladeINFP The Agricultural Revolution has been the downfall of Mankind
Today's plants aren't yesterday's.Also, man is not an omnivore he's an adaptovore.
The big problem is the animals today for the most part are the same as in the past maybe more fat today. Plants on the other hand have been altered that they are no where near what they use to be. Plants have a lot more sugar and starch than before. The only way humans would benefit from carrying that much fat as most have now is the lived in the sea. I remember when an apple was sour without all the sugar they have today. Too much gene tampering to compare today's food with food from the past. Just look at the birth rate today in most developed countries and say diet don't have something to do with it.
Actually, animals aren't more fat today. During most of the Paleolithic era, the favorite food of humans was megafauna. They were as blubbery as whales.
2:40 NO. Survive, for a while yes. But that's not thriving.
If people want to get benefit fromPaleo diet, they also need to be physically active like people in that era.
Two things. That advice applies to everyone on any diet. Humans were evolved to be active, not sedentary. The other point is that, actually, studies of hunter-gatherers shows they aren't all that intensely active. It's more that they move around a lot, not sitting in one position for hours.
this is the problem with human brains, IQ is getting lower and lower and AI is getting stronger, this guy is talking about diets of people thousands of years ago across the world like his great great relative told him, right now we just do not know what is going on in current wars or other things...current things we do not and this guy is talking about things centuries ago..that also of diets??? I know AI will take over shortly for sure....
Seasonal is how I eat,went back to how we ate in my childhood. Treats only for birthdays and major holidays
I like Tuesdays show and moxcience products
Gosh, you sound exactly like me.
My kids hated it.
That's how we ate. Only cakes on a birthday and chocolate only rarely. Sodas very rare.
Good point that the fruit and vegetables are not the same but also it probably depends on where we lived ☺️
I believe longevity has a lot to do with genetics
The meat we consume is probably lower in nutrients too. Depends on what the animals graze on.
A farmer I know refuses to eat bacon because he knows what the animals consume during their short lives.
I get organic, pasture-raised bacon and pork.
these vegans will always take things out of context for their own sake. Embarrassing
I am sure our ancestors are anything they could get their hands on.
They ate what they could get their hands on.
I can’t believe we are still fighting over this. Let them eat to be weak and frail and we eat to be strong and healthy. Eventually they won’t be here for us to worry about. 👍
This isn’t true at all. I agree that fighting about it is dumb. Be we are evolved to be extremely tribal primates so the fighting will continue.
The truth is every modern diet is good enough to get you to middle age and have lots of children. Therefore it’s all acceptable by evolution’s standard. Natural selection cannot alter this because if it works to replicate genes then it’s good enough. All it can do is select out traits that fail to reproduce the genes.
Unless you are implying that the strong are going to murder the weak. But in the age of technology that’s not gonna happen either.
I don’t care if carnivores or vegans or omnivores want to believe what thier tribe tells them to. But when dumb people who would fall asleep two pages into Dawkins start erroneously throwing around evolutionary concepts to prove thier point, I get annoyed.
Another obvious flaw in us somehow always eating a bit of everything is our digestion. Eating a plate full of meat, fat, carbs and fibre would not have happened. If you killed an animal all of it was eaten. If you didn’t have meat then you’d eat whatever you could find. If it was fruit season you’d eat them until you burst.
Nobody was eating three square meals a day or planning a 7 course meal. That made digestion far easier and it was less likely to activate the Randal cycle as happens when eating fat and carbs together.
The difference is fruit season, even near the equator, typically is only 2-3 months. Most plant foods are seasonal. Whereas most animal foods are available year round. So, eating whatever is available tends to lead to more animal foods, at least until agriculture.
Not to mention early humans preferred animal foods, as the scientific evidence indicates. But of course that changed with the megafauna die-off. The study in this video describes that later period of meat scarcity right before the agricultural revolution.
@@MarmaladeINFP yep and wild fruit nowhere near like todays. If we ate fruit exclusively our teeth would have been rotten from acid and sugars, never seen any reports of skulls with no teeth left.
In Spain 10k years ago just across from Morocco where these plant poo’s were found they found human bone fragments in fossils poo. In other words cannibalism, so fits in with declining prey numbers.
You forget maybe McDougall took the Jab!
He has been ill for a good 10 years. You can see the dementia in interviews in his early 70s. And a fall in the house from standing was enough to break bones when just past 70.
I mean, we're honestly glorified scavengers. Inuits eat rotten whale that's been cured. Certain places in Cambodia eat fermented shrimp paste. We literally eat what we had to. There are some crazy foods out there. We're opportunists at the core, in terms of diet.
If anything is not agreeing with you… get your gut right…
And you won’t have any problems…. Facts
This is the area that basically.invented agriculture 10k years ago. The idea that people in the levant were stone age hunter gatherers is farcical in the extreme. Also at least 500 years into the bronze age. We also have plemty of evidence of health declines due to deficient agriculture at these times. People CAN eat plants and grains but it is in no way THRIVING. COULD IS.NOT SHOULD
Is there real evidence the food supply in the US is markedly worse than Europe? The US has better food quality overall so I'm skeptical.
I'll bet it also depended on the hunting skills of your ancestral tribe (including tool making, ability to know where the game is, track them down, and bring home the bacon ;^). I am grateful my grandfather was a hunter and fisher and pass these skills down the line. Speaking of pesicides, check out Maready's book The Moth in the Iron Lung.
The time period in this study is RIGHT before the agricultural revolution. Indeed, the study describes it as “during the transition to agriculture”. And of course - they were eating the most unadulterated sources of plants possible - prior to selective breeding and gmo and herbicides and nutrient-depleted soils etc etc. We no longer have access to the plant foods they were eating.
The consensus I’ve seen seems to be that human ancestors were predominantly hunters for 2M years, and began transitioning to more and more plant foods and agriculture starting 85,000 years ago, snd especially 12,000 years ago as agriculture really kicked off and began being a main source of food.
Now it’s Doritos los tacos.
Really appreciate the myriad advice on this channel. But keto carnivore is an absolute godsend for SO many people. It seems to be the optimal diet for a lot. Probably some plants are fine for most - but it seems the evidence is pointing to us being adapted to thrive mostly on meat.
It is irrelevant to try to figure out when humans started to eat meat to survive harsh winters. Fact is that we are original plant eaters like all our relatives the primates. We should stop abusing animals unnecessary and destroying our planet, don’t you think? Why still trying to find excuses and be blind for the obvious things.
How is plant agriculture better? You need a lot of pesticides , insecticide, chemical fertilizers. Plus without ruminant animals to renew the topsoil you would eventually not be able to grow plants.
@@janedough6575 plant agriculture is not better, but it should be better. We should not use pesticides, fertiliser or manure, damaging soil and groundwater, rivers and oceans. 70-90% of agriculture is to make crops for feeding farm animals. So by stop eating meat, we already reduce up to 90% of the damage and monocrops and deforestation. Then we have to teach farmers to use compost instead of manure. It is just a matter of education as most people think we need manure to grow plants, that’s how bad habits work. People don’t know better. All being conditioned. Thinking breastfeeding from a cow is healthy and natural. It is difficult to change bad habits, even when they are damaging our environment and our knowledge that rape, slavery, exploitation and murder is wrong. Especially women should fight for the right of other females being abused every day in a holocaust, being raped, children kidnapped and breast milk forced being stolen and finally being murdered. Don’t you think?
@@Veganasty No. I think you’re completely delusional and live in a dream world. I’m too old for that.
Your channel is amazing❤ keep up the good work of breaking down these analysis and explain. There is a lot of nonsense publications in the academia with full of vegan bias.
Looks like vegans create a lot of bullshit (or veganshit?)
Europeans also experience the same problems from wheats, vegetables, etc. as Americans. Same Metabolic issues. Pesticides are sprayed on food in Europe:
I love the simplicity of our zoo's Dinosaur exhibit. They have placards showing how plant-eating dinosaurs' eyes are on the sides of their heads so they can be watching for predators. Carnivore predator dinosaurs' eyes are on the front of their heads so they can hunt their prey.
Not much has changed. Horses, cows, rabbits, etc. all have eyes on the side to watch out for predators. Lions/big cats, bears, dogs and humans all have eyes in the front. Exceptions are many primates for sure...but perhaps they are supposed to be predators and have chosen to forego their true nature.
Plants are toxic for those not designed for that kind of digestion.
Gut fermentation for a non ruminant animal is less than ideal.
There are plenty of human societies whose teeth had dental caries once they began to rely on agricultural foods for sustenance.
Looking at bones of ancient humans may show they ate plants but it will not tell you why or if they were eating that because they had to in order to survive when animal foods were scarce.
Veggie made me sick . After 35 years i am now carnivor . Never felt better . Soy should be banned .
In fairness, McDougall did have a stroke at 18, it's possible that contributed to his decline, no telling if vegan helped him actually live longer or not.
29:01 Oxalate content is reduced when food is cooked. Consuming more water and calcium also reduce the negative effects of a potentially high oxalate intake. This information always seems to be left out. 🤔
I think a meat rich diet is king. Just look at the body of a vegan as a majority compared with yourself and Shaun Baker. Says it all.
c'mon … the 'evidence' offered by the new study is rather ridiculous. teeth were an important tool in prehistoric man, and they were utilized for more than just eating. chewing is a mechanical process useful for crafting purposes for parts of clothes, tools, weapons, practically everything that needed to be made softer and more elastic.
in addition, it is known that prehistoric man also cleaned his teeth, and they certainly did not do this with mammoth bones. in other words, just because something was in the mouth or left a mark in the tooth enamel does not necessarily mean that it was involved in the digestion; not everything in the mouth is necessarily food.
it is analogous to the claim that chewing gum, if some advanced civilizations were to investigate us, is the food on which numerous generations of humans were raised. the 'new study' is barely an unconvincing speculation, with the only role of being used in the propaganda of the plant-based ideology, not really worth anyone's time.
I don't think ancient humans had the luxury to turn down a meal. I don't think ancient humans did much vegan "virtue signaling" back then.
Food sources probably varied seasonally in ancient times. More meat when hunting was good and more plant in their natural seasons.
God accepted Abel’s offering and rejected Cain’s. What more do you need to know? 😂
I’ve heard that methylation tests can help in understanding what your body does and does not process well. Are they really that useful?
We had some wild apple trees in the field next to our house.
The township came and cut them down as if they were a hazard.
So no more free, untainted apples for us common folk😮💨
Good luck getting 2000+ calories everyday in the wild without meat.
If the hunt was unsuccessful, or animals are in short supply, you gotta eat something, and that something is plant matter.
Animal meat and fat is nutrient dense and fruit and veggies are available seasonally fattening humans up for winter