Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are we really supposed to eat animals? Fruit seems a more natural choice

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
    I'm saying that in primitive times man would have been surrounded by fruit....not now. Why wouldn't we have? We would have lived in climates that were conducive for it and fruit would have been the easiest and most delightful thing for us to eat.
    No, we're more surrounded by fruit now because we cultivate. But still, with all the extra fruit, if you wanted to live as a fruitatarian in the village, you'd die of starvation before reaching adulthood. I spent enough time in my families villages (in tropical climate south pacific) to know this.

    Again, I suggest you go out in the world see how disconnected most westerners are to tribal/primal life.
    I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for everybody, and I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for a person through every stage of their life

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Sweet Leilani View Post
      No, we're more surrounded by fruit now because we cultivate. But still, with all the extra fruit, if you wanted to live as a fruitatarian in the village, you'd die of starvation before reaching adulthood. I spent enough time in my families villages (in tropical climate south pacific) to know this.

      Again, I suggest you go out in the world see how disconnected most westerners are to tribal/primal life.
      This is what I'm looking for. The higher consciousness "crap" comes with me trying to figure out if humans were meant to eat animals or if we just got it wrong. I'm trying to figure out why there wouldn't be enough fruit to feed us all in primitive times.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
        : Primal man would be in some warm place (where humans are meant to be) where there are lots of fruit trees and he'd eat lots of fruit because it is easy to get to and available in abundance. It's nicely packaged, satisfies his taste buds, doesn't need to be cooked, prepared or seasoned.
        Fruit is not necessarily widely available, it is seasonal and can take some effort to get to or process. For instant climbing trees or removing hard skin. Additionally fruits have a very low calorie density meaning you need to gather a lot of them in order to meet your calorie expenditure, which would take up many hours during the day. Some wild fruits are also far smaller and less calorie dense than the fruits of agriculture (strawberries, apples etc). The idea that homo sopiens at large had a mostly fruit diet is nonsense.

        I know primal man also ate meat, but could this not be considered human error? Like moving to cold climates? Money? War? Slavery? My point is, us humans have not always gotten it right (but in some instances there have been a few who have realized the error and fought to make great change).
        Moving to cold climates wasn't an error, no idea how you made that conclusion. War is natural when a species as diverse and as smart as man has differing ideologies. It isn't good, but its inevitable. There is nothing wrong with money either, it is simply a tool.

        Maybe we're supposed to use our unique higher consciousness as humans to evolve and see that we do not need to kill animals and burden our planet in order to be healthy. If one eats adequate calories in fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds there is no need to eat meat. We do not need all that protein. I use to stand behind the logic that there are essential fatty acids and essential amino acids, but no essential carbs. But this is because the human body is so resilient that it will make glucose from protein if you don't give it enough sugar. Why not just give it (natural) sugar? It will produce ketones to fuel the brain if you follow a very high fat/super low carb diet in order to not die. Why not just give it the natural sugar it needs to function? Fruit seems to be the perfect human food and a plant based diet can provide us with all the essential nutrients we need to thrive, so why not let the animals live their lives?
        Oh god, so much baloney in this last paragraph. Problems with an all fruit diet and what you said:
        -Lack of essential fatty acids
        -Lack of vitamins and minerals such as B12 and K2
        -Low calorie density
        -Fruits such as strawberries are extremely agriculturally intense to grow
        -Some land is not suitable for crop growth, so in fact having animals graze there is optimal
        -High sugar consumption may lead to health problems
        -Low protein which is unoptimal for athletes or people who want to keep fit
        http://lifemutt.blogspot.sg/ - Gaming, Food Reviews and Life in Singapore

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by AMonkey View Post
          Fruit is not necessarily widely available, it is seasonal and can take some effort to get to or process. For instant climbing trees or removing hard skin. Additionally fruits have a very low calorie density meaning you need to gather a lot of them in order to meet your calorie expenditure, which would take up many hours during the day. Some wild fruits are also far smaller and less calorie dense than the fruits of agriculture (strawberries, apples etc). The idea that homo sopiens at large had a mostly fruit diet is nonsense.

          I guess what I want someone to tell me is why there wouldn't have been ample wild fruit in primitive times?

          Oh god, so much baloney in this last paragraph. Problems with an all fruit diet and what you said:
          -Lack of essential fatty acids....a little Avocado?
          -Lack of vitamins and minerals such as B12 and K2...I take the B12 but have read we would have gotten it from dirt.
          -Low calorie density...You'd need to eat allot.
          -Fruits such as strawberries are extremely agriculturally intense to grow...Ok so not many strawberries then.
          -Some land is not suitable for crop growth, so in fact having animals graze there is optimal...unsuitable land would not be used for crop growth. Suitable land would be used
          -High sugar consumption may lead to health problems. It may not lead to health problems.
          -Low protein which is unoptimal for athletes or people who want to keep fit...Maybe your right, I eat beans and grains, but primal man wouldn't have cared about body image and muscles.
          ..
          Last edited by PrimalFish; 07-09-2013, 12:12 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Fruit is seasonal.... it grows well in spring and summer. What fruits and veggies grow well in winter in NY?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
              I'm saying that in primitive times man would have been surrounded by fruit....not now. Why wouldn't we have? We would have lived in climates that were conducive for it and fruit would have been the easiest and most delightful thing for us to eat.
              I'm not an anthropologist but I don't think this is the case. Maybe this 'Garden of Eden hypothesis' is the view in the vegan community? Was there anywhere in Africa, the Middle East, Europe or Asia where fruits grow (or grew) in sufficient abundance to support small communities of humans? I do agree though that our ancestors probably ate all of the fruit that they could find.

              Comment


              • #22
                Sorry dude, I meant 'crap' as in it's a crap thing to use for justification, not that consciousness itself is crap

                I understand what you're saying.. You're asking a bigger question about life and the universe, and how eating animals fits into it. Well there is very little truth that's universal, we each must find our own. The only way to find your own is to look within. And if that means for you that you feel more connected to all-that-is by not eating animals, then that's the right path for you. But being connected to all-that-is also means allowing others to follow their own path and not judge or condemn.

                You be as you be, and let others be as they be
                I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for everybody, and I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for a person through every stage of their life

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
                  I guess what I want someone to tell me is why there wouldn't have been ample wild fruit in primitive times?
                  My understanding is that during the last glacial maximum most of northern Europe was covered in ice and. Africa and the middle east were too dry (like Sahara desert dry) to support humans. Humans lived in refugia, primarily in what is now Italy and southern Spain. What was the climate like during this time and afterwards? I don't know, but I suspect that it would have been temperate, with a long winter when there would have been little fruit and vegetation available. It was no garden of Eden. If you want to find out more I suggest you investigate ancient climates in Europe, the middle east, and asia starting from ~20,000 years ago, about the end of the last glacial maximum.

                  I think there is a population on a pacific island that subsists mainly on coconuts but those are relatively low in sugars and, as everyone here knows, high in fat.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I have read allot of primal articles that say it would be ridiculous to consider primal man ate allot of carbs. But it seems to me that primal man would have eaten mostly fruit (also some nuts/seeds, leafy greens, and yes meat,fish). I was hoping someone could show me the flaw in my following logic: Primal man would be in some warm place (where humans are meant to be) where there are lots of fruit trees and he'd eat lots of fruit because it is easy to get to and available in abundance. It's nicely packaged, satisfies his taste buds, doesn't need to be cooked, prepared or seasoned. Then he'd take a crap and disperse the seeds and more fruit trees would grow. It seems to me like fruit is the only thing that wants to be eaten and we have a symbiotic relationship with it. I know primal man also ate meat, but could this not be considered human error? Like moving to cold climates? Money? War? Slavery? My point is, us humans have not always gotten it right (but in some instances there have been a few who have realized the error and fought to make great change). Maybe we're supposed to use our unique higher consciousness as humans to evolve and see that we do not need to kill animals and burden our planet in order to be healthy. If one eats adequate calories in fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds there is no need to eat meat. We do not need all that protein. I use to stand behind the logic that there are essential fatty acids and essential amino acids, but no essential carbs. But this is because the human body is so resilient that it will make glucose from protein if you don't give it enough sugar. Why not just give it (natural) sugar? It will produce ketones to fuel the brain if you follow a very high fat/super low carb diet in order to not die. Why not just give it the natural sugar it needs to function? Fruit seems to be the perfect human food and a plant based diet can provide us with all the essential nutrients we need to thrive, so why not let the animals live their lives?
                    Translation:
                    I think you are all making stupid choices, and my vegan friends told me I get to go to cute fuzzy animal heaven if I follow their dogma. I've come back to this forum to help save you retards from all the meat you're eating. Not only that, but I've actually bought into the idea that we can live on magic, without protein, and still avoid brain shrinkage. I'm going to pretend that eating animals is a burden to our planet to justify my false religion. I'm also going to ignore all the dead vegan babies and 40-year-old vegans who look like 80-year-olds. I'm better than you because I have bought into a pile of stupid lies, and I'm here to act like I know something, when I'm actually just embarking on a confusing new malnutrition campaign.

                    You know who else has good vascularity? That Harley Durianrider monkey whose eyes are clearly receding into his head as his brain deflates. Go compare photos. His neural tissue is actually shrinking. Just because you are starving enough to see your veins doesn't mean you are healthy. Ethiopian kids also have great vascularity.







                    Last edited by Knifegill; 07-09-2013, 12:51 AM.
                    Crohn's, doing SCD

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I think you're right about early man and fruit in warmer climates, but I believe seafood like mollusks and other shellfish, along with tubers and insects also made up much of the diet. Diets varied by regions and seasons, but I do think animal products are essential for optimal health. We may be able to skate by on an all fruit diet, but is it really optimal? Not for the overwhelming majority!
                      | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                      It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. - Samuel Adams

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        As others mentioned, it takes a long time to harvest and consume fruits, and a lot of calories are used up in that process. You end up eating all day, and not many people can live on one area, especially since not all plants are edible fruit plants. I spent an hour yesterday, for instance, picking maybe two cups of berries--a lot of effort for not much food. Granted, they were small berries, and things like apples are faster to pick. But, they were also at standing height and all ripe and all near each other. Large fruits are not always in season, you have to climb to get most of them, and even for the large fruits you're competing with all the other animals for them (for example, my mom has three filbert trees, they all make filberts, and we've never had a single filbert to eat because the squirrels eat them all before they are mature).

                        One of the things that separates us from other primates is our ability to cook. You hunt and kill a large animal, cook it, and you can feed quite a few people for quite a few days, and you don't have to spend as much time chewing it because the cooking helps predigest it. That provided early humans the time to create societies, make weapons, and, well, be human.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Knifegill View Post
                          Translation:
                          I think you are all making stupid choices, and my vegan friends told me I get to go to cute fuzzy animal heaven if I follow their dogma. I've come back to this forum to help save you retards from all the meat you're eating. Not only that, but I've actually bought into the idea that we can live on magic, without protein, and still avoid brain shrinkage. I'm going to pretend that eating animals is a burden to our planet to justify my false religion. I'm also going to ignore all the dead vegan babies and 40-year-old vegans who look like 80-year-olds. I'm better than you because I have bought into a pile of stupid lies, and I'm here to act like I know something, when I'm actually just embarking on a confusing new malnutrition campaign.

                          You know who else has good vascularity? That Harley Durianrider monkey whose eyes are clearly receding into his head as his brain deflates. Go compare photos. His neural tissue is actually shrinking. Just because you are starving enough to see your veins doesn't mean you are healthy. Ethiopian kids also have great vascularity.







                          I eat lots of psuedograins and beans, so I haven't done a frutarian diet and I do get protein. I feel great, so I stand by a low-fat vegan diet (for me). I came hear with questions about what the fruit situation would have been like in primitive times. By more vascular, I mean more pumped then on low-carb...most people find that happens. Don't eat more animals just because I'm not eating any.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Don't eat more animals just because I'm not eating any.
                            Sorry, I have to now. Just remember that every time you eat, I'm eating three times as much meat as you (would have) from now on, for the rest of my life, just because you posted this thread. That way, you're actually responsible for 2/3 of the animals I'm eating. Tell your friends.
                            Crohn's, doing SCD

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
                              But it seems to me that primal man would have eaten mostly fruit (also some nuts/seeds, leafy greens, and yes meat,fish)
                              Modern hunter gatherers seem generally to rely more on starchy/fibrous tubers than fruit, but I see what you're saying. They tend not to live in optimal environments, but I can't imagine foraging strategy changing much in 50,000 years.

                              Originally posted by PrimalFish View Post
                              ... so why not let the animals live their lives?
                              Because they have super nutrient dense organs filled with cholesterol, retinol, vitamin K2 and CoQ10. I see nothing inherently unhealthful about a high protein, high carb, low fat, high cholesterol diet (that would be lean wild game/fish and their organs, fruits, tubers, legumes, whatever grains are available, nuts and seeds). Do you?

                              If you feel better now on a vegan diet, I'd say it's probably more a matter of carbohydrates than animals. My two cents.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by mike View Post
                                My understanding is that during the last glacial maximum most of northern Europe was covered in ice and. Africa and the middle east were too dry (like Sahara desert dry) to support humans. Humans lived in refugia, primarily in what is now Italy and southern Spain. What was the climate like during this time and afterwards? I don't know, but I suspect that it would have been temperate, with a long winter when there would have been little fruit and vegetation available. It was no garden of Eden. If you want to find out more I suggest you investigate ancient climates in Europe, the middle east, and asia starting from ~20,000 years ago, about the end of the last glacial maximum.




                                I think there is a population on a pacific island that subsists mainly on coconuts but those are relatively low in sugars and, as everyone here knows, high in fat.

                                Thanks for this response

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X