True, Raw Primal page 2

[brahnamin]

but instead of adressing my point of cooking being unhealthy, relatively recent, and not primal....
you attacked my wording.

I think I need to look elsewhere if I want an intelligent, academic discussion.

I also attacked your notion that we (early primal hunters) rejected calorie dense fat in favor of *lean* meat and even preferred salad to that when every hunter on the planet (human and critter) naturally goes for fat and offal first (politically handcuffed modern desert dwellers notwithstanding) but you didn't answer that.

As to the rest, you just need to bring intelligent, academic discussion if you expect the same in return. The fact is, a handy handful of people on this forum disagree with most if not all of your points and can point to solid scientific evidence to back ourselves. Most of what you are spouting is scaretactic crap that has long been debunked and as one of the first posters to reply to you pointed out to you we've heard it so many times already that most of us won't bother.

Do your own research as to why.

And if you are making *scientific* claims you do need to know the difference between the fossil record and the archaeological record. You sound like an ass otherwise and won't be taken seriously. Those who do espouse a raw diet as a preferred method of primal living are cringing to find you on their side today.

ETA - Animal fat does not have to be rendered to be eaten. But it's sure delicious to take the time.

[Nady]

You mean Steven Raichlen is wrong??? Oh noooooo, say it isn't so!

[Urban Forager]

It is very likely that paleolithic people were more scavengers than hunters, the meat and protein were actually gathered rather than hunted. This would mean that less energy was used satisfying their nutritional needs. In the case of large game there were plenty of other predators to take down game. The predators would then gorge themselves on the muscle meats. What was left was bones filled with fatty marrow and brains. It makes a lot more sense to wait until the predators are sated and resting and then simply go in either take what you want or eat it on the spot.

If you look at paleo folks as scavengers it really changes how we think of them living in close proximity to large predators. It also changes how we think of their social structure as any one can scavenge, male or female, young or old.

[PeaceCorpsCaveMan]

I think it goes without saying that "Primal" is a brand and it is essentially what Mark says it is. Given that, I don't think anyone would claim there is one absolute "Primal" diet. Mark's guidelines leave much open to interpretation and there are dozens of variations. I think what you are arguing is what the true diet of Paleolithic era people was and how to apply that to the modern world.

[sbhikes]

Wasn't there some recent archeological evidence uncovered that showed Neanderthals or perhaps it was a pre-human ancestor, used fire for cooking? Humans were not the first advanced primates to use fire for cooking.

[Inksplat]

In regards to hunting, its also pretty well accepted that hunting dogs have been used since the beginning of Humanity, and earlier to Neanderthals.

A pack of dogs can definitely turn the tide of a hunt.

[cori93437]

Wasn't there some recent archeological evidence uncovered that showed Neanderthals or perhaps it was a pre-human ancestor, used fire for cooking? Humans were not the first advanced primates to use fire for cooking.

Oh yes.
I was just simplifying.
Humans, as in Homo sapiens, have had fire and cooked for their entire evolutionary period as far as anthropological evidence can tell.
It sort of negates the "stuff shouldn't be cooked" line right off the top.

[Ellement]

Evidence That Human Ancestors Used Fire One Million Years Ago

[ToldUzo]

Humans were propably both scavengers, hunters, gatheres and (like this marvelous video shows) scare away'ers:
Three Men vs. Fifteen Hungry Lions - Human Planet, Grasslands, Preview - BBC One - YouTube

[brahnamin]

It is very likely that paleolithic people were more scavengers than hunters, the meat and protein were actually gathered rather than hunted. This would mean that less energy was used satisfying their nutritional needs. In the case of large game there were plenty of other predators to take down game. The predators would then gorge themselves on the muscle meats. What was left was bones filled with fatty marrow and brains. It makes a lot more sense to wait until the predators are sated and resting and then simply go in either take what you want or eat it on the spot.

If you look at paleo folks as scavengers it really changes how we think of them living in close proximity to large predators. It also changes how we think of their social structure as any one can scavenge, male or female, young or old.

Yeah, but archaeological evidence shows that they certainly didn't remain scavengers. And the evidence points to hunting tools and cooking (not just fire but actual cooking) much farther back than the OP is insisting. As someone pointed out this evidence points to Neanderthals using fire and hunting tools long before that as well.

Wherever we started, hunting and cooking and the ability to significantly alter our environment to serve our needs took us far from our scavenging roots.