inuit diet page 5

[Paysan]

Altho' I have been willing to try a taste of a lot of unusual things, I'll let the whales go on living. It is not necessary in my current climate and diet. But my takeaway message is still: eat as wild animals as possible. Eat the whole critter, not just steaks. Eat raw or fermented or boiled meat. Eat every ounce of fat and dip dried meat in melted fat or mix with pounded fat. Everything above survival eating is just dessert! ;-)

[twa2w]

"That's a lot of claims, many of them highly dubious, a lot of things you "don't recall", a lot of beliefs, and a startling paucity of references.
I'm not sure why the Inuit diet rubs people up the wrong way quite so much as to make that kind of thing necessary. "

Oh I could provide references but if you were at least somewhat open minded you could look for yourself. I must say, on the other hand, I have yet to see/find any solid scientific references on the benefits to the Inuit diet - almost all are anecdotal - and by explorers who for the most part were not scientists. It is easy to find the autopsies on the net if you look. Also easy to find the references to the supplements that were given to V.S. Question everything -
People seem to be afraid to accept any thing that will upset their paradigm. How many people for example research various religions and actually change religions? Most just accept the faith they were brought up in - you will find the same thing applies to most other stuff - every one accepts the dogma. I try to question every thing and try not to accept things at face value - I did the research on the Inuit diet and I have lived with and known Inuit. I believe the Inuit are the fringe - the people who got pushed out of better areas and had no choice but to adapt. If you had a choice would you voluntarily live in the Arctic. Not a chance.
I did my research - I couldn't find anything to convince that the Inuit diet was as healthy as other 'native diets' and in fact found a fair amount to convince me otherwise. I am on to other things - I still keep an open mind and read threads like this looking to see if something may come up that would make me question my original findings.

[JEL62]

I must say, on the other hand, I have yet to see/find any solid scientific references on the benefits to the Inuit diet - almost all are anecdotal - and by explorers who for the most part were not scientists. It is easy to find the autopsies on the net if you look. Also easy to find the references to the supplements that were given to V.S. Question everything - People seem to be afraid to accept any thing that will upset their paradigm. I did my research - I couldn't find anything to convince that the Inuit diet was as healthy as other 'native diets' and in fact found a fair amount to convince me otherwise. I am on to other things - I still keep an open mind and read threads like this looking to see if something may come up that would make me question my original findings.

Nice post.

It saddens me to see so many people hanging their diet on the Inuit... when by many accounts it wasn't really a healthy diet at all.

A necessary diet... but not necessarily healthy.

The longest lived peoples on earth have always had a high plant-based diet.

[Paysan]

Nice post.

It saddens me to see so many people hanging their diet on the Inuit... when by many accounts it wasn't really a healthy diet at all.

A necessary diet... but not necessarily healthy.

The longest lived peoples on earth have always had a high plant-based diet.

The longest-lived people on earth, at least according to modern researchers, have always lived in moderate temperatures summer and winter. Vilcabamba comes to mind. Even noting the scepticism over reported very aged records, I believe that not fighting extremes of temperatures will. perforce, enable year-round plant availability and less illhealth.
Sort of a chicken and egg question? Which came first?

[Paysan]

"That's a lot of claims, many of them highly dubious, a lot of things you "don't recall", a lot of beliefs, and a startling paucity of references.
I'm not sure why the Inuit diet rubs people up the wrong way quite so much as to make that kind of thing necessary. "

Oh I could provide references but if you were at least somewhat open minded you could look for yourself. I must say, on the other hand, I have yet to see/find any solid scientific references on the benefits to the Inuit diet - almost all are anecdotal - and by explorers who for the most part were not scientists. It is easy to find the autopsies on the net if you look. Also easy to find the references to the supplements that were given to V.S. Question everything -
People seem to be afraid to accept any thing that will upset their paradigm. How many people for example research various religions and actually change religions? Most just accept the faith they were brought up in - you will find the same thing applies to most other stuff - every one accepts the dogma. I try to question every thing and try not to accept things at face value - I did the research on the Inuit diet and I have lived with and known Inuit. I believe the Inuit are the fringe - the people who got pushed out of better areas and had no choice but to adapt. If you had a choice would you voluntarily live in the Arctic. Not a chance.
I did my research - I couldn't find anything to convince that the Inuit diet was as healthy as other 'native diets' and in fact found a fair amount to convince me otherwise. I am on to other things - I still keep an open mind and read threads like this looking to see if something may come up that would make me question my original findings.

This exchange got me interested in looking up a small subset of Inuit, found in Greenland. Here's the Amazon blurb for "The Greenland Mummies." Quote: publication Date: June 10, 1991
How did they die? Why were they buried together? What had been the nature of their culture and beliefs? How had they survived in the harsh Arctic climate? To solve this icy mystery, a team of archaeologists, historians, and medical specialists used modern, innovative investigative techniques. They carried out their detective work with keen scholarly curiosity, combined with respect for these people of the past. While many puzzles have been answered, others remain unsolved. The investigation has revealed that the younger child was buried alive at the age of only six months, while the other, two and a half years old, had been born with Down's syndrome. Analysis of the hair of the mummies revealed evidence of air pollution at levels similar to those of today. Speculating on reasons for a mass grave -- a form of burial the Inuit normally used only because of some catastrophe -- the researchers have reconstructed the possible events of the past. The contents of the grave shed light on the every-day life of these people, allowing the investigators to place this evidence within the larger context of Thule culture and knowledge of Inuit contact with the Norse settlements which dotted the outer margins of Greenland during the medieval era. The Greenland Mummies brings the compelling story of this fervent collaboration to the attention of the world. Not only does it provide a fascinating and insightful look into the life and culture of the Inuit in the fifteenth century, it offers an impressive testament to one of the most successful archaeological investigations ever conducted.
--This text refers to an alternate Hardcover edition. endquote
It seems that these particular Inuit had a lot of health problems wrapped up in one small area of 2 mass graves. No males were buried here, the youngest was buried alive, and only the eldest was unrelated to all the others. That they had contact with Norse neighbours was acknowledged. Pollution was as deadly then as it is now. The big mystery is still why they had been buried in that particular way and fashion. Just goes to show, no matter where we live or how, sooner or later, we all die of something.;-)

[otzi]

[QUOTE=twa2w;952479 I believe the Inuit are the fringe - the people who got pushed out of better areas and had no choice but to adapt. If you had a choice would you voluntarily live in the Arctic. Not a chance.
I did my research - I couldn't find anything to convince that the Inuit diet was as healthy as other 'native diets' and in fact found a fair amount to convince me otherwise. I am on to other things - I still keep an open mind and read threads like this looking to see if something may come up that would make me question my original findings.[/QUOTE]

Remember, though, that when the Inuit's ancestors first settled the north coast of Alaska, Canada, and Greenland, they walked across the Bering Land Bridge into a landscape much different than it is today. The climate was milder and large land mammals ruled the scene--saber-tooth tigers, camels, buffalo, wooly mammoths, cave bears, etc...The area north of the Alaska Range was one of the only non-glaciated places in the northern hemisphere, strangely enough. As the glaciers to the south retreated, these people migrated south and became North American Natives ('Indians'). Some stayed in the north and became Athabaskans, Eskimos, and Inuits. They had extensive trade networks with tribes in the south and traded ivory, whale oil, seal furs for inland goods like animal hides and implements. They even had slaves. Anyhoo--these guys did indeed thrive on a diet limited to mostly fish, seaweed, sea mammals, migratory fowls, and large land mammals (mainly caribou). There were numerous villages that became isolated over the years and starvation was the main wide-spread killer due to seasonal variations in sea-ice and migration of animal changes.

I guess I'm rambling, but the point is the Inuit weren't always living like they are today. They have a rich history and much has been lost to them over the millenia. The first immigrants into the arctic were probably the hardiest breed of homo ever to roam the earth--not just a bunch of fringe wanderers that managed to survive.

[Paysan]

Well, I finally received and read my copy of The Greenland Mummies. This detailed minutae of what they were like, even the speculation, is right down my alley. The book does not reveal the causes of death for all 8 buried in the two main graves under consideration. After all, I doubt if I'll leave "the butler did it" type clues 500 years after my death, either. Only one, for sure, died of a cancer that was revealed by x-ray, and she was elderly by Inuit standards. As mentioned, the sea furnished the majority of their diets, and an interesting fact was that Inuit were known to bleed easily. Their blood did not clot easily. I upped my salmon oil immediately, as strokes and heart disease have figured in my history. There was no sign of either heart disease nor dental caries in any of the examined mummies, no matter how worn the teeth from hide chewing. Dental plaque extended only to the gum line - there were no signs of gum disease. Lice was abundant in clothing and hair, but especially in the one young woman whose bones were extremely calcium deficient, moreso than all the rest. Their teeth did reveal, however, episodic deprivation for some in early childhood, leading to malnutrition and all its consequences in later years.
The 4 year old boy likely had a skeletal hip deformity that researchers linked to Down's Syndrome. I reserve judgement, because both my aunt and a SinL have/had Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, and they were extremely intelligent, if crippled, people. Modern medicine saved them from total physical disability. No signs of diminished intelligence could be inferred except from his bones, and I remain skeptical. Except for the youngest, who may have been exposed prior to burial, none died as a result of violence.

[Paysan]

Well, I finally received and read my copy of The Greenland Mummies. This detailed minutae of what they were like, even the speculation, is right down my alley. The book does not reveal the causes of death for all 8 buried in the two main graves under consideration. After all, I doubt if I'll leave "the butler did it" type clues 500 years after my death, either. Only one, for sure, died of a cancer that was revealed by x-ray, and she was elderly by Inuit standards. As mentioned, the sea furnished the majority of their diets, and an interesting fact was that Inuit were known to bleed easily. Their blood did not clot easily. I upped my salmon oil immediately, as strokes and heart disease have figured in my history. There was no sign of either heart disease nor dental caries in any of the examined mummies, no matter how worn the teeth from hide chewing. Dental plaque extended only to the gum line - there were no signs of gum disease. Lice was abundant in clothing and hair, but especially in the one young woman whose bones were extremely calcium deficient, moreso than all the rest. Their teeth did reveal, however, episodic deprivation for some in early childhood, leading to malnutrition and all its consequences in later years.
The 4 year old boy likely had a skeletal hip deformity that researchers linked to Down's Syndrome. I reserve judgement, because both my aunt and a SinL have/had Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, and they were extremely intelligent, if crippled, people. Modern medicine saved them from total physical disability. No signs of diminished intelligence could be inferred except from his bones, and I remain skeptical. Except for the youngest, who may have been exposed prior to burial, none died as a result of violence.

[Neckhammer]

Nice post.

It saddens me to see so many people hanging their diet on the Inuit... when by many accounts it wasn't really a healthy diet at all.

A necessary diet... but not necessarily healthy.

The longest lived peoples on earth have always had a high plant-based diet.

Meh, not really. Last I read something like greater than 20% of well lived hunter gatherers get 85%+ of their calories from large game. The other 15% is foraged and small game/insects. Beyond that the average of all known HG societies averaged 70% hunted and 30% foraged with the "foraged" including small game and insects.

[Paysan]

Meh, not really. Last I read something like greater than 20% of well lived hunter gatherers get 85%+ of their calories from large game. The other 15% is foraged and small game/insects. Beyond that the average of all known HG societies averaged 70% hunted and 30% foraged with the "foraged" including small game and insects.

Most hunters were also gatherers. There is no real contradiction, because if the climate had serious temperature differences, meat/fat formed most of the winter diet; plants and sea creatures formed much of the summer diet. Dried and fermented foods rounded out the diet.