Depends how far back you go. During much of civilization, people managed to barely survive on grains. As hunter-gatherers, we ate low sugar, high fiber pre-domesticated foraged plants and MEAT. The body needs fiber and MEAT. We can survive on grains, but we don't thrive on them. Domestication has made plants taste better, but not necessarily made them healthier.
The idea of early man as a hunter-gatherer is a myth. The earliest archeological digs show no signs of plant foods. Back then, the "foods" we think of as plant foods today did not exist. They have all been gentically selected over a long period of time to make them more palatable to humans.
Humans were hunters. They may have started out as scavengers, but they soon became hunters. Humans did not eat much of any plant foods until it became necessary, around 10,000-20,000 years ago, when the big animals were killed off -- and the interglacial period of the current ice age began.
Fast forward to ancient Egypt (5,000 years ago), and they ate a lot of bread. They also have the worst teeth of any people examined. Plant foods rot the human teeth, due to the sugar.
When Weston Price traveled the world looking at the diets of primitive people, about 100 years ago, he was hoping to find vegetarians in great health, because he was a vegetarian and he thought it was a healthy diet.
Instead, he found no vegetarians at all, and in every case, the people who ate the most meat were by far the healthiest.
I remember reading about a tribe that tried to eat only grains. It was some sort of bread they were making. They almost all died out, until they started adding milk.
That's just how it is. Our stomach and digestive track is all geared towards eating meat, but with the added ability to get by on plants if necessary. But we are primarily meat eaters.
Also, fruit isn't necessarily bad for you either and shouldn't be treated as exclusively a treat.
Melons of various kinds for example are high in water and good for hydration as well as filling your stomach.
Limes and lemons, despite being pretty sweet in terms of smell and flavor, are actually considered keto friendly because of their low carb content. Very good to add some freshly squeezed juice into the mix.
Oranges are much more sweet, as are blood oranges.
Nuts are also very good for you, but moderation is important. They're high in fats and therefore calories, and their carbs add up fast.
It does absolutely depend how far back you go. But I don't believe the modern "scientific" belief that all of humanity were cave-dwelling Neanderthals 10,000 years ago, especially since there is vast archaeological data that suggests advanced civilized nations more than a hundred thousand years ago, who were presumably cultivating grains. (I would argue there is substantial evidence that humanity, and event he Earth is much, much older than is currently believed).
But it would follow then, that one's genetic lineage can also be an important factor in diet.
Either way, I agree with you. And while grains do provide some nutrients, they are not for everyone, and certainly not as critical as animal products (meat, dairy, fish, eggs), nor as greens. Obviously veganism/vegetarianism is foolish from even just a nutritional point of view, but so is the opposite extreme of exclusively eating animal products.
Vegetarianism isn't foolish in regards to nutrition.
You can still get dairy, you can still have eggs, and you can increase proteins via cheeses, protein rich vegetables such as edamame, etc.
Veganism is the diet that's truly silly. You are missing out on a lot of important nutrients. Not eating a product of an animal is way sillier than choosing not to eat an animal. Milk is meant to be consumed.
'Protein Rich' vegetables. They are protein rich on paper, but in practice, you have to eat large volumes of them to get enough nutrition. Give me a steak. F*ck off with your three plates of broccoli. Barf me out.
I whole-heartedly agree, that dairy, especially milk should be consumed liberally. But it is not a substitute for meat. The reason I say vegetarianism foolish is because is because it accomplishes nothing while depriving our bodies from great sources of nutrients. MOST (not all) can be obtained from non-meat animal products (especially eggs), but not always as efficiently. I'll repeat: balance is key.
Our bodies are designed to sustain from both plants and animals. I will concede that western society in the last 150 years has perhaps indulged too much when it comes to meat, to the point where we now serve meat as side dishes to meat. Meat can definitely be reduced (especially since it's generally more expensive) and supplemented with non-meat animal products, but it would be wise for most people to have at least one serving of red meat a day (on average). And don't forget the fish!
But in the end, it's that life must consume life. Plants are just as alive as any animal, and the wise would say even the minerals of the earth are tingling with life -- nothing is without it. It is good to be mindful of the life we consume, plant or animal, but to abstain from one as a false 'moral' decision based on the idea that because animals are more evolved than plants it is wrong to eat them, is unwise.
Our bodies are designed to sustain from both plants and animals.
Actually, technically they’re not. We don’t possess the bacteria that breaks down cellulose, such as a gorilla. Our digestive tracts most closely mirror a wolves- with one exception: we have an appendix.
Not being able to digest fiber is precisely why we eat it.
You are correct that we don't need fiber. We certainly won't die without it. And too much can easily be problematic. But most people prefer to eat it because it promotes good intestinal health and can keep you regular if you struggle with that.
An important distinction should be made, however, that it is INSOLUBLE FIBER that can be beneficial to a diet. Soluble fiber is not very good, and while large amounts can act as a laxative, it is not particularly good for intestinal health.
INSOLUBLE FIBER means plant refuse from vegetables, nuts, etc., not the water-soluble "fiber" that is advertised in cereals and used in stool softeners in high quantities.
That’s a common misconception. Fiber actually constipates people. It’s indigestible and irritates the delicate lining of the intestines. Would you eat sticks and rocks? They’re also indigestible.
Benefits from eating fibrous vegetables upon digestion is probably a confusion with their water content. If you eat sticky or dry foods then having something with water that can’t be digested is probably going to assist excavation. Raw meat happens to have high water content and is like a gentle massage going down the intestinal track. Eat a pound of raw fish / sashimi / poke and see what a perfect stool looks and feels like.
Meat and fat are also highly assimilable and most gets absorbed in the small intestines.
The body produces large quantities of bile because much of it is expected to be absorbed by fiber and passed. If you don't get fiber, you'll reabsorb too much bile and this results in high cholesterol.
The irritation that fiber causes is minor. Pineapple irritates the mouth but eating small amounts isn't a big deal. Fiber is far less irritating but servers a number of useful functions, like absorbing bile and helping to clear out the intestines to keep anything from lingering too long.
Depends how far back you go. During much of civilization, people managed to barely survive on grains. As hunter-gatherers, we ate low sugar, high fiber pre-domesticated foraged plants and MEAT. The body needs fiber and MEAT. We can survive on grains, but we don't thrive on them. Domestication has made plants taste better, but not necessarily made them healthier.
The idea of early man as a hunter-gatherer is a myth. The earliest archeological digs show no signs of plant foods. Back then, the "foods" we think of as plant foods today did not exist. They have all been gentically selected over a long period of time to make them more palatable to humans.
Humans were hunters. They may have started out as scavengers, but they soon became hunters. Humans did not eat much of any plant foods until it became necessary, around 10,000-20,000 years ago, when the big animals were killed off -- and the interglacial period of the current ice age began.
Fast forward to ancient Egypt (5,000 years ago), and they ate a lot of bread. They also have the worst teeth of any people examined. Plant foods rot the human teeth, due to the sugar.
When Weston Price traveled the world looking at the diets of primitive people, about 100 years ago, he was hoping to find vegetarians in great health, because he was a vegetarian and he thought it was a healthy diet.
Instead, he found no vegetarians at all, and in every case, the people who ate the most meat were by far the healthiest.
I remember reading about a tribe that tried to eat only grains. It was some sort of bread they were making. They almost all died out, until they started adding milk.
That's just how it is. Our stomach and digestive track is all geared towards eating meat, but with the added ability to get by on plants if necessary. But we are primarily meat eaters.
Also, fruit isn't necessarily bad for you either and shouldn't be treated as exclusively a treat.
Melons of various kinds for example are high in water and good for hydration as well as filling your stomach.
Limes and lemons, despite being pretty sweet in terms of smell and flavor, are actually considered keto friendly because of their low carb content. Very good to add some freshly squeezed juice into the mix.
Oranges are much more sweet, as are blood oranges.
Nuts are also very good for you, but moderation is important. They're high in fats and therefore calories, and their carbs add up fast.
It does absolutely depend how far back you go. But I don't believe the modern "scientific" belief that all of humanity were cave-dwelling Neanderthals 10,000 years ago, especially since there is vast archaeological data that suggests advanced civilized nations more than a hundred thousand years ago, who were presumably cultivating grains. (I would argue there is substantial evidence that humanity, and event he Earth is much, much older than is currently believed).
But it would follow then, that one's genetic lineage can also be an important factor in diet.
Either way, I agree with you. And while grains do provide some nutrients, they are not for everyone, and certainly not as critical as animal products (meat, dairy, fish, eggs), nor as greens. Obviously veganism/vegetarianism is foolish from even just a nutritional point of view, but so is the opposite extreme of exclusively eating animal products.
Balance is key.
Vegetarianism isn't foolish in regards to nutrition.
You can still get dairy, you can still have eggs, and you can increase proteins via cheeses, protein rich vegetables such as edamame, etc.
Veganism is the diet that's truly silly. You are missing out on a lot of important nutrients. Not eating a product of an animal is way sillier than choosing not to eat an animal. Milk is meant to be consumed.
'Protein Rich' vegetables. They are protein rich on paper, but in practice, you have to eat large volumes of them to get enough nutrition. Give me a steak. F*ck off with your three plates of broccoli. Barf me out.
You don't need a lot of edamame to reach protein goals, but of course that's one vegetable.
I'm not a fan of broccoli either. I'll eat it, but a steak is a lot more fun
I whole-heartedly agree, that dairy, especially milk should be consumed liberally. But it is not a substitute for meat. The reason I say vegetarianism foolish is because is because it accomplishes nothing while depriving our bodies from great sources of nutrients. MOST (not all) can be obtained from non-meat animal products (especially eggs), but not always as efficiently. I'll repeat: balance is key.
Our bodies are designed to sustain from both plants and animals. I will concede that western society in the last 150 years has perhaps indulged too much when it comes to meat, to the point where we now serve meat as side dishes to meat. Meat can definitely be reduced (especially since it's generally more expensive) and supplemented with non-meat animal products, but it would be wise for most people to have at least one serving of red meat a day (on average). And don't forget the fish!
But in the end, it's that life must consume life. Plants are just as alive as any animal, and the wise would say even the minerals of the earth are tingling with life -- nothing is without it. It is good to be mindful of the life we consume, plant or animal, but to abstain from one as a false 'moral' decision based on the idea that because animals are more evolved than plants it is wrong to eat them, is unwise.
Actually, technically they’re not. We don’t possess the bacteria that breaks down cellulose, such as a gorilla. Our digestive tracts most closely mirror a wolves- with one exception: we have an appendix.
Don’t need fiber at all. We can’t digest fiber
Not being able to digest fiber is precisely why we eat it.
You are correct that we don't need fiber. We certainly won't die without it. And too much can easily be problematic. But most people prefer to eat it because it promotes good intestinal health and can keep you regular if you struggle with that.
An important distinction should be made, however, that it is INSOLUBLE FIBER that can be beneficial to a diet. Soluble fiber is not very good, and while large amounts can act as a laxative, it is not particularly good for intestinal health.
INSOLUBLE FIBER means plant refuse from vegetables, nuts, etc., not the water-soluble "fiber" that is advertised in cereals and used in stool softeners in high quantities.
That’s a common misconception. Fiber actually constipates people. It’s indigestible and irritates the delicate lining of the intestines. Would you eat sticks and rocks? They’re also indigestible.
Benefits from eating fibrous vegetables upon digestion is probably a confusion with their water content. If you eat sticky or dry foods then having something with water that can’t be digested is probably going to assist excavation. Raw meat happens to have high water content and is like a gentle massage going down the intestinal track. Eat a pound of raw fish / sashimi / poke and see what a perfect stool looks and feels like.
Meat and fat are also highly assimilable and most gets absorbed in the small intestines.
The body produces large quantities of bile because much of it is expected to be absorbed by fiber and passed. If you don't get fiber, you'll reabsorb too much bile and this results in high cholesterol.
The irritation that fiber causes is minor. Pineapple irritates the mouth but eating small amounts isn't a big deal. Fiber is far less irritating but servers a number of useful functions, like absorbing bile and helping to clear out the intestines to keep anything from lingering too long.