The modern dietary landscape is dominated by approaches that prioritize calorie counting, macronutrient tracking, and dietary restriction, frequently designed to counterbalance the adverse effects of ultra-processed and carbohydrate-heavy diets on human physiology.
Excellent article. We need red meat for our brains to function and for general metabolism. Speaking from experience, if you want to lose weight, there is no better way than the Hay Diet. It was developed by a Howard William Hay back in 1922 and the basis of it is; "you don't mix protein and carbohydrate". He wrote a book on the subject, detailing possible recipes and what to drink depending on whether protein or carbohydrate.
For example, if you have fish n chips you can have the fish but no batter or chips and the rest of your meal is made up of greens, or alternatively you can have the batter and the chips but no fish. I was on this method of eating for 5 years and in the first few months of it I lost 2 stone, I looked like something out of Belsen.
Personally, I eat what I want to eat not what the government or "specialists" advise me to eat. That's why the governments are trying to cull cattle and reduce our protein intake. They want us all blithering idiots that hey can control....well not me!
Well we're not vaxed either. At the onset of the plandemic I did some research and as soon as I saw nRNA (modified ribonucleic acid), warning bells sounded. You don't need to be a scientist to realise they were messing with the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) all you need is O'Level Biology. We tried to warn our friends about what the governments and "scientists" were trying to do but to no avail, we lost quite a few. In fact some, when we told them we hadn't taken the "vaccine" told us not to visit. With time, and all the revelations recently, they've changed their tune, saying they wish they hadn't taken them. But that's after many have suffered injuries due to the jag, it really makes us sad to see our friends in such poor health.....if only they'd listened. The moral is we wouldn't trust governments to tell us the time of day!
They have great plans for more of the same in the pipeline💉💉💉 and here in your Europe they want to make it a condition of being able to travel, (this is on record) the EU is currently setting up the infrastructure, Certificate Of Vaccination ID = COVID. This is not by any means finished yet👍🤝
Interesting to note that China didn't use any mRNA product on its own citizens🤔
First of all, I found you on LI and thanks to Joel for that. Also, thanks to Joel for cross-posting your excellent article. Otherwise, I would have never known about your work. To the matter you discuss, it continues to amaze me the number of (ostensibly) rational people who cling to veganism as a reasonable approach. The people who cling to calorie counting are only slightly less annoying, to be honest. Looking forward to reading more of your insight!
Thank you for the kind words and support - it's hugely appreciated.
I have no argument against anyone who chooses to be vegan for themselves and for ethical reasons - it's certainly not the direction I would take, but each to their own...
However...
When the acolytes amongst the ranks of their cult come calling to preach that we must all "convert" because of "x, y or z" and/or the same feel the need to try sully my content with their misinformation & disinformation - I relish the opportunity to debate them and expose their ideological nonsense 🙌
Jo, we are Hypercarnivores (not Obligate Carnivores) of course we included plant materials, especially highly fibrous roots & tubers because fruit was seasonal - BUT THIS WAS FREAKING STARVATION FOOD...
The crap we were forced to eat in order to avoid starvation when the hunt was unsuccessful - it was never a preferred source of energy or nutrition and if you know even half as much as you claim about human gastroenterology, you know that the energy yield provided from fiber is incredibly poor (<10%) via the provision of SCFAs given off by the biome in the colon...
It's clear that you and I see this from very different angles (obviously - you're a vegan) and we aren't going to agree, so like I said to you in one of my very first responses - the best we can each hope for here is the recognition that industrial agriculture is a common enemy to rally against...
Otherwise, we honestly have nothing further to discuss...
Ricky, excellent article… I have been carnivore for the past 3 years. Results: I’ve dropped from 280lbs to 190lbs, my waist circumference dropped from 46” to 36”, my 5k parkrun time dropped from 45minutes to 24 minutes, blood pressure dropped from 150/100 to 110/70, lifetime gingivitis gone, various skin maladies gone, mental health much improved, mood stable throughout the day, loads of energy throughout the day, I am on zero meds as a 60 year old, illness and sickness is now very rare… all of this is as a result (either directly or indirectly) of becoming carnivore. I would not dream of moving away from this style of diet. All my carb cravings left within a month of starting, and they have yet to reappear. I don’t worry about calories, macros, tracking or any other dietary complication. I just eat fatty meat, eggs, fish and dairy. Zero plants. I cannot recommend this style of eating enough: my guess is that it is going to extend my life by 15-20 years.
Brilliant. Am Keto and have fasted 5 days alongside a hybrid non standard of care regime including supplements, anti parasitic AND radiotherapy for prostate cancer. My affinity has always been carnivore, eggs and cheese so has been easy to maintain.
For 90% of the 25 million years of human evolution we did eat like other primates do! Though didn't have big bellies, long arms nor walk on all fours, we did eat 95% plants. Our physiology was little affected by the last 2.5 million years of hunter- gathering who still ate a lot of fibre and a little amount of lean meat as evidenced by paleopoop.
As cholesterol (important for membranes etc) was mostly absent from the diet for most of evolution our bodies evolved to hang on to it. This is now maladaptive, leading to atherosclerosis (which develops over decades). Actual carnivores have not adapted this way- a dog, evolved from a wolf, can eat shed loads of fat and cholesterol and not develop the atherosclerosis that a human or rabbit would eating a tiny fraction of the amount. Why didn't we evolve to not hang on cholesterol during the paleolithic? Because the average life span was only 25 years old. Not old enough to die of heart attack nor affect selection.
So what kind of diet do long lived, healthy populations have?
You guessed it, rural Africans and Chinese eating mostly plant based, ie the diet we've evolved to eat, have lower CVD, hypotension, diabetes, stroke, gallstones, hernia, haemorroids, cataracts, macular degeneration, osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and lower colon and prostate cancer, in fact 17 times lower breast cancer risk . And when put to the test a whole food plant based diet can reverse heart disease, the only diet shown to do so.
You can insult all you like and gives thousands of anecdotal evidence of feeling ok after a few years on a 'carnivore' diet' -I'm sticking to what my heart tells me and to the evidence.
The stable isotope data doesn't support your assertions, neither does the fossil record...
Your veganism is only enabled because you rely on domesticated crops and the combination of processing & cooking - you would struggle to be vegan out in the wild...
What kind of spurious argument pits us both to survive in the ‘wild’- me eating fruit and nuts and you killing and eating raw wild animals (no cultivated grass) with your bare hands.
My ancestors lived plant based and I have the luxury of modern conviniences making it alot easier for me to do so. And?
You are floundering and just saying ‘oh no it doesn’t’ to what the evidence clearly shows.
FFS... Have you bothered reading the essay on which you are commenting...🤦♂️
I am not floundering - I laid the relevant detail & data out therein and I don't need to repeat it in the comments to accommodate your baseless bickering 🤦♂️
The stable isotope data places Upper Pleistocene Modern Humans in the Hypercarnivore trophic level - that much is abundantly clear... The very same ancestry we both share because we are not different species... 🤦♂️
Your hit piece on Weston Price is commendable, but relies massively on epidemiological garbage - far too much so to be taken seriously
This stable isotope analysis paper suggests that meat made up about 2.2% of total protein intake of 2 individuals in the Upper Pleistocene in Europe- with mammoth and reindeer each making up about 25-30% of the meat protein intake- which was only 2.2% of the total protein. All plants contain protein.
Historically speaking, man would NOT have survived the ice-age if they had been herbivores. Additionally, early agricultural civilizations are the places where the records show man's skull thickness declining, along with SMALLER BRAINS, tooth problems, smaller jaws, and clear signs of what we now call "modern" diseases of mankind.
In ancient civilizations it was also routine for the ruling class to demand the peasants bring animals to the temples for "sacrifice" and banned the peasants from eating any of this meat.
The fact humans possibly wouldn't have survived without eating meat doesn't mean it is healthy. It is possibly to tell the age at death from human bones and we know that modern day Masai and Inuits live on average 45 years.
It is true that humans still have what is referred to as a "vestigial" cecum, i.e., a small portion of the stomach which is designed to process plants. This indicates that, when desperate, humans can prevent starvation by eating plants.
However, the cecum in humans is about the size of that person's baby finger. In apes it's MUCH larger, due to their herbivorous diet, requiring more space for bacterial fermentation of plant material. It can take literally days, (of gas, belching, re-eating their poop and vomit) for the plants to be broken down enough for the herbivore to obtain adequate nutrition from them.
In both acid profile (PH) and physical structure, the human digestive system is much closer to a lion's than it is to any herbivore. Cows and other herbivores are forced to eat (and re-eat) plants for most hours of the day in order to feed the "bloom" in their stomachs. And it is the bacteria (having done all of the heavy lifting) in their stomachs that provide them with essential fatty acids and essential amino acids. So basically, the cows live off of an internal "farm" which they carry around in their THREE stomachs, and feed grass to.
Humans are apex predators ONLY because of our brains, which are made of 80% fat. Spending my time and money trying to replicate the stomach structure of an herbivore by stretching out a vestigial cecum and filling it with bacteria that will eat the plants for me so that I can then digest the bloom from this process, just doesn't interest me.
And another thing that is of no interest to me, is spending what's left of my life in a wheelchair. You see, when I went off of "healthy" plants, (salads, grains, beans, etc.) and switched carnivore I could no longer WALK. Arthritis had literally eaten the cartilage in my ankles, (bone on bone) and was swiftly devouring other joints. Once I dropped the plants out of my diet, the swelling was gone in DAYS, and within a week I was walking without pain. A few months later my joints were HEALED.
No matter what anyone tries to tell me, there is ZERO chance I will go back to not being able to walk, just so I can eat plants again.
One of the best essays I've read on Substack in a while. Thank You! I tested, and wrote a book about Ketosis—not to be confused with Ketogenic—and a hyper carnivorous diet consumed within 6 hours every day, for example eating between noon and 6pm, often can produce Ketosis. My diet is about 80% or slightly more fat/protein and a little less than 20% carbs, mostly green or purple. I've lived longer than 95% of the population with the disorder I have without a single disruption in my life and have never experienced pain or anything I can't do. Diagnosed end of Nov, 2022 means I've had this disorder for about 5 years and the 5 year survival rate is 6% and I have several years, if not more, still to go. A hyper-carnivore diet is what we were always meant to eat. I imagine you've read about the 2 nomadic tribes in Southern Africa? The elderly never get sick until 2 weeks before they die. They live to be 80, 85 and older and they're healthy, really healthy and then they get sick for a couple of weeks and pass away. 88% of Americans have Metabolic Disorder, the precursor to every disease we know. Blue drinks from Coca-Cola® and Dorito's®.
Yep, since our shift away from a hunter - gatherer approach towards agriculture at the end of the Pleistocene (some ~12k years ago) we have indeed shifted to a way more heavy reliance on plants & fungi... But, let's not conflate that with their lifespan please because modern medicine has actually done a tremendous job at combatting both infectious disease and trauma which were by far the biggest killers of Upper Pleistocene Modern Humans (UPMHs) - in fact, the average life expectancy for them is a bit misleading because of how prevalent infant mortality was... If you did into the data, those who made it past 5 years of age tended to live at least as long as we do now...
There is of course a ton of nuance involved, but I disagree with your last point because this simply doesn't track in nature...
- find me a single example out in the wild of members of the same species having differing nutritional requirements and therefore differing optimal diets...?
- There are none and humans are no different in that regard, save for disease or disability, we all have the same essential nutrient requirements, the same digestive system make-up & function...
The things which alter this are:
- personal preference (we are fickle & fussy creatures).
- epigenetics, meaning changes in the ability to tolerate certain toxins / compounds (allergies & intolerances).
Our base, optimal diet is a whole foods, animal-based & low-carb one - which is actually a fairly wide range within which each individual can find their groove 😉
I'm terribly sorry, but I would be very upset if you removed delicious veggies and fruit from my diet, and I will continue to fight for my right to Croissant .
Meat and fish are lovely but so are nuts and plants.
As long as you recognize that you are making your choices based on pleasure (taste & texture) over nutritional value (prioritizing essential nutrients in the most bioavailable forms) and you are thriving, then carry on doing what you are doing... 👍
However, if you are not thriving and have some health concerns or excess weight to shed, them you may wish to consider whether your food choices are helping or hindering 👍
The right to croissant, buttered toasted teacakes with coffee for breakfast & pasty (Cornish etc) & Scampi & Fries with green beans etc with a lager or wine & a cream cake is very important to me also, in fact, I'd go as far as saying, a bacon sarni with tomatoes & mushrooms is so important that life wouldn't be wirth living without such treats.
I have noticed that a pork chops dinner meal with apple sauce, stuffing, peas, mashed spuds & gravy accompanied by a nice lager provides for much more energy on the following day, something to do with my non negotiable evolved genetic requirement for certain specific saturated & monounsaturated fatty acids & alcohol.
I like meat and fish, eggs and dairy. But they always taste boring without some veggies and plant carbs on the side - and I forage here in Scotland for blaeberries and mushrooms, fruit and wild plants too - I just made a big batch of quince marmalade/ jelly from the local park ornamental quince - this tastes amazing with cheese and also with fish or pork. I also grow a lot of veggies myself in the garden. Life without buttered new potatoes - or fresh bread from my breadmaker - would be very dull indeed!
Proteins in animal products are not more 'bioavailable' weren't those studies compared to raw beans? In any case they are all broken down into amino acids which are found in plenty in plant foods.
Go do some learning please and come back to try again when you better understand the reality of nutrient density, bioavailability (especially phytotoxins/anti-nutrients) and human gastroenterology...
I'm a lifelong thin person who has been vegetarian (with some seafood) for a bit over 40 years, has always eaten cheese and eggs. I've never counted calories. Anyway, the diet described does not sound appealing to me - not intuitive at all.
Hey Elsa - absolutely possible to be healthy on a vegetarian diet which includes occasional seafood and I will do an essay on why that is soon... 😉
It's a concept I have come to call "gaming the system" and it has everything to do with human ingenuity and technological advancements, not so much to do with human physiology (other than the fact we found ways to work around inherent restrictions) 👍
One of the things that intuitive eating seems to forget is that food wasn't anywhere near as plentiful and convenient; you don't have to hunt, with all of the limitations that comes with that. You don't even have to prepare your food, and even if you do, it's easy to just put a pan on the stove and pull your "kill" out of the fridge. Hormones are meaningful of course, but these conveniences are a question mark when it comes to how effective these hormones will ultimately be for the general public.
Calorie counting and macronutrient tracking are not necessary, though if it works for people, there's nothing wrong with it unless, in probably rare cases, they get obsessive about it.
You make a point to compare the hypercarnivore diet to the standard modern diet of ultraprocessed, hyperpalatable foods, as though there's no such thing as a whole food diet.
Personally, though intuitive eating is hardly new, I see this as yet another diet craze to appeal to people who are looking for an answer to their dietary woes, (like the perennial obese, paleo low carber Jimmy Moore who apparently doesn't have these effective dietary hormones), who'll become dietary zealots who'll be sure to tell the rest of us that we're all doing it wrong. Not wanting to discount you entirely, I did have a brief look through your stack and I found the false dichotomy of the ancient man and the modern man to be absurd.
Good luck though. I have no doubt that it will be a help to people. There's plenty of room for various diet approaches.
However, I have been puzzled by the same questions you bring up - they are valid and that is why I prefer to avoid the dumpster fire that is "human nutritional sciences" (i.e. the epidemiology or observational science) and push into the hard sciences (experiment based disciplines) of biochemistry, physiology and gastroenterology, and I also include anthropology for the historical lense.
These align with the points I have made and the references are there for perusal, digestion (pun fully intended 😉) and debate.
My view is simply that if I understand what my physiology needs & why, and I align my lifestyle with this as best I can, I real the best possible health outcomes over time...
I want my health span to be as high as possible, for as long as possible across my lifespan 👍
The new carnivore diet is nothing like the ‘carnivore-like’ diet of early humans, which itself was nothing like an actual carnivore diet. In 2020 the number of cows, chickens, pigs, and sheep slaughtered for food was 73 billion and of the 11 billion animals killed for food each year in the US, 95% are from factory-farms. Although carnivore eaters encourage free-range, these products are only available to those who can afford them, the majority have to eat misery. Nor is there enough land, even with considerable deforestation, for 8 billion people to eat ‘grass-fed’. The coming climate crisis means that eating higher up the ‘trophic levels’ in such an energy intensive and environmentally destructive way will end, one way or another. To explore the true Paleo diet of low fat, unprocessed, fibre filled food without immense collateral damage and misery- individuals may wish to explore whole food plant based diets.
Yes, I'm still going,it's interesting and I have an open mind.
Yes some of our ancestors (from about one tenth of our evolution) started getting about 80% of their protein from animals but this doens't mean that they had a high meat diet- the number of calories nor contribution to the whole diet is not indicated.
Yes they are on the same 'trophic' level as 'carnivores' as they eat herbivores but that doesn't mean they their diets have the same make up or they get all of their calories from meat as a carnivore would.
Studies show about 20% of protein comes from plants so lots of carbs going down with the lower protein content.
And also evidence of lots of fibre.
So not a typical carnivore diet.
And it still doesn't explain why this part of evolution is picked as being our intuitive one when long term benefits/harrms into old age are not known? And long term benefits of plant based diets are known?
Isotope analysis looks at collagen and measures dietary nitrogen. In herbivores levels are about 3-7% and in carnivores about 6-12%, with omnivores in between, though the range already overlaps. These numbers are said to indicate ‘trophic levels’ or place in the food chain with a jump of 3-5% said to indicate one ‘trophic level’, from herbivore-like to carnivore-like. The analysis did not differentiate between sources of protein, plant or animals, it merely places in a ‘trophic’ category based on the percentages. In the study a few of the 13 available Neanderthal bones had similar nitrogen, about 10%, as the even fewer carnivores who were close to the same site and date (isotopes vary with climate and age). This does not mean that the make up of the diet of Neanderthals was the same as that of carnivores, though it does indicate that they ate some herbivores.
From the previous study we see that the Pleistocene Neanderthals were eating substantial amounts of protein from plants with only a small percentage from animal sources, plus the fossilised faeces record shows 100 grams of fibre daily: so nothing like a carnivore diet at all.
It is very easy to refute you claims that stable isotope analysis does not provide evidence of high meat consumption among Upper Pleistocene humans and Neanderthals:
1. Stable Isotope Ratios and Trophic Level Indicators:
Stable isotope analysis, particularly nitrogen isotope ratios (δ15N), has consistently shown that Neanderthals and early modern humans occupy trophic levels that indicate high levels of animal protein consumption, akin to those of top carnivores. Higher δ15N values are a reliable indicator of trophic level and reflect the type of protein consumed. Plant proteins typically have lower δ15N values than animal proteins due to the isotopic differences in their nitrogen sources. Studies, including those by Richards & Trinkaus (2009), demonstrate that δ15N levels in Neanderthal and Pleistocene human collagen are often higher than those found in herbivores and even some omnivorous species, aligning more closely with hypercarnivorous diets (Bocherens, 2009).
2. Differentiation Between Plant and Animal Protein:
It is true that stable isotope analysis does not directly differentiate between plant and animal proteins; however, the δ15N and δ13C values observed in Neanderthal and early modern human remains suggest a predominantly carnivorous diet. This is because the protein contribution from plants would typically lead to lower δ15N values than what is observed. Bocherens et al. (2005) and Richards & Trinkaus (2009) discuss how the isotopic signatures are consistent with high reliance on animal sources rather than plant-based ones. Moreover, δ15N values in carnivores are elevated by trophic level effects, which are difficult to achieve through plant consumption alone.
3. Archaeological Evidence:
Isotopic evidence is corroborated by the archaeological record, which shows a significant number of hunting tools and faunal remains associated with Neanderthal and Upper Paleolithic human sites. These findings indicate not only the consumption but also the processing of large quantities of meat, underscoring a diet heavily reliant on animal sources (Gaudzinski-Windheuser & Roebroeks, 2011).
4. Convergence with Dental Microwear and Morphological Analysis:
Additional evidence from dental microwear and morphology supports a meat-focused diet. The reduced tooth size and microwear patterns of Neanderthals and Upper Paleolithic humans align with a diet that includes significant animal protein, as these adaptations are typical of high-protein, lower-fiber diets that require less mastication (Ungar, 2012).
In summary, stable isotope studies do indicate a high-protein, animal-focused diet for both Neanderthals and early modern humans, when interpreted alongside other archaeological and morphological evidence. These findings collectively refute the assertion that stable isotope data fail to show significant meat consumption in Pleistocene hominins. Furthermore, the presence of plant materials in so called "paleopoop" serves only to confirm our ancestors Hypercarnivore approach because they would absolutely have included plant foods when the hunt was either unsuccessful or meat availability was low... It is folly to suggest they were largely plant based.
References:
- Bocherens, H. (2009). Neanderthal dietary habits: Review of the isotopic evidence. In *Human Paleobiology and the Origins of Homo* (pp. 241-256).
- Bocherens, H., Drucker, D.G., Billiou, D., Patou-Mathis, M., & Vandermeersch, B. (2005). Isotopic evidence for diet and subsistence pattern of the Saint-Césaire I Neanderthal: Review and use of a multi-source mixing model. *Journal of Human Evolution*, 49(1), 71-87.
- Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., & Roebroeks, W. (2011). A skillful hand: Techniques and expertise in the production of Middle Paleolithic hand tools. *Current Anthropology*, 52(S4), S4-S14.
- Richards, M.P., & Trinkaus, E. (2009). Isotopic evidence for the diets of European Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 106(38), 16034-16039.
- Ungar, P.S. (2012). Dental evidence for the reconstruction of diet in Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Quaternary International*, 279, 22-26.
This does not mean that the make up of the diet of Neanderthals was the same as that of the carnivores, though it does indicate that they ate some herbivores. From the previous study we see that the Pleistocene Neanderthals were eating substantial amounts of protein from plants (which generally have a much lower protein content than meat indicating the individuals must have had a lot of carbohydrate in their diet especially if the protein source was tubers) plus the fossilised faeces record shows they were consuming 100 grams of fibre daily: so nothing like a ‘carnivore’ diet at all.
It seriously doesn't take a brain surgeon or rocket scientist to spot that glaring issues with that arguement...
Anyone with an ounce of understanding in botany and/or agriculture will be able to point out that during the Upper Pleistocene there was only wild plants to rely on when the hunt was unsuccessful and that the kinds of wild (non-domesticated) plants available simply could not yield protein in the quantities necessary to place humans & Neanderthals on the same trophic level as other carnivores... 🤦♂️
During the Upper Pleistocene, Neanderthals and early modern humans likely supplemented their meat-heavy diets with the vegetation available, though most plant sources would have contributed limited protein compared to animal foods. The types of vegetation available varied by region but typically included nuts, tubers, seeds, and other hardy plants. Here’s a breakdown of some of the key plant sources and their nutritional contributions:
1. Nuts and Seeds: In some regions, wild nuts like acorns, hazelnuts, and possibly pine nuts could have been available. These foods are energy-dense, with a reasonable amount of fat and, in some cases, moderate protein. However, while nuts can provide calories, they are generally lower in protein than animal sources and may not have been significant protein sources in the quantities available or consumed.
2. Tubers and Root Vegetables: Wild tubers and roots, including varieties of wild yam and sedge roots, were likely foraged. Tubers provide carbohydrates and can be an important calorie source, but they are relatively low in protein. Evidence suggests that Neanderthals and early humans could have processed and cooked these to make them more digestible (Henry et al., 2011), but they still fall short of providing the protein density found in animal foods.
3. Wild Legumes and Seeds: Some leguminous plants (like wild pea varieties) existed during the Pleistocene and could provide a moderate source of protein. However, legumes generally require cooking to unlock their protein potential fully, and without controlled cooking techniques, these may not have been significant in Neanderthal diets. Still, early modern humans might have had more controlled fire use, making legumes a more viable protein source for them.
4. Berries and Small Fruits: Fruits like berries were also likely consumed, providing essential micronutrients and fiber, but they contain minimal protein. These would have been seasonal, providing variety rather than substantial nutrition year-round.
5. Green Vegetation: Hardy greens, including wild grasses and leaves, were likely available as seasonal foraging options. While these plants provide essential vitamins and minerals, they are very low in protein and would have contributed primarily fiber rather than macronutritional value.
Nutritional and Physiological Limits of Pleistocene Vegetation:
The available vegetation could offer supplemental calories, fiber, and micronutrients, but none of these plants would have provided protein at the levels of animal sources, nor would they have been abundant enough year-round to meet protein needs. High δ15N levels in stable isotope studies indicate that protein intake was largely animal-derived. Furthermore, human physiology is adapted for nutrient density; animal foods offer bioavailable protein and fat, which aligns with the observed dietary patterns in Neanderthals and early humans (Richards & Trinkaus, 2009).
Therefore, while some plants might have supplemented their diet, they were unlikely to be substantial protein sources.
References
- Henry, A. G., Brooks, A. S., & Piperno, D. R. (2011). Microfossils in calculus demonstrate consumption of plants and cooked foods in Neanderthal diets (Shanidar III, Iraq; Spy I and II, Belgium). *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 108(2), 486-491.
- Richards, M.P., & Trinkaus, E. (2009). Isotopic evidence for the diets of European Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 106(38), 16034-16039.
And you’re not answering the question, why not intuitively chose the majority of our evolution, 22.5 million years of 25 million, and eat mostly fruit and some bugs, instead?
You have lost the plot Ricky, being at a new ‘trophic level’ by starting to eat herbivores doesn’t turn you into a carnivore by suddenly changing 22.5 million years of living on mostly fruit and a few bugs! These humans were perfectly capable of digesting and assimilating wild plants, fruits and tubers. I am not saying the plants placed them on the carnivore trophic level- the meat did. But being on the carnivore trophic level doesn’t mean their diet was that of a wolf.
The carnivore crew spit on the huge amount of epidemiological evidence for plant based diets saying that studies are not placebo controlled (hard to do when people know what they’re eating) but are happy to be guided in their choices by a complete misrepresentation of a capricious isotope technique analysing bones from millions of years ago!
Excellent article. We need red meat for our brains to function and for general metabolism. Speaking from experience, if you want to lose weight, there is no better way than the Hay Diet. It was developed by a Howard William Hay back in 1922 and the basis of it is; "you don't mix protein and carbohydrate". He wrote a book on the subject, detailing possible recipes and what to drink depending on whether protein or carbohydrate.
For example, if you have fish n chips you can have the fish but no batter or chips and the rest of your meal is made up of greens, or alternatively you can have the batter and the chips but no fish. I was on this method of eating for 5 years and in the first few months of it I lost 2 stone, I looked like something out of Belsen.
Personally, I eat what I want to eat not what the government or "specialists" advise me to eat. That's why the governments are trying to cull cattle and reduce our protein intake. They want us all blithering idiots that hey can control....well not me!
They want us I'll and vaxed 👍
Well we're not vaxed either. At the onset of the plandemic I did some research and as soon as I saw nRNA (modified ribonucleic acid), warning bells sounded. You don't need to be a scientist to realise they were messing with the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) all you need is O'Level Biology. We tried to warn our friends about what the governments and "scientists" were trying to do but to no avail, we lost quite a few. In fact some, when we told them we hadn't taken the "vaccine" told us not to visit. With time, and all the revelations recently, they've changed their tune, saying they wish they hadn't taken them. But that's after many have suffered injuries due to the jag, it really makes us sad to see our friends in such poor health.....if only they'd listened. The moral is we wouldn't trust governments to tell us the time of day!
They have great plans for more of the same in the pipeline💉💉💉 and here in your Europe they want to make it a condition of being able to travel, (this is on record) the EU is currently setting up the infrastructure, Certificate Of Vaccination ID = COVID. This is not by any means finished yet👍🤝
Interesting to note that China didn't use any mRNA product on its own citizens🤔
They do ... https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/vaccines-are-population-control
Interesting to note they are building fast food 🇺🇸outlets everywhere I look in the 🇬🇧 Safe&Effective👇👍
First of all, I found you on LI and thanks to Joel for that. Also, thanks to Joel for cross-posting your excellent article. Otherwise, I would have never known about your work. To the matter you discuss, it continues to amaze me the number of (ostensibly) rational people who cling to veganism as a reasonable approach. The people who cling to calorie counting are only slightly less annoying, to be honest. Looking forward to reading more of your insight!
Thank you for the kind words and support - it's hugely appreciated.
I have no argument against anyone who chooses to be vegan for themselves and for ethical reasons - it's certainly not the direction I would take, but each to their own...
However...
When the acolytes amongst the ranks of their cult come calling to preach that we must all "convert" because of "x, y or z" and/or the same feel the need to try sully my content with their misinformation & disinformation - I relish the opportunity to debate them and expose their ideological nonsense 🙌
I'm in the "do you, Boo" camp as well. While it distresses me when I see the cultism pushed upon others, as you say, "to each their own."
😂😂😂
Jo, we are Hypercarnivores (not Obligate Carnivores) of course we included plant materials, especially highly fibrous roots & tubers because fruit was seasonal - BUT THIS WAS FREAKING STARVATION FOOD...
The crap we were forced to eat in order to avoid starvation when the hunt was unsuccessful - it was never a preferred source of energy or nutrition and if you know even half as much as you claim about human gastroenterology, you know that the energy yield provided from fiber is incredibly poor (<10%) via the provision of SCFAs given off by the biome in the colon...
It's clear that you and I see this from very different angles (obviously - you're a vegan) and we aren't going to agree, so like I said to you in one of my very first responses - the best we can each hope for here is the recognition that industrial agriculture is a common enemy to rally against...
Otherwise, we honestly have nothing further to discuss...
Ricky, excellent article… I have been carnivore for the past 3 years. Results: I’ve dropped from 280lbs to 190lbs, my waist circumference dropped from 46” to 36”, my 5k parkrun time dropped from 45minutes to 24 minutes, blood pressure dropped from 150/100 to 110/70, lifetime gingivitis gone, various skin maladies gone, mental health much improved, mood stable throughout the day, loads of energy throughout the day, I am on zero meds as a 60 year old, illness and sickness is now very rare… all of this is as a result (either directly or indirectly) of becoming carnivore. I would not dream of moving away from this style of diet. All my carb cravings left within a month of starting, and they have yet to reappear. I don’t worry about calories, macros, tracking or any other dietary complication. I just eat fatty meat, eggs, fish and dairy. Zero plants. I cannot recommend this style of eating enough: my guess is that it is going to extend my life by 15-20 years.
Brilliant. Am Keto and have fasted 5 days alongside a hybrid non standard of care regime including supplements, anti parasitic AND radiotherapy for prostate cancer. My affinity has always been carnivore, eggs and cheese so has been easy to maintain.
Appreciate the feedback Paul - wishing you the very best in your recovery! (Kick its arse mate!!!)
P.S . Thank God for mushrooms to go with EVERYTHING
Awesome post. I love how vegans compare us to primates and say we need to eat like they do.
But their guts are so huge that they have trouble standing upright, and their arms are so long they drag on the ground. They run on all fours.
Hiya JLG Are you saying humans aren't primates?
For 90% of the 25 million years of human evolution we did eat like other primates do! Though didn't have big bellies, long arms nor walk on all fours, we did eat 95% plants. Our physiology was little affected by the last 2.5 million years of hunter- gathering who still ate a lot of fibre and a little amount of lean meat as evidenced by paleopoop.
As cholesterol (important for membranes etc) was mostly absent from the diet for most of evolution our bodies evolved to hang on to it. This is now maladaptive, leading to atherosclerosis (which develops over decades). Actual carnivores have not adapted this way- a dog, evolved from a wolf, can eat shed loads of fat and cholesterol and not develop the atherosclerosis that a human or rabbit would eating a tiny fraction of the amount. Why didn't we evolve to not hang on cholesterol during the paleolithic? Because the average life span was only 25 years old. Not old enough to die of heart attack nor affect selection.
So what kind of diet do long lived, healthy populations have?
You guessed it, rural Africans and Chinese eating mostly plant based, ie the diet we've evolved to eat, have lower CVD, hypotension, diabetes, stroke, gallstones, hernia, haemorroids, cataracts, macular degeneration, osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and lower colon and prostate cancer, in fact 17 times lower breast cancer risk . And when put to the test a whole food plant based diet can reverse heart disease, the only diet shown to do so.
You can insult all you like and gives thousands of anecdotal evidence of feeling ok after a few years on a 'carnivore' diet' -I'm sticking to what my heart tells me and to the evidence.
The stable isotope data doesn't support your assertions, neither does the fossil record...
Your veganism is only enabled because you rely on domesticated crops and the combination of processing & cooking - you would struggle to be vegan out in the wild...
The isotope data and fossil record does support my assertions: stop lying… https://jowaller.substack.com/p/claims-of-weston-a-price-which-are?utm_source=publication-search
What kind of spurious argument pits us both to survive in the ‘wild’- me eating fruit and nuts and you killing and eating raw wild animals (no cultivated grass) with your bare hands.
My ancestors lived plant based and I have the luxury of modern conviniences making it alot easier for me to do so. And?
You are floundering and just saying ‘oh no it doesn’t’ to what the evidence clearly shows.
FFS... Have you bothered reading the essay on which you are commenting...🤦♂️
I am not floundering - I laid the relevant detail & data out therein and I don't need to repeat it in the comments to accommodate your baseless bickering 🤦♂️
The stable isotope data places Upper Pleistocene Modern Humans in the Hypercarnivore trophic level - that much is abundantly clear... The very same ancestry we both share because we are not different species... 🤦♂️
Your hit piece on Weston Price is commendable, but relies massively on epidemiological garbage - far too much so to be taken seriously
Yes placebo controlled studies on nutrition are hard to do for any diet.
This stable isotope analysis paper suggests that meat made up about 2.2% of total protein intake of 2 individuals in the Upper Pleistocene in Europe- with mammoth and reindeer each making up about 25-30% of the meat protein intake- which was only 2.2% of the total protein. All plants contain protein.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-41033-3
the stable isotope richards and trinkas 2009 is not your list of references
nor is Speth or Organ FFS
Historically speaking, man would NOT have survived the ice-age if they had been herbivores. Additionally, early agricultural civilizations are the places where the records show man's skull thickness declining, along with SMALLER BRAINS, tooth problems, smaller jaws, and clear signs of what we now call "modern" diseases of mankind.
In ancient civilizations it was also routine for the ruling class to demand the peasants bring animals to the temples for "sacrifice" and banned the peasants from eating any of this meat.
GUESS WHO DID GET TO EAT THE MEAT?
The fact humans possibly wouldn't have survived without eating meat doesn't mean it is healthy. It is possibly to tell the age at death from human bones and we know that modern day Masai and Inuits live on average 45 years.
It is true that humans still have what is referred to as a "vestigial" cecum, i.e., a small portion of the stomach which is designed to process plants. This indicates that, when desperate, humans can prevent starvation by eating plants.
However, the cecum in humans is about the size of that person's baby finger. In apes it's MUCH larger, due to their herbivorous diet, requiring more space for bacterial fermentation of plant material. It can take literally days, (of gas, belching, re-eating their poop and vomit) for the plants to be broken down enough for the herbivore to obtain adequate nutrition from them.
In both acid profile (PH) and physical structure, the human digestive system is much closer to a lion's than it is to any herbivore. Cows and other herbivores are forced to eat (and re-eat) plants for most hours of the day in order to feed the "bloom" in their stomachs. And it is the bacteria (having done all of the heavy lifting) in their stomachs that provide them with essential fatty acids and essential amino acids. So basically, the cows live off of an internal "farm" which they carry around in their THREE stomachs, and feed grass to.
Humans are apex predators ONLY because of our brains, which are made of 80% fat. Spending my time and money trying to replicate the stomach structure of an herbivore by stretching out a vestigial cecum and filling it with bacteria that will eat the plants for me so that I can then digest the bloom from this process, just doesn't interest me.
And another thing that is of no interest to me, is spending what's left of my life in a wheelchair. You see, when I went off of "healthy" plants, (salads, grains, beans, etc.) and switched carnivore I could no longer WALK. Arthritis had literally eaten the cartilage in my ankles, (bone on bone) and was swiftly devouring other joints. Once I dropped the plants out of my diet, the swelling was gone in DAYS, and within a week I was walking without pain. A few months later my joints were HEALED.
No matter what anyone tries to tell me, there is ZERO chance I will go back to not being able to walk, just so I can eat plants again.
Yes we’re not that adapted to eat grass.
This is what I do ... and I do eat meat at least once/day... as well as eggs https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/a-near-fool-proof-cure-for-cancer
I can eat as much as I want ... without gaining weight
One of the best essays I've read on Substack in a while. Thank You! I tested, and wrote a book about Ketosis—not to be confused with Ketogenic—and a hyper carnivorous diet consumed within 6 hours every day, for example eating between noon and 6pm, often can produce Ketosis. My diet is about 80% or slightly more fat/protein and a little less than 20% carbs, mostly green or purple. I've lived longer than 95% of the population with the disorder I have without a single disruption in my life and have never experienced pain or anything I can't do. Diagnosed end of Nov, 2022 means I've had this disorder for about 5 years and the 5 year survival rate is 6% and I have several years, if not more, still to go. A hyper-carnivore diet is what we were always meant to eat. I imagine you've read about the 2 nomadic tribes in Southern Africa? The elderly never get sick until 2 weeks before they die. They live to be 80, 85 and older and they're healthy, really healthy and then they get sick for a couple of weeks and pass away. 88% of Americans have Metabolic Disorder, the precursor to every disease we know. Blue drinks from Coca-Cola® and Dorito's®.
Thank you, that's kind of you to say 👍
Very pleased you are not just surviving but thriving - long may that continue 👏
Yep, since our shift away from a hunter - gatherer approach towards agriculture at the end of the Pleistocene (some ~12k years ago) we have indeed shifted to a way more heavy reliance on plants & fungi... But, let's not conflate that with their lifespan please because modern medicine has actually done a tremendous job at combatting both infectious disease and trauma which were by far the biggest killers of Upper Pleistocene Modern Humans (UPMHs) - in fact, the average life expectancy for them is a bit misleading because of how prevalent infant mortality was... If you did into the data, those who made it past 5 years of age tended to live at least as long as we do now...
There is of course a ton of nuance involved, but I disagree with your last point because this simply doesn't track in nature...
- find me a single example out in the wild of members of the same species having differing nutritional requirements and therefore differing optimal diets...?
- There are none and humans are no different in that regard, save for disease or disability, we all have the same essential nutrient requirements, the same digestive system make-up & function...
The things which alter this are:
- personal preference (we are fickle & fussy creatures).
- epigenetics, meaning changes in the ability to tolerate certain toxins / compounds (allergies & intolerances).
Our base, optimal diet is a whole foods, animal-based & low-carb one - which is actually a fairly wide range within which each individual can find their groove 😉
I'm terribly sorry, but I would be very upset if you removed delicious veggies and fruit from my diet, and I will continue to fight for my right to Croissant .
Meat and fish are lovely but so are nuts and plants.
As long as you recognize that you are making your choices based on pleasure (taste & texture) over nutritional value (prioritizing essential nutrients in the most bioavailable forms) and you are thriving, then carry on doing what you are doing... 👍
However, if you are not thriving and have some health concerns or excess weight to shed, them you may wish to consider whether your food choices are helping or hindering 👍
The right to croissant, buttered toasted teacakes with coffee for breakfast & pasty (Cornish etc) & Scampi & Fries with green beans etc with a lager or wine & a cream cake is very important to me also, in fact, I'd go as far as saying, a bacon sarni with tomatoes & mushrooms is so important that life wouldn't be wirth living without such treats.
I have noticed that a pork chops dinner meal with apple sauce, stuffing, peas, mashed spuds & gravy accompanied by a nice lager provides for much more energy on the following day, something to do with my non negotiable evolved genetic requirement for certain specific saturated & monounsaturated fatty acids & alcohol.
I like meat and fish, eggs and dairy. But they always taste boring without some veggies and plant carbs on the side - and I forage here in Scotland for blaeberries and mushrooms, fruit and wild plants too - I just made a big batch of quince marmalade/ jelly from the local park ornamental quince - this tastes amazing with cheese and also with fish or pork. I also grow a lot of veggies myself in the garden. Life without buttered new potatoes - or fresh bread from my breadmaker - would be very dull indeed!
Proteins in animal products are not more 'bioavailable' weren't those studies compared to raw beans? In any case they are all broken down into amino acids which are found in plenty in plant foods.
Go do some learning please and come back to try again when you better understand the reality of nutrient density, bioavailability (especially phytotoxins/anti-nutrients) and human gastroenterology...
I'm a lifelong thin person who has been vegetarian (with some seafood) for a bit over 40 years, has always eaten cheese and eggs. I've never counted calories. Anyway, the diet described does not sound appealing to me - not intuitive at all.
Hey Elsa - absolutely possible to be healthy on a vegetarian diet which includes occasional seafood and I will do an essay on why that is soon... 😉
It's a concept I have come to call "gaming the system" and it has everything to do with human ingenuity and technological advancements, not so much to do with human physiology (other than the fact we found ways to work around inherent restrictions) 👍
May I ask what your stools are like and how often you pass please?https://jowaller.substack.com/p/our-food?utm_source=publication-search
Just fine and once a day, almost like clockwork despite the practical absence of fiber... 🤷♂️
One of the things that intuitive eating seems to forget is that food wasn't anywhere near as plentiful and convenient; you don't have to hunt, with all of the limitations that comes with that. You don't even have to prepare your food, and even if you do, it's easy to just put a pan on the stove and pull your "kill" out of the fridge. Hormones are meaningful of course, but these conveniences are a question mark when it comes to how effective these hormones will ultimately be for the general public.
Calorie counting and macronutrient tracking are not necessary, though if it works for people, there's nothing wrong with it unless, in probably rare cases, they get obsessive about it.
You make a point to compare the hypercarnivore diet to the standard modern diet of ultraprocessed, hyperpalatable foods, as though there's no such thing as a whole food diet.
Personally, though intuitive eating is hardly new, I see this as yet another diet craze to appeal to people who are looking for an answer to their dietary woes, (like the perennial obese, paleo low carber Jimmy Moore who apparently doesn't have these effective dietary hormones), who'll become dietary zealots who'll be sure to tell the rest of us that we're all doing it wrong. Not wanting to discount you entirely, I did have a brief look through your stack and I found the false dichotomy of the ancient man and the modern man to be absurd.
Good luck though. I have no doubt that it will be a help to people. There's plenty of room for various diet approaches.
Yep, there is a ton of nuance indeed.
However, I have been puzzled by the same questions you bring up - they are valid and that is why I prefer to avoid the dumpster fire that is "human nutritional sciences" (i.e. the epidemiology or observational science) and push into the hard sciences (experiment based disciplines) of biochemistry, physiology and gastroenterology, and I also include anthropology for the historical lense.
These align with the points I have made and the references are there for perusal, digestion (pun fully intended 😉) and debate.
My view is simply that if I understand what my physiology needs & why, and I align my lifestyle with this as best I can, I real the best possible health outcomes over time...
I want my health span to be as high as possible, for as long as possible across my lifespan 👍
The new carnivore diet is nothing like the ‘carnivore-like’ diet of early humans, which itself was nothing like an actual carnivore diet. In 2020 the number of cows, chickens, pigs, and sheep slaughtered for food was 73 billion and of the 11 billion animals killed for food each year in the US, 95% are from factory-farms. Although carnivore eaters encourage free-range, these products are only available to those who can afford them, the majority have to eat misery. Nor is there enough land, even with considerable deforestation, for 8 billion people to eat ‘grass-fed’. The coming climate crisis means that eating higher up the ‘trophic levels’ in such an energy intensive and environmentally destructive way will end, one way or another. To explore the true Paleo diet of low fat, unprocessed, fibre filled food without immense collateral damage and misery- individuals may wish to explore whole food plant based diets.
Yes, I'm still going,it's interesting and I have an open mind.
Yes some of our ancestors (from about one tenth of our evolution) started getting about 80% of their protein from animals but this doens't mean that they had a high meat diet- the number of calories nor contribution to the whole diet is not indicated.
Yes they are on the same 'trophic' level as 'carnivores' as they eat herbivores but that doesn't mean they their diets have the same make up or they get all of their calories from meat as a carnivore would.
Studies show about 20% of protein comes from plants so lots of carbs going down with the lower protein content.
And also evidence of lots of fibre.
So not a typical carnivore diet.
And it still doesn't explain why this part of evolution is picked as being our intuitive one when long term benefits/harrms into old age are not known? And long term benefits of plant based diets are known?
Isotope analysis looks at collagen and measures dietary nitrogen. In herbivores levels are about 3-7% and in carnivores about 6-12%, with omnivores in between, though the range already overlaps. These numbers are said to indicate ‘trophic levels’ or place in the food chain with a jump of 3-5% said to indicate one ‘trophic level’, from herbivore-like to carnivore-like. The analysis did not differentiate between sources of protein, plant or animals, it merely places in a ‘trophic’ category based on the percentages. In the study a few of the 13 available Neanderthal bones had similar nitrogen, about 10%, as the even fewer carnivores who were close to the same site and date (isotopes vary with climate and age). This does not mean that the make up of the diet of Neanderthals was the same as that of carnivores, though it does indicate that they ate some herbivores.
From the previous study we see that the Pleistocene Neanderthals were eating substantial amounts of protein from plants with only a small percentage from animal sources, plus the fossilised faeces record shows 100 grams of fibre daily: so nothing like a carnivore diet at all.
You still going...? 🙄
It is very easy to refute you claims that stable isotope analysis does not provide evidence of high meat consumption among Upper Pleistocene humans and Neanderthals:
1. Stable Isotope Ratios and Trophic Level Indicators:
Stable isotope analysis, particularly nitrogen isotope ratios (δ15N), has consistently shown that Neanderthals and early modern humans occupy trophic levels that indicate high levels of animal protein consumption, akin to those of top carnivores. Higher δ15N values are a reliable indicator of trophic level and reflect the type of protein consumed. Plant proteins typically have lower δ15N values than animal proteins due to the isotopic differences in their nitrogen sources. Studies, including those by Richards & Trinkaus (2009), demonstrate that δ15N levels in Neanderthal and Pleistocene human collagen are often higher than those found in herbivores and even some omnivorous species, aligning more closely with hypercarnivorous diets (Bocherens, 2009).
2. Differentiation Between Plant and Animal Protein:
It is true that stable isotope analysis does not directly differentiate between plant and animal proteins; however, the δ15N and δ13C values observed in Neanderthal and early modern human remains suggest a predominantly carnivorous diet. This is because the protein contribution from plants would typically lead to lower δ15N values than what is observed. Bocherens et al. (2005) and Richards & Trinkaus (2009) discuss how the isotopic signatures are consistent with high reliance on animal sources rather than plant-based ones. Moreover, δ15N values in carnivores are elevated by trophic level effects, which are difficult to achieve through plant consumption alone.
3. Archaeological Evidence:
Isotopic evidence is corroborated by the archaeological record, which shows a significant number of hunting tools and faunal remains associated with Neanderthal and Upper Paleolithic human sites. These findings indicate not only the consumption but also the processing of large quantities of meat, underscoring a diet heavily reliant on animal sources (Gaudzinski-Windheuser & Roebroeks, 2011).
4. Convergence with Dental Microwear and Morphological Analysis:
Additional evidence from dental microwear and morphology supports a meat-focused diet. The reduced tooth size and microwear patterns of Neanderthals and Upper Paleolithic humans align with a diet that includes significant animal protein, as these adaptations are typical of high-protein, lower-fiber diets that require less mastication (Ungar, 2012).
In summary, stable isotope studies do indicate a high-protein, animal-focused diet for both Neanderthals and early modern humans, when interpreted alongside other archaeological and morphological evidence. These findings collectively refute the assertion that stable isotope data fail to show significant meat consumption in Pleistocene hominins. Furthermore, the presence of plant materials in so called "paleopoop" serves only to confirm our ancestors Hypercarnivore approach because they would absolutely have included plant foods when the hunt was either unsuccessful or meat availability was low... It is folly to suggest they were largely plant based.
References:
- Bocherens, H. (2009). Neanderthal dietary habits: Review of the isotopic evidence. In *Human Paleobiology and the Origins of Homo* (pp. 241-256).
- Bocherens, H., Drucker, D.G., Billiou, D., Patou-Mathis, M., & Vandermeersch, B. (2005). Isotopic evidence for diet and subsistence pattern of the Saint-Césaire I Neanderthal: Review and use of a multi-source mixing model. *Journal of Human Evolution*, 49(1), 71-87.
- Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., & Roebroeks, W. (2011). A skillful hand: Techniques and expertise in the production of Middle Paleolithic hand tools. *Current Anthropology*, 52(S4), S4-S14.
- Richards, M.P., & Trinkaus, E. (2009). Isotopic evidence for the diets of European Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 106(38), 16034-16039.
- Ungar, P.S. (2012). Dental evidence for the reconstruction of diet in Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Quaternary International*, 279, 22-26.
This does not mean that the make up of the diet of Neanderthals was the same as that of the carnivores, though it does indicate that they ate some herbivores. From the previous study we see that the Pleistocene Neanderthals were eating substantial amounts of protein from plants (which generally have a much lower protein content than meat indicating the individuals must have had a lot of carbohydrate in their diet especially if the protein source was tubers) plus the fossilised faeces record shows they were consuming 100 grams of fibre daily: so nothing like a ‘carnivore’ diet at all.
Jo...
It seriously doesn't take a brain surgeon or rocket scientist to spot that glaring issues with that arguement...
Anyone with an ounce of understanding in botany and/or agriculture will be able to point out that during the Upper Pleistocene there was only wild plants to rely on when the hunt was unsuccessful and that the kinds of wild (non-domesticated) plants available simply could not yield protein in the quantities necessary to place humans & Neanderthals on the same trophic level as other carnivores... 🤦♂️
During the Upper Pleistocene, Neanderthals and early modern humans likely supplemented their meat-heavy diets with the vegetation available, though most plant sources would have contributed limited protein compared to animal foods. The types of vegetation available varied by region but typically included nuts, tubers, seeds, and other hardy plants. Here’s a breakdown of some of the key plant sources and their nutritional contributions:
1. Nuts and Seeds: In some regions, wild nuts like acorns, hazelnuts, and possibly pine nuts could have been available. These foods are energy-dense, with a reasonable amount of fat and, in some cases, moderate protein. However, while nuts can provide calories, they are generally lower in protein than animal sources and may not have been significant protein sources in the quantities available or consumed.
2. Tubers and Root Vegetables: Wild tubers and roots, including varieties of wild yam and sedge roots, were likely foraged. Tubers provide carbohydrates and can be an important calorie source, but they are relatively low in protein. Evidence suggests that Neanderthals and early humans could have processed and cooked these to make them more digestible (Henry et al., 2011), but they still fall short of providing the protein density found in animal foods.
3. Wild Legumes and Seeds: Some leguminous plants (like wild pea varieties) existed during the Pleistocene and could provide a moderate source of protein. However, legumes generally require cooking to unlock their protein potential fully, and without controlled cooking techniques, these may not have been significant in Neanderthal diets. Still, early modern humans might have had more controlled fire use, making legumes a more viable protein source for them.
4. Berries and Small Fruits: Fruits like berries were also likely consumed, providing essential micronutrients and fiber, but they contain minimal protein. These would have been seasonal, providing variety rather than substantial nutrition year-round.
5. Green Vegetation: Hardy greens, including wild grasses and leaves, were likely available as seasonal foraging options. While these plants provide essential vitamins and minerals, they are very low in protein and would have contributed primarily fiber rather than macronutritional value.
Nutritional and Physiological Limits of Pleistocene Vegetation:
The available vegetation could offer supplemental calories, fiber, and micronutrients, but none of these plants would have provided protein at the levels of animal sources, nor would they have been abundant enough year-round to meet protein needs. High δ15N levels in stable isotope studies indicate that protein intake was largely animal-derived. Furthermore, human physiology is adapted for nutrient density; animal foods offer bioavailable protein and fat, which aligns with the observed dietary patterns in Neanderthals and early humans (Richards & Trinkaus, 2009).
Therefore, while some plants might have supplemented their diet, they were unlikely to be substantial protein sources.
References
- Henry, A. G., Brooks, A. S., & Piperno, D. R. (2011). Microfossils in calculus demonstrate consumption of plants and cooked foods in Neanderthal diets (Shanidar III, Iraq; Spy I and II, Belgium). *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 108(2), 486-491.
- Richards, M.P., & Trinkaus, E. (2009). Isotopic evidence for the diets of European Neanderthals and early modern humans. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 106(38), 16034-16039.
And you’re not answering the question, why not intuitively chose the majority of our evolution, 22.5 million years of 25 million, and eat mostly fruit and some bugs, instead?
You have lost the plot Ricky, being at a new ‘trophic level’ by starting to eat herbivores doesn’t turn you into a carnivore by suddenly changing 22.5 million years of living on mostly fruit and a few bugs! These humans were perfectly capable of digesting and assimilating wild plants, fruits and tubers. I am not saying the plants placed them on the carnivore trophic level- the meat did. But being on the carnivore trophic level doesn’t mean their diet was that of a wolf.
The carnivore crew spit on the huge amount of epidemiological evidence for plant based diets saying that studies are not placebo controlled (hard to do when people know what they’re eating) but are happy to be guided in their choices by a complete misrepresentation of a capricious isotope technique analysing bones from millions of years ago!