CookingZilla.com Forum Index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requirements

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CookingZilla.com Forum Index -> Vegetarian
Author Message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:34 pm    Post subject: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requirements Reply with quote

Anthropological Research Reveals Human
Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.


Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
Reprinted with permission of the author.


Many claims are set forth stating what the "natural" diet of humans
is
or should be, but in order to ascertain what constitutes the basic
dietary requirements for optimal health, the problem must be
approached from an anthropological perspective which encompasses the
total dietary evolution and history of mankind, a scrutinization and
syntheses of human diets from the earliest times to the present, the
diets of mankind's nearest relatives, the primates, and cross-
cultural
dietary comparisons of primitive and modern societies.


There are one hundred and ninety-two living higher species of
primates
in addition to humans. (30) Until recently, it was taken for granted
that all monkeys and apes were vegetarians, but ethological studies
(1, 2, 12) revealed that all primates, in their natural habitat, also
eat small animals. The National Zoo in Washington attempted to breed
the Amazon Golden Marmoset monkey in captivity, but failed until
animal protein was added to their diet. (5) It had been erroneously
assumed that they were complete vegetarians, but apparently they must
have some animal protein in order to be fertile. With the addition of
animal protein, they reproduce rapidly in captivity. (5)


Until the research of Goodall (16, 52) it was assumed that
Chimpanzees
eat only plant foods, but she discovered that they kill and eat
monkeys, baby baboons, and other small animals and concluded that
there was a small but fairly regular number of them captured and
eaten
throughout the year. Gibbons, orangutans, and baboons also kill and
eat small animals regularly. (35, 44) The simplest of all primates,
the tree shrew, which resembles the supposed ancestor of today's
primates most closely, lives entirely on small animals. Ethological
studies have necessitated the reclassification of monkeys and apes
from herbivores to omnivores, and indicate that all primates have a
basic need for some animal protein in their diet if health is to be
maintained. (1)


The first humans, the Australopithecines (9, 11, 54) (and Homo
habilis), who appeared around four million years ago, included food
plants in their diets, but they apparently ate a large number of
small
animals and were scavengers; they ate the remains of any large
animals
they could find, and therefore were able to secure a large amount of
meat. (43) Around one million years ago, man had evolved into Homo
Erectur (Peking and Java Man), and had greatly increased his ability
to hunt large game. His life centered entirely around the hunt for
game (4, 20, 50). Following in the evolutionary sequence was
Neanderthal man (early Homo Sapiens), followed by Cro-Magnon Man.
(36)
Again, there has been a progressive increase in the hunting
technology
especially for large game. The driving force that compelled Cro-
Magnon
man to all unpopulated parts of the inhabitable world was his quest
for game. Actually, the disappearance of many game species, such as
the wild horse, mammoth, et. al., was not due to climatic change, but
to man hunting them to extinction in his quest for meat. (7, 2Cool From
the very beginning, the diet of humans has been meat oriented,
therefore the evidence seems to warrant the conclusion that our human
progenitors, from the very beginning around four million years ago,
have relied heavily upon meat as a major source of food; they were
omnivorous, but the emphasis was on meat, not on plant foods. (7) Man
turned only to agriculture, which began around 10,000 years ago, when
he had largely exhausted the seemingly endless supply of game due to
his ever increasing population. (7)


Of humans some four million years on earth, 99% of this time has been
that of hunting game and gathering wild plants. (21) And, when the
animals had been hunted to either extinction or near extinction, then
and only then did humans turn to agriculture and animal
domestication.
(7) However, when humans turned to agriculture, a large percentage of
the crops was devoted to rearing domesticated animals for meat. Meat
has been, and remains so when available, the choice food of mankind
because it supplies all the nutrients, amino acids, minerals,
vitamins, and essential elements necessary to sustain sound health.
For example, the surest source of vitamin B-12 is animal protein. (2)


No cultures or people in the world have ever been 100% vegetarians;
however, a number, such as the Masai of Africa (25, 26), Plains
Indians (7), the Eskimo (29, 42, 47, 48, 49) and the Lapps (34), in
their traditional culture, subsist almost entirely on meat and have
been very healthy. When they adapted to our modern diet which is high
in refined carbohydrates, their health deteriorated rapidly; they
developed a high incidence of degenerative diseases characteristic of
our modern civilization, especially heart disease. (2)


In 1957, several hypotheses maintained that there is a direct
relationship between diet, especially animal fats, and coronary heart
disease and cancer of the colon. (19) All of these studies are
controversial because a large percentage of the supporting data has
been epidemiological in nature, and many studies contradictory to
these findings have been made (13, 14, 15, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31,
32,
51).


The publicity given these studies implicating foods containing
cholesterol and saturated fats, such as "red meat," in causing heart
disease and cancer, has prompted many people to adopt, erroneously, a
total or partial vegetarian diet in the hope of maintaining or
restoring sound health and thus avoiding heart disease and cancer.
(2)


For example, Puerto Ricans eat a large amount of animal fat, but have
a very low rate of colon cancer and breast cancer. (13) A comparative
study on the incidence of colon and breast cancer was carried out in
Finland and the Netherlands because both peoples consume about the
same amount of animal fat per capita per day. Even though the animal
fat consumption was the same, breast and colon cancer rates in the
Netherlands was discovered to be almost double that of Finland
although vegetable oil consumption in the Netherlands in much higher
than in Finland. (13)


Weidman and his colleagues (53) carried our a cross-cultural study,
with a follow-up, centered on specific adult risk factors for
atherosclerosis in 103 white school children ranging in age from six
to sixteen; and concluded that diet is not of major importance in
having an impact on serum cholesterol levels. (53) Although Americans
have been recommended to eat a diet moderate in cholesterol and
calories, if carried too far it may result in some high risk factors
for children and especially for those who show low serum cholesterol
levels. (53)


A study conducted by N.E. Hitchcock and M. Bracey in the town of
Busselton, Western Australia, contradicts the orthodox view that diet
is closely correlated with the body's level of serum cholesterol
content indicating a high risk for heart attack. (17) They studied
three groups of mothers and children at Busselton; one with high
cholesterol, one with medium and one with low cholesterol levels.
They
studied the diet patterns of each group and found no significant
difference among them in the percentage of daily energy contribution
of protein, fat or carbohydrates. They also noted that obesity was
not
a factor in the cholesterol level since the levels or the obese did
not differ from the non-obese. They concluded that the result of
their
study strongly indicates that diet does not account for the
differences in cholesterol levels of culturally homogenous groups.
They further state that the "correlation between habitual diet and
average serum cholesterol levels is good between contrasting
populations (for example, people of Japan and Finland)," and note
that
"within a given culture, people eating the same kind of food can have
different serum lipids. Those who develop coronary heart disease do
not necessarily eat differently from those who do not." (17)


As a result of the widespread publicity and promotion of vegetable
oils, millions of Americans are convinced that by not eating meat,
eggs, and dairy products and by consuming only plant fats
(polyunsaturated fats), that they will greatly reduce their chances
of
suffering from heart disease that afflicts and kills a million or
more
Americans every year. Scrutinization of the facts shows that they
have
been lulled into a sense of false security. (23) They fail to know or
understand the following facts that are never carried in the
advertisements:


1. There is no positive or direct scientific proof that eating foods
high in cholesterol raises serum cholesterol levels. (23)


2. There is no positive or direct proof that high cholesterol levels
results in heart disease. (23)


3. There is no positive or direct proof that lowering cholesterol
levels will reduce one's susceptibility to heart disease. (23)


4. Consuming great quantities of polyunsaturated fats or oils may be
detrimental to health. (23)


The present state of knowledge in the cholesterol diet controversy
has
been evaluated by Reiser, who stated that the assumption that serum
cholesterol is directly related to saturated (animal fats) and
cholesterol in the diet is based upon three erroneous assumptions as
follows:


1. That each person is at equal risk of heart disease in proportion
to
how much animal fat and cholesterol is included in the diet.


2. One's risk of coronary heart disease will increase with the rise
of
serum cholesterol.


3. One can control the rise in serum cholesterol by eliminating
animal
fats and cholesterol containing foods.


He categorically sets forth clinical data that the above assumptions
are invalid when subjected to strict scientific investigation and do
not provide justification for people eliminating all animal fats and
meat from their diet. (38, 39, 40)


Michael DeBakey, world renowned heart surgeon from Houston, who has
devoted extensive research into the cholesterol coronary disease
theory, states that out of every ten people in the United States who
have atherosclerotic heart disease, only three or four of these ten
have high cholesterol levels; this is approximately the identical
rate
of elevated cholesterol found in the general population. (10) His
comment: "If you say cholesterol is the cause, how do you explain the
other 60 percent to 70 percent with heart disease who don't have a
high cholesterol?" In 1964 DeBakey made an analysis of cholesterol
levels from usual hospital laboratory testing of 1,700 patients with
atherosclerotic disease and found there was no positive or definitive
relationship or correlation between serum cholesterol levels and the
extent or nature of atherosclerotic disease. (10)


A comparative study of men in Crete and the village of Crevalcore,
Italy, indicates that there is probably no relationship between serum
cholesterol and coronary heart disease when the level is 245 mg of
cholesterol per 100ml. (38, 39, 40) The men in Crete show serum
cholesterol levels of 200mg/dl and have an incidence of less than one
coronary heart disease per 100 men in five years. In contrast, the
men
in Crevalcore with similar serum cholesterol levels suffer an
incidence of approximately six cases of coronary heart disease in
five
years. (38, 39, 40)


Many questions are being asked about the generally accepted and
greatly advertised theory that consumption of saturated fatty acids
(beef, lamb, mutton, butter, and pork) are major factors contributing
to hypercholesterolemia and heart disease, while the consumption of
polyunsaturated fatty acids (vegetable oils) will prevent coronary
heart disease. Rivers states that the trend toward eating so much
margarine and other vegetable oil products may be "exactly the wrong
thing," and explains that because polyunsaturates are very unstable,
extra polyunsaturated fatty acids are added by substituting soft
margarines and stabilized vegetable oils for animal fats and butter.
The difficulty is, he continued, that the two changes lead to a
dramatic increase in the eating of trans-fatty acids that results in
hypercholesterolemic effects that far outweigh the reported benefits
of polyunsaturated fats. (41)


It seems that the human body requires some essential polyunsaturated
fatty acids such as linoleic and arachidonic acid, but the
established
requirement seems to be only approximately 1% of calories. (1Cool
Studies strongly indicate that large consumption of margarine, and
other polyunsaturated vegetable fats, may be conducive to cancer.
(37)
Animal experiments found that rats fed a chemical carcinogen in
addition to 20% vegetable polyunsaturated fat and a much higher
incidence of tumors than when fed a carcinogenic with animal fat.
(37)
In a similar experiment, rats treated with a carcinogen and given 5%
corn oil had a 3.5 times higher incidence of colon tumors that did
rats who were maintained on 5% lard. (37)


Studies have also linked a high intake of polyunsaturates, which is
probably over 10% of the average American's diet, with vitamin
deficiencies, liver damage, premature aging, nutritional muscular
dystrophy, cancer, and severe blood disease in infants. (23)
Polyunsaturated fatty acids are believed to be highly reactive
chemical compounds that render them possibly harmful; they can be
oxidized by ordinary cooking in one's body when they react with
nitrous oxide in smog, from X-rays and sunlight and some trace metals
such as iron. (23) Passwater states that of fourteen tests conducted,
all showed a high correlation between eating high amounts of
polyunsaturates in the form of corn oil, peanut oil, margarines,
soybean oil, et al., and notes that presently Americans eat two to
three times more vegetable oils than were consumed sixty years ago.
He
stresses that only from two to four percent of one's diet should
consist of vegetable fats. (33)


Most hunting and gathering societies eat a large amount of meat. The
classical example is the Eskimo who lived almost entirely on land and
sea mammals, fish and birds. Anthropologist Vilhjalmur Steffansson,
who spent many years living with the Eskimo around the turn of the
century, found that they were in excellent health and remained so as
long as they maintained their traditional diet. (47) It was
discovered
that as long as they ate fresh meat, they obtained an ample supply of
vitamin C which was previously thought to come only from plant
sources. However, cooking at high temperatures destroys vitamin C in
both meat and plant foods.


Although it was accepted that the Eskimo thrived in a high state of
good health on an almost complete meat diet, authorities stated that
the diet would probably be harmful for Europeans. To prove the thesis
that a 100% meat diet is sufficient for sound health, Vilhjalmur
Steffansson and Karsten Anderson submitted themselves to an
experiment
conducted by The Russell Sage Institute of Pathology at Bellevue
Hospital, an affiliate of the Medical College of Cornell University.
For a period of one year, they ate only fresh meat in the ratio of
two
pounds of fresh lean meat to one-half pound of fat per day.
Steffansson, who had been on the Eskimo diet for years, remained in
good health, while Anderson was found to be in much better physical
condition than when he began the experiment. (47) Steffansson
continued to live on the Eskimo diet for many decades, in very good
health, until his death at the age of 83.


Otto Schaeffer, a specialist in internal medicine and director of the
Northern Medical Research Unit at Charles Campbell Hospital, Arctic
Canada, found that as long as the Eskimo lived on his native diet in
the traditional manner, he remained in sound health and was
practically free from degenerative diseases, especially those that
afflict Americans. (42) He reports that with the adoption of the
white
man's diet, which consists largely of refined carbohydrates (sugar,
white flour), processed polyunsaturated fats, and other processed
foods, the Eskimo is widely afflicted with all the degenerative
diseases common to our modern society. (42)


There is a relationship between diet and degenerative diseases, but
the total history of mankind strongly indicates that the relationship
is not one of consuming meat and animal fats. Anthropological data
strongly suggest that as human societies developed a greater
dependence on cereal grain crops and other carbohydrate foods, such
was accompanied by undermining the health adaptations of food-
producing populations unless they were successfully able to maintain
a
balance between meat and animal protein and their relatively low
content protein plant crops such as rice, wheat, barley, potatoes,
and
corn. (6, 34) Since the last century, this deterioration has been
accelerated to a very high level due to the ever increasing use of
sugar (55, 56, 57, 5Cool, refined white flour, coffee and other
caffeinated beverages, excessive consumption of salt, alcohol,
chemical preservatives, synthetic, processed and junk foods. (2)


it is in investigating the relationship of the effects that these
foods have upon the body, including smoking, that will probably be
most fruitful in providing answers to the ever increasing rate of
degenerative diseases.


Anthropological research proves that humans are both animal and plant
eaters, but of the two, animal foods are essential in human
nutrition.
(2) The wisest diet is no doubt the one humans have followed for
millions of years, a diet that emphasizes fresh meat or animal
protein
supplemented with wholesome plant foods augmented by ample exercise.


References


1. Abrams, H. Leon, Jr., "The Relevance of Paleolithic Diet in
Determining Contemporary Nutritional Needs," J. Applied Nutr.
31:43-59. (1979).


2. Abrams, H. Leon, Jr., "Vegetarianism: AnAnthropological/
Nutritional
Evaluation," J. Applied Nutr. 32:53-87. (1980).


3. Bates, Marston, Gluttons and Libertines, New York, Random House,
pp. 48-49, (1967).


4. Braidwood, Robert J., Prehistoric Men, 8th edition, Glenville,
Ill., Scott, Foresman and Co., pp. 52-113, (1975).


5. Campbell, Sheldon, "Noah's Ark in Tomorrow's Zoo; Animals are a-
comin', two-by-two," Smithsonian, 8:42-50, (1978).


6. Cassidy, C.M., "Nutrition and Health in Agriculturalists and
Hunter-
Gatherers," Nutrtional Anthropology, Jerome, Norge W., Randy F.
Kandel
and Frettel H. Pelto, editors, Pleasantville, New York, pp. 117-179,
(1980).


7. Cohen, Mark Nathan, The Food Crisis in Pre-History, New Haven,
Yale
University Press, p. 15, (1977).


8. Constable, George, The Neanderthals, New York, Time-Life Books,
(1973).


9. Dart, Raymond, Adventures With the Missing Link, New York, Viking
Press, p. 255, (1969).


10. De Bakey, Michael, JAMA, 189:655-659, (1964).


11. Edey, Maitland A and The Editors of Time-Life Books, The Missing
Link, New York, Little, Brown, (1972).


12. Eimerl, Sarel, Devore, Irven, and the Editors of Life, The
Primates, New York, Time, Inc., pp. 152-53, (1965).


13. Enig, M.G., R.J. Munn, and M. Keeney, Fed Proc. 37:2215, (1978).


14. Enstrom, J.E. Br. J Cancer, 32:432, (1975).


15. Glueck, C.J. and W.E. Connor, Am J Clin Nutr, 31:727, (1978).


16. Goodall, Jane, Miss Goodall and the Wild Chimpanzees, A
documentary film of Jane Goodall's studies of wild chimpanzees in
their natural habitat in a rain forest in Tanzania, Africa, National
Geographic, (1966).


17. Hitchciock, N.E. and M. Gracey, "Diet and Serum Cholesterol,"
Archives of Diseases of Childhood, 52:790, 1977, and Food and
Nutrition Notes And Reviews, Commonwealth Dept. Of health, Australia,
35:April-June, (1978).


18. Holman, Ralph T., :Function and Metabolism of Essential Fatty
Acids," Nutrition in Transition, proceedings of Western Hemisphere
Nutrition Congress V, p. 77, A.M.A., (1978).


19. Keys, A., "Diet and Development of Coronary Disease," J Chron
Dis.
4:364, (1956).


20. Leakey, M.D., Olduvai Gorge, Vol. 3 Oxford, Cambridge University
Press, (1971).


21. Lee, R.B. and DeVore, I., "Problems in The Study of Hunters and
Gatherers," in Lee and DeVore, Eds., Man The Hunter, pp. 3-20,
Aldine,
(1968).


22. Lyon, J.L., M.R. Klauber, J.W. Gardner, and C.R. Smart. N Eng J
Med. 294:129, (1976).


23. Lyon, Nancy, "Cholesterol . . . Is Just One Heart Threat,"
Science
Digest, 81:28-31, 1977.


24. Mann, GV, OA Roels, DL Price, and JM Merrill, "Cardiovascular
Disease in African Pygmies," J Chron Dis, 15:341, 1962.


25. Mann, GV, EM Scott, LM Hursch, CA Heller, JB Youmans, CF
Consolazio, EB Bridgforth, AL Russell and M Silverman. "The Health
and
Nutritional Status of Alaskan Eskimos," Amer J Clin Nutr., 11:31,
1962.


26. Mann, GV, "Diet and Disease Among the Milk and Meat Eating Masai
Warrior of Tanganykia," Food and Nutrition, 34:104, 1963.


27. Mann, GV. N Engl J Med. 297:644, 1977.


28. Martin, Paul S., "Pleistocene Overkill," Natural History,
76:32-38, 1967.


29. Martin, Paul, "Eskimos, Shocking Example to Us All, Primitive
Diets vs Junk Food," Let's Live, pp. 25-28, June, 1977.


30. Morris, Desmond, The Naked Ape, New York, MCGraw Hill, p. 9,
1967.


31. Nichols, AB, C Ravenscroft, DE Lamphiear, and LD Ostrander, Am J
Clin Nutr, 29:1384, 1976.


32. Nichols, AB, C Ravenscroft, DE Lamphiear, and LD Ostrander,
"Independence of Serum Lipid Level and Dietary Habits, The Tecumseh
Study," JAMA, 236:1948-1953, 1976.


33. Passwater, Richard a., Cancer and Its Nutritional Therapies, New
Canaan, Conn, Keats, pp. 2-114, 1978.


34. Pelto, Gretel H. And Pertti Pelto, The Cultural Dimension of the
Human Adventure, New York, Macmillan, pp. 292-301, 1979.


35. Perry, Richard, Life in Forest and Jungle, New York, Taplinger
Publishing Co., pp. 165-85, 1976.


36. Prideaux, Tom. Cro-Magnon Man, New York, Time-Life Books, 1973.


37. Reddy, et al., Cancer Research, 35:3421, 1975.


38. Reiser, Raymond, "The Three Weak Links in the Diet-Heart Disease
Connection," Nutrition Today, 14:22-28, 1979.


39. Reiser, R. Am J Clin Nutr, 26:524, 1973.


40. Reiser, R. Am J Clin Nutr, 31:865, 1978.


41. Rivers, John, Nature Mag., 270-2, 1977.


42. Schaeffeor, Otto, "When the Eskimo Comes to Town," Nutr Today,
6:8-16, 1971.


43. Schaller, George B and Gordon Lowther, "The Relevance of
Carnivore
Behavior to the Study of Early Hominids," Southwest J Anthro,
25:307-41, 1969.


44. Search For the Great Apes, a documentary film on the ethological
research on gorillas by Dian Fossey and the ethological research of
orangutans by Birute Galdikas-Brindamour, National Geographic, 1975.


45. Shaper, AG, M Jones and J Kyobe, "Plasma Lipids in an African
Tribe Living on a Diet of Milk and Meat," Lancet, 2:1324, 1961.


46. Shaper, AB, "Cardiovascular Studies in the Samburu Tribe of
Northern Kenya," Am Heart J, 63:437, 1962.


47. Stefansson, Vilhjamur, "Food of the Ancient and Modern Stone Age
Man," J Amer Diet Assoc, 13:2, 1937.


48. Stefansson, Vilhjamur, The Fat of the Land, New York, Macmillan,
1957.


49. Stefansson, Vilhjamur, Cancer: Disease of Civilization? New York,
Hill and Wang, 1960.


50. Treistman, Judith. The Prehistory of China, Garden City, New
York,
The Natural History Press, p. 15, 1972.


51. Truswell, SA, Am J Clin Nutr. 31:977, 1978.


52. Van Lawick-Goodall, Jane, In the Shadow of Man, New York,
Houghton
Mifflin, p. 297, 1971.


53. Weidman, WH, LR Elveback, RA Nelson, et al., "Nutrient Intake and
Serum Cholesterol Levels in Normal Children 6 to 16 Years of Age,"
Pediatrics, 61:354-359, 1978.


54. White, Edmund, Dale Brown and the Editors of Time-Life Books, The
First Men, Waltham, Mass, Litle, Brown & Co., pp. 68-94, 1973.


55. Yudkin, John, "Sugar Consumption and Myocardial Infarction,"
Lancet, 1:296-297, 1971.


56. Yudkin, John, "Sucrose and Heart Disease," Lancet 14:16-20, 1969.


57. Yudkin, John, "Sugar Intake and Myocardial Infarction," Am J Clin
Nutr. 20:503, 1967.


58. Yudkin, John, "Dietary Fat and Dietary Sugar in Relation to
Ischemic Heart Disease and Diabetes," Lancet, 2:4, 1964.

Archived from group: rec>food>veg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 5:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Picasso" wrote in message @d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
>
> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> Reprinted with permission of the author.

A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.

Knowledge has moved on since then.

One example:

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starchy-tubers-gave-our-ancestors-brains-a-boost.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> @d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> Knowledge has moved on since then.

Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
changed much!

>
> One example:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...

This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
development.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 11:29 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

>"Picasso" wrote in message
>@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>> "Picasso" wrote in message
>>
>>
>> @d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
>> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
>> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
>> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
>> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>>
>> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
>> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>>
>> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>>
>> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
>Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
>changed much!

An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.

>>
>> One example:
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
>This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
>not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
>minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
>that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
>development.

A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Tree Sparrow" wrote in message @mid.individual.net...
>
> "Picasso" wrote in message
> @d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
>> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
>> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
>> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
>> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>>
>>
>> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
>> Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> One example:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starchy-tubers-gave-our-ancestors-brains-a-boost.html

Another example:

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3, 502S-507S, September
2003
The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: a paradigm
shift?

Excerpt:

A new paradigm is emerging. For the past 10-20 y, epidemiologic, clinical,
and basic science research on the health effects of several plant foods is
greatly expanding scientists' understanding of the role these foods have on
human health and nutrition. Antioxidants, abundantly present in plant foods,
have been postulated to prevent cardiovascular disease and certain cancers
(53-55). Anticarcinogenic properties have been described for a myriad of
substances present mainly in fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods (56,
57).

Plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and whole grains,
provide active substances on which human metabolism is dependent. However,
only a few of those to date have been labeled as "essential nutrients."
Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of not only vitamins, such as
carotenoids, ascorbic acid, tocopherols, and folic acid, but also fiber,
indoles, thiocyanates, cumarins, phenols, flavonoids, terpenes, protease
inhibitors, plant sterols, and a host of other yet unknown and unnamed
phytochemicals and nonnutrient compounds that may protect humans from many
cancers and other diseases (57, 5Cool.

Consequently, the increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease
experienced by populations following diets largely based on animal foods, as
opposed to vegetarians, may be due to not only an excess of energy, total
and saturated fat, and other nutrients, but also a deficiency or very
marginal intake of phytochemicals and other compounds abundant in plant
foods but not yet labeled as nutrients. Accordingly, even though deviating
from the classic definition of deficiency, chronic-degenerative diseases may
also be considered as deficiency diseases, in addition to diseases of
excess. Therefore, the overall contribution of diets largely based on animal
foods to the causation of human diseases from excess, unbalance, and
deficiency of nutrients or other food compounds appears to be noticeably
different from earlier estimates.

Figure 3 presents the proposed model that tries to capture the new
understanding of the role of vegetarian and meat-based diets in human health
and disease in affluent societies. In this new model, the relative
contribution to the causation and prevention of diseases for excess or
deficiency is clearly unequal for the 2 contrasted diets, with a more
favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for the vegetarian diet. Corresponding to
previous models, the total area under each diet pattern curve is the same,
but the shape of the 2 curves varies considerably. The expanded area of risk
of deficiency under the meat-based diet curve reflects the risk of diseases
largely attributed to "phytochemical deficiency" because of the marginal
intake of plant foods on this diet pattern. In affluent societies, this
model considers the risk of "phytochemical deficiency" diseases-namely, an
unknown proportion of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other
degenerative diseases-among those following a meat-based diet to be greater
than the risk of the classic acute nutrient deficiency diseases for
vegetarians. In conclusion, recent scientific advances seem to have resulted
in a paradigm shift: diets largely based on plant foods, such as
well-balanced vegetarian diets, are viewed more as improving health than as
causing disease, in contrast with meat-based diets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:58 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

On Dec 26, 4:26 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Tree Sparrow" wrote in message
>
> @mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Picasso" wrote in message
> >@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> >> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> >> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> >> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> >> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> >> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> >> Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > One example:
>
> >http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> Another example:
>
> American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3, 502S-507S, September
> 2003
> The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: a paradigm
> shift?
>
> Excerpt:
>
> A new paradigm is emerging. For the past 10-20 y, epidemiologic, clinical,
> and basic science research on the health effects of several plant foods is
> greatly expanding scientists' understanding of the role these foods have on
> human health and nutrition. Antioxidants, abundantly present in plant foods,
> have been postulated to prevent cardiovascular disease and certain cancers
> (53-55). Anticarcinogenic properties have been described for a myriad of
> substances present mainly in fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods (56,
> 57).
>
> Plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and whole grains,
> provide active substances on which human metabolism is dependent. However,
> only a few of those to date have been labeled as "essential nutrients."
> Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of not only vitamins, such as
> carotenoids, ascorbic acid, tocopherols, and folic acid, but also fiber,
> indoles, thiocyanates, cumarins, phenols, flavonoids, terpenes, protease
> inhibitors, plant sterols, and a host of other yet unknown and unnamed
> phytochemicals and nonnutrient compounds that may protect humans from many
> cancers and other diseases (57, 5Cool.
>
> Consequently, the increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease
> experienced by populations following diets largely based on animal foods, as
> opposed to vegetarians, may be due to not only an excess of energy, total
> and saturated fat, and other nutrients, but also a deficiency or very
> marginal intake of phytochemicals and other compounds abundant in plant
> foods but not yet labeled as nutrients. Accordingly, even though deviating
> from the classic definition of deficiency, chronic-degenerative diseases may
> also be considered as deficiency diseases, in addition to diseases of
> excess. Therefore, the overall contribution of diets largely based on animal
> foods to the causation of human diseases from excess, unbalance, and
> deficiency of nutrients or other food compounds appears to be noticeably
> different from earlier estimates.
>
> Figure 3 presents the proposed model that tries to capture the new
> understanding of the role of vegetarian and meat-based diets in human health
> and disease in affluent societies. In this new model, the relative
> contribution to the causation and prevention of diseases for excess or
> deficiency is clearly unequal for the 2 contrasted diets, with a more
> favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for the vegetarian diet. Corresponding to
> previous models, the total area under each diet pattern curve is the same,
> but the shape of the 2 curves varies considerably. The expanded area of risk
> of deficiency under the meat-based diet curve reflects the risk of diseases
> largely attributed to "phytochemical deficiency" because of the marginal
> intake of plant foods on this diet pattern. In affluent societies, this
> model considers the risk of "phytochemical deficiency" diseases-namely, an
> unknown proportion of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other
> degenerative diseases-among those following a meat-based diet to be greater
> than the risk of the classic acute nutrient deficiency diseases for
> vegetarians. In conclusion, recent scientific advances seem to have resulted
> in a paradigm shift: diets largely based on plant foods, such as
> well-balanced vegetarian diets, are viewed more as improving health than as
> causing disease, in contrast with meat-based diets.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How do they define "meat-based diets"? Also, "diets largely based on
plants" does not equate to vegetarian. A plant-based diet is fine,
probably optimal but vegetarian, especially vegan is most definitely
not.

The longest lived people do not follow vegetarian diets. Perhaps
you've heard of the Okinawans? Diets that include the regular
consumption of fish seems to promote health and longevity. I'm sure
you've heard of the Okinawan Study. Look it up!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

On Dec 25, 1:29 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> >"Picasso" wrote in message
> >@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> >On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> >> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> >>@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com....
>
> >> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> >> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> >> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> >> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> >> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> >> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> >> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> >> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> >> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> >Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
> >changed much!
>
> An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.

LOL. No its the face the facts theory. Human physiology hasn't changed
much so you can pretty much stuff your logical fallacy one-liners.

>
>
> >> One example:
>
> >>http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> >This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
> >not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
> >minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
> >that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
> >development.
>
> A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.- Hide quoted text -

LOL. Another one? You're on a role! To you its the "Appeal to
popularity" fallacy because the experts opinions don't agree with your
vegetarian dogma. Nice try though.

P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:58 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Picasso" wrote in message @t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 25, 1:29 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> >"Picasso" wrote in message
> >@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> >On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> >> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> >>@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> >> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> >> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> >> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> >> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> >> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> >> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> >> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> >> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> >Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
> >changed much!
>
> An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.

>LOL. No its the face the facts theory. Human physiology hasn't changed
>much so you can pretty much stuff your logical fallacy one-liners.

You wrote "..theories and opinions haven't changed much" - A clear example
of a logical fallacy.

I have not stated or implied that "Human physiology hasn't changed much."
Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?

>
>
> >> One example:
>
> >>http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> >This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
> >not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
> >minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
> >that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
> >development.
>
> A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.- Hide quoted text -

>LOL. Another one? You're on a role! To you its the "Appeal to
>popularity" fallacy because the experts opinions don't agree with your
>vegetarian dogma. Nice try though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
"An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a
fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or
all people believe it."

What vegetarian dogma? - I posted a link and an extract from the New
Scientist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:59 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Picasso" wrote in message @f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 26, 4:26 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Tree Sparrow" wrote in message
>
> @mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Picasso" wrote in message
> >@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> >> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> >> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> >> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> >> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> >> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> >> Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > One example:
>
> >http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> Another example:
>
> American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3, 502S-507S,
> September
> 2003
> The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: a paradigm
> shift?
>
> Excerpt:
>
> A new paradigm is emerging. For the past 10-20 y, epidemiologic, clinical,
> and basic science research on the health effects of several plant foods is
> greatly expanding scientists' understanding of the role these foods have
> on
> human health and nutrition. Antioxidants, abundantly present in plant
> foods,
> have been postulated to prevent cardiovascular disease and certain cancers
> (53-55). Anticarcinogenic properties have been described for a myriad of
> substances present mainly in fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods
> (56,
> 57).
>
> Plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and whole grains,
> provide active substances on which human metabolism is dependent. However,
> only a few of those to date have been labeled as "essential nutrients."
> Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of not only vitamins, such as
> carotenoids, ascorbic acid, tocopherols, and folic acid, but also fiber,
> indoles, thiocyanates, cumarins, phenols, flavonoids, terpenes, protease
> inhibitors, plant sterols, and a host of other yet unknown and unnamed
> phytochemicals and nonnutrient compounds that may protect humans from many
> cancers and other diseases (57, 5Cool.
>
> Consequently, the increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease
> experienced by populations following diets largely based on animal foods,
> as
> opposed to vegetarians, may be due to not only an excess of energy, total
> and saturated fat, and other nutrients, but also a deficiency or very
> marginal intake of phytochemicals and other compounds abundant in plant
> foods but not yet labeled as nutrients. Accordingly, even though deviating
> from the classic definition of deficiency, chronic-degenerative diseases
> may
> also be considered as deficiency diseases, in addition to diseases of
> excess. Therefore, the overall contribution of diets largely based on
> animal
> foods to the causation of human diseases from excess, unbalance, and
> deficiency of nutrients or other food compounds appears to be noticeably
> different from earlier estimates.
>
> Figure 3 presents the proposed model that tries to capture the new
> understanding of the role of vegetarian and meat-based diets in human
> health
> and disease in affluent societies. In this new model, the relative
> contribution to the causation and prevention of diseases for excess or
> deficiency is clearly unequal for the 2 contrasted diets, with a more
> favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for the vegetarian diet. Corresponding to
> previous models, the total area under each diet pattern curve is the same,
> but the shape of the 2 curves varies considerably. The expanded area of
> risk
> of deficiency under the meat-based diet curve reflects the risk of
> diseases
> largely attributed to "phytochemical deficiency" because of the marginal
> intake of plant foods on this diet pattern. In affluent societies, this
> model considers the risk of "phytochemical deficiency" diseases-namely, an
> unknown proportion of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other
> degenerative diseases-among those following a meat-based diet to be
> greater
> than the risk of the classic acute nutrient deficiency diseases for
> vegetarians. In conclusion, recent scientific advances seem to have
> resulted
> in a paradigm shift: diets largely based on plant foods, such as
> well-balanced vegetarian diets, are viewed more as improving health than
> as
> causing disease, in contrast with meat-based diets.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

>How do they define "meat-based diets"?

Perhaps diets based on meat.

> Also, "diets largely based on
>plants" does not equate to vegetarian.

The quoted example of a plant based diet is a "well-balanced vegetarian
diet"

>A plant-based diet is fine,
>probably optimal but vegetarian, especially vegan is most definitely
>not.

Is that an opinion based on *recent* scientific evidence?

>
>The longest lived people do not follow vegetarian diets. Perhaps
>you've heard of the Okinawans? Diets that include the regular
>consumption of fish seems to promote health and longevity. I'm sure
>you've heard of the Okinawan Study. Look it up!

Another logical fallacy. - Because some long lived people eat fish, it does
not logically follow that to live longer you need to eat fish.

There are many factors of long life found in the "Okinawa Centenarian
Study".

To quote from http://www.okicent.org/study.html "Their healthy arteries
appear to be in large part due to their lifestyle: diet, regular exercise,
moderate alcohol use, avoidance of smoking, blood pressure control, and a
stress-minimizing psychospiritual outlook. However, there are also potential
genetic aspects such as lower fibrinogen levels possibly due to differences
in fibrinogen-related genes."

"Okinawans are at extremely low risk for hormone-dependent cancers including
cancers of the breast, prostate, ovaries, and colon. Compared to North
Americans, they have 80% less breast cancer and prostate cancer, and less
than half the ovarian and colon cancers. Some of the most important factors
that may protect against those cancers include low caloric intake, high
vegetables/fruits consumption, higher intake of good fats (omega-3,
mono-unsaturated fat), high fiber diet, high flavonoid intake, low body fat
level, and high level of physical activity."

See http://www.okinawaprogram.com/okinawa_diet/food_pyramid.html Note that
for meat it states 0-7 servings. - That means that meat, poulty and eggs are
not essential, as recommended by the study you quoted.

BTW good fats, including omega 3 can be derived from non animal sources.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 2:53 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Tree Sparrow" wrote in message @mid.individual.net...
>
> "Picasso" wrote in message
> @t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 25, 1:29 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>> >"Picasso" wrote in message
>> >@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>> >On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>> >> "Picasso" wrote in message
>>
>> >>@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
>> >> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
>> >> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
>> >> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
>> >> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>>
>> >> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
>> >> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>>
>> >> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>>
>> >> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>>
>> >Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
>> >changed much!
>>
>> An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.
>
>>LOL. No its the face the facts theory. Human physiology hasn't changed
>>much so you can pretty much stuff your logical fallacy one-liners.
>
> You wrote "..theories and opinions haven't changed much" - A clear example
> of a logical fallacy.
>
> I have not stated or implied that "Human physiology hasn't changed much."
> Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?

To clarify my last incorrect paragraph: You changed your statement from
"Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't changed
much" to "Human physiology hasn't changed much" in your defence of the use
of "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy. Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?

>
>>
>>
>> >> One example:
>>
>> >>http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>>
>> >This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
>> >not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
>> >minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
>> >that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
>> >development.
>>
>> A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.- Hide quoted text -
>
>>LOL. Another one? You're on a role! To you its the "Appeal to
>>popularity" fallacy because the experts opinions don't agree with your
>>vegetarian dogma. Nice try though.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
> "An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a
> fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many
> or all people believe it."
>
> What vegetarian dogma? - I posted a link and an extract from the New
> Scientist.
>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:57 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

On Dec 29, 2:58 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> @t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 25, 1:29 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >"Picasso" wrote in message
> > >@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com....
> > >On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> > >> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> > >>@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com....
>
> > >> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> > >> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> > >> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> > >> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> > >> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> > >> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> > >> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > >> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > >> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > >Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
> > >changed much!
>
> > An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.
> >LOL. No its the face the facts theory. Human physiology hasn't changed
> >much so you can pretty much stuff your logical fallacy  one-liners.
>
> You wrote "..theories and opinions haven't changed much" - A clear example
> of a logical fallacy.
>
> I have not stated or implied that "Human physiology hasn't changed much."
> Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?

A lie of mine? No, it is commonly understood that human physiology has
changed very little. Whether you choose to believe or not isn't my
problem.


> > >> One example:
>
> > >>http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch....
>
> > >This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
> > >not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
> > >minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
> > >that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
> > >development.
>
> > A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.- Hide quoted text -
> >LOL. Another one? You're on a role! To you its the "Appeal to
> >popularity" fallacy because the experts opinions don't agree with your
> >vegetarian dogma. Nice try though.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
> "An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a
> fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or
> all people believe it."
>
> What vegetarian dogma? - I posted a link and an extract from the New
> Scientist.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Picasso



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

On Dec 29, 2:59 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> @f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 26, 4:26 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Tree Sparrow" wrote in message
>
> >@mid.individual.net...
>
> > > "Picasso" wrote in message
> > >@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com....
>
> > >> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> > >> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> > >> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> > >> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> > >> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> > >> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> > >> Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > > A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > > Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > > One example:
>
> > >http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch....
>
> > Another example:
>
> > American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3, 502S-507S,
> > September
> > 2003
> > The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: a paradigm
> > shift?
>
> > Excerpt:
>
> > A new paradigm is emerging. For the past 10-20 y, epidemiologic, clinical,
> > and basic science research on the health effects of several plant foods is
> > greatly expanding scientists' understanding of the role these foods have
> > on
> > human health and nutrition. Antioxidants, abundantly present in plant
> > foods,
> > have been postulated to prevent cardiovascular disease and certain cancers
> > (53-55). Anticarcinogenic properties have been described for a myriad of
> > substances present mainly in fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods
> > (56,
> > 57).
>
> > Plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and whole grains,
> > provide active substances on which human metabolism is dependent. However,
> > only a few of those to date have been labeled as "essential nutrients."
> > Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of not only vitamins, such as
> > carotenoids, ascorbic acid, tocopherols, and folic acid, but also fiber,
> > indoles, thiocyanates, cumarins, phenols, flavonoids, terpenes, protease
> > inhibitors, plant sterols, and a host of other yet unknown and unnamed
> > phytochemicals and nonnutrient compounds that may protect humans from many
> > cancers and other diseases (57, 5Cool.
>
> > Consequently, the increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease
> > experienced by populations following diets largely based on animal foods,
> > as
> > opposed to vegetarians, may be due to not only an excess of energy, total
> > and saturated fat, and other nutrients, but also a deficiency or very
> > marginal intake of phytochemicals and other compounds abundant in plant
> > foods but not yet labeled as nutrients. Accordingly, even though deviating
> > from the classic definition of deficiency, chronic-degenerative diseases
> > may
> > also be considered as deficiency diseases, in addition to diseases of
> > excess. Therefore, the overall contribution of diets largely based on
> > animal
> > foods to the causation of human diseases from excess, unbalance, and
> > deficiency of nutrients or other food compounds appears to be noticeably
> > different from earlier estimates.
>
> > Figure 3 presents the proposed model that tries to capture the new
> > understanding of the role of vegetarian and meat-based diets in human
> > health
> > and disease in affluent societies. In this new model, the relative
> > contribution to the causation and prevention of diseases for excess or
> > deficiency is clearly unequal for the 2 contrasted diets, with a more
> > favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for the vegetarian diet. Corresponding to
> > previous models, the total area under each diet pattern curve is the same,
> > but the shape of the 2 curves varies considerably. The expanded area of
> > risk
> > of deficiency under the meat-based diet curve reflects the risk of
> > diseases
> > largely attributed to "phytochemical deficiency" because of the marginal
> > intake of plant foods on this diet pattern. In affluent societies, this
> > model considers the risk of "phytochemical deficiency" diseases-namely, an
> > unknown proportion of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other
> > degenerative diseases-among those following a meat-based diet to be
> > greater
> > than the risk of the classic acute nutrient deficiency diseases for
> > vegetarians. In conclusion, recent scientific advances seem to have
> > resulted
> > in a paradigm shift: diets largely based on plant foods, such as
> > well-balanced vegetarian diets, are viewed more as improving health than
> > as
> > causing disease, in contrast with meat-based diets.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
> >How do they define "meat-based diets"?
>
> Perhaps diets based on meat.
>
> > Also, "diets largely based on
> >plants" does not equate to vegetarian.
>
> The quoted example of a plant based diet is a "well-balanced vegetarian
> diet"
>
> >A plant-based diet is fine,
> >probably optimal but vegetarian, especially vegan is most definitely
> >not.
>
> Is that an opinion based on *recent* scientific evidence?
>
>
>
> >The longest lived people do not follow vegetarian diets. Perhaps
> >you've heard of the Okinawans? Diets that include the regular
> >consumption of fish seems to promote health and longevity. I'm sure
> >you've heard of the Okinawan Study. Look it up!
>
> Another logical fallacy. - Because some long lived people eat fish, it does
> not logically follow that to live longer you need to eat fish.
>
> There are many factors of long life found in the "Okinawa Centenarian
> Study".
>
> To quote fromhttp://www.okicent.org/study.html"Their healthy arteries
> appear to be in large part due to their lifestyle: diet, regular exercise,
> moderate alcohol use, avoidance of smoking, blood pressure control, and a
> stress-minimizing psychospiritual outlook. However, there are also potential
> genetic aspects such as lower fibrinogen levels possibly due to differences
> in fibrinogen-related genes."
>
> "Okinawans are at extremely low risk for hormone-dependent cancers including
> cancers of the breast, prostate, ovaries, and colon. Compared to North
> Americans, they have 80% less breast cancer and prostate cancer, and less
> than half the ovarian and colon cancers. Some of the most important factors
> that may protect against those cancers include low caloric intake, high
> vegetables/fruits consumption, higher intake of good fats (omega-3,
> mono-unsaturated fat), high fiber diet, high flavonoid intake, low body fat
> level, and high level of physical activity."
>
> Seehttp://www.okinawaprogram.com/okinawa_diet/food_pyramid.htmlNote that
> for meat it states 0-7 servings. - That means that meat, poulty and eggs are
> not essential, as recommended by the study you quoted.
>
> BTW good fats, including omega 3 can be derived from non animal sources.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Unfortunately with studies such as this one is that vegetarians
immediately jump to the conclusion that if some fruits and vegetables
in the diet are good for you then a diet of nothing but plant foods is
optimal. Now there's a logical fallacy if you ever saw one.

Unfortunately for vegetarians the real-life experiences show that
plant-based diets that includes meat produce healthier longer-lived
people. You can look at the centenarian studies done in the USA or
even the studies done comparing Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons,
the SDA group representing the non-smoking, non-drinking vegetarian
group while the Mormons served to represent the non-smoking, non-
drinking non-vegetarian group. A very good comparison. There were
significantly fewer incidences of deaths from heart disease in the
Mormon group.

South Indians (vegetarian) were compared with their North Indian
countrymen. The Northerners, who consume meat, live longer lives than
the vegetarians from the south.

I remember reading an article at the BBC website where a study was
cited comparing longevity amongst three diet groups; vegans,
vegetarians and meat-eaters. By "meat-eaters" I'm not talking about
about Atkins type dieters but rather plant-based diets that included
meat. The longest lived were the meat-eaters. Second were the
vegetarians and a distant third were the vegans.

One last thing regarding the Okinawans, they tend not to eat to point
of bursting. They finish a meal feeling 80% full (according to the
Okinawan Study).

P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:00 am    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Picasso" wrote in message@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 29, 2:59 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> @f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 26, 4:26 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Tree Sparrow" wrote in message
>
> >@mid.individual.net...
>
> > > "Picasso" wrote in message
> > >@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >> Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> > >> Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> > >> H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> > >> Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> > >> University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> > >> Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> > >> Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > > A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > > Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > > One example:
>
> > >http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> > Another example:
>
> > American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 78, No. 3, 502S-507S,
> > September
> > 2003
> > The contribution of vegetarian diets to health and disease: a paradigm
> > shift?
>
> > Excerpt:
>
> > A new paradigm is emerging. For the past 10-20 y, epidemiologic,
> > clinical,
> > and basic science research on the health effects of several plant foods
> > is
> > greatly expanding scientists' understanding of the role these foods have
> > on
> > human health and nutrition. Antioxidants, abundantly present in plant
> > foods,
> > have been postulated to prevent cardiovascular disease and certain
> > cancers
> > (53-55). Anticarcinogenic properties have been described for a myriad of
> > substances present mainly in fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods
> > (56,
> > 57).
>
> > Plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and whole
> > grains,
> > provide active substances on which human metabolism is dependent.
> > However,
> > only a few of those to date have been labeled as "essential nutrients."
> > Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of not only vitamins, such as
> > carotenoids, ascorbic acid, tocopherols, and folic acid, but also fiber,
> > indoles, thiocyanates, cumarins, phenols, flavonoids, terpenes, protease
> > inhibitors, plant sterols, and a host of other yet unknown and unnamed
> > phytochemicals and nonnutrient compounds that may protect humans from
> > many
> > cancers and other diseases (57, 5Cool.
>
> > Consequently, the increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease
> > experienced by populations following diets largely based on animal
> > foods,
> > as
> > opposed to vegetarians, may be due to not only an excess of energy,
> > total
> > and saturated fat, and other nutrients, but also a deficiency or very
> > marginal intake of phytochemicals and other compounds abundant in plant
> > foods but not yet labeled as nutrients. Accordingly, even though
> > deviating
> > from the classic definition of deficiency, chronic-degenerative diseases
> > may
> > also be considered as deficiency diseases, in addition to diseases of
> > excess. Therefore, the overall contribution of diets largely based on
> > animal
> > foods to the causation of human diseases from excess, unbalance, and
> > deficiency of nutrients or other food compounds appears to be noticeably
> > different from earlier estimates.
>
> > Figure 3 presents the proposed model that tries to capture the new
> > understanding of the role of vegetarian and meat-based diets in human
> > health
> > and disease in affluent societies. In this new model, the relative
> > contribution to the causation and prevention of diseases for excess or
> > deficiency is clearly unequal for the 2 contrasted diets, with a more
> > favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for the vegetarian diet. Corresponding
> > to
> > previous models, the total area under each diet pattern curve is the
> > same,
> > but the shape of the 2 curves varies considerably. The expanded area of
> > risk
> > of deficiency under the meat-based diet curve reflects the risk of
> > diseases
> > largely attributed to "phytochemical deficiency" because of the marginal
> > intake of plant foods on this diet pattern. In affluent societies, this
> > model considers the risk of "phytochemical deficiency" diseases-namely,
> > an
> > unknown proportion of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other
> > degenerative diseases-among those following a meat-based diet to be
> > greater
> > than the risk of the classic acute nutrient deficiency diseases for
> > vegetarians. In conclusion, recent scientific advances seem to have
> > resulted
> > in a paradigm shift: diets largely based on plant foods, such as
> > well-balanced vegetarian diets, are viewed more as improving health than
> > as
> > causing disease, in contrast with meat-based diets.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
> >How do they define "meat-based diets"?
>
> Perhaps diets based on meat.
>
> > Also, "diets largely based on
> >plants" does not equate to vegetarian.
>
> The quoted example of a plant based diet is a "well-balanced vegetarian
> diet"
>
> >A plant-based diet is fine,
> >probably optimal but vegetarian, especially vegan is most definitely
> >not.
>
> Is that an opinion based on *recent* scientific evidence?

Please answer the question.

>
>
>
> >The longest lived people do not follow vegetarian diets. Perhaps
> >you've heard of the Okinawans? Diets that include the regular
> >consumption of fish seems to promote health and longevity. I'm sure
> >you've heard of the Okinawan Study. Look it up!
>
> Another logical fallacy. - Because some long lived people eat fish, it
> does
> not logically follow that to live longer you need to eat fish.
>
> There are many factors of long life found in the "Okinawa Centenarian
> Study".
>
> To quote fromhttp://www.okicent.org/study.html"Their healthy arteries
> appear to be in large part due to their lifestyle: diet, regular exercise,
> moderate alcohol use, avoidance of smoking, blood pressure control, and a
> stress-minimizing psychospiritual outlook. However, there are also
> potential
> genetic aspects such as lower fibrinogen levels possibly due to
> differences
> in fibrinogen-related genes."
>
> "Okinawans are at extremely low risk for hormone-dependent cancers
> including
> cancers of the breast, prostate, ovaries, and colon. Compared to North
> Americans, they have 80% less breast cancer and prostate cancer, and less
> than half the ovarian and colon cancers. Some of the most important
> factors
> that may protect against those cancers include low caloric intake, high
> vegetables/fruits consumption, higher intake of good fats (omega-3,
> mono-unsaturated fat), high fiber diet, high flavonoid intake, low body
> fat
> level, and high level of physical activity."
>
> Seehttp://www.okinawaprogram.com/okinawa_diet/food_pyramid.htmlNote that
> for meat it states 0-7 servings. - That means that meat, poulty and eggs
> are
> not essential, as recommended by the study you quoted.
>
> BTW good fats, including omega 3 can be derived from non animal sources.-
> Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

>Unfortunately with studies such as this one is that vegetarians
>immediately jump to the conclusion that if some fruits and vegetables
>in the diet are good for you then a diet of nothing but plant foods is
>optimal. Now there's a logical fallacy if you ever saw one.

I'm not the one making the claims. You posted a selective out of date
'study' and seem unable to defend it, in any comprehensible way.


>Unfortunately for vegetarians the real-life experiences show that
>plant-based diets that includes meat produce healthier longer-lived
>people. You can look at the centenarian studies done in the USA or
>even the studies done comparing Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons,
>the SDA group representing the non-smoking, non-drinking vegetarian
>group while the Mormons served to represent the non-smoking, non-
>drinking non-vegetarian group. A very good comparison. There were
>significantly fewer incidences of deaths from heart disease in the
>Mormon group.

Provide a citation.

>South Indians (vegetarian) were compared with their North Indian
>countrymen. The Northerners, who consume meat, live longer lives than
>the vegetarians from the south.

Provide a citation.

>I remember reading an article at the BBC website where a study was
>cited comparing longevity amongst three diet groups; vegans,
>vegetarians and meat-eaters. By "meat-eaters" I'm not talking about
>about Atkins type dieters but rather plant-based diets that included
>meat. The longest lived were the meat-eaters. Second were the
>vegetarians and a distant third were the vegans.

Provide a citation. I'd rather read it myself than answer something that may
be a figment of your imagination.

I had a quick look and stumbled across this that I thought you'd like.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6180753.stm

>One last thing regarding the Okinawans, they tend not to eat to point
>of bursting. They finish a meal feeling 80% full (according to the
>Okinawan Study).

As I quoted above "Some of the most important factors that may protect
against those cancers include *low caloric intake*, high vegetables/fruits
consumption, higher intake of good fats (omega-3, mono-unsaturated fat),
high fiber diet, high flavonoid intake, low body fat level, and high level
of physical activity."


P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tree Sparrow



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Anthropological Research Reveals Human Dietary Requireme Reply with quote

"Picasso" wrote in message @y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 29, 2:58 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> @t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 25, 1:29 pm, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >"Picasso" wrote in message
> > >@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> > >On Dec 23, 7:53 am, "Tree Sparrow" wrote:
> > >> "Picasso" wrote in message
>
> > >>@d29g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >> > Anthropological Research Reveals Human
> > >> > Dietary Requirements for Optimal Health
> > >> > H. Leon Abrams, Jr., MA, EDS
> > >> > Associate Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, ECJC,
> > >> > University System of Georgia, Swainsboro, Georgia.
>
> > >> > Journal of Applied Nutrition, 1982, 16:1:38-45
> > >> > Reprinted with permission of the author.
>
> > >> A 25 year old selective sweep of older work, some over 50 years old.
>
> > >> Knowledge has moved on since then.
>
> > >Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't
> > >changed much!
>
> > An example of the "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy.
> >LOL. No its the face the facts theory. Human physiology hasn't changed
> >much so you can pretty much stuff your logical fallacy one-liners.
>
> You wrote "..theories and opinions haven't changed much" - A clear example
> of a logical fallacy.
>
> I have not stated or implied that "Human physiology hasn't changed much."
> Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?

>A lie of mine? No, it is commonly understood that human physiology has
>changed very little. Whether you choose to believe or not isn't my
>problem.


Why didn't you answer my corrected post?

"To clarify my last incorrect paragraph: You changed your statement from
"Human physiology hasn't however and theories and opinions haven't changed
much" to "Human physiology hasn't changed much" in your defence of the use
of "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy. Was that a mistake or a lie of yours?"

I guess it's the same reason for both the questions.



> > >> One example:
>
> > >>http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19526215.100-starch...
>
> > >This idea that starches contributed to our developing large brains is
> > >not a commonly shared one. I've seen this article as well and its a
> > >minority opinion. Most anthropologists continue to share the opinion
> > >that meat-eating was more likely responsible for our brain
> > >development.
>
> > A good example of the "Appeal to Popularity" fallacy.- Hide quoted
> > text -
> >LOL. Another one? You're on a role! To you its the "Appeal to
> >popularity" fallacy because the experts opinions don't agree with your
> >vegetarian dogma. Nice try though.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
> "An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a
> fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many
> or
> all people believe it."
>
> What vegetarian dogma? - I posted a link and an extract from the New
> Scientist.- Hide quoted text -

Why don't you answer questions?

>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
"Western Diet" research shows strong colon cancer connection New work done for the August 15th, 20077 issue of the "Journal of the American Medical Association" (JAMA) says that the high-calorie and low-fiber dietary pattern associated with the "Western diet" are associated with an increased risk of colon cancer re

Learn Which Component of COW MILK is Crucial to Human Health

DDT in human milk and mental capacities in children at schoo

Chef Reveals Secret Recipes to Popular Restaurants Master Chef reveals the secret recipes for many of America's favorite dishes. Now you can impress your family & friends with these unique recipes. Be the first to have the recipes that everyone loves but nobody knows how to make including: * Junior's NY C

sugar research Hi, I've eliminated white sugar from my diet of coffee (equal to about 3/4 cup a day in my coffee.... yes, I know, that's a LOT of sugar AND coffee). the change had some dramatic effects. 1. the profound sleepiness that occured at 13:00-14:00 hours (1 - 2
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CookingZilla.com Forum Index -> Vegetarian All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group