But meat makes you smart... Meat was what made our brains bigger. ------ TOTALLY FALSE! Despite the myth being debunked, many meat eaters, and even doctors, still literally believe that meat, especially red meat, was what made our brain bigger. It was actually a theory, that came from what they called Expensive Tissue Hypothesis (ETH), and even the researcher who came up with it admitted that it was a mistake. Our brain actually got bigger due to the the cooking of plant foods, such as starches (tubers), not because of (red) meat. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6983330.stm rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/.../1729/715.abstract newscientist/article/mg17723871.500 They discovered that humans have multiple copies of a gene, called Amylase 1 (or AMY1), found in human DNA, which is evolutionarily designed for digesting tubers (starches, like potatoes). Ptyalin, a form of Amylase, is also found in our saliva, and in the saliva of other frugivorous animals, which proves that we are designed to eat carbs. The salivary amylase gene has undergone duplication during evolution, and DNA hybridization studies indicate that many individuals have multiple tandem repeats of the gene. The number of gene copies correlates with the levels of salivary amylase, as measured by protein blot assays using antibodies to human amylase. Gene copy number is associated with apparent evolutionary exposure to high-starch diets. For example, a Japanese individual had 14 copies of the amylase gene (one allele with 10 copies, and a second allele with four copies). The Japanese diet has traditionally contained large amounts of rice starch. In contrast, a Biaka individual carried six copies (three copies on each allele). The Biaka are rainforest hunter-gatherers who have traditionally consumed a low-starch diet. Perry and colleagues speculated the increased copy number of the salivary amylase gene may have enhanced survival coincident to a shift to a starchy diet during human evolution. In addition, according to some tooth enamel analysis of fossilized teeth of our ancestors, it appears that most of our ancestors had a mostly frugivorous diet (starch, fruits), while meat was just a small part of their diet. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC17605/ We did not evolve as omnivores, as some experts claim. We evolved as frugivores, and our ancestors were frugivores, as well. Our canines are there for a reason - to tear hard fruits, such as apples and quinces, not for tearing meat. If we would have evolved as omnivores, we would have completely changed our anatomical design by now, and we would now be able to tolerate high levels of cholesterol and animal protein, but we are not. Our anatomical design is still that of a 100% herbivore (long intestinal tract, alkaline saliva, weak stomach acid, etc.). Humans are labelled as omnivores based on the dietary habits of most people in rich countries, not based on anatomical design.
Posted on: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:14:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015