|
[ Essential Fatty Acids Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
The current issue (December/2002) of Scientific American has an article called "Food for Thought," which discusses how dietary change was a driving force in human evolution. I have always wondered why we have bigger brain than other animals (relative to body size), and this article provides some convincing answers, which include 1)the VARIETY of the food we--actually our ancesters--ate; 2)the change from crawling on all fours to standing on two feet; 3) the addition of a little bit (yes, only a little bit!) of animal product to the diet; 4) the introduction of cooking foods, which in turn, added more variety to the diet; etc. The discussions are not in any great depth, but still, it's fun to read.
In Reply to: Interesting article posted by bing on November 28, 2002 at 21:26:22:
As theories go, that one sounds a bit feeble. this one sounds better, and one need not drag food into it at all.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Gregory on November 28, 2002 at 22:17:00:
BTW, Gregory, have you clicked your amygdalas forward to any significant and noticable effect? I've heard interviews with him on Art Bell's show.
In Reply to: Interesting article posted by bing on November 28, 2002 at 21:26:22:
Here's another one on this topic. Discussions on this site are at great depth.
In Reply to: Interesting article posted by bing on November 28, 2002 at 21:26:22:
There is considerable evidence that the increase in FISH consumption when humans were close to extinction forced a huge increase in the frontal cortex of our brains. Without fontal cortex developement, intelligent thought (as we know it) is not possible. Humans, at one point, were forced to become more like scavangers when their numbers were significantly reduced. They ate shellfish and whatever fish they could catch. Big game animals were difficult for them at that point. The DHA/EPA caused an increase in the frontal cortex that allowed humans to gain intelligence in a very short period of time, perhaps inside 1000 years. There is more about this available on the internet. The easiest place to find research is in Barry Sears new book, "Omega RX" available at any book store. The entire book is about fish oil.
Your 3rd point raises an eyebrow. DNA testing has proven that the diet of pre-civilized humans were mostly meats and vegetables supplemented with fruits, nuts, insects, seeds, and whatever else they could muster up. Beans, grains, soy, rice, ect,. these weren't on the menu.
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by R. on November 29, 2002 at 00:13:37:
no, but I've clicked them back to my extreme detriment if that counts. well, no sense going into that here. I've bought
all of his books and are still reading and digesting them. I wish I had gotten them after I got the Invisible
Path material. It would have been easier to integrate the material. If nothing else I am a firm believer in "personal evolution" and the material is excellent for self-quickening.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 29, 2002 at 01:46:04:
Thanks, HY.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 29, 2002 at 01:46:04:
Is that why I seem smarter and clearer thinking lately. Must be all that salmon I am eating. Salmon=smarts. :)
Your 3rd point raises an eyebrow. DNA testing has proven that the diet of pre-civilized humans were mostly meats and vegetables supplemented with fruits, nuts, insects, seeds, and whatever else they could muster up. Beans, grains, soy, rice, ect,. these weren't on the menu.
-HY
So I guess their diet is the one we should be following, meats, veg, fruit,nuts,insects, seeds. Hmmm, I may pass on the insects though. :)
Santha
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Santha on November 29, 2002 at 18:48:05:
Yes :-) that would be the smartest diet, minus the insects of course lol
It is VERY interesting what fish oils do for the brain. Without DHA, the brain cannot function. It's quite amazing
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Gregory on November 28, 2002 at 22:17:00:
ok, it does sound interesting. So the source of energy is a collective force, as the articla suggests. Does that mean several people have to work together to transmit anything? What about the distance--like how far it can go--or is there a limit on distance/space at all? Could it reach the other side of the globe, like china, for instance?
I never doubted about its good nature, and therefore never associated it with anything negative, as the article tries to disabuse. I mean, how can anything be not good when it can make your each and every cell smile? But I keep wondering how many people actually get to experience this. If not many, then why me?
"... in my wicked youth or childhood,
I must have done something good."
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 29, 2002 at 01:46:04:
About your point of pre-historic humans ate "mostly meat," does it help to mention, as suggested by the article, that the "mostly meat" diet was actually the diet of the neandertal hunters? Look how "smart" they were, and how they suffered their pitiable fate as far as species is concerned. ;)
And yes, the benefits of fish is recognized by just about every major health-conscious diet that deemphasizes meat (the microbiotics, the sea-food vegetarians, Paul Pitchford, me, etc.)
Beans and grains came to our diet after the introduction of cooking--a technique that played an important role in the increase of human brains. So in that case, beans and grains most likely also contributed to the brain enlargement. Just a thought.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 00:41:55:
So, they got smart first to think of cooking, and then they developed bigger brains? Sounds fishy to me. Some educated people can't handle basic computer knowledge, but cooking... I think it's much more difficult to suddenly realize that foods can be cooked. They were probably smart already before that.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 29, 2002 at 22:05:09:
Yes, but keep the insects in mind when regular food becomes hard to come by.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 00:41:55:
"Beans and grains came to our diet after the introduction of cooking" Absolutely not. Beans and grains came to our diet after the introduction of agriculture. The preparation of beans & grains is non-obvious. As a crop suitable for eating shortly after harvest it is a failure. "Ex Deux Machina" would have had to have taken place in order for grain and/or legumes processing to become commonplace. This suggests a level of food storage and processing and knowledge far above the techological level of either hunter-gatherer groups OR the non-nomadic agriculturist peoples.
As for the cro-magnan/neanderthal debate -you make proclamations like you where there when it happened! One of the leading theories is that different versions of "early man" were "fielded" until a viable one was found. The field tests were sometimes run simultaneously to compare features and enhancements. There is nothing mysterious or sinister about any of this. As you yourself claim bing, there is no one "native" to the planet. If a sentient species is going to inhabit, it would be best to find one (or create one) that can survive the population process. If you had a vested interest in having that happen, wouldn't you?
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article - Beans and grains came to our diet after... posted by I disagree on November 30, 2002 at 01:59:30:
I got the impression that you and I are not using the same paradigm. It seems to me you are looking at it from a science fiction point of view, while I look at it from a purely evolutionary/science point of view--species survive, or thrive, or extinct all on their own, with no "divine" intervention. But, funny thing is, as I'm writing this at this moment, I also realize the flaw in my own argument (as of yesterday), and realize that if we regard the cosmos as a whole, and everything in it is related, then of course there must be lots and lots of "divine" interventions all over the place all the time. This is still a brand new subject to me, given my background as a dialectic materialist. But I'm learning new things everyday now; so pretty soon, I probably will be able to get some "clues" in this matter--although I get the feeling that NOBODY will ever get all this figured out. Like Walt likes to say, there are more things than you can dream of in your philosophy (my wording). Fascinating!
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by R. on November 30, 2002 at 01:40:52:
"Cooking" usually doesn't happen without fire. At some point in history, early humans discovered the use of fire for warmth and fending off wild animals; and either by accident, or by the "smart-ass" in the group, they found that meat, nuts, tubers, even insects, tasted different--maybe better--when they are roasted over the fire. They also discovered that even the yucky tasting tubers, beans, grass seeds, etc started tasting fine after they are roasted in fire. Well, those tribes that figured this out thrived the times when other foods weren't in abundance; and gradually, they perfected this art of roasting and grilling to the apex of hamburgers and the Texas BBQ. Hope this clarify some points.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by R. on November 30, 2002 at 01:42:36:
Westerner don't even know what they are missing in terms of culinary delicacies. sigh.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 00:41:55:
I have to disagree because the main developement of the frontal cortex of humans happened before the advent of agriculture. If it weren't for this frontal cortex developement, agriculture would not have been possible. I know that you would like to think that beans and grains are the "hub" of our modern diets, but evidence just doesn't support it.
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by R. on November 30, 2002 at 01:42:36:
Absolutely. There is a guy that I saw on TV recently that teaches people how to spot "edible" insects. He teaches that certian species of worms have more usable protein than even chicken. I thought it was neat, but I couldn't stomach the idea :-)
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 12:25:00:
"They also discovered that even the yucky tasting tubers, beans, grass seeds, etc started tasting fine after they are roasted in fire. "
What are your sources Bing? Are you making this up?
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Oh, no on November 30, 2002 at 16:47:24:
The source is in the article, although not in the exact wording--I made their idea sounds more interesting and real-life like.
btw, roasted soybeans in the pods are DELICIOUS! You put the whole soy plant (still green or just ripe) over camp fire, stir a little, and after a while, you get the tastest beans on earth! (only people from northeast China (like my mom) know this trick.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 30, 2002 at 15:01:30:
I KNOW you'd disagree, since we already agreed to disagree.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 18:22:06:
LOL I knew it LOL you are incorrigible....
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Oh, no on November 30, 2002 at 20:16:33:
sounds like R.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 30, 2002 at 15:04:14:
I couldn't stomach an idea of eating raw meat either, some time ago. But today I ate some animal's raw heart with blood in it, and I am fine. I bet I'll eat worms if they are the only things available to keep me alive and well.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 21:01:19:
But it's not. I agree with that, though.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article - Beans and grains came to our diet after... posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 12:12:14:
Theories abound on "what happened when" bing. Being a materialist is just another way of saying you don't know,
and are willing to base your theory on dedective reasoning. This is fine, but does not make your theory any more valid than mine. However you are correct that divine intervention happens far more frequently then is usually given credit for
and from that point of view, various theories have merit.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Helping You on November 29, 2002 at 01:46:04:
Yea, I was going to question the little bit
of meat statement. To see primative people in
Sumatra bring down an elephant with a spear,
10 mi from their village and butcher and
smoke the meat to preserve it and have less
to carry and along the way puch a hole in a
termite mound to get the rope like mushrooms
the termites grow which the filmer said were
the best he ever tasted I wonder if we can
know for sure what people did when ??
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on November 30, 2002 at 12:29:32:
Westerner don't even know what they are missing in terms of culinary delicacies. sigh.
Well, dog/cat doesnt sound that appealing either. :-)
Bing, have you ever eaten cat or dog and what does it taste like?
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article - Yesterday's Science Fiction is Today's Science Fact posted by I still disagree on December 01, 2002 at 01:58:54:
I think you got a point about "yesterday's science fiction is today's science fact." And not only science fiction; legendary stories, folk stories, myths, etc all contain elements that have turned out to be true. All this seem to indicate that whatever that exists in the human imagination is reality already--somewhere, sometime; yes?
"detective reasoning?" or did you mean defective reasoning? If you mean the latter, I've to say it's not so much I'm "willing" to base my theory on it; it's more like that's the only theory I've got right now. But I'm willing to try other theories, though. So what ARE the theories that "abound on what happened when?"
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Good Doggy on December 01, 2002 at 10:02:32:
Never tried cat or snake meat--all of which are part of the famous Cantonese cusine; although I did try dog (sorry, dog lovers:)) and it's very tasty. You see, Asian culture seem to look at dog differently from the American/western culture in that dogs, at best, are guards for country folks; in the cities, no dogs. People seek love/warmth/companionship from other fellow humanbeings rather than from pets. This tradition, like many others, is rapidly changing, though, as China is trying very hard to emulate the American lifestyle. So, yes, there are pets as "pets" now, and pets owners will NEVER consider eating their pets, or other people's pets, for that matter.
As to the taste of dog meat (I'm feeling a little hesitant to go on further but what the heck), it tastes rather like donkey meat but has a more delicate texture. It's really lean--almost no fat; it's also very dense--unlike chicken--and therefore very nourishing. It has a dark color so could be classified as red meat. It possesses an extremely hot nature (as in the Chinese belief in the hot/cold/warm/cool nature in foods), and therefore is a winter treat. In just about every Korean resteraunt in Beijing (or elsewhere) you can find thinly sliced, cooked dog meat, served ove a large bowl of the famous Korean cold (but spicy hot) noodle soup. As far as I know, Korean resteraunts are the only places that serve dog meat. I appologize again for all yo dog lovers over there. ;)
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on December 01, 2002 at 11:12:42:
and here i thought the Chinese ate dog and cat because of scarce "meat animals" and over-population.
i guess you learn something new every day. Vince F., don't let this woman vist you... LOL LOL
bing, doesn't eating dog break your vegetarian taboo? you know, that's repulsive.
you must think that with all these pet dogs americans are just "playing with their food." eh?
some things are better left unsaid bing
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on December 01, 2002 at 11:12:42:
I've never tried a snake or cat, but I've eaten a man. The meat was very tender and delicious, very similar to pork. Good when roasted over friendly fire or part of a soup. But don't think I do it often. I've done that only once when it was a matter of surviving. The man was half dead anyway and his eyes were practically begging me to stop his misery. At least, that's how I interpreted it.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article - Yesterday's Science Fiction is Today's Science Fact posted by bing on December 01, 2002 at 10:30:16:
Perhaps deductive reasoning is what was meant.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by R. on December 01, 2002 at 01:33:48:
Bon appetite!! :-)
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Man eater on December 01, 2002 at 15:10:44:
Oh, geez, your post scared the beejesus out of me!!!
Can you tell us about this experience in more detail?
I also wanted to make a comment that it has been said by cannibals before that 'dark' human flesh tastes sweeter than 'white' meat.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on December 01, 2002 at 11:12:42:
My poor doggy! I will never let him around you.bing without close supervision. lol
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by OMG! on December 01, 2002 at 22:28:50:
There's nothing else to tell. I was hungry, so I ate the man. He was dying anyway. If by white meat you mean chicken, then yes, he was delicious much beyond chicken. I kind of developed a taste for it. Do you want me to eat you?
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Man eater on December 02, 2002 at 01:06:48:
No I meant as in dark skinned people taste sweeter than white people. Well, thats what I have read of cannibals or those in desperate situations who have eaten human flesh. I think you are one of those people that I would be scared to meet in a dark alley! :)
"Do you want me to eat you?"
Is that a threat or a promise?! lol
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by a dog lover on December 01, 2002 at 11:54:19:
Jeee, just abscent from this board for half a day and I've missed all this fun! Yeah, you got me. So ALL you dog lovers now should be VERY, VERY careful when I'm around. lol lol America is surely a free country, with all these delicious free foods all over the place...lol lol My neighbor's dog is barking like hell right now; I'd better go and check on him...lol
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by bing on December 02, 2002 at 09:21:39:
Oh no, bingeeeeeeeeeeee, dont do it!!! Please dont do it!? Resist the temptation!. lol
You crack me up. Your sense of humor is almost as sick as mine. lol
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Miss Bliss on December 02, 2002 at 09:58:50:
nm
In Reply to: Or maybe sicker? Yeah, much sicker! lol nmi posted by bing on December 02, 2002 at 10:12:20:
Bingeeeeeeeeee
How much longer are you going to be in America for? I am going to miss your zany sense of humour and sense of fun
From your crazy pal
*~ BLISS ~*
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Santha on December 02, 2002 at 02:38:27:
I was hoping you'd say something like that :)
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Man eater on December 02, 2002 at 19:34:26:
OH, you are sooooooooooo BAD!!! lol
I was really hoping for that story of how you came to be a man eater!
Are you like my worst nightmare come to life?! heh heh
Santha
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Man eater on December 01, 2002 at 15:10:44:
Hey, I just had a thought. :)
ARe you making up this man eating story? lol
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Santha on December 02, 2002 at 22:42:50:
No, not worst at all. I would only eat you if you were dying and I needed your body to survive. But if you want me to eat you... I could be your best dream come to life :)
In Reply to: Re: Interesting article posted by Man eater on December 03, 2002 at 11:42:28:
You're just too much!!! Crack me up!!! LMAO
I wish I had more of those kind of dreams. lol
I bet you are reallly goooooooooooood too!
(such a nasty girl I am!) :)
|
[ Essential Fatty Acids Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |