Bear,

I take it you have no problem eating dairy products (at least the dairy fat). Since our ancestors did not eat that, how is it that we can eat it now? Just curious, as I don't really understand this aspect of paleo eating. It seems that most everyone trying to follow a paleo WOE seems to favor some form of dairy, whether it be cream, butter, or cheese. I use to love cheese but wanted to not consume it because of it having foreign proteins, etc. and so have stayed away from it. I still eat raw butter. BTW... do you eat raw dairy (or "dead dairy")?

Also, the meat I get is from local farmers and has been raised as natural as possible. I eat a lot of bison that has been totally naturally raised. And I eat game meat like deer and elk. Is that something that matters? I notice you said it was not necessary to eat "organic" meat. What about eating grass-fed versus grain-fed animals? Or free-range chickens versus factory-farmed chickens? What about omega 3/6 ratios in animal fat? And what about raw meat? How long have humans been cooking, do you think?

Another thing... do you think early humans ever resorted to eating anything other than animals, like if game was scarce? Or did they just gorge on meat to put on extra body fat to live on during times of famine (or even dry meat to save it), or do you think game was always plentiful and available? And what about that "sweet tooth"? I have read repeatedly that it is a "built-in survival mechanism" so we would forage on carbs, get fat, and live on our fat reserves during winter/famine. What is your take on this common assumption?

Thanks for sticking around this thread.

Ummmm.....I don't think it works that way

By the way, is human milk considered a dairy product?

Simply put, populations became too large to be supported by the game that could be found.

Very simply put. In other words, they were beginning to exceed the carrying capacity of the land. They had to take advantage of other food sources, albeit not as nutritious as their hunting provided them.

I don't have time right now to elaborate. Perhaps someone else could jump in here. THANKS!

How about the game became aware they were being hunted and started avoiding the area?

It's a misnomer that primitive man was a total carnivore. From my research/recollection primitive man's diet did not exceed 70% protein.

I suggest that people coming on to this thread read ALL my posts first before asking about things I have already covered, like dairy, eggs etc. Animal husbandry was a true paleo food solution, and appeared well before agriculture.

Perhaps a better comparison, rather than with the great apes, who are not in the direct human evolutionary line and separated from us over 4 million ybp, but with the tree shrew, which of all the primates of today is still a specialised insectivore. The mountain gorilla is today's largest non-specialist insectivore- massive backs provide the power to strip the bark off grub- infested trees. Captive gorillas didn't accept red meat as food, but ate vegetation on offer, the basis of the formerly held (false) assumption they were herbivores. However they all proved infertile until animal-based food was given to them in an acceptable form to replace their natural food-bugs. The tree shrew (looks like a big mouse with very human-shaped ears) evolved from a precursor insectivore placed earlier in our direct ancestral lineage. That man may have been an opportunist (like the dog) way back is perfectly reasonable, an my explain why, unlike felines both dogs and men are able to manage some vegetation- but we have very little capacity and we pay a price in tooth decay and wear, stomach/intestinal/gall bladder problems, arterial blockage and the auto-immune syndrome, diabetes. Not value for 'biological money' except for short periods of no food animal. I suggest reading about what is now known about apes in the professional scientific journals before making spurious statements about the dietary habits of the great apes, there has been extensive recent research in the literature on dietary habits. By the way- chimps like monkey meat best- and nothing better than a nice fat baboon. They hunt in cooperative groups very like we do.


The false claim about carnivores eating the stomach and/or its contents is an ancient vegetarian hoax. No Inuit would consider eating the stomach of a prey animal as food. Dogs won't eat it and neither will my domestic cat. In spite of being 15 yrs old, and castrated, he loves to chow down on wild baby bunny- he eats the little buggers bones, skull and all, but carefully leaves the furry feet, stomach and intestines in a pile in the middloe of a path. My guess is, it is 'bragging rights' he is exercising. How he could know that rabbits are a serious pest here is a mystery

'Dead dairy'- right. The cult of raw-milkers. I would have to say that the cream and butter from a home cow might be a bit tastier, but the major claim raw-milkers make is about the damage heat does to the calcium which is not a part of butter or cream, and many cheeses are made from raw milk in Europe. Pasteurisation by flash-heating and immediate flash cooling of commercially marketed diary provides protection from a range of nasties and is worth way more than any perceived loss.

Milk (of any animal) is not good for adults, especially low fat or skim- they feature prominently in the market trollies pushed by very obese individuals in all the market I have been in. Children have milk-specific enzyme systems in the stomach up to about 6 yrs, adults do not. Human babies do poorly on non-human milk, the best you can get as a substitute for mum is mare's milk.

Before that human populations were locked into prey availability, vis-a-vis the Inuit- were right up until recent time. Inuit are known to have life-spans to 90+, but most never make that figure due to various kinds of accidents, trichinosis from eating raw arctic predators meat and overall body damage from sometimes lengthy periods of starvation due to scarcity of prey animals.

Of course a meat diet did not and in fact cannot exceed or even reach 70%- it is toxic at hign levels. It was ~20% to maybe as high as 50% in times of low fat on the prey available. The all meat diet is NOT in strict terms a 'low carb diet', it is a high FAT diet. It is possible to survive a verylong period on not pretein as well as not carbs, in other words on fat alone- many months can go by. In a shortage of dietary protein the body becomes very conserving of amino acids and if not damaged, does not break them down, but recycles them

Correction (oops)

Of course IN a meat diet, PROTEIN did not, and in fact cannot exceed or even reach 70%- it is toxic at hign levels.

It was ~20% to maybe as high as 50% in times of low fat on the prey available.

I'm very well aware of the concept of carrying capacity. However, what puzzles me is that you are all so certain about these things. In this thread is too much "IS" and too little "MAY". I think science is far too sketchy as to allow to draw such definite conclusions.

Regarding the reoccurring example of the hunting chimps: what about bonobos? They rarely hunt and focus their lives mainly on having 20 orgies a day. We as humans are thought to be in between chimps and bonobos.

I definitely want to be reincarnated as a Bonobo.

Would you please cite a reference or two for this.

The sexual practices of the bonobos is a very interesting subject. Google it and you'll find lots of good material. They use sex as a form of social intercourse. (pun intended) It's a greeting, a hand shake, a way of apologizing, and they do it in every possible combination of genders and positions. (I've seen footage of them having a quickie while both were hanging from a branch)

Whenever I read about eating the contents of herbivore intestines, I remember a travel show I saw (Globe Trekker with Ian Wright). The host is way out in Lapland in the middle of nowhere. His guide, a professional reindeer hunter, shoots a reindeer and while gutting it offers some of the partially digested intestinal material to the show's host, insisting it is an Arctic delicacy. When the host tentatively tries a bit and spits it out as the most vile tasting stuff, the guide laughs heartily at this bit of Laplander humor. He then says that no one actually eats the stuff, it's disgusting. And this is a guy who subsists on an almost totally reindeer diet all year long so eats just about every part but the hooves.

Ever since seeing this, I am very skeptical of this story of eating the partially digested lichens and scrub grass the caribou or reindeer or whatever live on.

Just my experience. Maybe some early arctic explorers had this same joke played on them and they bought it, hook line and sinker while their indigenous guides just laughed at them.

Plane

Sorry for the hijack: I read a book probably 10 or more years ago called "Peacemaking Amoung Primates". It was VERY thought provoking. Anyway, it covered the Bonobo social structure. I especially liked the end where they compared human peacemaking with primate peacemaking... especially the bit with Kruschev's pounding his shoe on a desk at the UN. Very, very, very excellent work.

You gotta read "Our Inner Ape" by Frans der Waal. One of the most intriguing books I've ever read. de Waal is leading primatologist and he does a great job in working out how chimps, bonobos, and humans are alike and not alike. A great read!

Woah there guys. One random guy pops up on the board, lays down his opinion, and suddenly everyone is like "thank you for validating me! I shall now go forth and eat nothing but critters for the rest of my days."

Have you left your common sense at the door?

Now, I'm not picking on The Bear. (hi The Bear!) I'm sure his way of eating has worked for him over the years, or he wouldn't be here. I'm merely pointing out that hearing an anecdote about one person does not equal adequate research before radically changing your diet. Now, all of us here have changed our diet to some extent or another or we wouldn't be here. But I'm willing to wager that we did it after reading, reading, and reading some more and coming to an educated conclusion that seems to fit all the facts. Maybe The Bear has a valid conclusion about his diet. I don't know, because I have done no research on it yet. It is definitely intriguing though, and has sparked my interest enough that I WILL start doing some research on it. That doesn't mean I'm gonna run out and immediately radically change my eating patterns because one guy said so.

I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just honestly concerned for people.

BTW, The Bear, I think I ran across your webpage about two years ago and was intrigued enough about the essays that I remembered them today when I clicked over there! The internet is a small world.

What?!?! Why not, this is the guy that helped design the greatful dead's logo!!! That's gotta be worth something!!!