Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

iSURG

  1. Home
  2. science
  3. > mice were fed three types of red meat – pork, beef and mutton

> mice were fed three types of red meat – pork, beef and mutton

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved science
18 Posts 10 Posters 4 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • U usernamesaretricky@lemmy.ml

    Humans historically, also didn't eat much meat up until very recently. More recent research suggests our ancient human ancestors were eating far more plants than meat

    EDIT: For example:

    Here we present the isotopic evidence of pronounced plant reliance among Late Stone Age hunter-gatherers from North Africa (15,000–13,000 cal BP), predating the advent of agriculture by several millennia

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-024-02382-z

    A This user is from outside of this forum
    A This user is from outside of this forum
    acosmichippo@lemmy.world
    wrote last edited by
    #9

    This is just not true in the bigger picture of human evolution. That paper focuses on humans in North Africa 15,000–13,000  years ago which is a very tiny snapshot in time and geography.

    Eating meat is a major part of what separated archaic humans from other primates; it is theorized that the calories from meat is part of what helped us grow our larger brains. Homo Habilis was eating meat 2.6 million years ago, well before Homo Sapiens even existed. Homo Erectus hunted to the point of wiping out many large herbivores over a 1.5 million year time period. They are meat regularly enough for tapeworms to speciate specifically for us as hosts.

    U 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • A acosmichippo@lemmy.world

      This is just not true in the bigger picture of human evolution. That paper focuses on humans in North Africa 15,000–13,000  years ago which is a very tiny snapshot in time and geography.

      Eating meat is a major part of what separated archaic humans from other primates; it is theorized that the calories from meat is part of what helped us grow our larger brains. Homo Habilis was eating meat 2.6 million years ago, well before Homo Sapiens even existed. Homo Erectus hunted to the point of wiping out many large herbivores over a 1.5 million year time period. They are meat regularly enough for tapeworms to speciate specifically for us as hosts.

      U This user is from outside of this forum
      U This user is from outside of this forum
      usernamesaretricky@lemmy.ml
      wrote last edited by
      #10

      Humans and human ancestors have also been consuming large quantities of plants for far earlier than that. Here's another paper looking 780,000 years ago finding a wide amount of plants consumed

      we demonstrate that a wide variety of plants were processed by Middle Pleistocene hominins at the site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov in Israel (33° 00’ 30” N, 35° 37’ 30” E), at least 780,000 y ago. These results further indicate the advanced cognitive abilities of our early ancestors, including their ability to collect plants from varying distances and from a wide range of habitats and to mechanically process them using percussive tools.

      Just a moment...

      favicon

      (www.pnas.org)

      I am not saying that hunting didn't happen (it definitely did). I am just saying that more recent research is painting a very different picture of the level of consumption of it

      L 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • perogiboi@lemmy.caP perogiboi@lemmy.ca

        My parents fed me red meat for almost every dinner I can recall growing up. I’m early 30s and my cholesterol is very high. I was able to drop my cholesterol significantly in one month by changing my diet to mostly vegan with chicken and fish once or twice a week. Switched my morning eggs out to egg whites. Cooked in avocado oil instead of butter.

        J This user is from outside of this forum
        J This user is from outside of this forum
        jassmith@sh.itjust.works
        wrote last edited by
        #11

        That’s very impressive. Dietary factors generally account for a very small proportion of blood LDL. Your diet must have been very poor and you likely have some known genetic mutations which greatly exacerbate the issue.

        perogiboi@lemmy.caP J 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • U usernamesaretricky@lemmy.ml

          Humans and human ancestors have also been consuming large quantities of plants for far earlier than that. Here's another paper looking 780,000 years ago finding a wide amount of plants consumed

          we demonstrate that a wide variety of plants were processed by Middle Pleistocene hominins at the site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov in Israel (33° 00’ 30” N, 35° 37’ 30” E), at least 780,000 y ago. These results further indicate the advanced cognitive abilities of our early ancestors, including their ability to collect plants from varying distances and from a wide range of habitats and to mechanically process them using percussive tools.

          Just a moment...

          favicon

          (www.pnas.org)

          I am not saying that hunting didn't happen (it definitely did). I am just saying that more recent research is painting a very different picture of the level of consumption of it

          L This user is from outside of this forum
          L This user is from outside of this forum
          lumisal@lemmy.world
          wrote last edited by
          #12

          If a species is straight up annihilating multiple species merely through predation, it's not statistically possible for it to be a small amount of meat. A wide variety of plants eaten, as pointed out in that paper, doesn't mean it was mostly a plant diet - if anything, that means it's likely humans primarily only ate plants while traveling during a hunt.

          J 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J jassmith@sh.itjust.works

            That’s very impressive. Dietary factors generally account for a very small proportion of blood LDL. Your diet must have been very poor and you likely have some known genetic mutations which greatly exacerbate the issue.

            perogiboi@lemmy.caP This user is from outside of this forum
            perogiboi@lemmy.caP This user is from outside of this forum
            perogiboi@lemmy.ca
            wrote last edited by
            #13

            Interesting personal assumptions but my diet was quite healthy aside from the daily eggs and meat consumption. As I mentioned in my comment, I replaced my dietary proteins from red meat often to red meat seldom and replaced it with plant proteins. When you consume high cholesterol foods, you’re likely going to have high blood LDL. That’s just physics. The study you linked even says this (as well as the fact that more and better studies are needed for more precise conclusions).

            J 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L limer@lemmy.ml

              Mice do not eat that much meat of other mammals.

              Giving an over abundance of it, for a long time, will shock the mouse.

              P This user is from outside of this forum
              P This user is from outside of this forum
              pulsewidth@lemmy.world
              wrote last edited by
              #14

              What do you think happens when a mouse finds a large carcass in the wild? They just take a few nibbles and then go "that's enough, time for some greens now. Gotta keep my diet balanced". No, they gorge themselves on the opportunistic meal and will return each night until it's gone or inedibly rotten.

              The study is fine. The conclusions, interesting. The sudden 'mouse diet & gut-study experts' disagreeing because they don't like it, reminds me of Facebook tbh.

              J 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P pulsewidth@lemmy.world

                What do you think happens when a mouse finds a large carcass in the wild? They just take a few nibbles and then go "that's enough, time for some greens now. Gotta keep my diet balanced". No, they gorge themselves on the opportunistic meal and will return each night until it's gone or inedibly rotten.

                The study is fine. The conclusions, interesting. The sudden 'mouse diet & gut-study experts' disagreeing because they don't like it, reminds me of Facebook tbh.

                J This user is from outside of this forum
                J This user is from outside of this forum
                jet@hackertalks.com
                wrote last edited by
                #15

                The study is fine as you say, the problem is the news cycle throwing around a very contrived mouse study as anti-meat news for humans.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • L lumisal@lemmy.world

                  If a species is straight up annihilating multiple species merely through predation, it's not statistically possible for it to be a small amount of meat. A wide variety of plants eaten, as pointed out in that paper, doesn't mean it was mostly a plant diet - if anything, that means it's likely humans primarily only ate plants while traveling during a hunt.

                  J This user is from outside of this forum
                  J This user is from outside of this forum
                  jet@hackertalks.com
                  wrote last edited by
                  #16

                  primarily only ate plants while traveling during a hunt.

                  Or when meat was scarce!

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • J jassmith@sh.itjust.works

                    That’s very impressive. Dietary factors generally account for a very small proportion of blood LDL. Your diet must have been very poor and you likely have some known genetic mutations which greatly exacerbate the issue.

                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    jet@hackertalks.com
                    wrote last edited by
                    #17

                    This isn't quite accurate, dietary interventions can have huge impact on LDL.

                    Seed Oils (Industrial oils from processing plant seeds, or vegetable oils) - are known to dramatically lower LDL... Oreo Cookie Treatment Lowers LDL Cholesterol More Than High-Intensity Statin therapy in a Lean Mass Hyper-Responder on a Ketogenic Diet: A Curious Crossover Experiment

                    Ketogenic ABF Can increase LDL from the population average considerably in a few months

                    A long term standard western diet can increase LDL through glycation and oxidation damage to circulating LDL, preventing the liver from reusing that LDL and producing more LDL (so there is a build up of usable LDL and damaged LDL showing up as elevated LDL)

                    All that being said, LDL, and more generally Cholesterol - IS NOT A DISEASE. You would die if you didn't have any, the body will produce it on demand if its not consumed in the diet. The link between LDL (undamaged) and heart disease (the lipid heart hypothesis) is not based on repeatable science, and isn't holding up with modern scrutiny

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • perogiboi@lemmy.caP perogiboi@lemmy.ca

                      Interesting personal assumptions but my diet was quite healthy aside from the daily eggs and meat consumption. As I mentioned in my comment, I replaced my dietary proteins from red meat often to red meat seldom and replaced it with plant proteins. When you consume high cholesterol foods, you’re likely going to have high blood LDL. That’s just physics. The study you linked even says this (as well as the fact that more and better studies are needed for more precise conclusions).

                      J This user is from outside of this forum
                      J This user is from outside of this forum
                      jet@hackertalks.com
                      wrote last edited by
                      #18

                      When you consume high cholesterol foods, you’re likely going to have high blood LDL.

                      It's not a dose independent response, if you eat only cholesterol (like only egg yolks for a month), you will find adding even more egg yolks does not increase the LDL, the excess gets processed into other nutrients or excreted. The feedback mechanisms in regulating LDL are very good, its just a optimization that food cholesterol can be used for circulating LDL, if you didn't eat any cholesterol at all your body would still make LDL.

                      More generally Cholesterol, and specifically LDL, is not a disease.

                      artificially lowering LDL is not actually good for your health. Its far more impactful to measure atherosclerotic risk directly with plaque imaging (CAC for example).

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups