The discussion of vegetarianism and nutrition has gotten pretty heated in that thread. Passionate folks are saying all kinds of interesting but contradictory things, such as: you need a high protein diet, you need a high carb diet, you need to hug Mr. Atkins, a no meat diet is best, or iron intake is fine as long a you are not doing Ironman distances, etc. Well, here is a wrench thrown into the works.
The human body and human race is amazingly adaptable. That is why there are over 6 billion of us on this planet. And we human beings can survive on an amazing range of good or crappy food for a surprisingly long time. But what exact diet we human beings are best evolved for is still in dispute, even by anthropologists who have studied this for a lifetime.
But perhaps we can agree on a few things. Whatever diet we ARE best evolved to consume (if there even is only one such diet) is probably impossible to reproduce today for about 99% of us (many of the foods, meats, whatever, in their original forms, are simply unavailable).
The next assumption that is probably valid is that observing what our nearest living cousins (the great apes, especially those that share well over 98% of our genetic material) eat in UNDISTURBED conditions is probably (read: probably, NOT absolutely) a good hint of what we might be designed to eat. Mitigating factors to all of this would be: do any apes still live in undisturbed conditions? Do any apes do Ironman races? Are we human beings designed to do 10 hour endurance events?
Another assumption that might carry some weight is that it may be wise to be initially very skeptical and wary of “new”, fad type diets that promise stupendous results, especially those that focus on weight loss (the current obsession of Western civilization) as their main selling point. And especially those that promise to make a lot money for someone (usually not the dieter, but more likely the book writer, the TV guest, the seminar speaker, the supplement makers, a particular agricultural lobby, etc.).
So where does that leave us? Well, I believe that since there is such an incredible range of what we (at least here in the wealthy developed world) can readily choose to eat, we should consider factors other than just what the “ideal” diet is from a evolutionary standpoint. For example, might there be situations where it is actually better for our health to eat something we are probably not ‘evolved’ to eat (say, organic brown rice) than eating something we might be ‘evolved’ to eat (say, meat from a cow that has been killed 4 weeks ago after living a hellishly tortured and drugged up life)? Every situation is different and the SOURCE of one’s plants, animals, or titanium can be as important as the TYPE of item.
Life is politics and the way we consume has an enormous impact on the world, probably much more than whether you voted for Bush or Gore. In the diet area, I am not a vegetarian, but I do my best not to consume any ‘factory farmed’ animal products irregardless of what I think of what I am ‘evolved’ to eat. Because it doesn’t take much of a stretch for me to see that, considering how we run the places, to the critters in the factory farm “camps”, all people are Nazis. And I think that eating products from animal Auschwitz’s can’t be good for my health or anyone else’s. If that means I have to bend and undergo some trivial inconveniences in my life, I think I’ll manage.