Are Humans Carnivores or Herbivores?
September 9th, 2005 by Steve Pavlina
Email this article to a friend
Are human beings anatomically more similar to natural carnivores or to natural herbivores? Let’s find out….
- Intestinal tract length. Carnivorous animals have intestinal tracts that are 3-6x their body length, while herbivores have intestinal tracts 10-12x their body length. Human beings have the same intestinal tract ratio as herbivores.
- Stomach acidity. Carnivores’ stomachs are 20x more acidic than the stomachs of herbivores. Human stomach acidity matches that of herbivores.
- Saliva. The saliva of carnivores is acidic. The saliva of herbivores is alkaline, which helps pre-digest plant foods. Human saliva is alkaline.
- Shape of intestines. Carnivore bowels are smooth, shaped like a pipe, so meat passes through quickly — they don’t have bumps or pockets. Herbivore bowels are bumpy and pouch-like with lots of pockets, like a windy mountain road, so plant foods pass through slowly for optimal nutrient absorption. Human bowels have the same characteristics as those of herbivores.
- Fiber. Carnivores don’t require fiber to help move food through their short and smooth digestive tracts. Herbivores require dietary fiber to move food through their long and bumpy digestive tracts, to prevent the bowels from becoming clogged with rotting food. Humans have the same requirement as herbivores.
- Cholesterol. Cholesterol is not a problem for a carnivore’s digestive system. A carnivore such as a cat can handle a high-cholesterol diet without negative health consequences. A human cannot. Humans have zero dietary need for cholesterol because our bodies manufacture all we need. Cholesterol is only found in animal foods, never in plant foods. A plant-based diet is by definition cholesterol-free.
- Claws and teeth. Carnivores have claws, sharp front teeth capable of subduing prey, and no flat molars for chewing. Herbivores have no claws or sharp front teeth capable of subduing prey, but they have flat molars for chewing. Humans have the same characteristics as herbivores.
But aren’t humans anatomically suited to be omnivores?
Nope. We don’t anatomically match up with omnivorous animals anymore than we do with carnivorous ones. Omnivores are more similar to carnivores than they are to herbivores. For a more detailed summary table that compares the properties of carnivores, herbivores, and omnivores side by side, see this page:
Comparative Anatomy & Taxonomy
The link above also debunks the opportunistic feeder theory, which states that because humans can eat like omnivores, that we must therefore be omnivores. And this is of course false because mere behavior doesn’t indicate suitability. There are plenty of things we can do as a species that would threaten our survival if we all considered them suitable default behavior, such as shooting each other, lobbing hand grenades, or sending spam.
September 9th, 2005 at 3:39 am
As long as people with relevant qualifications, such as doctors and dieticians, consistently tell me that a balanced diet includes fish and meat, I will continue to eat meat.
September 9th, 2005 at 3:42 am
Hello Steve,
I definitely do not agree regarding teeth. Humans do have sharp front teeth. Have you ever seen front teeth of a cow?
What about eyes? Eyes of a victims are usually located on sides so they can see everything around them and escape a hunter. Eyes of hunters are always located in a front so they have 3D view to know exact distance to hunt a victim. Are humans hunters or victims?
Regards
Vilmantas
September 9th, 2005 at 4:15 am
Take a look at
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_087.html
Cecil takes this question on with the following results:
Teeth - we have teeth suited for both rip/tear and for grinding. Seems to me that puts us somewhere between the two types.
Intenstinal length - actually humans fall somewhere in between carnivores and herbivores with a length somewhere around 8x body length.
Intenstinal construction - Herbivores tend to have a variety of special digestive organs for dealing with slow-to-digest plant matter. We lack these, meaning we can’t directly deal with something that won’t digest in about a day.
There are plenty of darn good reasons for being a vegitarian, starting right at the top with it being a lot more healthy than eating meat, proceeding to greater efficiency in obtaining food (it takes how many pounds of corn to get one pound of beef?!?!) as well as avoiding all that messy slaughtering of animals stuff.
Don’t confuse the argument with side items - stick the fact that really hits people where they live - their health!
September 9th, 2005 at 4:21 am
@Tim: lol. Do you know how much nutritional education the typical doctor receives? Even so, doctors and dieticians aren’t consistent in their advice. So what do you do when they disagree, which is certainly the case today?
@Vilmantas: Compared to carnivores, our teeth are dull and non-threatening. Having the eyes in front also makes it easy to read, use tools, and do a variety of other tasks that would likely be harder with eyes on the side. So we’re free to read a book while other species are playing the hunter-victim role.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:02 am
“Do you know how much nutritional education the typical doctor receives?”
No, I don’t. Please tell me how much education my doctor has received. BTW, do you know how much nutritional education the typical personal development speaker receives?
BTW, I don’t trust most doctors. My point is you are assuming you know more than the rest of us. You attitude for the past week on on this diet stuff has come across very condesending. I am neither agreeing or diagreeing with the information presented. The tone is making at least this reader feel insulted for not immediately recognizing the vegan is the perfect choice for all.
Can we now discuss personal development. I am tired of hearing that I should eat my veggies. Not to change the subject, but why is introversion considered a negative quality? Should a use a paper planner or electronic? Covey or GTD or, duh, both? Paper or plastic? I want to try getting up eariler and if I were single it would be easy but how to do this when you have a family/spouse’s needs to consider?
September 9th, 2005 at 5:06 am
I can’t speak for everyone else here, but a carnivorous (but cute & fluffy) critter lives with me, and my “sharp teeth” are nothing like hers in comparison. In fact, I would go so far as to call hers “fangs”. Human teeth are made for ripping and tearing? Ripping what? Not the hide of cows. Speaking of cows, what’s the point about their teeth? They are designed to “cut” stems, leaves, and root things. Flat and sharp, but definitely not fangs.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:16 am
Steve,
With all due respect, you turn me off when you leave the personal development and delve into pseudoscience. You sound like a creationist or conspiracy theorist when you talk about flouride and vegetarianism. When you disagree with 95% of scientists, there’s a chance you’re right, but without credentials or a heap of evidence, most of us are going to regard you pretty skeptically.
GB
September 9th, 2005 at 5:41 am
Steve, with all due respect, this all semms more like facts swinging.
We do have fangs, and our front teeth are more like of a predator, though somewhat undeveloped. And while it’s easier to read and do stuff with both our eyes staring at the front, the initial reason for such a placement was obviously something different.
And while I do agree with you about the vegan diet usefullness - I didn’t actually believe this post.
September 9th, 2005 at 6:03 am
Steve, I don’t think anyone is going to argue that humans are carnivores. Not even the most voracious of meat eaters is going to have a diet made up of more than maybe 60% meat.
I’ll be convinced that meat is not meant for human consumption when vegetarians start living longer than meat eaters. And I’m not talking about comparing health-conscious vegetarians to slobs eating cheeseburgers day in and day out.
The problem with your argument is that there are plenty of healthy people who do eat meat with no ill effects. Sure, we’ve read how you feel much better eating raw vegetables and fruits, but I feel run down when I don’t eat shrimp, chicken, or beef for several days. It’s a personal decision that each person has to make themselves. Trying to convince people that humans can’t eat meat isn’t going to change nearly as many minds as describing good vegan meal ideas.
Another problem with this argument is that it comes off as propaganda. To me, I think it’s great if you’ve found a diet that works for you. I couldn’t care less if that diet includes meat or not. But people who do eat meat as part of their healthy diet don’t want to feel guilt-tripped about it by vegans.
Josh
BTW, I think your blog is awesome, I just don’t agree with this post. And before someone says I can’t tell you what to post on your own blog, I’ll go ahead and agree with that statement. I’m just giving some feedback.
September 9th, 2005 at 6:17 am
Vilmantas said:
“I definitely do not agree regarding teeth. Humans do have sharp front teeth.”
Don’t know about you, but my front teeth don’t look like this or this.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:27 am
On the question of whether our nearest ape relatives are herbivores, check out Craig Stanford’s 1999 article The Predatory Behavior and Ecology of Wild Chimpanzees, which summarises the evidence that common chimpanzees regularly hunt, that meat eating is a substantial proportion of their diet, and argues that early humans likely had similar hunting and eating behaviour. He also cites evidence that pregant chimps with plentiful access to meat are more likely to have a live birth.
On the question of teeth, chimpanzees have formidable strength and the ability to improvise weapons. They don’t need claws and fangs to hunt.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:38 am
Steve:
Our eyes our not located forward so that we can read — c’mon! Human eyes were front and center long before homo sapiens developed reading and writing skills. Our erect carriage suits us for running to and from potential prey. And while our incisor and canine teeth are obviously not as pronounced as a lion or wolf’s, they are nevertheless made for ripping and tearing — and not just ripping and tearing apple skins.
Our closest animal relatives, the apes, will — according to a Discovery channel show I just watched — eat meat “whenever they get the chance.” You should have seen these “cute and loveable” chimps ripping apart a little monkey with their bare hands. They sucked on the bloody bones for hours. Apes, like humans, are omnivorous. That adaptability is what has made human beings the dominant species on the planet. We can live (almost) anywhere and eat (almost) anything. Neolithic humans, who lived far more in tune with nature than we do, were hunters AND gatherers.
If our species is evolving toward strict vegetarianism, it is a social evolution, not a biological one. Our bodies can digest meat perfectly well. Just try feeding a pork chop to a cow. It would probably explode! You are right in many things: we should eat more consciously and demand better, higher grade foods for our families and selves and treat animals more humanely. But most of my relatives have lived to a ripe and active old age by eating a balanced diet and staying reasonably fit. They even wore anti-perspirant and drank tap water! Enduring a life-long misery of Mercola-type vigilance, where everything around us is a potential poison, is not worth the extra few years it may (never proved) provide. This topic is one for debate — please do not present it as a lecture. It is a real turn-off.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:42 am
We are absolutely the best throwers in the animal kingdom, and if what people like is any guide, we’ve got a long history of hiding and then throwing something at an animal to kill it.
We’ve also got some history of chipping flint to substitute for fangs.
The other thing we’re probably built for is eating insects–we’ve got good close vision and clever fingers. I haven’t explored the health value of eating insects, but I suspect the American taboo against it is not a good idea.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:44 am
One more thing about us human, we can conciously choose what to put into our mouth. I have conciously abstained from meat for the past 1 year, and never complained of any illnesses/sicknesses so far.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:47 am
GB:”With all due respect, you turn me off when you leave the personal development and delve into pseudoscience”
For many, making any transition in your life that is beneficial emotionally AND physically, is definitely personal development. Veganism is included in that as well. In the short time that I have been eating non animal products, I feel I have developed not only a sense of overall physical health, but a mental clarity distinguishing “right” from “gray area” from “wrong” as well. That sounds like personal development to me.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:47 am
@Max: Typically U.S. doctors receive less than the equivalent of one semester of education on nutrition. They’re lucky to get one full course on it. As for the typical personal development speaker, who knows? I’m not a typical one.
Diet is a significant part of personal development — finding the right diet for you, whatever that may be, will help give you the energy and resilience to make all the other changes in your life.
@GB: I disagree with 95% of people about a lot of things. Health just happens to be one that has a lot of marketing $ on the 95% side.
As for my credentials, that’s my life itself. I have a Ph.D in growth.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:50 am
Hey Steve,
Love your web. It’s very inspirational!
Human diet is certainly a controversial subject – as we can see! Epidemiological evidence would suggest we are omnivores - and there many independent, multi-decade and multi-country studies to back this up. Consider the Eskimo’s original diet, for example, where study data suggests very low cancer and heart disease incidence.
I think the problem with meat is QUALITY! Especially red meat.
If you want to express your views on your blog which is open to logical argument, so be it. If others have a BEEF with that, then let them be gone. After all, no one remembers the moaners and groaners, but only the inspirators and innovators.
Keep up the good work!
Brad Watson
September 9th, 2005 at 7:50 am
Humans are omnivores. Moreover, there’s scientific evidence that if they hadn’t been omnivores with at least some meat in their diet, we wouldn’t be all sitting here now having this intellectual argument:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14672286
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14672287
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15101252
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15605391
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15701527
as well as evidence for biological selection even in recent humans for genetic variations enhancing the ability to eat meat- and dairy-rich diets:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15480793
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=223100
There’s also serious reason to think that our real problem isn’t with eating meat, but with just eating too much fatty foods (including fatty meats):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14708953
Mr. Pavlina, I love your blog, and even am inclined to try eating less meat and more non-meat after reading your posts. But the religious zeal with which you argue that all meat and dairy are absolutely bad for all human beings reminds me of Catholicism.
To which my reaction is that of Stephen Dedalus in _Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man_: why should I give up nonsense that is beautiful and coherent [Catholicism] in exchange for nonsense that isn’t [in the book, Protestantism, but it could also be Marxism, New Age Thinking, or vegetarianism-as-moral-cult]?
September 9th, 2005 at 8:16 am
Steve, I can’t help but get a vibe that you’re writing about these topics too far into your lifestyle change for most to believe.
Whenever I read your articles, I get the perception that “Here is Steve, who hangs out with Vegans, eats at Vegan restraunts, reads Vegan books and suprise, he’s recommending a Vegan diet”.
You’re so far embeded into the lifestyle that I don’t know if I can truly believe you. It’s like a priest touting the benefits of Christianity.
I don’t want to come off as mean spirited, because your site has given me an insight that most sites don’t even come close to approaching. I greatly appreciate your efforts.
I would love to see you take one of the leading books promoting a balanced diet, and go head to head with the author in a point/counter-point style discussion (like you did with that Lazy blogger guy). Or theoretically, I’d love to see yourself and several other give a detailed account of their 30-day challenge of transitioning to a Vegan lifestyle.
September 9th, 2005 at 8:33 am
I agree with GB, Nick, and Josh. It seems like you have a high level of tolerance and empathy when it comes to differences of opinion in other areas, but when it comes to your diet articles, I must say that I don’t feel very motivated and inspired.
Would 24-year-old Steve have followed your diet advice? Or were you at a different place of personal growth at that age and a different diet better suited you?
September 9th, 2005 at 9:01 am
Whoa Steve! With all due respect, your science is dated. I’m not hear to pick apart your argument point-by-point, but I would like to make a couple comments:
1) studies of shown a strong correlation between consumption of saturated fats and *reduced* risk of stroke.
2) when doctors quote studies to you in support of the idea that saturated fats lead to heart disease, they haven’t looked at the more recent research which controlled for “carbohydrate load.” When you control for carbohydrate load (which is easy to do if you compare American populations with most tribal cultures) you find that there is *NO* significant correlation between saturated fat consumption and heart disease. What you DO find is a correlation between the amount of processed and starchy carbohydrates and heart disease (grains for instance).
3) Vitamin B-12 can *only* be obtained from animal sources, and it is required in our diets. That being the case, it seems unlikely they human beings evolved as herbivores. In fact, it’s impossible.
4) Women who eat the least amount of protein suffer from the highest incidence of osteoperosis.
Just my two-cents worth (but I do make my living do this).
September 9th, 2005 at 9:18 am
I’m going to eat you Steve… =)
September 9th, 2005 at 9:34 am
My teeth tear through raw meat just fine, thank you very much. And yes, human saliva is alkaline - but when you eat meat raw and warm you don’t need any saliva or chewing - you just bite and swallow. Raw meat is easily digested and goes through your system fairly quickly, as long as you leave yourself an hour or so between a green vegetable meal and a meat one. After I eat meat, I usually have an immediate bowel movement that clears the way for the required change in intestinal acidity. With fruits, though, especially ones like tomatoes and citrus, there isn’t even a need to wait before consuming meat.
Most of the rest of your article is a straw man - you’re trying to imply that because humans have anatomy that’s different from other omnivores, this means we’re not omnivores. That’s wordplay - defining a category that excludes us, and then using that definition to prove that we’re not in the category.
As for cholesterol - show me a study that follows human raw meat eaters’ cholesterol. Cooked meats and fats are quite different substances from raw. If you think they’re the same, stick your arm in an oven for a few minutes and tell me it’s still any good when it comes out.
We agree on one thing: less processed is better. But there’s a big hole in your thinking when you conclude that this means you shouldn’t eat meat and dairy. The hole is that you’re ignoring *raw, unprocessed* meat and dairy, as if they don’t exist. They do, and there are quite a few of us out here who eat them.
September 9th, 2005 at 9:49 am
Like many others here, I’m turned off by this stuff in a personal development blog — and I happen to be a vegetarian.
The whole thing comes across as preachy and condescending and, frankly, I doubt that anyone subscribed to a personal development/productivity blog to get nutrition advice.
In being a vegetarian, I’ve found that talking about it with others is much like talking about religion and politics. Everyone has their own opinions and there’s little chance that my brief interaction is going to sway them from those beliefs — especially if it’s preachy. So if spending my time evangelizing isn’t going to change someone, then at best I’ve wasted my time and theirs and, at worst, turned them off. So if someone wants to know more, I’ll answer their questions… but I can’t presume to think that what works for me (in diet, faith, etc) works for others.
September 9th, 2005 at 9:59 am
Steve, I thoroughly enjoy your articles both those of your inspirational and pseudoscience theories. I agree with some of your readers that this article is lacking in objectivity but not that it doesn’t present a valid argument. The information provided and the optional source don’t say either way that humans are carnivores/herbivores or omnivores but rather that they have developed traits of both for varying reasons, dietary needs aside.
As for the vegan, raw and whole foods diet: One of the essential qualities of this life thing is the option of choice. The Vegan thing may not be for everyone, maybe you choose veg., maybe meat; there is something to be said for the dietary type theories as well.
On a personal note: Currently, I’m struggling with giving up my Polish diet (meat for breakfast, meat for lunch, and meat for supper… and some more meat for snacktime, mmmmm…..meat *arghghghghgh*) for a Vegan, raw and whole food diet. Why? Because of it’s positive effect on my mother’s health.
My mother was suffering from liver disease, high blood-pressure, high cholestoral. Her then boyfriend, who has successfully been on this diet for over 30 years proposed that she try it for a year and see what happens. She did. Nearly 6 months into her conversion she was at her doctors for some regular tests and ran into a problem. The doctor ordered retests because neither of them could believe that her liver had done a 360 and had drastically regenerated itself - to the point where it was a slightly damaged liver but not one that could be considered “diseased” (it has since regenerated almost completely). As well her blood pressure, cholestoral levels and the results of all her other tests came back that she was perfectly healthy. It’s been 2 and a half years and she’s in better health than she has ever been. (To add to this her regular excercise regime is far from demanding, she simply makes sure she walks when she can walk and keeps herself busy instead of couch/computer potatoing.)
Another effect she discovered was that she stopped taking her premrin, estrogen replacement pills and other prescription medication because she simply didn’t need them anymore. She gets regular check ups to make sure everything is on track and the doctor continues to report that she is in a high degree of health, more than is normal for a person of her age.
She has been after me to try the diet. “Just try it,” she keeps telling me. I can’t ignore it. No matter how much I love my meat I see how it’s affected other people and know that I have to try it myself to understand whether it is the correct choice for me. My doctor has studied it and offers it as a viable healthy choice along with regular excercise. Like everything you can’t deny you have to admit that there is a choice and it offers, even if only in part, potential. It is a theory but a theory that holds as much truth as a theory can.
Keep up the good work Steve!
September 9th, 2005 at 10:14 am
Jeremy: B-12 is also easily obtained from some fermented vegetables, see http://www.supplementwatch.com/suplib/supplement.asp?DocId=1028 for details on B-12. I also recently read that B-12 is made by some bacteria, so is easy to ingest if you don’t wash all the dirt off your veggies (which was likely common as our species was evolving). Couldn’t remember or find the URL for that one though.
Do you have a URL for the studies on saturated fat and/or carbs? I’m curious.
Make it a good day!
Kevin
September 9th, 2005 at 10:50 am
Aside from the excellent comment left by @Erich Schwarz I’d like to make a few points. This post makes several assumptions that I don’t think are necessarily true. You are completely over simplifying the complex nature of metabolism and biosynthesis. Anatomy is such a poor indicator of evolution in biosynthetic pathways and genetic networks. There are so many reasons for varying morphology in the intestinal tract. Humans are one of the few species to walk upright for starters! LIke I said in my post from yesterday, teeth are a very poor indicator of dietary needs. Gorilla’s and Babboons have massive fangs, but they eat a pure veg diet. Humans and Chimpanzees have small incisors and they both eat large portions of meat on a regular basis. Chimpanzees actually farm Colobus monkeys, carefully killing only a specific age range to ensure that that their food source remains stable. Very similar to how we farm beef in a way. I also don’t know how you can say that carnivores don’t need fiber when both cats and dogs (and many other carnivores) prefer to fill their bellies with gobs of plants and grass after a good meal. Lastly I don’t know why we can’t get past this teeth and claws comparison. Humans have big brains and opposable thumbs that allow them to create amazing killing devices. have you ever seen a herbivore sharpen an arrow
? If you have any understanding of human biology on the molecular level, and the mechanisms of molecular evolution you would not put so much stock in the anatomy of a species. In fruit fly’s there is a known mutation called “antennaepedia” , a small mutation can result in the fly growing a set of legs on top of its head. Based purely on anatomy you would expect this fly and a “normal” fly to be very different, however they are 99.999999% similar.
Steve, I love your blog and think you are an extremely insightful person. I also appreciate the fact that you will challenge basic assumptions in society. However, I don’t feel that you have the domain knowledge necessary to foster fruitful discussion when it comes to topics in complex human biology. If you focused on the ethical and environmental issues related to veganism you might be able to catalyze more positive dialog. I can’t wait until we can stop arguing about the past and focus on the present and future.
September 9th, 2005 at 11:03 am
James says: “Just try feeding a pork chop to a cow.”
Um…cows do/did eat cow and pig and even chicken litter, that’s where mad cow (a.k.a. BSE) comes from. The government would like you to believe that it no longer happens, but over 1,000 violations of government safety regulations were logged this year. Those are only the ones that were “caught”. Do you know which ones? I don’t.
Jeremy Markum says: “Vitamin B-12 can *only* be obtained from animal sources,”
And sea vegetables, Nutritional yeast, fortified cereals and soymilks, mushrooms, tempeh, miso, sunflower margarine, …
Jeremy Markum says: “Women who eat the least amount of protein suffer from the highest incidence of osteoperosis”
Women with the highest incident of bone density loss and frequent breaks are the biggest milk drinkers. The USA consumes the highest amount of dairy of any country, and also has the biggest incident of osteoporosis. Calcium is leached out of bones by *animal* protein, but not by plant protein (like broccoli, etc). In essence, the more animal calcium you consume, the more you will lose it in your urine, right along with calcium that you already had in your system.
September 9th, 2005 at 11:40 am
Hey Steve,
I have to agree with Jethro when he says: “It seems like you have a high level of tolerance and empathy when it comes to differences of opinion in other areas, but when it comes to your diet articles, I must say that I don’t feel very motivated and inspired.”
I also felt it was very disrespectful to “lol” at Tim’s comment.
It seems like you have some of that built-up “resistance” toward eating meat that you write about in your other post above. Perhaps it’s something you should investigate further?
September 9th, 2005 at 12:01 pm
I haven’t compared the human body to herbivores, omnivores, or carnivores, but I have done extensive studying on the effects of diet on health. For those of you wanting some good scientific evidence about good nutrition and its impact on chronic disease - and alternately good health - I highly recommend “The China Study” by T. Colin Campbell, PhD. He presents the 20-year China Study, as well as hundreds of other controlled laboratory studies done over the course of the last 100 years. He encourages you to draw your own conclusions from the data, which is well foot-noted. What are his conclusions? A whole foods, plant based diet can stop and often reverse such chronic diseases as cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, diabetes…It can also prevent them from happening in the first place.
Just because 95% of the population does something doesn’t make it the better way. What about smoking? Formula feeding? Both are dangerous to your health, as most people will now admit.
As for what the average M.D. knows about nutrition, my son’s pediatrician gives out coupons to McDonald’s. Surely even the meat-eaters in the crowd don’t consider fast food joints to be “healthy”!
September 9th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
I thought it was interesting that another essay on comparative anatomy came to a different conclusion — namely, that humans show characteristics of omnivores:
http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/omni.htm
In conclusion, the author writes “Humans are classic examples of omnivores in all relevant anatomical traits. There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet. For that reason, the best arguments in support of a meat-free diet remain ecological, ethical, and health concerns.”
Interestingly, the author is himself a vegetarian.
Here’s another:
http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-9a.shtml
Again, the writer is a long-term vegetarian.
I don’t have any personal axe to grind here — I just think it’s interesting that, like so many topics, there are multiple sides to the issue that seem to make reasonable claims. Personally, I’ve experimented with my diet a few times and found that eliminating meat and dairy products has undesirable side effects, so I do include them, in moderation.
September 9th, 2005 at 12:43 pm
This entire debate about omnivores vs. herbavores and our evolution doesn’t matter. I’m pretty sure I believe the studies that say that man would not have made it without meat during our early history, but that doesn’t mean that it is the healthiest way for us to eat now. All that matters is finding a healthy diet for you and your family today. I’d rather find what diet works best for a life expectancy of 60+ years vs. 20+
September 9th, 2005 at 1:23 pm
LOL, Come on guys, I think Steve is just sharing his views on his diet, it has worked for him, so he wants to share it with all of us, his conviction doesn´t mean he’s necessary right, but you shouldn’t misunderstand his intentions, he’s not trying to sell you any vegan product at all, hence, I don’t see a reason why he could lie about it, his advice is sincere. But above all, I think you could TRY this vegan diet for 30 days before disqualifying it, that way you will have actual bases to say it is no good. Forget what doctors say, they think they are right today and they are proved wrong 20 years later, always happens, the best think you can do is to experiment by yourself, 30 days without meat or daily won’t kill you…
September 9th, 2005 at 4:09 pm
I don’t see the recent articles on vegetarian/vegan nutrition to be a zealot thing on Steve’s part. I see it partly as Steve responding to the interest of his readers — both positive and negative. I also see it partly as running with a theme. I’ve noticed that when I’m really interested in something, I’ll totally burn myself out on it, then ignore it for a few weeks or months and come back to it later after it’s integrated into my memory. If I remember right, Steve has mentioned the technique working for him as well.
Whether I go veg or not, I’m certainly giving up milk. A huge part of the US population, apparently myself included, are lactose intolerant. Steve, your recent info makes some interesting poitns in conjunction with that. Are people lactose intolerant because we’re not supposed to drink milk? And then there’s marketing. The US government has been doing a huge milk-drinking campaign for god knows what reason. Studies clearly show it doesn’t help obese kids lose weight, and on top of that, studies also clearly show that a huge part of the US, like I mentioned before, can’t even digest the stuff properly.
I might have been willing to beleive all this “drink milk” bull, except drinking milk doesn’t decrease my PMS symptoms (though that TV commercial is hella funny!) or help me drop pounds. It makes my stomach hurt. Really bad. And I was denying it, at the cost of my comfort, until this year. I think you can apply this to any kind of diet study. Take the studies with a grain of salt and listen to what your body tells you about the foods you’re eating, not what the researchers say.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:20 pm
http://www.paleodiet.com/
There is a lot of scientific study pointing away from your random musing.
September 9th, 2005 at 8:15 pm
@Raw Eater: Got any video of yourself (or someone else) chasing down an animal, smashing it into rocks and trees, and then devouring its flesh? The thought of killing an animal unnecessarily and then eating it turns my stomach, but I’d be curious to see someone actually doing it, if for no other reason that to raise my awareness of human behavior. The closest thing I’ve seen to this would have to be the brain-eating zombies in Return of the Living Dead. I’ve never seen a human run down a goat. You must have been REALLY hungry.
For some reason I keep picturing a naked “Lord of the Flies” wild man with a stick chasing down neighborhood pets. I guess that’s sort of analogous to the view of vegans as people who just eat like Bugs Bunny all day.
@Dustin: I have heard that vegans taste best. Even carnivorous animals prefer to eat vegan animals. So there’s a very good chance that I’m delicious. However, if you do try to eat me, I will defend myself with my fangs and claws.
September 9th, 2005 at 8:43 pm
Hi Steve,
Let me start by saying that I REALLY enjoy your blog. The topic of “Personal Development” is great, and I haven’t found any other web sites like yours out there. I truly enjoy looking at new entries, and check for updates every morning. However, the last few entries related to diet have been quite uninteresting, and I have to agree with others when they say that you seem to quite an more open mind and a higher level of tolerance when it comes to other areas, but not when it comes to diet.
I am not vegan or vegetarian. Though I won’t disagree that it may be possible to get good nutrition even if you are vegan or vegetarian (there are great sources of protein in some vegetables, etc), I strongly believe that a good diet involves eating everything in moderation - both in terms of what you eat, and how much you eat. I respect whatever choices people have made in terms of their diet - I have no problem with you being vegan; that is completely your choice. But I do have an issue with the blog entries that seem to be coming across as “preaching” to many of us readers, especially when we disagree with your conclusion entirely. As you can see from the various links posted in the comments, there is much research that is contrary to your conclusion that humans are supposed to be herbivores.
Humans DO have omnivorous set of teeth. Observing the teeth of herbivorous animals like cows, goats, and sheep, you will find that they all ONLY have FLAT teeth, which are obviously suited for a herbivorous diet. In carnivorous animals like the lion, tiger, or leopard, you will find a set of pointed teeth i.e. suited for a carnivorous diet. However, if you analyze the set of teeth of humans, you find that we have flat teeth as well as pointed teeth, making us omnivorous. You say that “Compared to carnivores, our teeth are dull and non-threatening”. No disagreement. But at the same time, I can say that if you compare us to herbivores, UNLIKE them, we DO have SOME pointed teeth.
As far as the point about the human digestive system. The digestive system of herbivorous animals can digest ONLY vegetables. The digestive system of carnivorous animals can digest ONLY meat. But the digestive system of humans can digest both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food.
It seems that in your argument, you are only comparing humans to carnivores and stating that we are not like them. CORRECT! We are not 100% like carnivores, but please understand that we are not 100% like herbivores either. And there is no denying that. Therefore, we are omnivores. Let’s let each person figure out if they want to be 100% herbivorous, 100% omnivorous, or any level in between those two extremes
And let’s please get some personal development blog entries, and not about diet. Thanks!
September 10th, 2005 at 12:15 am
I pretty much echo the sentiments of many others. Are you aware of how many thousands of years we were hunter-gatherers compared to the years after? And do you realize how many thousands of years we had two eyes in front of our heads prior to ever grasping the concept of the written word? It’s laughable at best to suggest that we evolved binocular vision for the purpose of reading. As for the tool-using argument, it somewhat defeats itself since so many of our early tools were used *for* hunting.
It seems that you have developed many ideas and systems that work well for you, despite the fact that some of them aren’t grpunded in fact. It’s similar to your essay about confidence, and the suggestion that we pretend as though nothing can harm us. It’s not based in reality, but it’s an excellent system for building confidence. Sometimes false beliefs serve as a model within which we can live healthier, happier lives. I think this is the same way that superstitious belief (belief in higher purpose, etc.) evolved. It’s not grounded in fact, but it gives us a survival benefit; it gives us motivation to work harder, fight harder, etc.
September 10th, 2005 at 7:31 am
@Mike: Sorry… the “reading” thing wasn’t meant in that context — it was a semi-joke. I forgot to put a smilie. I wasn’t suggesting that we have eyes in the front of our heads as an evolutionary response to reading. I was merely suggesting that we have other uses for our eyes than chasing down pets to eat.
Also, keep in mind that I’m not suggesting humans cannot eat an omnivorous diet. Of course they can. Being able to eat both plants and animals has surely aided our long-term survival. It’s just not our ideal diet. Cannibalism is an option too, but it’s not necessary either (unless your plane crashes in the snowy mountains and that’s all you have to eat).
@Jeremy: Who said anything about saturated fats? I was writing about cholesterol… not the same thing. Saturated fats can come from plants too. Cholesterol comes only from animals.
As has been previously mentioned, there are other sources of B12 aside from animals, unless you have a really broad definition of “animal” that includes microorganisms in the soil, yeast, etc. Plus our requirements for B12 are extremely small, measuring in micrograms (millionths of a gram), and our bodies can store it for years at a time. A little goes a long way.
September 10th, 2005 at 8:27 am
Elaine said: “Are people lactose intolerant because we’re not supposed to drink milk?”
We (and all mammals) are not supposed to drink milk after weaning. It’s only in the last 4,000-5,000 years that some of the human population adapted to digesting lactose in adulthood. If you’re lactose intolerant it doesn’t mean there’s something wrong with you. Being lactose intolerant in adulthood was the normal state for humans for most of our existence, and even today only a portion of the population can drink milk in adulthood without it making them sick. Here’s an excerpt from the wikipedia:
“The normal mammalian condition is for the young to lose the ability to effectively digest milk sugar (lactose) at the end of the weaning period (a species-specific length of time usually equal to roughly 3% of lifespan). It has been established that certain human populations have undergone a mutation on chromosome 2 which results in a bypass of the normal shutdown in lactase production, allowing members of these groups to continue consumption of fresh milk and fresh milk products throughout their lives.
There is some debate on exactly where and when the mutation(s) occurred, some arguing for separate mutation events in Sweden and the Arabian Peninsula near 4000 BC which converged as they spread, while others argue for a single event in the Middle East at about 4500 BC which radiated from there. Whatever the precise origin in time and place, most modern western Eurasians and people of western Eurasian ancestry show the effects of this mutation (that is, they are able to safely consume milk products all their lives) while most modern eastern Eurasians, sub-saharan Africans and native peoples of the Americas and Pacific Islands do not (they are ‘lactose intolerant’ as adults)”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance
September 10th, 2005 at 8:50 am
If an adult human can’t wean itself off of milk, then why switch to the milk of a whole other species?
September 10th, 2005 at 4:12 pm
Thanks a lot steve. Now I’ve got in my head tons of mental pictures.
Rat milk.
Pig milk.
Cat milk.
Raccoon milk.
Three toed sloth milk.
Aaarrrggh!!
September 10th, 2005 at 11:19 pm
Steve, very precise answer and very detailed. And very pesuasive i might say! I ve already started to adopt a new vegeterian diet according to what you suggest. Wish me luck cause i was a passionate carnivore so far?
Can you suggest me 2-3 good books on the nutrition you re following?
I was wandering:what are you eating for breakfast?This is the meal of the day i have the bigger difficulty to fullfill.
be safe
Vasilis
September 11th, 2005 at 4:18 am
@Thisisthesea2002: My diet is mainly a mix of raw food and macrobiotics, so any book on either of those subjects will explain the foods on those diets. I can’t say there’s any one particular book I’d recommend over others in terms of nutrition. My wife communicates with many vegan dieticians and doctors through her work, so we often receive the latest nutritional info from a more direct path than books. But you might ask this question on the forums on my wife’s site, and I’m sure they could give some recommendations on recent books:
http://vegfamily.com/forums/
If you want some meal ideas, you can find many free vegan recipes here:
http://vegfamily.com/vegan-recipes/
For breakfast I often have a shake or smoothie. They’re very easy to make in a Vitamix, which is perhaps the most useful kitchen appliance for vegans. Plus both of our kids (ages 2 and 5) love them too.
September 11th, 2005 at 8:13 am
I can recommend a few really good books that contain recipes with “normal” ingredients and delicious results…
How it all Vegan by Sarah Kramer
Viva Le Vegan by Dreena Burton
Glad Cow Cookbook by Summer Keightley
I’m a cookbook collector so I have tons! But these are the ones I use the most with the best results.
I’d also recommend reading Becoming Vegan by Brenda Davis & Vesanto Melina to make sure you are giving yourself the daily nutrition in the right amounts. It’s easy to slide into being a “pasta and potato” vegan, but it’s not healthy and it’s boring to boot. Once I got on my game and started sourcing nutrients from such a wide variety of foods that I never would have tried before, I realized that I was missing some delicious stuff because I was just put off by weird sounding names! (That’s putting it mildly)
Good luck Vasilis! And have fun! Food *is* fun! If it wasn’t, nobody would congregate in the kitchen during parties or family gatherings!
September 11th, 2005 at 12:55 pm
Diet for a New World by John Robbins.. You will have enough facts to answer any question..
what I always say is, “Fine, eat meat. But since I stopped I have NEVER EVER felt so good!”
Don’t knock it til you try it.. I feel 10 years younger..
September 11th, 2005 at 1:04 pm
link to some facts for the non-believers.. Take a look at the nutrition section..
http://marcussharpe.com/diet.shtml
September 11th, 2005 at 7:51 pm
@Annie above says: “Women with the highest incident of bone density loss and frequent breaks are the biggest milk drinkers. The USA consumes the highest amount of dairy of any country, and also has the biggest incident of osteoporosis.”
Yes, what you say is true. But it is *NOT* because of the protein in milk, or the consumption of protein from animal sources, that calcium is leached from the bones; rather, it is the high acidity of our diets overall in the U.S.! One can eat lots of animal protein and keep acidity low simply by eating lots of green veggies along with (which I recommend). Of course, most starchy and processed carbohydrates also contribute to the acidity of our diets.
September 11th, 2005 at 8:30 pm
@Jeremy: Since animal products are acidifying, it seems better to simply avoid them altogether. No need to consume something harmful in moderation by “diluting” its negative effects with veggies. Why not skip the damage dealers, and just consume the veggies then? This seems to work a whole lot better in the long run.
September 12th, 2005 at 10:11 am
Steve, I never said I ran down goats; I said I frequently chased them out of our yard as a teenager, likewise I chased out chickens. If I’d been a raw eater at the time, and determined to catch and kill the animals rather than simply stop them from digging up our gardens, it wouldn’t have required very many helpers to do it.
In any case, I buy my meat at the supermarket like everybody else, and leave the killing to the experts. For pretty much any creature to live, though, other creatures have to die, so I fail to see how it’s “unnecessary” to kill animals.
Raw animal flesh contains huge amounts of nutrients that are nearly impossible to get in any other way. For example, consider creatine. Sure, your body can make it from other substances, but the conversion is not “for free”; it requires other nutrients. Eating raw meat is cheaper than creatine supplements, but it also includes lots of other vitamins, enzymes, and amino acids that get destroyed by even moderate cooking temperatures. And few of these nutrients are available from any plant source, except by synthesis.
So, from my point of view at least, I don’t believe it’s possible for humans to experience their peak health possibilities without eating raw meat, making it “necessary” in my book. It’s remarkable hubris to think that in the last half-century or so we’ve somehow become smart enough to know better what our diet should be than in the previous 2.5 million years, or to think that we can somehow synthesize everything our bodies need from synthetic foods like soy, when we still have so very little real understanding of how our bodies work.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:26 am
@Raw Eater: When you say, “leave the killing to the experts,” are you by any chance referring to the typical unskilled (usually illegal and financially desperate) slaughterhouse workers whose time on the job often lasts only days before they can no longer stomach it? That’s about as “expert” as such people get. It’s not as if the meat industry requires the same level of expertise as those who designed the gas chamber. In fact, frequently chickens are scalded alive as their feathers are removed.
The alternative to eating animal flesh needn’t be refined soy products, btw. Many of us just eat plants. Nutritionally it’s a lot cheaper and simpler than eating the animals who eat plants, especially given the massive system-wide energy loss involved in eating animals for food.
My body fills its nutritional needs from plants — I don’t need to eat hair or drink blood or anything like that.
September 13th, 2005 at 2:16 am
Hi Steve.
reading this in the light of your last article “Awareness and resistance” has brought a grin to my face.
Ever thought about your own resistance when it comes to “meat” in people’s diet?
For starters:
I do eat meat, but very little. I live a vegetarian diet most of the time, and have lived vegan for some time.
I do however, *enjoy* meat too much to stop.
This is a topic that one can almost *never* bring up with strict vegetarian or vegan people.
Although “living healthy” is often brought into the discussion, I have observed many people’s reason to become vegetarian or vegan to be ethically oriented.
“I want to protect the animals / environment / be nice to animals, etc…”
Health reasons are then sought out *after the fact* to justify this behaviour even more. Sometimes distorting or misusing facts or studies.
for example:
Curiously, a lot of chinese food (depending on region) *does* contain meat.
Well.. to make this topic more controversial, I’ll point you to a site on the (radical?) other side of the argument spectrum and watch you cringe in resistance.
As you said, respect goes out to the people who think, really think, about their choices.
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/vegetarian.html
Excerpt from the site:
¨ In the first, nutrient intakes in ninety-four Japanese centenarians investigated between 1972 and 1973 showed a higher proportion of animal protein to total proteins than in contemporary average Japanese.
¨ The second demonstrated that high intakes of milk and fats and oils had favourable effects on ten-year survivorship in 422 urban residents aged sixty-nine to seventy-one. The survivors revealed a longitudinal increase in intakes of animal foods such as eggs, milk, fish and meat over the ten years.
¨ In the third study, nutrient intakes were compared between a sample from Okinawa Prefecture where life expectancies at birth and sixty-five were the longest in Japan, and a sample from Akita Prefecture where the life expectancies were much shorter. It found that the proportion of energy from animalproteins and fats were significantly higher in the former than in the latter.
September 13th, 2005 at 4:21 am
@Marcus: I went vegetarian (and then vegan) for health and personal growth. I learned about the ethical, environmental, social, and other issues of these diets later on — I can’t say they were were a significant factor in making the initial decision to switch. As I’ve mentioned previously, I tried each of these diets for 30 days as an experiment. Those experiments simply haven’t ended.
Saying that you enjoy meat too much to stop is saying that you’re addicted to it, is it not? I’ve heard people say the same sentence with “smoking” instead of meat. It doesn’t offend or upset me to see you write that. Imagine what it would be like, however, to be able to eat based on conscious choice instead of social conditioning.
September 13th, 2005 at 1:34 pm
Ilya,
Thanks for the detailed info! I’ll have to look up the lactose thing and forward it to my mom, as well. Funny thing is, I’m half Dutch. But I guess not all folks of west European ancestry have to have mutated genes.
I’ve been experimenting with Silk soy milk and Rice Dream rice milk. They’re pretty good! And the positive effects on my stomach make them seem even tastier.
Annie,
If you think that’s bad — I recently read a blog where a guy finds weird stuff and eats it. He decided at one point that if his son drinks breast milk, he should at least try it. He even tried it mixed with chocolate.
That kind of goes along with your point, Steve. If even the thought of a human adult drinking human milk is enough to make a human gag… then why don’t we have the same reaction towards drinking cow’s or goat’s milk?
September 13th, 2005 at 2:16 pm
“”Steve:he thought of killing an animal unnecessarily and then eating it turns my stomach, but I’d be curious to see someone actually doing it, if for no other reason that to raise my awareness of human behavior.
@Steve:For large portions of society throughout history, the slaughter of animals for meat was part of every day life. I grew up in a family that farmed, hunted and fished regularly. A great many of my meals consisted of vegetables I grew myself as well as animals I either raised or hunted and directly ended the life of. Learning to humanely dispatch as well as process for eating were part of growing up. Having turkey for Thanksgiving wasn’t a matter of thawing a bird, it was a matter of selecting one from the barn. These things were part of my parents upbringing as well and much of the rural population of their generation and many generations before them. It’s only been in the last 75-100 years or so that the eating of meat has been sourced from a grocery store. However, that’s not unique to meat. Most people have no idea where their food comes from, regardless of it’s membership in the animal or plant kingdom.
I have actually attempted to try the vegetarian experiment and hated every moment of it. I thoroughly enjoy the flavor and texture of meat. I have made choices to ensure that my omnivorous diet is chosen from the best options. As a result, we eat locally raised, grass fed bison instead of beef, etc.
I think most of the controversy here circles around whether *as a species* we are built to eat one or the other. Had the posting explored (like previous ones on this topic) mostly the “try it for yourself”, “here are the benefits of”, “experiment to find the best diet for you” etc. of eating vegetarian, there wouldn’t have been nearly as divided a response. However, by questioning humanity’s biological suitability for eating meat, you raised a much bigger issue than previous postings did.
September 14th, 2005 at 6:39 am
@Steve
Sorry, Steve… but that:
———
Saying that you enjoy meat too much to stop is saying that you’re addicted to it, is it not? I’ve heard people say the same sentence with “smoking” instead of meat. It doesn’t offend or upset me to see you write that. Imagine what it would be like, however, to be able to eat based on conscious choice instead of social conditioning.
———
does not do me justice.
When I say I “enjoy” meat, I do not fall into the same trap as smokers who “enjoy” their cigarettes too much. As I said, I have lived vegetarian and vegan diets already.
Most of the time, I still eat a pure vegetarian diet.
But I enjoy, yes, *enjoy* the taste, texture, smell… of meat.
It *is* a conscious choice on my behalf, as it is a conscious choice for me to do sports or live vegetarian most of the time.
Maybe this is the point where you come across as diet - fanatic. Did you accept me eating meat, consciously choosing to eat meat? No, you accuse me of being
just another junkie, not willing or able to see past his social conditioning.
Hmm….
September 14th, 2005 at 7:48 am
@Elaine…I think I know that site! “Steve, Don’t Eat That”…or something like that?
September 15th, 2005 at 6:54 am
I really dislike zealous attitudes. The typical soy-eating vegan is far from healthy. Vegans (even non-soy vegans) have not been proven to be healthier then meat eaters. In fact, most vegans sites I’ve been too have cited many studies that claim to prove how healthy veganism is but all those studies are flawed.
Vegans vs Junk food eaters > vegans win.
Vegans vs Soy-Vegans > vegans win.
Vegans vs Heavy meat eaters and milk drinkers > vegans win.
But show me the studies that show that vegans vs moderate meat eaters who consume no processed foods and meat cooked only on the outside (so basically raw, but with surface bacteria mostly eliminated).
As a non-soy vegan, where would you get sufficient amounts of protein? How about Calcium? How much nuts and beans are required for myself (a 72kg male) to meet my requirements of 1,4g/lbs of bodyweight?
Heres a fun fact. I was looking at vegan options for small babies. Vegan sources said that broccoli and spinach were good sources of calcium for babies. I then checked the nutritional requirements of babies and guess what? My friends’ baby who is about a year old needs 17,5dl (2,5dl / cup) of chopped broccoli to meet her minimum requirements.
Try getting a baby to eat that much broccoli in one day (spinach has less calcium). Yes, misinformation really sucks.
Now try looking at studies about soy. And I’m talking about legitimate studies published in peer-reviewed literature that is not sponsored by companies producing soy. Tell me what you discover.
On a positive note, I think its awesome that you accept comments on your blog that try to disagree with what you say. It shows some open mindedness and your achievents in personal growth alot more then many of your blog entries. But I do think its kinda bad that you only answer the comments you can easily knock out but leave the comments with good valid arguments unanswered.
It would be a fun 30-day experiment for you to eat 3 meat meals a week, or one a day or whatever you prefer, but sticking to unprocessed muscles, the most expensive, tender parts of a sheep and so forth.
P.S. I have no problems killing my own meat for eating. That said, I wouldnt go at a pack of sheep with a machine gun and then leave the rotting carcasses on the ground. And I wouldnt try to CATCH the sheep, I’d throw stuff at it.
September 20th, 2005 at 8:07 am
Steve, it would be very informative if you could provide a post with accurate description of what you eat. For example a one week in your ordinary life.
I am interested if you have completely excluded simple sacharides, dairy products, eggs, do you use normal or sea salt, do you eat bakery products or boiled cereals only, do you eat potatoes, do you use wide range of cereals and legumes or just rice, beans and lentils?
Do you eat all kind of fruits or do you hold to macrobiotic rules to eat only foods from your climatic zone and when they are growing only?