Um, we are apes. We are large bodied tailless primates.
As far as the Frugivore thing, it's not my idea. Linnaeus, the guys who invented modern classification nomenclature, did in the 1700s.
Quote:
Humans are also sometimes described as frugivores, a view taken by Linnaeus:.
Man's structure, external and internal, compared with that of other animals shows that fruit and succulent vegetables constitute his natural food.
|
This is from wikipedia
You are correct there are groups of people that eat almost 100% meat, however i never argued that one couldn't do this. If you actually read what i wrote you would read that this is possible but requires pre-processing. They still aren't designed for it. They have to adapt the food to them. The entire homo genus has been using tools and even fire to adapt food to them.
But we seem to have gotten off the topic here. The question was whether humans are anatomically 100% meat eaters, and the answer is a resounding no. Anatomically we are herbivores or frugivores, no matter what we chose to eat. Notice that I am making no claims of health and never have. That comes down to belief, and this isn't about belief.
Now what i have to ask is where did you get this 3 mutations stuff from? Are you joking? Are you saying that Mongolians are a different mutation than Chinese people? Are you saying that the plains indians are a different mutation than those of the Ohio river valley? Are you saying that the transition from eating vegetables to eating meat is as simple as a couple of mutations? I grew up on SAD, I could have reproduced and lived to probably 50 or 60 that way, does that mean I'm mutated to eat Hoho's? Of course when you put people on a western diet they get disease. We get disease.