PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Craig Coonrad <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 2003 11:17:46 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (45 lines)
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Amadeus Schmidt wrote:

> Craig, did you read the Articles of Richard Wrangham ("Out of the Pan,
> Into the Fire" and "The raw and the stolen")? I once found it on the
> net. It's quite thought provoking :-)

I haven't. If you have links I'd like to read it.

> But the human can survive in the hot african day, when the predators
> sleep. And safely collect tubers (or carcasses).
> A large brain with many neurons lasts better than a small one in the
> heat. This is my idea of an evolutionary driving force to brain
> enlargement. Actually based on a similar idea of a scientist I once
> heard of.

When I was in the north of Brazil during a blazing summer. People would
concentrate most of their activities during early morning and evening
(like other predators) to avoid the heat of the midday. It seems people do
that everywhere in hot climes. In the U.S. air conditioning is ubiquitous.
I doubt we would have such a heat aversion if we evolved to thrive in the
midday sun.

Also, given our cerebral cortex and opposable thumbs, I'm sure we picked
up sticks and stones as defensive weapons pretty early on. So that
co-mingling with other predators was of course dangerous but less so. We
probably wouldn't have developed such a close relationship with the dog if
we weren't out hunting at the same time and thinking "boy we could sure
make a good team with those dogs, they chase down the prey and corner it,
we come in with sticks and stones for the kill".

> Those who suspect an increased carcass eating as a keypoint of brain
> enlargement can only point out that the mass of the brain consists of
> about 1gram more *long chain fatty acids* (~ 1% of 1 kg more brain). And
> suspect that this "mass" can easily be eaten be eating animal *brains*.
> And suggest that this lcFA couldn't be self-synthesized by the human
> child (which is absurd since many human childs do grow up normally

You addressed many of the points of my email accept the last one. That is
we didn't become meat eaters because it tastes good. There is a reason.
If all these children seem to grow up fine without lcFA, and they
synthesize it themselves. Why is it that we would risk life and limb to
acquire meat?

Craig

ATOM RSS1 RSS2