Wally Day wrote, quoting Ward Nicholson.:

>Quoth Ward: (emphasis '>>>' '<<<' mine):
Ward:
>50,000,000 to 30,000,000 B.C.: A gradual shift in diet
>for these primates to mostly frugivorous ...
> ........ as to lesser items in the diet, such
>as >>> insects, meat, <<< and other plant foods.[ ]

>Approx. 7,000,000 to 5,000,000 B.C.: After the end of
>the previous period, a fork occurs ...
>..Most
>paleoanthropologists believe that after the split, >>>
>flesh foods began to assume a greater role <<< in the
>human side of the primate family at this time.[14]

Wally:
>Obviously, while the earliest primates were primarily
>vegetarian, there was, at least, some flesh eating
>prior to the divergence. Note that flesh foods took on
>a "greater role in" rather than "were introduced into"
>the diet at the divergence. My point still stands.

I did read the interview's statements carefully, otherwise I wouldn't
have referred to them. Shure, even earliest
primates did include some animal material (mosly of insects).
And Ward said that it played "a greater role" after some time.
But we are not told   *how big* this role was. There are *no*
numbers and percentages mentioned. And so, even for the later
ice age times of of homo habilis/erectus and australopethines.
We have some numbers from Jane Godalls study on chimps, which
revealed that they aren't vegetarians.
They aren't vegetarians, but they eat much less animal protein
than most human vegetarians do (in form of dairy).
Godalls chimps ate about 2% of insects with their food (including
the termites). They too kill and eat the babies of annother monkey
in times where other food isn't available plentiful
- annother 3 percent.

I've never doubted that this is the case for primates.
I just want to point out, that the animal food percentages are still
very small, and the meat quality too is totally different
compared to today (lean insects and monkey babies).
This was the case for a very big time of our history (from 50,000,000
to 7,000,000) and is what i consider important
if we try to look at adaptions to food.

I've seen that Ward interprets this small animal food ingestion to
have had the effect of makeing the human body dependant on something
in it. But what this was didn't show up, up to now.

For gorillas it may be the protein in total.
(You say they should eat more of it?? IMO they do eat enough)
They  are eating leaves  which are rather low in protein
and so a few percent of insect protein may be important.
A few percent monkey babies, added to fruit or insects to leaves
results in an overall protein supply way below todays usual veggies.

So I think my statements still apply (whatever this may imply):
 > They were certaionly not prey-eaters.
 > 7 million years ago primates were eating mainly
 > fruits. since 30 mio years

Gorillas are impressingly big and powerful animals and their
nutrition demanded just such a kind of animal.
Just my point of view on gorillas.

regards

Amadeus S.

--
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net