On Tue, 05 Dec 2000, ginny wilken wrote:

>
> We were probably doing just fine in the food chain until our big brains
> started trying to preserve food,
>

You should be aware of the limitations of comparing humans to animals. Certain
inferences may be made from the study, but keep firmly in mind that there are
profound differences between humans and all other species. Men walk on the
moon, chimps sit in the forest playing with sticks. It is precisely our 'big
brains' which account for the difference.  As Philip points out, in another
post, we have been using fire for a very long time, long enough even to adapt
to some of the cooked proteins etc. Cooking kills bacteria, and makes some
ingredients more digestible, so you must consider the benefits as well as the
costs.


>
> living in places we weren't naturally able to endure,
>

We are able to survive in hostile environments due to our intelligence, which
is completely natural for us. And being a product of our intelligence, our
technology is completely natural also.

>
> Our digestive systems WERE designed to fit into a non-manipulated world, a
> world we changed willy-nilly.  We have "modified" our food choices by
> accident, and then tried to educate ourselves about what we did.
>

Our digestive systems were not designed to fit anywhere, rather they were
evolved in competition with other species. And since our intelligence allows us
to modify the environment, this too must be seen as a natural process. We have
modified our diet by choice.

>
> My opinion is that we screwed up bigtime. If things don't change, this is a
dying race, not an enduring one,
>


Humans are the ultimate survivors. All other species have lost the competition
for global dominance, and it is likely that only those animals that have a
direct use to man have any prospect of long term survival.

Andy.