I am assuming this is some sort of vegan talking point that since some human teeth are mostly flat, ignoring canines and some particularly sharp front incisors, humans are supposed to eat only plants? Aren’t humans omnivores though?
You are interpreting that backwards. I wouldnt say it’s a vegan talking point so much as a non vegan talking point in reverse. It’s commonly argued that because humans have canines were meant to eat meat. Whereas vegans fully acknowledge the capacity to digest meat and evolutionary history that evolved omnivorous diets (but argue the majority of (not all) people have a want rather than a need) . The vegans are just memeing back.
meh I’ve heard mostly vegans make this dumbass argument.
I definitely support vegans but I don’t support pseudoscientific bullshit no matter who says it.
If anything is dumbass pseudoscience, it’s the paleo diet, carnivore diet, and all other low carb diets.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FNIoKmMq6cs&pp=ygUhcGFsZW9udG9sb2dpc3QgZGVidW5rcyBwYWxlbyBkaWV0
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-problem-with-the-paleo-diet-argument/
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18596505-the-low-carb-fraud
Multiple different things can be dumbass pseudoscience, actually. Any time someone starts talking about what humans “were meant to eat”, I’m done listening. Humans can and do survive and thrive on an extremely broad variety of diets. It’s part of why societies were able to develop in so many different places.
Right, exactly. This is what I said. Humans _can _ survive on vegan diets. So the question becomes, if it’s possible to live a totally healthy normal life not eating meat, should you? This is the moral line that vegans come down on differently than the typical meat eater.
Nobody is arguing that humans can’t eat meat or that it wasn’t beneficial for our ancestors to be able to. The question is, if it’s not required, is it moral? Btw, veganism is about harm reduction. There are people to this day in impoverished countries who are actually required to eat meat to achieve sufficient nutrient intake. You will find 99% vegans having no problem with those people. But if you live in a country with basic infrastructure you probably have enough to at least significantly reduce meat intake
Hi there! You appear to be interpreting some type of meat eating ideology from my comment. Let me encourage you to take it at face value - the only intent is to criticize the idea that humans are “meant” to eat particular foods, an idea present both in the meme that started this thread and in the above mentioned paleo diet
We are agreeing lol. My point is that vegans do not actually make this argument. I have yet to ever hear it made unironically. Sometimes it is made in jest because it is made to us with sincerity from meat eater ideology.
Another question is: if it’s moral, are you gonna do it for that reason?
I have no arguments against veganism. Vegans are right. Yet I am not a vegan.
This is the “fuck off, I like guns” of meat eating and pretty much the only argument I’m receptive to. I get frustrated when people argue they should be able to do things using bad arguments. But if you say, I don’t have a good argument for this but I’m gonna do it anyway, that’s at least being honest with yourself and I respect that a lot more.
Have you realized you’re arguing with somebody named militant vegan yet?
Humans don’t have to kill things with their teeth. Sharks do.
Yeah one thing you notice about the ocean is the teeth are designed so if you catch something it can’t get away. Look at anglerfish and baleen. White sharks have hundreds of teeth. Most omnivorous land mammals have teeth just like ours.
This is just a bad comparison, but it is funny.
Humans generally don’t need to kill animals.
It’s true. I usually eat animals that were killed for me. Thanks, grocery stores!
Neither do cows but I’ve seen one too many slurp a Snake like spaghetti and eat baby birds as if they were KitKats
Just because an animal does it doesn’t mean it’s okay for humans to do it
Just because an animal does it doesn’t mean it’s okay for humans to do it
Then comparing human teeth to animal teeth is irrelevant no? Because what the animals do is irrelevant.
Don’t kid yourself, Jimmy boi. If a cow ever got the chance, he’d eat you and everyone you care about!
I would be a vegan but I just don’t have the time or willpower.
I mean, the amount of time you have to spend bitching about other’s dietary choices is exhausting.
I’ve considered being like A half vegan Like a vegan but I’ll occasionally splurge at like events and restaurants
It’s not really considered as admirable tho and is just frowned upon by both vegans and non vegans
What if you just did it without getting any credit. You don’t need others approval to make a positive change
Nah, don’t you understand? I’m literally designed to hunt and kill animals, just like other predators.
This gun? Well how else am i supposed to kill them? I don’t have any sort of claws or sharp teeth or anything designed to kill animals for sustinence
What do you mean why am i cooking the meat? I’ll get sick if i don’t, just like every other predator on the planet. Plus, i couldn’t even chew it if it were raw.
And all that is assuming natural = moral, which, if your moral code is equivilant to a lions, is not compatible with society. But it’s convenient to not change most people’s behavior, so they’re cool ignoring the logical conclusion of that argument.
This is not a valid argument. We literally evolved to use tools. And humans absolutely can eat raw meat
Maybe we evolved to use our brains to make and use tools. Maybe we’re currently evolving to use our brains to eat fewer animals.
Our ancestors fought their way to the top of the food chain over millions of years. It just feels wrong and ungrateful to eat a purely plant based diet. Like I’m betraying my own species.
I wouldn’t mind eating a vegan diet if there was a way to compensate. We could, for example, have a system where for every vegan meal sold someone strangles a small rodent.
The reason we cook most meats is because capitalism dictates it should be produced the cheapest possible way, leading to contaminations and other nasty stuff in the meat that require cooking it. Even salmonella isn’t present in raw chicken if the chicken grew in a clean environment eating clean food.
Dude what the fuck are you on about? Wild animals carry parasites and other harmful microorganisms that cooking removes. Are you seriously implying that modern farming is the reason we cook our food?
I know that capitalism is the boogeyman on lemmy and is the cause of all things bad, but this one really takes the cake.
Why so aggressive? I realize my original comment was maybe not clear and lacked context because I honestly just typed it in a bit of a rush without thinking too hard about it, but that’s no reason to put words in my mouth and attack me.
Obviously, wild animals can carry parasites and we certainly started dying from food born illnesses much less often once we figured out to cook the meat, that’s so basic I didn’t even think my comment could be interpreted that way. But that has little to do with the topic (which was whether we can digest raw meat) and ignores the myriad of dishes that are made of raw meat like steak tartare, torisashi, charcuterie, carpaccio, sushi, poisson cru a la tahitienne, etc etc.
The common theme of all these dishes is the meat is of high quality, butchered and prepared well (Vs minced meat full of cow shit because they don’t bother butchering them properly, for example). That was my only point.
Your statement, “Even salmonella isn’t present in raw chicken […]” implies that wild fowl–animals that don’t have to worry about sanitary conditions in modern, industrial farming–would be safe to eat raw. Taking sushi and sashimi as another example, that’s safe(-ish) only because they use ocean fish; there’s no freshwater sushi because freshwater fish carry parasites that can infect humans, and so isn’t safe, even from the most pristine lakes and streams in the world.
I’d say that modern farming–when the best practices are used–is the reason we’re able to eat things raw at all. When you look at feces from Romans up through late medieval Europeans, you see that most humans had all kinds of nasty intestinal parasites. (Also, a certain amount of parasitic infection seems to be good, because it keeps your autoimmune system from always being on ultra-high alert.)
Yes that’s fair, I can see how it was interpreted that way. The chicken example I had in mind was a specific one, and the chickens aren’t wild at all just well cared for and extreme care is given to the preparation, I didn’t have wild animals in mind at all which carry a whole bunch of other well known risks, only ones that are farmed in good conditions and used to prepare raw meat dishes every day across the globe.
Human teeth are omnivorous.
We have TWO semi-pointy teeth. Two.
*Even Wikipedia agrees the bottom two are bullshit.
Human teeth also have sharp peaks and deeper valleys within them which is the case for the overwhelming majority of omnivorous creatures. Most obligate herbivores have flatter teeth or will regrow them unless they have teeth explicitly for a particular use case.
Source: You can check out scads of scientific resources on herbivores versus omnivore versus carnivore teeth. I assume you know how a search engine works, but here’s a solid article on differences.
Also my sister has been one of the veterinary bigwigs at several zoos through her lifetime and we’ve had multiple discussions on it.
How is a blog a source? All you’ve given is anecdotal evidence. I have that too. Pandas, sharp teeth, claws, obligate herbivores. Gorillas, sharp teeth, big muscles, obligate herbivores.
I’m sure your sister is a fine veterinarian, and if we’re going to get anecdotal I have a degree in biology and don’t really care what opinion your sister has. I work for real medical doctors who are anti-vax. Someone’s job doesn’t make them sensible.
Errrr… are you looking for me to provide you a primary scientific source for how teeth work in animals with differing diets? Most of that is in veterinary texts (which is an amalgam of info), but it’s akin to asking for a scientific evidence for gravity. What you’re asking is too broad to be covered in a single paper and shows a misunderstanding of how scientific studies focus and function. I was simply giving you a primer since you asked, and that blog is good enough for that (and accurate from the portion I read).
I can point you at papers (such as this one on Tooth root morphology as an indicator for dietary specialization in carnivores) which can help explain part of how food selection works in evolution, but I’m not sure what level of information would satisfy you or why you’d even want it?
Here’s one on how tooth wear affects teeth differently based on evolutionary eating habits.
Here’s one on the development and evolution of teeth.
Here’s one on mammalian teeth in specific.
If you’d like more, feel free to use https://scholar.google.com/ to look for more.
