• Hextic
      link
      fedilink
      4011 months ago

      Fr meat is the reason we have big brain.

      Now if you wanna argue that we should have never left the trees and created civilization then you may have a point.

      • Cralder
        link
        fedilink
        5211 months ago

        The dose is the poison. Meat in the amount we consume today is unhealthy. In the past people didn’t eat meat every day or even close to it.

        • @toxic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1611 months ago

          That doesn’t inherently make it unhealthy. We have the means to not have to eat the animals we slaughter immediately due to refrigeration.

          • @docmark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            20
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The frequency and serving sizes are what make it unhealthy. Coupled with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle and one of the best/easiest decisions you can make to improve your health is to cut back on meat, especially processed meat products. Proccessed meat is definitely, 100% unhealthier than cuts from your local butcher.

            • @abraxas@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              211 months ago

              Processed meat is a Group 1 carcinogen. We should be treating it like we treat cigarettes.

                • Cralder
                  link
                  fedilink
                  211 months ago

                  That does not mean air causes cancer if that’s what you are saying. Processed meat actually does.

                • @abraxas@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  111 months ago

                  While that’s true, some things are definitely worse than others.

                  You can ignore them and smoke if you want. And if you’re lucky, you’ll still die of something that isn’t caused by your smoking.

            • @toxic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              Yes, but all these points were not mentioned by the user I’m responding to. He stated that our ancestors didn’t eat meat as frequently as we do now. That was his argument against red meat.

    • @Aldrond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3611 months ago

      Although high in nutrients, the difficulty in digestion makes it a carciogen. Particularly red meat - bird and fish (pre omnipresent plastics and heavy metals) are relatively healthier.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        English
        911 months ago

        I think it’s more the industrial farming and food processing practices that make it carcinogenic.

        • @Aldrond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1111 months ago

          It’s not. Remember that evolutionary incentives don’t care if you tend to live very far fast 32.

          • @abraxas@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It actually is. Most carcinogenic evidence on meats come from processed meats. Per cited references, eating way too much red meat is “probably” a cause for cancer, but eating processed meats is definitely a cause for cancer.

            And by “way too much”, that’s 1.5lbs/week. I love a good steak, but don’t really eat 1.5lbs/week of it.

      • @abraxas@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        511 months ago

        That’s sorta half the story. The official statement is that consistently eating more than 1.5lbs (500g) of red meat per week “probably” (their word) increases your cancer risk. The real story is that eating more than 50g of processed meat per week dramatically increases your cancer risk. To the extent that processed meat is ranked as a “Group 1” carcinogen.

        Flip-side, grains and legumes have been tied to cancer as well. I can’t find exactly what category, but they seem fairly convinced they are carcinogenic.

        It is, sadly, like the California Cancer joke, where almost everything causes cancer if taken to excess.

      • @psud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        If it is hard to digest meat, why do carnivores have shorter guts than herbivores?

        • @Aldrond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          “Hard” doesn’t necessarily mean “requiring many resources” in this case. It has more nutrients, and as such it’s usually not digested as fully as herbivores digest plant matter.

          It’s harder on the system doing the digestion.

    • @psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Since the grain industry gained power in the 1940s. They funded much research to say

      1. Meat is hard to digest (when in fact carnivorous animals have the shortest gut; we’re omnivores and have a medium gut, we also have the most acidic stomach acid of the mammals which is an adaptation to eating meat)
      2. Grain is the healthiest food (the only type of animal that does well on seeds is birds, they don’t have teeth for bread to get stuck between and rot. The ancient Egyptians lived on bread and had the worst dental health)
      3. That humans need a balanced diet of many different things - which we do when we’re eating nutritionally poor foods like bread, but many thrive on simple diets of fatty meat (Inuit before they adopted the standard American diet; Buffalo hunting native Americans; modern followers of lion, carnivore, zero carb)

      The standard diet as recommended by science (much of which was bought by the wheat peak bodies) has made us fat. Getting fatter is the most unhealthy state, it leads to diabetes, hypertension, bad cholesterol and early death

      • @dx1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        This is a common explanation but is unfortunately propaganda in itself.

        https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Weston_A._Price_Foundation

        Long story short on what you wrote - meat is a nutritionally rich food option and kind of nutritionally acceptable if your people have been living in the tundra for a few thousand years & have actually managed to genetically accommodate it, since there isn’t much else food the further you go north (although it’s very much overly simplistic to depict Inuit diets as entirely meat-based). But for modern people, in temperature or tropical regions, it makes no sense at all, plant-based diets give you the best balance of nutrients without extremely high fat and cholesterol content…there’s a real anti-scientific hubris going on with people trying to brush away this basic fact.