| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Linus Akesson introduces the Chipophone | Main | The best of the year’s lives and letters »

November 29, 2012

Sorry, vegans: Eating meat and cooking food is how humans got their big brains

Christopher Wanjek in the Washington Post:

Bigstock-grunge-abstract-background-16904822Vegetarian, vegan and raw diets can be healthful, probably far more healthful than the typical American diet. But to call these diets “natural” for humans is a bit of a stretch in terms of evolution, according to two recent studies.

Eating meat and cooking food made us human, the studies suggest, enabling the brains of our prehuman ancestors to grow dramatically over a few million years.

Although this isn’t the first such assertion from archaeologists and evolutionary biologists, the new studies demonstrate that it would have been biologically implausible for humans to evolve such a large brain on a raw, vegan diet and that meat-eating was a crucial element of human evolution at least a million years before the dawn of humankind.

At the core of this research is the understanding that the modern human brain consumes 20 percent of the body’s energy at rest, twice that of other primates. Meat and cooked foods were needed to provide the necessary calorie boost to feed a growing brain.

One study, published last month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examined the brain size of several primates. For the most part, larger bodies have larger brains across species. Yet humans have exceptionally large, neuron-rich brains for our body size, while gorillas — three times as massive as humans — have smaller brains with one-third the neurons. Why?

More here.

Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 07:10 AM | Permalink

Comments

I don't know about the eating meat part, but Michio Kushi the founder of the macrobiotic movement in the US made the case years and years ago that cooking was what substantially increased the human brain size. He also taught that meat and dairy consumption was a large factor in the rise of cancer deaths in western countries.

Posted by: Larry | Nov 29, 2012 8:06:47 AM

now that we have these giant brains, we can ask: is it ethical to eat meat? and if so, do factory farms and factory slaughter houses cause unwarranted animal suffering?

Posted by: sjg | Nov 29, 2012 8:16:05 AM

Isn't the morally or environmentally relevant question whether we should eat meat today given our ability to do without, not how we got here? When ev-psych researchers demonstrate that propensity to steal or rape or bully might confer success in some model, they're usually called upon to state very clearly that they're not endorsing those behaviors just because they're natural. It would be nice if these guys had to make the same conceptual point, and weren't given so much latitude just because they're in a numerical supermajority.

Posted by: prasad | Nov 29, 2012 9:01:48 AM

The main thrust of the article can be easily filed under 'we already knew that',
but as sjg pointed out: there are some incredible problems of the ethical sort with our current meat production and consumption.
If you are gonna eat it, and your situation enables you to, please please please hunt or raise it yourself.
I got some chickens in the yard and I hunt a wild pig or two every year. If I can find the time I also take a deer. Outside of that I do everything I can to assure that my meat comes from ethical sources, but it is becoming exceedingly difficult to verify as more and more producers take advantage of the traditional vetting methods (farmers markets, 'organic' labels, etc.)
It would be nice if there was some way for folks in urban areas without the means or time to hunt to be able to craigslist a local hunter to harvest meat for them. Well maybe not craigslist, but, you get the idea.
There are quite a few of us out there and there are definitely WAY too many pigs here in CA.

Posted by: DrunktankDan | Nov 29, 2012 9:12:58 AM

Why are human brains in America still growing?

Posted by: Dredd | Nov 29, 2012 10:00:36 AM

I agree with all of the above comments. Those that abhor destructive animal husbandry practices but are not prepared to go vegetarian should support local ethically raised animal producers. Grass-fed and pasture finished beef, for example, is almost by definition going to be humane, and, if you know how to cook it correctly, it is far more tasty than commodity beef (not to mention far more healthy for you, too).

Posted by: Max | Nov 29, 2012 10:04:49 AM

As a vegetarian for about 7 years now, I have been answering this challenge since basically day 1, and I am very tired of hearing the same naturalistic fallacy emerge constantly.

Posted by: Ian | Nov 29, 2012 12:00:52 PM

This article's headline and rhetoric try to make it sound like there's some kind of battle going on between meat-eaters and vegetarians and that each side wants to score points off the other -- like Republicans and Democrats. Politicizing what should be a dispassionate discussion based on health data and cultural preference doesn't help to clarify the issues.

Posted by: Faze | Nov 29, 2012 12:25:12 PM

Why are vegetarians so angry? Because they're hungry!

Posted by: aguy109 | Nov 29, 2012 2:33:33 PM

The Michael Pollan compromise:
1)Don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't have recognized as food.
2)Shop the perimeter of your supermarket. The junk food is all in the middle.

Posted by: Larry | Nov 29, 2012 3:42:16 PM

If murdering animals can be justified for the sake of human evolution, then so can cannibalism...

Slate: An evolutionary case for cannibalism http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2010/12/bite_me.html

NYTimes: Animal Cannibalism May Make Good Evolutionary Sense
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/science/animal-cannibalism-may-make-good-evolutionary-sense.html?pagewanted=all

Posted by: Raza Husain | Nov 29, 2012 4:23:46 PM

Raza, did you read the article? It goes out of its way pointing out that these two new studies are in no way justifications for any modern dietary practices, either for or against meat eating. They are simply presenting evidence that suggests that meat eating must have been a critical fixture in the proto-human and early human diet.

It's funny to see though that the rashness and scattershot nature of your comments aren't confined only to discussions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is reassuring to know this.

Posted by: Max | Nov 29, 2012 4:43:35 PM

Oh Lord, why do humans have such a punitive superego?

Just eat according to the plan Nature has devised for any omnivorous species and go to communion on Sundays to replenish yourself with symbolic blood and flesh, but without forgetting the Holy Spirit.

Posted by: Félix E. F. Larocca, MD | Nov 29, 2012 7:48:48 PM

I did a summer of canoeing in the Yukon Territory in the late 60's (before the glaciers melted) in the Kluane Game Sanctuary.

I asked an old timer there "what do you eat here?" to get a general idea of their cuisine.

He replied, "anything that don't eat us first!"

Posted by: Dredd | Nov 30, 2012 2:41:25 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Sundar on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Sundar on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Sundar on Why race as a biological construct matters

Sundar on Race Is Not Biology

Joel Grant on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

khaled on Evolution shapes new rules for ant behavior

musafir on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

araldo on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

JM on Physicists Create Quantum Link Between Photons That Don't Exist at the Same Time

SteveRR on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

jo smith on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

Grace on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Elatia Harris on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Abbas Raza on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Louise Gordon on The need for critical science journalism

omar on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

jo smith on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

carlos on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

freddie on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Eli on "Everybody Hurts" by Sachal Studios, Lahore, Pakistan

Jalees Rehman on The need for critical science journalism

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed