That's right. Agriculture allowed for civilization, but much of the foods that agriculture has brought us are not optimal for human health. That said, industrial agriculture and food processing have gone even further away from meeting human biological needs
Economics cannot be divorced from our dietary needs. Our needs need to be considered within lens of our economic system. How can we meet our needs whilst consuming cost effective plant foods that’s where our efforts should lie…
I would just like to clarify that saturated fat is not bad for our health either, so the fact that the meat in Australia contains less of it is not necessarily a good thing. There's also no evidence that unsaturated fats would be better than the saturated ones. She started the presentation by saying we have always been eating fatty meats, and then she ends it by praising leaner meats 🙄 And lastly, a paleo diet isn't difficult to sustain at all. I follow a carnivore diet, which is even more restrictive, but I don't feel restricted at all. In fact, I've never even cheated in 3 years! The reason is when you stop carbohydrates indefinitely, you not only stop being so hungry all the time but you also stop craving sweet foods. So this is wrong, because an ancestrally appropriate diet is the EASIEST to follow if there is enough will power and motivation to follow it.
I wonder if she has read up on vitamin C yet. Since the vitamins in meat are so bio avaliable to us the small amount in meat is enough for us. That is as long as you don't consume carbohydrates because glucoce competes with vitamin C for transportation in the body.
@@Johannore the explanation is that your statement is wrong. An only meat diet is a sure way to premature death. No health authority on this planet recommends it. Its the opposite, all science and all experts recommend a diet high in plant foods and low in animal products.
@@Johannore your statement is simply wrong. And people on such no carb diets die much earlier - shown in more and more studies. If it were so good then the nutrition authorities would recommend it. But they dont, because they have a duty towards the public to promote the most healthy diet for their population. You get your “information” from dodgy internet sites that dont give a f… about your health.
@@virtualzeth8868 Better don't forget eggs, a true source of power, and don't leave the organs out, liver, brains, heart, bone marrow, etc. are far more valuable than the muscle meat. Vegetables are just a nice to have, but not really necessary.
@@virtualzeth8868 Better don't forget eggs, a true source of power, and don't leave the organs out, liver, brains, heart, bone marrow, etc. are far more valuable than the muscle meat. Vegetables are just a nice to have, but not really necessary.
Wonderful presentation! She's saying things exactly as they are. It's unbelievable that most people have no idea about our origins, and still doubt them when you present them even though we have so much evidence. These things should be common knowledge. They are so important. If people knew these things, nobody would buy the lie that we need so many carbohydrates to live, especially if they come from foods we literally never ate during our entire evolution. And most people would understand that meat is not bad for us, but it's actually the best food we can eat, because we have always been eating it!
The argument that the earth's fresh water was tied up in ice made the earth drier is wrong. The surface area of the oceans (across which most of the water vapor in the atmosphere comes from) was only slightly smaller. Most water vapor in the atmosphere doesn't come from evaporation of fresh water, but from evaporation from salt water. The real reason the climate was drier during glacial periods was the air and surface temperatures were lower then, which implies that lower absolute humidities are possible (i.e., at saturation, cold air contains less water vapor than warm air).
We don't require huge amounts of vitamin C on a carnivore diet. There is enough vitamin C in meat to stop us getting scurvy. Sailers in days gone by got scurvy living on biscuits but the officers who eat meat did not. See lectures by Amber O'Hearn. Check out lectures by
Human milk is great, but cow's milk--well, it's better than starvation, but it has problems, even if you are a person of north European descent like me: nutritionstudies.org/12-frightening-facts-milk/
@@ebola5632 Well, as for just tolerating the lactose or milk sugar, it is more than long enough. All we had to do was continue producing into adulthood the digestive enzyme lactase that we also use to digest the lactose in our mothers' milk in infancy. The problem is not digestion, but the nutritional composition of cows' milk, which is very different from human milk and which, when consumed regularly over many years, increases the likelihood of developing various disorders, such as ear aches, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, type I diabetes, and cancer among others. Back when farmers ran short of food between spring planting and the first harvest, being able to drink milk from cows who fed on grasses or hay that man could not digest could make the difference between life and death. However, we continue to drink cows' milk today for cultural reasons rather than necessity, and we would be better off to skip it.
@@ebola5632 Not so - remember we became pastoralists, busy domesticating ruminant animals as well as dogs long before we became farmers. Goat, sheep and cow milk are still widely used than as now.
4 years later, having gorged on videos in this space for months, this video stood out as a brilliant encapsulation of the evolutionary arguments for the heady discourse on paleo, LCHF, keto and carnivore influences, until the last 5 minutes. I wonder if 4 years later you would rephrase your conclusions to rank saturated fats higher than protein, (and obviously higher than carbs), or were you afraid to say so, hesitant, politically correct, in fear of being silenced?
Really fantastic lecture! Fascinating to understand that our modern agricultural way of life has been damaging to our health. Our hunter gatherer ancestors were arguably healthier. Cut out the breads, pastas and processed foods, and instead follow a ‘ketogenic’ diet- to include fatty meats and veg. You’ll loose weight, stop snacking (because you’ll get your nutrition from your meal and won’t need to snack).
Too much misinformation. For example, she implies that chimps depend on fruit sugar, and this is wrong. The wild fruit they eat is sour, tannic, and bitter compared to the sweet fruit humans grow. Human food like bananas is a rare treat for them. BTW Even Eskimos don't eat a ketogenic diet. All hunter gatherers eat carbs to some degree, including them.
@@robinlillian9471 Which carbs do the Eskimos (Inuits) and other similar cultures (Evenks, Yakutian, Chuckchi) consume, apart from glycogen? You claim Eskimos don't eat a ketogenic diet. Do you have any sources to support your claim? Also do you realise the ketogenic diet doesn't mean no carbs at all, but rather carbohydrates in smalller quantities, up to 50g per day?
Thank you so much for sharing this excellent information! Three things come to mind however: Are studies of coprolites not a valuable additional tool to determine our ancestral diet along with C-14/15 isotope testing of bones? Apparantly vitamine c requirement goes down when eating more animal produce, how else did they (or Eskimos) get through a 7 or 8 month winter without fruits and scurvy? Dairy may have calcium, but osteoporosis is highest in dairy consuming parts of the world, and dairy is also allergen number one of all foodgroups. Surely we will not be allergic to food that was/ is meant for us?
So what about fat, saturated fat, apparantly that's what we thrived on all those millions of years, or at least the last 200.000 yrs. Not good? Humans ate vegetables. Can you name three vegetables of significance that grew abundantly in that time? (Also in winter)
@@H.v.R. 1) We did not thrive. We lived into our 30's 2) a scientist threw a horse into a frozen lake for a couple of months; when he pulled the horse back out, the meat did have a substantial amount of vitamin C - the study needs to be independently confirmed 3) I am amongst people who have multiple copies of a gene for lactase persistence as an adult for me cow's milk is like medication. But even I could overdo it if I consumed half a gallon or more of milk a day. If you do not cherry-pick studies, except for upset stomachs, milk is fine for all women of all ages and for lactase persistent males. Males who are not lactase persistent as adults do increase their chances of prostate cancer, if they consume cow's milk. The false belief that milk consumption increases the odds of broken bones is on the decrease amongst vegans. Many vegans care too much about credibility.
@@Skiskiski Child mortality rates pulled down average lifespan drastically compared to people that secured food-supplies by starting to farm. Bones from 70 year old hunter-gatherers however, are generally far healthier than those of their agricultural counterparts, which often heave significant loss of bone-density, pits in skull due to iron deficiency and extremely poor dental health with almost no teeth left around age thirty. Milk is a tricky one, sadly we cannot trust much of the information that is fed to us by big-corp sponsored studies. Apart from lactose, β-casein seems to be a culprit to many suffering milk intolerance or -allergy. Some people fare better on A2 beta-casein milk from more traditional breeding stocks like Jersey or African cows as compared to A1 milk which is the most sold milk. Fermented forms of milk have less detrimental effects on the overall health for many. In addition some tolerate sheep, goat horse or donkey milk far better than cows milk. The gut microbiome apparently adjusts faster or easier to prolonged milk consumption by certain peoples like for example the Tibetans than it does to many of the anti-nutrients found in nuts, seeds, vegetables and fruits, that are more widely available to us now than ever before, and year round which is not a good thing when it comes to oxalic acid or goitrogens and many others. The list of anti-nutrients in plants consumed by humans is considerable: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2217210/ Personally I do not tolerate milk-products of any kind very well except for ghee which has been stripped of the milk solids and is pure fat. In my opinion gut microbiome (which is inherited from the mother during natural birth) is more responsible for how you react to milk consumption than genetic make-up. I like various cheeses, cream, yoghurt, buttermilk and kefir, i can get away with eating a small quantity now and then.
@@H.v.R. Meat properly, aka lightly, cooked contain just enough vitamin C to prevent scurvy as has been proven by Shackleton and Stefansson and other Arctic and Antarctic explorers - the ones who survived ate fresh and fatty meat. There is no need to ever eat any plant whatsoever.
A bit of sexism in the lecture.... women gathered most of the calories? From foraged plants? Very doubtful. Most foraged good is leafy, not fruit, not tubers (the latter two only seasonal.) Vegetation provides minerals and vitamins, meat is protein and fat and more available. The Aboriginals when eating a native diet get 64% of their food from things that move and 36% from things that don't move. That means men provided most of the calories.... and... as men don't nurse they are the natural selection to go hunt and women are naturally selected to forager with dextrous hands around the camp,.
In most groups all over the world gathering of wild plants, especially nuts and seeds (fat/oil rich, calorically dense), primarily obtained by woman, made up the majority of calories from day to day. Of course there are exceptions and societies who did things differently.
Eggs were collected. Small animals, lizards, bunny rabbits, birds, insects, bivalves and other seafoods, turtles and river fishes - that sort of thing.
Quite a decent archeological review, although one cannot conclude the diet of paleolithic hunters gatherers from modern hunters gatherers, different big game availability, different tools and trade opportunities. but even with overall fine review, conclusions are either wrong or conforming with modern diet conventions. Somewhat disappointing.
She’s correct anout the impending ice age.. we are very due for one jist going by the cycles from the past. Eat meat! Lots of meat! Excellent presentation
While I found this interesting, it was disheartening to see that the slide she used to highlight obesity was a person in fitness gear and presumed to be exercising. Way to really deflate the desire to workout while overweight.
Well, obesity is a very recent issue. Back like 50 to 60 years ago, almost everyone was fairly athletic and thin. Im sure she didn't choose it thinking people would be upset by it because shes probably as old as 50 or 60 and they see things differently to todays younger gen who are a little bit more insecure no thanks to the media around us, hence why your perspective may be different to hers.
The focus seems to be on our genes but we have our parents genes, mothers mitochondrial genes and a microbrial genes. All of which are not as rigid as one would think. I think with food, we should focus on our microbial communities and the damage our lifestyle habits have done to them. How we are wiping out key players with our habits and how it has become common place to malnourish others to the point of hibernation/extinction. Many of these important microbes feed off of diverse plant foods compounds like: inulin, FODMAPS and resistant starches. Consuming these compounds are imperative within a healthy lifestyle protocol. Their consumption is massively lacking balance within these western diets and is a far more significant variable in the quest of optimal health. We can’t sustain large populations off of a predominantly animal food diet so we need to adapt to a plant food one. We can’t simply divorce ourselves from the economy at mass and act as if it’s a solution. Plus there’s the ethical implications do you really want to carve a live dependent on treading on others corpses? It’s not necessary - many vegans have lived long healthful lives.
...grains...corn, rice and wheat, rye and barley came out of no where about 15 thousand years ago...and city states followed... geneticists can't account for the actual time of controlled conditions needed for...it... discounting GMOs...anunaki...???...
@@robinlillian9471 You are surely joking. If you think cannibalism wasn't huge in humanity's past, you're wrong. Stop equating feral humans of the past to those in your neighborhood. They did indeed 'eat their neighbors'. A practice that continues even today among some primitive societies.
@@joelcoley2606 From the nutritional aspect nothing speaks against consuming human carcasses. I, for myself, have a strong negative feeling towards cannibalism, but that's social conditioning. My ethics is not the same as the ethics of some tribal people in Papua New Guinea, for example. If we want to discuss with scientific terms we should leave out morals and make a clear distinctions between facts and ethics. The science can give an answer to a hypothesis being true or false. Ethics don't disprove facts.
@@cezar3977 That correlates with my comment. I suspect that the taboos against cannibalism started with the advent of agriculture. Such a community would be able to devote resources to war to protect their gene pool from predation. Simply put, humans were not as rich of a source of protein as wild game, but took much less energy consumption to kill. But to deny that it happened on a regular basis is dubious at best.
not many chimps live in the Arctic, so they're just stuck with whatever fruit is in season in the region where they live. like, you know, around, mostly, somewhere near to Central and West Africa...
Common sense? It is widely known the animal agriculture is the most energy intensive form of protein ever created man. Not even close to other proteins. The planetary destruction is unfathomable as well. You have to be kidding right? Are you really that confused and lost? @@stric10
Animals are the most amount of energy required to obtain a protein man has ever created by far. Shall we dissect and compare them numbers a bit and then we can discuss common sense? @@stric10
@@magnuseriksson5547 that is the narrative you bought into. Not likely until the gun. Primarily gatherers!~ A type 1 or type 2 carcinogen. Either causes cancer or likely too cause cancer. All meat. Smoking was a type 1 in 1964 but many people still smoke. Meat causes cancer.... Just the factual scientific data....
1) We did not thrive. We lived into our 30's 2) a scientist threw a horse into a frozen lake for a couple of months; when he pulled the horse back out, the meat did have a substantial amount of vitamin C - the study needs to be independently confirmed 3) I am amongst people who have multiple copies of a gene for lactase persistence as an adult; for me cow's milk is like medication. But even I could overdo it if I consumed half a gallon or more of milk a day. If you do not cherry-pick studies, except for upset stomachs, milk is fine for all women of all ages and for lactase persistent males. Males who are not lactase persistent as adults do increase their chances of prostate cancer, if they consume cow's milk. The false belief that milk consumption increases the odds of broken bones is on the decrease amongst vegans. Many vegans care too much about credibility.
1: false, if you look at the hadza hunter gatherer people you have people being 80 years and older, this statistic counts in infant mortality(1 in 5 babies die)., 3: agriculture spread from mesopotamia to europe 5-10k years ago, making us able to tolerate milk but it doesn’t make it something good or natural. Humans are the only species to consume milk after infancy(also the only species to have a high amounts of depression, cancer, mental disorders etc.
Ok sure, most probably didn't make it past 40, but look at their lifestyle back then. Humans were more exposed to the elements. They didn't have the shelter and heat we have today. Clothes that could withstand any type of weather. Probably didn't have ways to cool themselves during heatwaves. Didn't have medication and healthcare like we do today. So that means if one broke a leg, chances were higher of infection and death. When it comes to their diets, they were most likely more healthy then us today and could probably out run you anyday.
Hunter-gatherers rarely lived to the age of 40, and even today most people do just fine on a diet high in animal protein, fat, and cholesterol in their 20's and 30's, even better if they are also physically active. But after the age of 40, these high animal food diets begin to take an increasing toll on people's health. The healthiest cultures on earth consume mostly plants with a small amount of animal flesh, similar to the macro-nutrient ratios of chimpanzees.
That is a myth. The reason why the life expectancy is right around there for that time is due to infant mortality. There are many skeletons that have been determined to be 50+ years old when they died.
I googled this and it appears you are right, the life expectancy numbers are distorted by the effect of high childhood mortality, much like the case with pre-industrial farmers. However, I stand by what I wrote after my first nine words: people on low animal flesh diets usually live longer than people who eat more animal flesh.
BS I'm 50 plus and am at peak fitness. I have animal protein 3 or 4 times a day,I work hard and fast. Have normal bad cholesteral and high good cholesteral.
A simple correlation found in few cases says nothing about the causation. Someone might live longer on a carbohydrate rich diet, but there are so many confounding factors. Do they live long because they eat a lot of carbohydrates, or despite eating a lot of carbohydrates? Or thanks to the animal protein they include, no matter how small the quantities are? Also you have to provide a credible source to support your claim, not cherry-picked data. In Kenya the Maasai who live a traditional lifestyle with animal based diet (practically only meat, milk and blood) have a longer life and health span than the urban population in Nairobi that consumes mainly carbohydrates and plant oils.
@@cezar3977 we must have adequate protein or humans suffer the consequences. Eating one piece of meat daily will supply enough amino acids when consumed with plant foods that are LOW in starch & sugar. Eat lots of starch & sugar & the micrbiome that digests & extracts nutrients from fiber will suffer. WE do know this, but online, folks choose to ignore it!! Namaste'
Professor Brand-Miller would seem to have us believe that eating more animal foods is the way to health. If that is the case, then how does she explain why the levels of CHD, stroke, diabetes (T2) and cancer have rocketed in every single part of the globe where a mostly (90%) plant based diet is replaced by a meat and dairy centred one? In every case, as meat and dairy consumption has increased, so have the rates of chronic disease. The dietary change has accompanied the increase in wealth in places like China. I think that this talk is very misleading. What was the life expectancy and health profile of these hunter gatherer peoples whom she admires so much? Viewers may find the following presentation on paleolithic diet interesting: ruclips.net/video/BMOjVYgYaG8/видео.html
Why would anyone have to explain anything to your ideology driven claims? Get a life man! If you dont agree, go watch cowspiracy for the hunderth time!
Having 50% of the children die before they reach adulthood is not part of my value system. If you want a good book on hunter/gatherers that is concise and accurate, try Dr. Robert L Kelly's book, "The Lifeways of Hunter-Gatherers". Full of nice charts on lifestyle habits and accurate documentation on what real life hunter gatherers face daily.
NONE of these cultures were vegan, let's stop using the smarmy, ambiguous term "plant based". All of these increases in health issues also go in lock-step with increasing sugar, refined carbs, less sun, less activity and a host of other evolutionary discordant changes, not the least of which is the gut microbiome alterations we see in all westernized societies. You ARE aware that the population with the lowest incidence of CVD is a hunter gather-group, yes?
Very brave. Having a presentation like this, with this content 6 years ago was not an easy thing to do.
Agriculture is a matter of economics rather than our dietary needs. This is why we are getting sicker as a species.
There is a difference between agriculture and agribusiness.
That's right. Agriculture allowed for civilization, but much of the foods that agriculture has brought us are not optimal for human health. That said, industrial agriculture and food processing have gone even further away from meeting human biological needs
80 % of all agriculture is for animal feed. Our lust for meat and cheese is our doom
Almost all of the crops grown goes to feed animals which we then eat. Thats the cause of all our health problems
Economics cannot be divorced from our dietary needs. Our needs need to be considered within lens of our economic system. How can we meet our needs whilst consuming cost effective plant foods that’s where our efforts should lie…
This lecture just came up on my feed. Excellent talk. Then again, I happen to agree with the speaker’s analysis and conclusions.
I would just like to clarify that saturated fat is not bad for our health either, so the fact that the meat in Australia contains less of it is not necessarily a good thing. There's also no evidence that unsaturated fats would be better than the saturated ones. She started the presentation by saying we have always been eating fatty meats, and then she ends it by praising leaner meats 🙄 And lastly, a paleo diet isn't difficult to sustain at all. I follow a carnivore diet, which is even more restrictive, but I don't feel restricted at all. In fact, I've never even cheated in 3 years! The reason is when you stop carbohydrates indefinitely, you not only stop being so hungry all the time but you also stop craving sweet foods. So this is wrong, because an ancestrally appropriate diet is the EASIEST to follow if there is enough will power and motivation to follow it.
I wonder if she has read up on vitamin C yet. Since the vitamins in meat are so bio avaliable to us the small amount in meat is enough for us. That is as long as you don't consume carbohydrates because glucoce competes with vitamin C for transportation in the body.
Comparing Vit C and sugar is such an ignorant statement. As a biochemist I am depressed about the gullibility of so many.
@@johnsnow5264can you please explain to me why people who eat only meat don't lack vit C even though there is now way near RDI.
@@Johannore the explanation is that your statement is wrong. An only meat diet is a sure way to premature death. No health authority on this planet recommends it. Its the opposite, all science and all experts recommend a diet high in plant foods and low in animal products.
@@Johannore your statement is simply wrong. And people on such no carb diets die much earlier - shown in more and more studies. If it were so good then the nutrition authorities would recommend it. But they dont, because they have a duty towards the public to promote the most healthy diet for their population. You get your “information” from dodgy internet sites that dont give a f… about your health.
@@Johannore this statement is wrong.
Great talk! Eat meat and stay healthy!
But don't forget veggies as well ;p
@@virtualzeth8868 Better don't forget eggs, a true source of power, and don't leave the organs out, liver, brains, heart, bone marrow, etc. are far more valuable than the muscle meat.
Vegetables are just a nice to have, but not really necessary.
@@virtualzeth8868 Better don't forget eggs, a true source of power, and don't leave the organs out, liver, brains, heart, bone marrow, etc. are far more valuable than the muscle meat.
Vegetables are just a nice to have, but not really necessary.
@@virtualzeth8868 nope...no need for veggies
Great information, actual science... 4 years, 332 likes. Great RUclips algorithm.
Wonderful presentation! She's saying things exactly as they are. It's unbelievable that most people have no idea about our origins, and still doubt them when you present them even though we have so much evidence. These things should be common knowledge. They are so important. If people knew these things, nobody would buy the lie that we need so many carbohydrates to live, especially if they come from foods we literally never ate during our entire evolution. And most people would understand that meat is not bad for us, but it's actually the best food we can eat, because we have always been eating it!
The argument that the earth's fresh water was tied up in ice made the earth drier is wrong. The surface area of the oceans (across which most of the water vapor in the atmosphere comes from) was only slightly smaller. Most water vapor in the atmosphere doesn't come from evaporation of fresh water, but from evaporation from salt water. The real reason the climate was drier during glacial periods was the air and surface temperatures were lower then, which implies that lower absolute humidities are possible (i.e., at saturation, cold air contains less water vapor than warm air).
All the more reason to believe that it is preposterous to think that man can affect the climate.
We don't require huge amounts of vitamin C on a carnivore diet.
There is enough vitamin C in meat to stop us getting scurvy.
Sailers in days gone by got scurvy living on biscuits but the officers who eat meat did not.
See lectures by Amber O'Hearn.
Check out lectures by
Particularly when the meat is eaten raw (or no more than medium rare). Vitamin C is denatured by heat
Quality of meat and fish in pre-agriculture world was MUCH higher.
Europeans have used dairy for long enough to adapt to adult tolerance of dairy products, so it's hard to say it's bad for you...
Human milk is great, but cow's milk--well, it's better than starvation, but it has problems, even if you are a person of north European descent like me:
nutritionstudies.org/12-frightening-facts-milk/
About 5-10k years, this is not long enough of evolution to 100% tolerate it.
@@ebola5632 Well, as for just tolerating the lactose or milk sugar, it is more than long enough. All we had to do was continue producing into adulthood the digestive enzyme lactase that we also use to digest the lactose in our mothers' milk in infancy. The problem is not digestion, but the nutritional composition of cows' milk, which is very different from human milk and which, when consumed regularly over many years, increases the likelihood of developing various disorders, such as ear aches, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, type I diabetes, and cancer among others. Back when farmers ran short of food between spring planting and the first harvest, being able to drink milk from cows who fed on grasses or hay that man could not digest could make the difference between life and death. However, we continue to drink cows' milk today for cultural reasons rather than necessity, and we would be better off to skip it.
@@ebola5632 Not so - remember we became pastoralists, busy domesticating ruminant animals as well as dogs long before we became farmers. Goat, sheep and cow milk are still widely used than as now.
@@michaels4255 That's opinion. Where's your double-blind random clinical trial citation?
4 years later, having gorged on videos in this space for months, this video stood out as a brilliant encapsulation of the evolutionary arguments for the heady discourse on paleo, LCHF, keto and carnivore influences, until the last 5 minutes.
I wonder if 4 years later you would rephrase your conclusions to rank saturated fats higher than protein, (and obviously higher than carbs), or were you afraid to say so, hesitant, politically correct, in fear of being silenced?
I think you surmised accurately, although she did get enough subtle digs, with the pie charts.
Really fantastic lecture! Fascinating to understand that our modern agricultural way of life has been damaging to our health. Our hunter gatherer ancestors were arguably healthier. Cut out the breads, pastas and processed foods, and instead follow a ‘ketogenic’ diet- to include fatty meats and veg. You’ll loose weight, stop snacking (because you’ll get your nutrition from your meal and won’t need to snack).
Too much misinformation. For example, she implies that chimps depend on fruit sugar, and this is wrong. The wild fruit they eat is sour, tannic, and bitter compared to the sweet fruit humans grow. Human food like bananas is a rare treat for them. BTW Even Eskimos don't eat a ketogenic diet. All hunter gatherers eat carbs to some degree, including them.
@@robinlillian9471 Which carbs do the Eskimos (Inuits) and other similar cultures (Evenks, Yakutian, Chuckchi) consume, apart from glycogen?
You claim Eskimos don't eat a ketogenic diet. Do you have any sources to support your claim?
Also do you realise the ketogenic diet doesn't mean no carbs at all, but rather carbohydrates in smalller quantities, up to 50g per day?
@@cezar3977 NO ketogenic =
If tooth condition indicatesdiet we are not eating meat or vegetables but rather sugar....
Thank you so much for sharing this excellent information!
Three things come to mind however:
Are studies of coprolites not a valuable additional tool to determine our ancestral diet along with C-14/15 isotope testing of bones?
Apparantly vitamine c requirement goes down when eating more animal produce, how else did they (or Eskimos) get through a 7 or 8 month winter without fruits and scurvy?
Dairy may have calcium, but osteoporosis is highest in dairy consuming parts of the world, and dairy is also allergen number one of all foodgroups. Surely we will not be allergic to food that was/ is meant for us?
So what about fat, saturated fat, apparantly that's what we thrived on all those millions of years, or at least the last 200.000 yrs. Not good?
Humans ate vegetables. Can you name three vegetables of significance that grew abundantly in that time? (Also in winter)
@@H.v.R. 1) We did not thrive. We lived into our 30's 2) a scientist threw a horse into a frozen lake for a couple of months; when he pulled the horse back out, the meat did have a substantial amount of vitamin C - the study needs to be independently confirmed 3) I am amongst people who have multiple copies of a gene for lactase persistence as an adult for me cow's milk is like medication. But even I could overdo it if I consumed half a gallon or more of milk a day. If you do not cherry-pick studies, except for upset stomachs, milk is fine for all women of all ages and for lactase persistent males. Males who are not lactase persistent as adults do increase their chances of prostate cancer, if they consume cow's milk. The false belief that milk consumption increases the odds of broken bones is on the decrease amongst vegans. Many vegans care too much about credibility.
@@Skiskiski Child mortality rates pulled down average lifespan drastically compared to people that secured food-supplies by starting to farm.
Bones from 70 year old hunter-gatherers however, are generally far healthier than those of their agricultural counterparts, which often heave significant loss of bone-density, pits in skull due to iron deficiency and extremely poor dental health with almost no teeth left around age thirty.
Milk is a tricky one, sadly we cannot trust much of the information that is fed to us by big-corp sponsored studies.
Apart from lactose, β-casein seems to be a culprit to many suffering milk intolerance or -allergy.
Some people fare better on A2 beta-casein milk from more traditional breeding stocks like Jersey or African cows as compared to A1 milk which is the most sold milk.
Fermented forms of milk have less detrimental effects on the overall health for many.
In addition some tolerate sheep, goat horse or donkey milk far better than cows milk.
The gut microbiome apparently adjusts faster or easier to prolonged milk consumption by certain peoples like for example the Tibetans than it does to many of the anti-nutrients found in nuts, seeds, vegetables and fruits, that are more widely available to us now than ever before, and year round which is not a good thing when it comes to oxalic acid or goitrogens and many others.
The list of anti-nutrients in plants consumed by humans is considerable:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2217210/
Personally I do not tolerate milk-products of any kind very well except for ghee which has been stripped of the milk solids and is pure fat.
In my opinion gut microbiome (which is inherited from the mother during natural birth) is more responsible for how you react to milk consumption than genetic make-up.
I like various cheeses, cream, yoghurt, buttermilk and kefir, i can get away with eating a small quantity now and then.
@@H.v.R. Meat properly, aka lightly, cooked contain just enough vitamin C to prevent scurvy as has been proven by Shackleton and Stefansson and other Arctic and Antarctic explorers - the ones who survived ate fresh and fatty meat. There is no need to ever eat any plant whatsoever.
@@kayallen7603 Correct!
Very interesting content and presenter.
A bit of sexism in the lecture.... women gathered most of the calories? From foraged plants? Very doubtful. Most foraged good is leafy, not fruit, not tubers (the latter two only seasonal.) Vegetation provides minerals and vitamins, meat is protein and fat and more available. The Aboriginals when eating a native diet get 64% of their food from things that move and 36% from things that don't move. That means men provided most of the calories.... and... as men don't nurse they are the natural selection to go hunt and women are naturally selected to forager with dextrous hands around the camp,.
In most groups all over the world gathering of wild plants, especially nuts and seeds (fat/oil rich, calorically dense), primarily obtained by woman, made up the majority of calories from day to day. Of course there are exceptions and societies who did things differently.
Eggs were collected. Small animals, lizards, bunny rabbits, birds, insects, bivalves and other seafoods, turtles and river fishes - that sort of thing.
@@huntergiron2388 I've never seen a paleolithic cave painting with women picking nuts and seeds, they were hunting large prey.
@@Michal_Sobczyk lol
@@Michal_Sobczyk they were hunting vegans
I have adhd, came her to see if I’m maximising my efficiency, maybe my diet is stricter than I thought if the hunter gatherer theory is correct? Idk.
Quite a decent archeological review, although one cannot conclude the diet of paleolithic hunters gatherers from modern hunters gatherers, different big game availability, different tools and trade opportunities.
but even with overall fine review, conclusions are either wrong or conforming with modern diet conventions. Somewhat disappointing.
She’s correct anout the impending ice age.. we are very due for one jist going by the cycles from the past.
Eat meat! Lots of meat!
Excellent presentation
18:55 ... yes, and women today gather at T.J. Maxx.
Wow, I sure enjoyed that👏👏👏👏👏
While I found this interesting, it was disheartening to see that the slide she used to highlight obesity was a person in fitness gear and presumed to be exercising. Way to really deflate the desire to workout while overweight.
If a cartoon pic outweighs being healthy, the person obviously doesn’t find obesity to be a pressing issue
Well, obesity is a very recent issue. Back like 50 to 60 years ago, almost everyone was fairly athletic and thin. Im sure she didn't choose it thinking people would be upset by it because shes probably as old as 50 or 60 and they see things differently to todays younger gen who are a little bit more insecure no thanks to the media around us, hence why your perspective may be different to hers.
The focus seems to be on our genes but we have our parents genes, mothers mitochondrial genes and a microbrial genes. All of which are not as rigid as one would think. I think with food, we should focus on our microbial communities and the damage our lifestyle habits have done to them. How we are wiping out key players with our habits and how it has become common place to malnourish others to the point of hibernation/extinction. Many of these important microbes feed off of diverse plant foods compounds like: inulin, FODMAPS and resistant starches. Consuming these compounds are imperative within a healthy lifestyle protocol. Their consumption is massively lacking balance within these western diets and is a far more significant variable in the quest of optimal health. We can’t sustain large populations off of a predominantly animal food diet so we need to adapt to a plant food one. We can’t simply divorce ourselves from the economy at mass and act as if it’s a solution. Plus there’s the ethical implications do you really want to carve a live dependent on treading on others corpses? It’s not necessary - many vegans have lived long healthful lives.
...grains...corn, rice and wheat, rye and barley came out of no where about 15 thousand years ago...and city states followed... geneticists can't account for the actual time of controlled conditions needed for...it... discounting GMOs...anunaki...???...
Atlanteans invented agriculture and taught all the butt-sniffing primitives how to build shit.
Yet vegans think we’re herbivores 🤦🏽♂️
starch is sugar ...
Grains are bad! Read Richard Manning's book Against The Grain
And read Richard Manning and John Ratey Go Wild
👌
No science behind that
Anything edible. Including other humans.
Very rarely. Do you eat your neighbors?
@@robinlillian9471 You are surely joking. If you think cannibalism wasn't huge in humanity's past, you're wrong. Stop equating feral humans of the past to those in your neighborhood. They did indeed 'eat their neighbors'. A practice that continues even today among some primitive societies.
@@joelcoley2606 From the nutritional aspect nothing speaks against consuming human carcasses.
I, for myself, have a strong negative feeling towards cannibalism, but that's social conditioning. My ethics is not the same as the ethics of some tribal people in Papua New Guinea, for example.
If we want to discuss with scientific terms we should leave out morals and make a clear distinctions between facts and ethics.
The science can give an answer to a hypothesis being true or false. Ethics don't disprove facts.
@@cezar3977 That correlates with my comment. I suspect that the taboos against cannibalism started with the advent of agriculture. Such a community would be able to devote resources to war to protect their gene pool from predation. Simply put, humans were not as rich of a source of protein as wild game, but took much less energy consumption to kill. But to deny that it happened on a regular basis is dubious at best.
Cheddar Man, in England
Alright?
Was going to comment the same but though someone surely had done it. Well played.
They ate a sh$$load of DINOSAUR meat!
....that upward inflection is something else. Very distracting.
Now I'm going to fucking notice it.
She speaks and hears via computers in her brain - are you a perfect public speaker? Please, try for a little grace.
I'm curious to know where chimps find fruit all year round.
They're in the tropics. Some tree or another is producing fruit at any given time
not many chimps live in the Arctic, so they're just stuck with whatever fruit is in season in the region where they live. like, you know, around, mostly, somewhere near to Central and West Africa...
I think she needs to give more weight to her observation that studying remnant population is not a high value source for inquiring of prehistory.
Humans were primarily gatherers with very little animals in the diet. Common sense.
common sense would imply invest the least amount of effort in return for the most amount of energy
Common sense? It is widely known the animal agriculture is the most energy intensive form of protein ever created man. Not even close to other proteins.
The planetary destruction is unfathomable as well. You have to be kidding right? Are you really that confused and lost? @@stric10
Animals are the most amount of energy required to obtain a protein man has ever created by far. Shall we dissect and compare them numbers a bit and then we can discuss common sense? @@stric10
Humans were primarily hunters with a lot of animals in the diet. That is common sense.
@@magnuseriksson5547 that is the narrative you bought into. Not likely until the gun. Primarily gatherers!~
A type 1 or type 2 carcinogen. Either causes cancer or likely too cause cancer. All meat. Smoking was a type 1 in 1964 but many people still smoke.
Meat causes cancer.... Just the factual scientific data....
1) We did not thrive. We lived into our 30's 2) a scientist threw a horse into a frozen lake for a couple of months; when he pulled the horse back out, the meat did have a substantial amount of vitamin C - the study needs to be independently confirmed 3) I am amongst people who have multiple copies of a gene for lactase persistence as an adult; for me cow's milk is like medication. But even I could overdo it if I consumed half a gallon or more of milk a day. If you do not cherry-pick studies, except for upset stomachs, milk is fine for all women of all ages and for lactase persistent males. Males who are not lactase persistent as adults do increase their chances of prostate cancer, if they consume cow's milk. The false belief that milk consumption increases the odds of broken bones is on the decrease amongst vegans. Many vegans care too much about credibility.
Great observations!
1: false, if you look at the hadza hunter gatherer people you have people being 80 years and older, this statistic counts in infant mortality(1 in 5 babies die)., 3: agriculture spread from mesopotamia to europe 5-10k years ago, making us able to tolerate milk but it doesn’t make it something good or natural. Humans are the only species to consume milk after infancy(also the only species to have a high amounts of depression, cancer, mental disorders etc.
1. We did thrive, average life span #,s are skewed low by infant mortality.
Life expectancy remained below 40 years until 1800 when the average person could afford to eat meat often. It has doubled since then.
Ok sure, most probably didn't make it past 40, but look at their lifestyle back then. Humans were more exposed to the elements. They didn't have the shelter and heat we have today. Clothes that could withstand any type of weather. Probably didn't have ways to cool themselves during heatwaves. Didn't have medication and healthcare like we do today. So that means if one broke a leg, chances were higher of infection and death. When it comes to their diets, they were most likely more healthy then us today and could probably out run you anyday.
We are so good at hunting that we now have to assist our Prey in their reproduction in order to not hunt them to extinction
Hunter-gatherers rarely lived to the age of 40, and even today most people do just fine on a diet high in animal protein, fat, and cholesterol in their 20's and 30's, even better if they are also physically active. But after the age of 40, these high animal food diets begin to take an increasing toll on people's health. The healthiest cultures on earth consume mostly plants with a small amount of animal flesh, similar to the macro-nutrient ratios of chimpanzees.
That is a myth. The reason why the life expectancy is right around there for that time is due to infant mortality. There are many skeletons that have been determined to be 50+ years old when they died.
I googled this and it appears you are right, the life expectancy numbers are distorted by the effect of high childhood mortality, much like the case with pre-industrial farmers. However, I stand by what I wrote after my first nine words: people on low animal flesh diets usually live longer than people who eat more animal flesh.
@@michaels4255 prove it.
BS I'm 50 plus and am at peak fitness. I have animal protein 3 or 4 times a day,I work hard and fast. Have normal bad cholesteral and high good cholesteral.
That's absolutely not true. Hong Kong people live longer between us e they ate a ton of meat
🍖
Disapointing lecture with very little information and much speculation.
I smell confirmation bias on your tone, not to mention your username. Don’t deny the truth it doesn’t help.
Yet people live longer where they eat more carbs..weird huh stone age diet does not mean healthy
Where? People in the US eat a high carb diet and they all dying early.
Not true.
A simple correlation found in few cases says nothing about the causation. Someone might live longer on a carbohydrate rich diet, but there are so many confounding factors.
Do they live long because they eat a lot of carbohydrates, or despite eating a lot of carbohydrates? Or thanks to the animal protein they include, no matter how small the quantities are?
Also you have to provide a credible source to support your claim, not cherry-picked data.
In Kenya the Maasai who live a traditional lifestyle with animal based diet (practically only meat, milk and blood) have a longer life and health span than the urban population in Nairobi that consumes mainly carbohydrates and plant oils.
@@cezar3977 we must have adequate protein or humans suffer the consequences. Eating one piece of meat daily will supply enough amino acids when consumed with plant foods that are LOW in starch & sugar. Eat lots of starch & sugar & the micrbiome that digests & extracts nutrients from fiber will suffer. WE do know this, but online, folks choose to ignore it!! Namaste'
@@KenWang1 because it refined carbs. Big difference.
Professor Brand-Miller would seem to have us believe that eating more animal foods is the way to health. If that is the case, then how does she explain why the levels of CHD, stroke, diabetes (T2) and cancer have rocketed in every single part of the globe where a mostly (90%) plant based diet is replaced by a meat and dairy centred one? In every case, as meat and dairy consumption has increased, so have the rates of chronic disease. The dietary change has accompanied the increase in wealth in places like China. I think that this talk is very misleading. What was the life expectancy and health profile of these hunter gatherer peoples whom she admires so much? Viewers may find the following presentation on paleolithic diet interesting:
ruclips.net/video/BMOjVYgYaG8/видео.html
Why would anyone have to explain anything to your ideology driven claims? Get a life man! If you dont agree, go watch cowspiracy for the hunderth time!
Having 50% of the children die before they reach adulthood is not part of my value system. If you want a good book on hunter/gatherers that is concise and accurate, try Dr. Robert L Kelly's book, "The Lifeways of Hunter-Gatherers". Full of nice charts on lifestyle habits and accurate documentation on what real life hunter gatherers face daily.
Vegan trolls would have you believe that alarmist claims about meat are based on science rather than industry consensus.
NONE of these cultures were vegan, let's stop using the smarmy, ambiguous term "plant based". All of these increases in health issues also go in lock-step with increasing sugar, refined carbs, less sun, less activity and a host of other evolutionary discordant changes, not the least of which is the gut microbiome alterations we see in all westernized societies. You ARE aware that the population with the lowest incidence of CVD is a hunter gather-group, yes?
What on earth would an absence of medial care in childbirth and early childhood have to do with the evolutionary implications of diet for humans???
Animal fats are essential for human health saturated and unsaturated animal fats. They are not the devil