{"id":14073,"date":"2011-02-03T09:54:25","date_gmt":"2011-02-03T14:54:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/14073\/human-physiology-proves-humans-meant-eat-plants\/"},"modified":"2011-02-03T09:54:25","modified_gmt":"2011-02-03T14:54:25","slug":"human-physiology-proves-humans-meant-eat-plants","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/14073\/human-physiology-proves-humans-meant-eat-plants\/","title":{"rendered":"Human physiology proves humans were meant to eat plants"},"content":{"rendered":"

Human physiology proves humans were meant to eat plants<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

ADVOCATE FOR SAVING DOGS\u2122<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

“Let Them Eat Art” (114493383)<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong>\"\"
\nMoonwarriors2<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong>Reposted with thanks by:
\nMartha<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong>*\u2665\u2020\u2665*Garden of Vegan*\u2665\u2020\u2665 * (www………myspace…..com\/192455612<\/a>)
\nChristopher (www………myspace…..com\/132118982<\/a>)<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Why Humans Are Primarily Plant-Eaters By Design <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>by Michael Bluejay<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>A fair look at the evidence shows that humans are optimized for eating exclusively plant foods, and not meat – Consider<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>* Human anatomy:<\/strong> We’re most similar to other herbivores, and drastically different from carnivores<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>* Longevity & health:<\/strong>
\nThe more meat we eat, the sicker we get – Meat is poison to us – It’s
\nthe primary reason we get heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis,
\nand every other major degenerative disease – If eating meat were
\nnatural, it wouldn’t destroy our health<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>* Physical performance:<\/strong> People have much better endurance when they don’t eat meat — whether they’re professional athletes or not<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Clearly we’re capable of eating meat- But that doesn’t mean it’s natural<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>You
\ncan dress a monkey up in a cute little suit and teach it to perform
\ncircus tricks, but just because it can doesn’t mean that it’s natural —
\nnor that it should – When I say that meat-eating is unnatural, I mean
\nsimply that our bodies aren’t optimized to have it be a normal part of
\nour diets — and we suffer the consequences when we make it so<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Vegan bodybuilder, Kenneth Williams – Shattering the myth that vegans are skinny and malnourished<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photo<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>The
\nmeat-eating reader already has half a dozen objections to this before
\n(s)he’s even read the rest of the article, and I will address those
\nobjections specifically, but first let me address them generally: It is
\nhuman nature to want to feel that what we’re doing is right, proper, and
\nlogical – When we’re confronted with something that suggests that our
\ncurrent practices are not the best ones, it’s uncomfortable – We can
\neither consider that our choices may not have been the best ones, which
\nis extremely disturbing, or we can reject that premise without truly
\nconsidering it, so that we don’t have to feel bad – And we do this by
\nsearching our minds for any arguments we can for why the challenge must
\nbe wrong, to justify our current behavior<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Think about that for a moment<\/strong>:
\nOur feeling that our current actions are correct isn’t based on our
\narguments – Rather, our actions come first and then we come up with the
\narguments to try to support those actions – If we were truly logical,
\nwe’d consider the evidence first and then decide the best course of
\naction – But often we have it in reverse, because it’s too difficult to
\naccept that we might have been wrong<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>This
\nis particularly true when it comes to veg{….etari}anism – It is quite
\neasy to identify because the anti-….veg{etari}an arguments are
\nusually so weak and desperate, compared to other kinds of discourse – A
\nperson who would never normally suggest something so fantastic as the
\nidea that plants can think and feel pain, will suddenly all but lunge
\nfor such an argument when they feel their meat-eating ways are being
\nquestioned – It’s human nature<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>At an earlier point in my life<\/strong>,
\nI was in the same position as you probably are – My habits were
\nchallenged by a book I ran across in the library called Going Vegetarian
\n– I didn’t want to consider it fairly, because I wanted to keep eating
\nmeat<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>I’d grown up eating it, and I liked it – And there was
\nanother reason: I’d grown up in a small farming community raising and
\nkilling chickens – Accepting the book’s premise really meant that I’d
\nhave to admit that I might not have made the best choices – So I came up
\nwith various weak defenses to justify my behavior – But deep down I
\nknew I was kidding myself, and practicing a form of intellectual
\ncowardice – When I considered the arguments honestly, I stopped eating
\nanimals – That was over 20 years ago and it was absolutely the best
\ndecision I ever made<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>So I challenge you:<\/strong> stop trying
\nto figure out ways that I “must” be wrong even before you’ve bothered to
\nread the rest of this article – Instead, read it, and actually consider
\nit rather than reflexively trying to come out with ways to dismiss it
\nout of hand – You can certainly still disagree after you’ve considered
\nall the evidence — but not before<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Most meat-eating readers
\nwill find it necessary to try to defeat me, at least in their minds, so
\nlet’s consider what constitutes doing so: providing more and better
\nevidence for your position – You do not win the argument by making a
\nsingle point, as most of the readers who email me seem to think – The
\nevidence favoring a plant diet for humans is clear, convincing, and
\noverwhelming – There is definitely some evidence for the other side, to
\nbe sure, but it’s simply not nearly as strong – What I’m saying is, if
\nthere are 30 strong points for, and you come up with one or two against,
\nwhich is the better position? I mention this because the people who
\nemail me about this article seem to believe that whoever makes the
\nfewest points has presented the most convincing case – They somehow seem
\nto believe that all the evidence I present somehow disappears into thin
\nair when they present their lone argument, such as that humans have
\ncanine teeth – Please don’t fall into that trap<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Many believe
\nthat lunging at at the minority of evidence in the red box makes their
\nposition compelling – But it doesn’t – The only way to make that
\nposition compelling is to make the box bigger – A whole lot bigger<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>But haven’t humans always eaten meat?<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>The
\nangry people who email me always insist, “But humans have always eaten
\nmeat!” I can’t think of a better example of a case in which people
\nbelieve something to be true just because they assume it is – We all
\ngrew up thinking that our ancestors were meat-eaters, but where did we
\nget that idea? Is it true just because it’s part of our collective
\nconsciousness? More importantly, what does the evidence say?<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>John AMcDougall, M D<\/strong>,
\nperhaps the most knowledgable expert on the relationship between diet
\nand disease, asserts that our early ancestors from at least four million
\nyears ago followed diets almost exclusively of plant foods – Many other
\nscientists believe that early humans were largely veg{etari}an – (See
\narticles by Grande & Leckie and Derek Wall) – This is important
\nbecause while prehistoric peoples hunted animals, that is still a
\nrelatively recent development in the long period of human existence –
\nCertainly not long enough for our bodies to have adapted to it from
\nevolution – Here’s some evidence: The Maasai in Kenya, who still eat a
\ndiet high in wild hunted meats, have the worst life expectancy in the
\nworld (Fuhrman)<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>There’s another important fact never acknowledged by meat proponents:<\/strong>
\nHumans act by idea rather than by instinct – Other animals are
\nprogrammed to know what food is – We are not – For us, it’s learned
\nbehavior – Or in some cases, guessed behavior We can make choices about
\nwhat we should eat even if that’s contrary to good health, as millions
\nprove every day when they eat at McDonald’s – If our ancestors ate meat,
\nthey were simply being human and making choices rather than acting on
\ninstinct – Think about it: Do you really believe that cavemen were true
\nexperts about nutrition? If so, what other major decisions about your
\nlife would you like to put in the hands of a caveman?<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>What it means to be an omnivore<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>There
\nis no question that humans are capable of digesting meat- But just
\nbecause we can digest animals does not mean we’re supposed to, or that
\nit will be good for us – We can digest cardboard – That does not mean we
\nshould<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>If
\nthe evidence shows that our anatomy favors the digestion of plant
\nfoods, and we’re healthier when we eat less animal foods, what do we
\nmake of the fact that we’re capable of eating animals? It’s simple: We
\nhave the ability to eat a wide variety of foods as a survival mechanism –
\nThe fact that we can eat just about anything, including meat, is very
\nhandy, from a biological point of view – But the fact that we’re able to
\ndoesn’t mean that we’re designed to – The evidence for this is that our
\nbiology is similar to that of other herbivores, and the more animal
\nfoods we incorporate into our diets, the more our health suffers – In
\nfact, it is rather specious to claim that humans are natural meat-eaters
\nconsidering how poorly we fare when we do so<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>McDougall
\nexplains how the ability to digest animal foods didn’t hurt our survival
\nas a race, although it takes a toll on our lifespan:<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>“Undoubtedly,
\nall of these [……..meat-….containing] diets were adequate to
\nsupport growth and life to an age of successful reproduction – To bear
\nand raise offspring you only need to live for 20 to 30 years, and
\nfortuitously, the average life expectancy for these people was just that
\n– The few populations of hunter-….gatherers surviving into the 21st
\nCentury are confined to the most remote regions of our planet
\n&endash;- like the Arctic and the jungles of South America and
\nAfrica &endash;- some of the most challenging places to manage to
\nsurvive – Their life expectancy is also limited to 25 to 30 years and
\ninfant mortality is 40% to 50% – Hunter-….gatherer societies
\nfortunately did survive, but considering their arduous struggle and
\nshort lifespan, I would not rank them among successful societies”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Finally, our physiology is much more similar to that of other plant-eaters than it is of true omnivores, as we’ll see shortly<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Considering the other primates<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Our
\nclosest animal relatives are primates – They provide clues about our
\nideal diet since our anatomy is so similar – Very few of them eat any
\nsignificant amount of animals, and those who do typically mostly stick
\nto things like insects, not cows, pigs, and chickens – Jane Goodall,
\nfamous for her extensive study of apes while living with them, found
\nthat it was very rare for the primates she saw to eat other animals –
\nCritics lunge all over the fact that Goodall discovered that primates
\noccasionally eat meat – But the key word here is occasionally – If we
\nate meat is infrequently as the other primates did, our health would be a
\nlot better – Goodall herself apparently wasn’t impressed by primates’
\noccasional eating of meat: Jane Goodall is a vegetarian<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Why humans are primarily plant-eaters by design<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong> <\/strong>http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Vc2HfsdVvjo<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong> <\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>How
\nslight is the other primates’ animal consumption? This article on
\nprimate eating habits from Harvard has a bar graph of all the things
\nthat chimps and monkeys eat (Fig 3), and meat isn’t even in the chart –
\nWhat they do eat is fruit, seeds, leaves, flowers, and pith – There is a
\ncategory called “……..Miscellaneous”…., which for most species
\namounts to less than 5% of their diet, and for chimps and redtail
\nmonkeys less than 1% – The Honolulu Zoo gives a slighty higher figure,
\nsaying that non-plant consumption is 5% of a chimp’s diet, but this
\nincludes their main non-plant food, termites -you slice it, their diet
\nis at least 95% plants<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Which brings up another point:<\/strong>
\nThe people who hysterically scream at me that chimps are omnivores,
\nbesides ignoring that chimps’ meat consumption is so small as to be
\nvirtually non-existent, never acknowledge that the non-plant foods
\nchimps eat are not the same things humans eat – Chimps do not eat cattle
\nand chickens – And humans don’t eat termites – The idea that the
\nmeat-laden American diet can be justified because chimps may eat a
\nwhopping 5% of non-plant foods, none of it cattle or chickens, and much
\nof it termites, is rather silly<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Let’s use the Harvard
\narticle’s figure for chimps and round it up to a generous 1% – If that
\nwere beef — which it is not — how much beef would that be? About 1\/3
\nof an ounce, or 1\/50 of a pound – That’s about 1\/7th of a medium carrot –
\nYes, there you have chimps’ overwhelming “omnivorism”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Consider
\nalso that even though primates eat meat sparingly, there again it’s
\nlikely because they’re intelligent and like humans are able to make
\nchoices to act outside of instinct – As other writers put it, “While
\nchimpanzees are known to kill, this behaviour is not necessarily dietary
\nbut ritualistic” – Eugene Khutoryansky who does believe that eating
\nmeat is natural, still cautions that the implications of that should
\ngive us pause:<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Eating meat is indeed natural in the sense
\nthat other animals do it as well – In fact, it is even done on occasion
\nby our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees- However, there are
\nmany other things which are also natural – For example, chimpanzee males
\nsometimes rape the females in their tribe – Chimpanzees sometimes
\nengage in organized warfare against other tribes with which they compete
\nfor territory – A chimpanzee male, in a moment of rage, sometimes picks
\nup a nearby infant, and crushes his skull against a rock – And
\nchimpanzees do on occasion eat meat, and they do on occasion engage in
\ncannibalism, in spite of the fact that there is a plentiful supply of
\nfood from other sources<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>So eating meat is indeed absolutely
\nnatural- However, the fact that it is natural does not imply that it is
\nethically permissible – If we believed that eating meat was ethically
\npermissible simply because other animals did it as well, then this would
\nimply that there is nothing wrong with rape, cannibalism, or
\ninfanticide, all of which routinely occurs throughout the animal kingdom<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Humans lack a desire to eat whole animals<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>True carnivores (and omnivores) <\/strong>get
\nexcited about eating whole prey animals when they see them – Humans do
\nnot – We’re interested in eating the body parts only because they’ve
\nbeen removed from the original animal and processed, and because we grew
\nup eating them, making it seem perfectly normal – It’s amazing how much
\nof a disconnect we’ve been able to learn about the difference between
\nanimals and food – As GoVeg puts it:<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>While carnivores take pleasure in killing animals and eating their raw flesh,<\/strong>
\nany human who killed an animal with his or her bare hands and dug into
\nthe raw corpse would be considered deranged – Carnivorous animals are
\naroused by the scent of blood and the thrill of the chase – Most humans,
\non the other hand, are revolted by the sight of raw flesh and cannot
\ntolerate hearing the screams of animals being ripped apart and killed –
\nThe bloody reality of eating animals is innately repulsive to us, more
\nproof that we were not designed to eat meat<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Ask yourself:<\/strong>
\nWhen you see dead animals on the side of the road, are you tempted to
\nstop for a snack? Does the sight of a dead bird make you salivate? Do
\nyou daydream about killing cows with your bare hands and eating them
\nraw? If you answered “no” to all of these questions,
\ncongratulations……..&..amp;..emdash;you’re a normal human
\nherbivore&..amp;….emdash;like it or not – Humans were simply not
\ndesigned to eat meat – Humans lack both the physical characteristics….
\nof carnivores and the instinct that drives them to kill animals and
\ndevour their raw carcasses<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Comparing humans to other animals<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photo<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Human
\nphysiology is strikingly similar to that of other plant-eaters, and
\nquite unlike that of carnivores – It is telling that in none of the
\nhorribly misspelled missives that readers have sent in to argue with me
\ndo they ever deny the data in the following table – They simply think
\nthat by making some other point (e g , that humans possess canine teeth)
\nthat somehow obliterates the more convincing data in the table<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Meat-Eaters<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Carnivorous animals,<\/strong>
\nincluding the lion, dog, wolf, cat, etc, have many unique
\ncharacteristics…. which set them apart from all other members of the
\nanimal kingdom – They all possess a very simple and short digestive
\nsystem — only three times the length of their bodies – This is because
\nflesh decays very rapidly, and the products of this decay quickly poison
\nthe bloodstream if they remain too long in the body – So a short
\ndigestive tract was evolved for rapid expulsion of putrefactive bacteria
\nfrom decomposing flesh, as well as stomachs with ten times as much
\nhydrochloric acid as non-….carnivorous animals (to digest fibrous
\ntissue and bones) – Meat-eating animals that hunt in the cool of the
\nnight and sleep during the day when it is hot do not need sweat glands
\nto cool their bodies; they therefore do not perspire through their skin,
\nbut rather they sweat through their tongues – On the other hand,
\nvegetarian animals, such as the cow, horse, zebra, deer, etc, spend much
\nof their time in the sun gathering their food, and they freely perspire
\nthrough their skin to cool their bodies – But the most significant
\ndifference between the natural meat-eaters and other animals is their
\nteeth – Along with sharp claws, all meat-eaters, since they have to kill
\nmainly with their teeth, possess powerful jaws and pointed, elongated,
\n“canine” teeth to pierce tough hide and to spear and tear flesh – They
\ndo NOT have molars (flat, back teeth) which vegetarian animals need for
\ngrinding their food – Unlike grains, flesh does not need to be chewed in
\nthe mouth to predigest it; it is digested mostly in the stomach and the
\nintestines – A cat, for example, can hardly chew at all<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Plant-Eaters<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Grass-……..and-….leaf-eating animals<\/strong>
\n(elephant, cow, sheep, llama, etc) – live on grass, herbs, and other
\nplants, much of which is coarse and bulky – The digestion of this type
\nof food starts in the mouth with the enzyme ptyalin in the saliva- these
\nfoods must be chewed well and thoroughly mixed with ptyalin in order to
\nbe broken down – For this reason, grass-and-leaf eaters have 24 special
\n“molar” teeth and a slight side-to-side motion to grind their food, as
\nopposed to the exclusively up-and-down motion of carnivores – They have
\nno claws or sharp teeth; they drink by sucking water up into their
\nmouths as opposed to lapping it up with their tongue which all meat
\neaters do – Since they do not eat rapidly decaying foods like the meat
\neaters, and since their food can take a longer time to pass through,
\nthey have much longer digestive systems — intestines which are ten
\ntimes the length of the body<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Interestingly, recent studies have
\nshown that a meat diet has an extremely harmful effect on these
\ngrass-and-leaf eaters – Dr William Collins, a scientist in the New York
\nMaimonedes Medical Center, found that the meat-eating animals have an
\n“almost unlimited capacity to handle saturated fats and cholesterol” –
\nIf a half pound of animal fat is added daily over a long period of time
\nto a rabbit’s diet, after two month his blood vessels become caked with
\nfat and the serious disease called atheriosclerosi….s develops – human
\ndigestive systems, like the rabbit’s, are also not designed to digest
\nmeat, and they become diseased the more they eat it, as we will later
\nsee<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Fruit-eaters include mainly the anthropoid apes,<\/strong>
\nhumanity’s immediate animal ancestors – The diet of these apes consists
\nmostly of fruit and nuts – Their skin has millions of pores for
\nsweating, and they also have molars to grind and chew their food; their
\nsaliva is alkaline, and, like the grass-and-leaf eaters, it contains
\nptyalin for predigestion – Their intestines are extremely convoluted and
\nare twelve times the length of their body, for the slow digestion of
\nfruits and vegetables<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Human Beings<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>\"Photobucket\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Human characteristics<\/strong>
\nare in every way like the fruit eaters, very similar to the grass-
\neater, and very unlike the meat eaters, as is clearly shown in the table
\nabove – The human digestive system, tooth and jaw structure, and bodily
\nfunctions are completely different from carnivorous animals – As in the
\ncase of the anthropoid ape, the human digestive system is twelve times
\nthe length of the body; our skin has millions of tiny pores to evaporate
\nwater and cool the body by sweating; we drink water by suction like all
\nother vegetarian animals; our tooth and jaw structure is vegetarian;
\nand our saliva is alkaline and contains ptyalin for predigestion of
\ngrains – Human beings clearly are not carnivores by physiology — our
\nanatomy and digestive system show that we must have evolved for millions
\nof years living on fruits, nuts, grains, and vegetables<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Furthermore, it is obvious that our natural instincts are non-….carnivorous – <\/strong>Most
\npeople have other people kill their meat for them and would be sickened
\nif they had to do the killing themselves – Instead of eating raw meat
\nas all flesh-eating animals do, humans boil, bake, or fry it and
\ndisguise it with all kinds of sauces and spices so that it bears no
\nresemblance to its raw state- One scientist explains it this way “- A
\ncat will salivate with hungry desire at the smell of a piece of raw
\nflesh but not at all at the smell of fruit – If man could delight in
\npouncing upon a bird, tear its still-living limbs apart with his teeth,
\nand suck the warm blood, one might conclude that nature provided him
\nwith meat-eating instinct – On the other hand, a bunch of luscious
\ngrapes makes his mouth water, and even in the absence of hunger he will
\neat fruit because it tastes so good ”<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Scientists and naturalists, including the great Charles Darwin who gave the theory of evolution,<\/strong>
\nagree that early humans were fruit and vegetable eaters and that
\nthroughout history our anatomy has not changed – The great Swedish
\nscientist von Linn\u00e9 states: “Man’s structure, external and internal,
\ncompared with that of the other animals, shows that fruit and succulent
\nvegetables constitute his natural food ”<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>So it is clear from
\nscientific studies that physiologically…., anatomically, and
\ninstinctively, man is perfectly suited to a diet for fruit, vegetables,
\nnuts, and grains – This is summarized in the table above<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>from What’s Wrong with Eating Meat,<\/strong>
\nby Barbara Parham, \u00a9Ananda Marga Publications, 1979<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>As
\nanother author said, “The human body was not designed to catch or eat
\nanimals – You have no claws – Your teeth do not rend flesh – Your mouth
\ncan not seriously wound nor is it made to really get a good bite into an
\nstruggling victim like true carnivores can – You are not fit to run
\nfast to catch prey- Meat-eaters have fast enough reflexes to ambush or
\novertake a victim – You do not – Try catching a pig or a chicken with
\nyour bare hands; see what happens”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>“But what about canine teeth and binocular vision?”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>It’s
\npart of our collective consciousness that we have “canine teeth” and
\nthat this “proves” that we’re meat eaters – But the truth is that this
\nargument couldn’t be weaker<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Humans’ so-called “canine teeth” are
\nunlike the canine teeth of actual canines, which are really long and
\nreally pointed – Our teeth are absolutely not like theirs – In fact,
\nother vegetarian animals (like gorillas and horses) possess the same
\nso-called “canine” teeth<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Overall, our teeth resemble those of
\nplant-eaters much more than meat-eaters – For example, we have molar
\nteeth (plant-eaters do, carnivores don’t) – Try to find a human-type
\nmolar inside your cat’s mouth – Our teeth can also move side to side to
\ngrind, just like the other plant-eaters, and completely unlike the
\ncarnivores – Their jaws go only up and down<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>My favorite quote from when someone brought up the canine rationalization…. on a message board:<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>“Hey Julia–we evolved with canine teeth? I’d like to see you tackle a steer and tear it apart with those ferocious incisors”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>What’s funny to me is how the teeth argument is so important to meat proponents<\/strong>
\nwhen they make their point about canine teeth, and then as soon as they
\nfind out that our teeth are much more similar to those of herbivores
\nthan of carnivores, and therefore consideration of our teeth suggests
\nthat we’re designed to be plant eaters — suddenly what kind of teeth we
\nhave is not so important to them after all<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Others have argued that predators have eyes on the front of their heads <\/strong>for
\nbinocular vision, while prey animals have eyes on the sides, indicating
\nthat we fall into the predator camp – This ignores the fact that the
\nanimals that we’re most similar to — the other primates — have eyes on
\nthe front of their heads, and are almost exclusively vegetarian – It’s
\nalso important to remember what I said at the top of this article: There
\nis certainly evidence on both sides of this debate, but the
\npreponderance of evidence clearly shows that we’re suited to eating
\nplants almost exclusively<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>“You’re not taking into account evolution”<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Of
\ncourse I’m not – Anyone making the claim that we evolved to eat meat
\nthrough relatively recently-….developed hunting skills only
\ndemonstrates how poorly they understand evolution, which takes place
\nover a much longer period of time – Besides, if we had truly evolved to
\nbe meat-eaters, it wouldn’t kill us when we do so, which is the next
\ntopic —<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>If meat is so good for us, it wouldn’t kill us<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>The
\nmedical evidence is overwhelming and indisputable: The more animal
\nfoods we eat, the more heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other
\ndegenerative disease we suffer – This has been exhaustively demonstrated
\nbeyond any doubt – If it were natural for us to eat these food, they
\nwouldn’t kill us – The fact that health can be regained by laying off
\nmeat and dairy is powerful evidence that we shouldn’t have been eating
\nthose foods in the first place<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>Dean Ornish, MD was the first
\nperson to prove that heart disease can be reversed, and he did so by
\nfeeding his patients a vegetarian diet – John McDougall, MD has also
\nwritten extensively about how animal foods cause disease, and how people
\ncan regain their health by eating vegan instead – The esteemed T Colin
\nCampbell oversaw the most massive study of the relationship between diet
\nand disease, the China Study, which the New York Times caled “the grand
\nprix of epidemiology” – – His conclusions are the same as the other
\nexperts: we’re not designed to eat animal foods, because we get sick
\nwhen we do so<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>There is no need to argue with me about this<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong>If
\nyou feel otherwise, let’s just agree to disagree – I’ve received a ton
\nof email on this issue, none of it illuminating, most of it badly
\nmisspelled, and I simply don’t have the time nor desire to debate
\neveryone who wants to argue with me- And trust me, I have definitely
\nheard every argument – (I stopped hearing genuinely new arguments
\napproximately 19 years ago) – If you feel so strongly about your
\nposition that you absolutely must make it known, then simply do what I
\ndid: Put up your own web page espousing your own views – You can be
\nconfident that I will not write to you to argue about what you have
\nwritten
\nsource<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Human physiology proves humans were meant to eat plants ADVOCATE FOR SAVING DOGS\u2122 “Let Them Eat Art” (114493383) Moonwarriors2 Reposted with thanks by: Martha *\u2665\u2020\u2665*Garden of Vegan*\u2665\u2020\u2665 * (www………myspace…..com\/192455612) Christopher (www………myspace…..com\/132118982) Why Humans Are Primarily Plant-Eaters By Design by Michael Bluejay A fair look at the evidence shows that humans are optimized for eating exclusively […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14073","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-other"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14073","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14073"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14073\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14073"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14073"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendburst.com\/blog-new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14073"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}