Skip to main content

Home/ Nutrition/ Group items matching "diet,part_II" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Matti Narkia

Are we meat eaters or vegetarians? Part II | The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D. - 0 views

  •  
    "Meat eating made us human. The anthropological evidence strongly supports the idea that the addition of increasingly larger amounts of meat in the diet of our predecessors was essential in the evolution of the large human brain. Our large brains came at the metabolic expense of our guts, which shrank as our brains grew. In April 1995 an article appeared in the journal Current Anthropology that was an intellectual tour de force and, in my view, an example of a perfect theoretical paper. "The Expensive-Tissue Hypothesis" (ETH) by Leslie Aiello and Peter Wheeler demonstrated by a brilliant thought experiment that our species didn't evolve to eat meat but evolved because it ate meat. It was our gradual drift toward the much higher quality diet provided by food from animal sources that allowed us to develop the large brains we have. It was hunting and meat eating that reduced our GI tracts and freed up our brains to grow. As I wrote at the start of this post, the evidence indicates that we didn't evolve to eat meat - we evolved because we ate meat."
Matti Narkia

Are we meat eaters or vegetarians? Part II | The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D. - 0 views

  •  
    Meat eating made us human. The anthropological evidence strongly supports the idea that the addition of increasingly larger amounts of meat in the diet of our predecessors was essential in the evolution of the large human brain. Our large brains came at the metabolic expense of our guts, which shrank as our brains grew.
Matti Narkia

Whole Health Source: Eicosanoids and Ischemic Heart Disease, Part II - 0 views

  •  
    "Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Eicosanoids and Ischemic Heart Disease, Part II Here's where it gets more complicated and more interesting. The ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 matters, but so does the total amount of each. This is a graph from a 1992 paper by Dr. Lands: In sum, this suggests that the single best way to avoid a heart attack is to reduce omega-6 consumption and ensure an adequate source of omega-3. The lower the omega-6, the less the omega-3 matters. This is a nice theory, but where's the direct evidence? In the next post, I'll discuss the controlled trial that proved this concept once and for all: the Lyon diet-heart trial.
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20 items per page