First, be advised that I haven't done a lot of research on this topic, so correct me if necessary.I believe humans are meant to eat meat in moderation because the type of protein in the meat contains all the essential amino acids that are vital to muscle growth, repair, and maintenance. Merely coincidence? Conversely, most vegetables do not contain all the necessary amino acids (soybeans being an exception I know of). True, vegetables, eaten in right combinations, can provide adequate amino acids. But it would seem that eating meat is easier and more natural--especially for the primitive man who would have had no idea of what combinations of vegetables to eat.
Vegans/vegetarians say that meat is harmful to people. This is true--when meat is consumed in excess. But it is the same with things such as sodium and iron--nutrients that the body needs, but if over-ingested can be quite harmful.
One thing which I'm not sure about though--what did the earliest humans eat in place of meat if they didn't hunt? I'm thinking of several possibilities (sans any research on my part): 1) They ate insects, 2) They scavenged for already dead animals, including those cached away by predators, 3) They had a different pysiological makeup that precluded the necessity for the same amino acids that we require (this seems highly unlikely), 4) Their lifestyle precluded this need for the same amino acids we need (which also seems unlikely, given the rigorous activity primitive man undertook daily), 5)They were somehow able to intake the essential amino acids in their vegetable diet (which, again, seems unlikely), 6) A combination of several of the above.
So, if you would like to try to set me straight, or even agree, please do so. But please, send a copy of your response to my e-mail addy, as I don't frequent The Debating Room. Thanks.
None.
