100 Million Years Of Food Summary

Have you ever pon­dered why diet-relat­ed ail­ments afflict the West­ern world? More indi­vid­u­als today strug­gle with obe­si­ty, food aller­gies, var­i­ous types of can­cer, and type 2 dia­betes than ever before.

It appears some­thing is not quite right with our eat­ing pat­terns. How­ev­er, iden­ti­fy­ing what is amiss with how we’re con­sum­ing present­ly and deter­min­ing what we should be prac­tic­ing instead is chal­leng­ing. The encour­ag­ing news is we might dis­cov­er a few solu­tions to this query from our ances­tors’ dietary habits. In recent years, there has been a sig­nif­i­cant increase in paleo or pri­mal diets.

Con­sid­er­ing our fore­bears were gen­er­al­ly much fit­ter than mod­ern humans, we are striv­ing to repli­cate that. This book explores whether the dietary selec­tions of these ancient pre­de­ces­sors would be suit­able for us in the present day. We need to go way back in time – com­menc­ing 100 mil­lion years ago with our ear­li­est, tree-dwelling ances­tors. By exam­in­ing how these ances­tors adjust­ed to vary­ing envi­ron­ments and diets, we gain a com­pre­hen­sive perspective.

On this cap­ti­vat­ing explo­ration through the evo­lu­tion of human­i­ty, you’ll discover

  • Bugs – why we should eat some every now and then.
  • Milk – does it gen­uine­ly ben­e­fit the body?
  • Plants – are they sus­te­nance or toxicity?

100 Million Years Of Food Summary

1: Insects and fruits

Imag­ine if one of our ear­li­est ances­tors strolled into one of today’s super­mar­kets? They would be over­whelmed by the choic­es. The dis­tinc­tion between the din­ing options acces­si­ble to our ancient ances­tors and the crammed, vivid­ly col­ored aisles of con­tem­po­rary gro­cery stores could scarce­ly be more pronounced.

Our ear­li­est ances­tors emerged around 100 mil­lion years ago and inhab­it­ed the trees of trop­i­cal forests. They main­ly feast­ed on the insects abun­dant in this habi­tat. Dis­gust­ing, isn’t it? Insects are gen­uine­ly a nutri­ent-rich source of vit­a­mins and iron.

Despite insects still pos­si­bly being a valu­able addi­tion to the mod­ern human diet, rely­ing sole­ly on bugs wouldn’t be wise. Chitin, which forms the exoskele­tons of insects, is indi­gestible to us now, where­as our ances­tors pos­sessed enzymes that enabled them to break down this sub­stance. Bugs can also incite aller­gies and pro­duce nox­ious substances.

Nev­er­the­less, inte­grat­ing insects into the human diet in mod­est quan­ti­ties could be tremen­dous­ly advan­ta­geous to con­tem­po­rary food pro­duc­tion. Insects can be farmed akin to live­stock and are con­sid­er­ably more effi­cient. Crick­ets con­vert feed into calo­ries 12 times more effec­tive­ly than cows per pound and emit approx­i­mate­ly 50 per­cent less car­bon diox­ide in the process.

Despite their mer­its, our ances­tors com­menced mod­i­fy­ing their dietary prac­tices around 60 mil­lion years ago. The cli­mate began cool­ing at this time, and the first fruit-bear­ing trees emerged as the atmos­phere turned more humid. Simul­ta­ne­ous­ly, our ances­tors lost the capa­bil­i­ty to syn­the­size vit­a­min C, a cru­cial nutri­ent that safe­guards against cell dam­age, dur­ing this era.

Since they could obtain ample vit­a­min C from fruit, they sur­vived this tran­si­tion. Our ances­tors tran­si­tioned to full-time fruit con­sump­tion around 30 mil­lion years ago. How­ev­er, overindulging in fruit can also be detri­men­tal. Fruit con­tains fruc­tose, a form of sug­ar that our bod­ies can only metab­o­lize in restrict­ed amounts; exces­sive sug­ar intake can lead to con­di­tions like insulin resis­tance and pan­cre­at­ic cancer.

Actor Ash­ton Kutch­er expe­ri­enced the per­ils of exces­sive fruc­tose first­hand. Kutch­er adhered to Steve Job’s fruitar­i­an diet for a month while prepar­ing to por­tray the tech CEO. After just 30 days of fol­low­ing this reg­i­men, Kutch­er was hos­pi­tal­ized with pan­cre­at­ic complications.

2: Meat

About two mil­lion years ago, our ances­tors’ diet under­went anoth­er trans­for­ma­tion. They began depart­ing from the trees and embrac­ing a more ter­res­tri­al way of life. These ear­ly humans com­menced hunt­ing, for­ag­ing, and con­sum­ing more meat than ever before.

They began resem­bling humans more close­ly, and their brains under­went swift growth. The fat­ty acids in meat make it the ide­al fuel for a devel­op­ing brain. In fact, the brain size of our ances­tors dou­bled with­in just one mil­lion years, a change that might have been attrib­ut­able to their increas­ing­ly car­niv­o­rous diets.

With these enlarged brains, our ances­tors attained an evo­lu­tion­ary edge. Smarter, more coor­di­nat­ed hunt­ing groups could take down more prey, enhanc­ing their fam­i­lies’ like­li­hood of sur­vival and prop­a­ga­tion. Despite meat poten­tial­ly being the cat­a­lyst for our evo­lu­tion­ary tri­umph, exces­sive con­sump­tion of it is not con­ducive to our well-being.

We can tol­er­ate pro­tein only to a lim­it­ed extent, and meat is replete with it. Pro­teins can trig­ger the pro­duc­tion of poten­tial­ly haz­ardous nitro­gen com­pounds when digest­ed by the human body. If an indi­vid­ual derives over 40 per­cent of their dai­ly caloric intake from pro­tein, the lev­els of these com­pounds can esca­late perilously.

Addi­tion­al cho­les­terol is anoth­er rea­son why an over­abun­dance of meat con­sump­tion can be detri­men­tal to our health. It can con­join with oth­er sub­stances and obstruct our arter­ies. Nonethe­less, do not assume cho­les­terol is entire­ly harmful.

Vital sex hor­mones like testos­terone and estro­gen are syn­the­sized from cho­les­terol. Addi­tion­al­ly, cho­les­terol can enhance our moods by ele­vat­ing the lev­els of high-den­si­ty lipopro­tein or HDL. Although most of the body’s cho­les­terol is man­u­fac­tured by our liv­er and intestines, meat and dairy sup­ply sup­ple­men­tary sources that influ­ence our hor­mone levels.

Females on a diet rich in cho­les­terol may attain sex­u­al matu­ri­ty soon­er. While this enhances their poten­tial repro­duc­tive out­put by facil­i­tat­ing ear­li­er child­birth, it also short­ens their lifespan.

3: Meat alternatives

Were you aware that sub­sti­tutes for red meat are far from nov­el? Present­ly, we have an array of dietary options avail­able, mak­ing it more con­ve­nient to adhere to a bal­anced veg­e­tar­i­an diet than in the past. Even our ances­tors with a pen­chant for meat diver­si­fied. Although not every indi­vid­ual devel­oped a taste for fish, it pre­vailed over red meat in numer­ous cul­tures. Ever ques­tioned how this mate­ri­al­ized? Red meat was scarce in sev­er­al regions, prompt­ing the inclu­sion of fish, a read­i­ly avail­able and nutri­tious sus­te­nance. Since fat­ty fish are replete with ben­e­fi­cial omega‑3 fat­ty acids and vit­a­min D, essen­tial for skele­tal health, this was a pru­dent decision.

Despite easy access to fish, not every cul­ture opt­ed to incor­po­rate it into their diets. Var­i­ous cul­tur­al ratio­nales under­pinned this choice. While some cul­tures revered fish as sacred crea­tures dwelling in a divine milieu, oth­ers, like the Apache Indi­ans, deemed fish unhy­gien­ic and unsuit­able for consumption.

Ani­mal milk was anoth­er sig­nif­i­cant alter­na­tive to meat that infil­trat­ed the human diet rough­ly 8,000 years ago. How­ev­er, ani­mal milk is not as salu­bri­ous for human inges­tion as com­mon­ly believed, notwith­stand­ing it often being per­ceived as a panacea of sorts. North­ern Euro­peans were among the first to rec­og­nize the mer­its of ani­mal milk.

It is nutri­ent-rich and abun­dant in cal­ci­um. Cru­cial­ly, an ani­mal can be con­sumed only once, but it can be milked repeat­ed­ly. While sta­tis­tics estab­lish a cor­re­la­tion between milk con­sump­tion and chil­dren’s height growth, this surge in stature may come at a cost.of skele­tal sys­tem strength. A con­nec­tion can be observed in the coun­tries with the high­est dairy intake. The inhab­i­tants of these nations with above-aver­age stature also face increased rates of hip fractures.

Con­sump­tion of milk may pose an addi­tion­al prob­lem for indi­vid­u­als from regions with lim­it­ed his­to­ry of dairy con­sump­tion. These indi­vid­u­als absorb cal­ci­um more effec­tive­ly than those from areas where milk is tra­di­tion­al­ly ingest­ed. This implies that these indi­vid­u­als might encounter dan­ger­ous­ly height­ened cal­ci­um lev­els if they con­sume a large amount of milk. Ele­vat­ed blood-cal­ci­um lev­els have been asso­ci­at­ed with prostate can­cer. Next, we will delve into the back­ground of veg­eta­bles and their role in the nutri­tion­al hierarchy.

4: Consuming Plants

At some point, your par­ents prob­a­bly empha­sized the impor­tance of con­sum­ing your veg­eta­bles. We all acknowl­edge that veg­eta­bles are nutri­tious and brim­ming with essen­tial nutri­ents, don’t we? The real­i­ty is, most plants are actu­al­ly not con­ducive to health, and some are even haz­ardous. Why is this so? Con­sid­er this; plants lack the abil­i­ty to flee and are sur­round­ed by oth­er organ­isms that aim to con­sume them.

They are com­pelled to defend them­selves as they can­not escape. They accom­plish this by pro­duc­ing sub­stances that deter, harm, and some­times erad­i­cate the ani­mals attempt­ing to con­sume them, essen­tial­ly engag­ing in chem­i­cal warfare.

Wild veg­eta­bles may con­tain bit­ter com­pounds or tox­ins to dis­cour­age con­sump­tion, and it’s only in the domes­ti­cat­ed vari­ants that these traits have been elim­i­nat­ed. Legumes, puls­es, and soy­beans serve as a good exam­ple. They con­tain com­pounds known as lectins, which may lead to ill­ness and poten­tial­ly result in liv­er harm. A vari­a­tion of lectin referred to as ricin is among the most lethal tox­ins rec­og­nized by humankind.

It’s present in the seeds of the cas­tor oil plant and can lead to excru­ci­at­ing death even in minus­cule quan­ti­ties. This makes one pon­der why humans ini­tial­ly start­ed con­sum­ing plants, does­n’t it? The shift towards agri­cul­ture by humans occurred approx­i­mate­ly 12,000 years ago in var­i­ous regions of the world con­cur­rent­ly. The hypoth­e­sis is that oth­er food alter­na­tives became scarce, prompt­ing us to resort to cul­ti­vat­ing and con­sum­ing plants.

The pri­ma­ry notion as to why this tran­si­tion took place was due to over­hunt­ing by humans and the expan­sion of trees into the grass­lands they inhab­it­ed, trig­gered by the extinc­tion of large prey ani­mals such as the mammoth.

Humans com­menced seek­ing out alter­na­tive options when this major food source was lost. Plants were eas­i­ly acces­si­ble and could be cul­ti­vat­ed with rel­a­tive ease, mak­ing them appear to be the ide­al choice. Plant-derived foods pre­dom­i­nat­ed in dense­ly pop­u­lat­ed regions and areas where main­tain­ing ani­mals proved to be challenging.

5: Swift Transformations

The human body’s adapt­abil­i­ty is quite remark­able. We pos­sess a unique abil­i­ty to accli­mate to sig­nif­i­cant dietary mod­i­fi­ca­tions. Nev­er­the­less, this process requires time, poten­tial­ly span­ning gen­er­a­tions. With the ascen­dan­cy of food pro­cess­ing, the slug­gish­ness of the adap­ta­tion process posed a gen­uine chal­lenge. With insuf­fi­cient time to adjust to this shift, humans began encoun­ter­ing a myr­i­ad of new ailments.

For instance, a dis­tress­ing ail­ment known as beriberi emerged in the lat­ter half of the nine­teenth cen­tu­ry among wealth­i­er indi­vid­u­als in East and South­east Asia. Heart com­pli­ca­tions, mobil­i­ty issues, and men­tal per­plex­i­ty afflict­ed indi­vid­u­als afflict­ed with this condition.

It was sub­se­quent­ly revealed that a severe defi­cien­cy of B1 trig­gered the ill­ness. It was the afflu­ent indi­vid­u­als who bore the brunt since they could afford to pro­cure the “refined” high­ly pol­ished rice. The refin­ing process had stripped away most of its B1 con­tent. Anoth­er dis­or­der stem­ming from nutri­ent defi­cien­cy, Pel­la­gra, became wide­spread among the less afflu­ent pop­u­la­tions of the Amer­i­can South around 1900.

This ail­ment, char­ac­ter­ized by severe symp­toms such as red sores, debil­i­ta­tion, and even demen­tia, result­ed from alarm­ing­ly low lev­els of vit­a­min B3. These com­mu­ni­ties had been sub­sist­ing sole­ly on items craft­ed from indus­tri­al­ly milled corn, which, in con­trast to fresh corn, lacked a suf­fi­cient amount of this essen­tial nutrient.

While processed food pos­es a threat to human well-being, it is not the sole con­cern. Oth­er lifestyle mod­i­fi­ca­tions can also have adverse effects on our health. The preva­lence of asth­ma and food aller­gies is on the rise. Although there exists a debate regard­ing specifics, it is prob­a­ble that lifestyle choic­es are respon­si­ble. Present­ly, indi­vid­u­als spend a far greater amount of time indoors com­pared to pre­vi­ous eras.

This trans­lates to dimin­ished lev­els of vit­a­min D, also dubbed the “sun­shine vit­a­min,” owing to reduced expo­sure to sun­light, which trig­gers our body to syn­the­size this nutri­ent. Giv­en that expec­tant moth­ers with dimin­ished vit­a­min D lev­els are more prone to deliv­er­ing aller­gic off­spring, this dynam­ic con­tributes to the esca­lat­ing inci­dence of aller­gies among the gen­er­al populace.

  Anoth­er hypoth­e­sis elu­ci­dat­ing the surge in aller­gies is known as the hygiene hypoth­e­sis. It posits that mod­ern chil­dren, owing to being raised in exces­sive­ly san­i­tized envi­ron­ments, devel­op aller­gies and asth­ma. The crux of this con­cept is that for a child’s immune sys­tem to learn how to dif­fer­en­ti­ate between benign pro­teins and harm­ful bac­te­ria and com­bat infec­tions with­out going into over­drive, expo­sure to some germs is essential.

6: Some Extra Pounds

Stud­ies reveal that on aver­age, Japan­ese indi­vid­u­als con­sume 300 few­er calo­ries per per­son than Amer­i­cans. While this might sound healthy, is it pru­dent to emu­late their approach? Although it is true that the Japan­ese exhib­it a longer lifes­pan than Amer­i­cans, this alone does not sig­ni­fy that their lifestyle is superior.

There are both advan­tages and draw­backs to lim­it­ing your calo­rie intake. Ingest­ing too few calo­ries can lead to decreased con­cen­tra­tion by depriv­ing your brain of req­ui­site sus­te­nance. Pro­longed insuf­fi­cien­cy of pro­tein can result in mus­cle weakness.

It’s all about strik­ing a bal­ance. Many ani­mals will scale back non-essen­tial bod­i­ly func­tions, such as repro­duc­tion, when faced with a peri­od of food scarci­ty. Humans are no excep­tion. Women who con­sume few­er calo­ries may live longer but might expe­ri­ence reduced fer­til­i­ty and height­ened irritability.

Sur­pris­ing­ly, being slight­ly over­weight is actu­al­ly health­i­er. In fact, even if you are over­weight, metic­u­lous­ly mon­i­tor­ing every calo­rie is not advis­able. Thus, hav­ing a few extra pounds can be advan­ta­geous. Indi­vid­u­als with a body mass index between 25 and 30 gen­er­al­ly exhib­it a longer lifes­pan than those with nor­mal weights.

It is plau­si­ble that indi­vid­u­als car­ry­ing excess weight pos­sess height­ened ener­gy reserves to weath­er off weight loss dur­ing severe ill­ness­es and har­bor more fat to safe­guard them from tox­ins, pro­mot­ing improved health. Regard­less of the health advan­tages asso­ci­at­ed with a few sur­plus pounds, reduc­ing calo­rie intake may not aid in weight reduction.

The asso­ci­a­tion between weight and caloric con­sump­tion is rather ten­u­ous. Research indi­cates that slen­der, con­tem­po­rary hunter-gath­er­ers ingest approx­i­mate­ly the same quan­ti­ty of calo­ries as your aver­age mod­ern-day Amer­i­can while engag­ing in sim­i­lar lev­els of phys­i­cal activ­i­ty. The pri­ma­ry dis­par­i­ty is that they expe­ri­ence greater fluc­tu­a­tions in calo­rie intake across dif­fer­ent seasons.

This implies that not all vari­a­tions in body weight can be sim­plis­ti­cal­ly attrib­uted to calo­rie intake and exer­cise. Final­ly, mon­i­tor­ing your total calo­ries with­out regard for the qual­i­ty of the food they orig­i­nate from is futile. Irre­spec­tive of how few calo­ries you ingest, if your diet pre­dom­i­nant­ly com­pris­es junk food and sug­ary bev­er­ages, your health will be compromised.

7: Consumption

You aim to eat in a health-con­scious man­ner, but your friend invites you out for a buf­fet lunch. Are youDe­cid­ing between a bowl of oats, some meat­balls, or a glass of Pros­ec­co? Well, that real­ly depends on your per­son­al pref­er­ences. There’s no one-size-fits-all answer.

To iden­ti­fy the best dietary choic­es for you, take into account fac­tors such as your age, cul­tur­al back­ground, and your con­sump­tion habits. Most food and drinks aren’t inher­ent­ly good or bad. Take alco­hol, for exam­ple. Exces­sive intake can harm your brain and diges­tive sys­tem. Yet, stud­ies sug­gest that mod­er­ate alco­hol con­sump­tion can help com­bat heart dis­ease in indi­vid­u­als above forty.

Your eth­nic back­ground also plays a role. Many peo­ple of Asian descent have a genet­ic pre­dis­po­si­tion that results in low­er lev­els of alco­hol dehy­dro­ge­nase, the enzyme cru­cial for alco­hol break­down. As a result, they need to be mind­ful of their alco­hol con­sump­tion. Asians tend to get more intox­i­cat­ed per drink com­pared to their Cau­casian coun­ter­parts due to alco­hol enter­ing their blood­stream at a faster rate.

Like­wise, while young girls who con­sume a lot of meat may reach puber­ty ear­li­er and face an ele­vat­ed risk of cer­tain can­cers, elder­ly women — for whom ear­ly puber­ty is not a con­cern — might ben­e­fit from the pro­tein in meat, boost­ing their strength.

Indi­vid­ual dietary require­ments vary sig­nif­i­cant­ly, but that does­n’t mean eat­ing has to be a soli­tary expe­ri­ence. Our ances­tors used to hunt togeth­er and share their meals, fos­ter­ing com­mu­nal bonds and ensur­ing equi­table food distribution.

Recre­at­ing this com­mu­nal aspect of eat­ing can have numer­ous ben­e­fits. Sup­port­ing pay-what-you-can eater­ies and enjoy­ing meals with friends can pro­mote a sense of togeth­er­ness. By mak­ing meal­time a shared expe­ri­ence, we can bring back the care and com­mu­ni­ty that food once represented.

Final Summary

The main take­away from this book is that the human diet has under­gone sig­nif­i­cant evo­lu­tion over mil­lions of years. By trac­ing this evo­lu­tion­ary jour­ney, we can under­stand the fac­tors shap­ing our present-day diets. While there’s no one-size-fits-all dietary reg­i­men, there are sim­ple guide­lines that can enhance both health and happiness.

Prac­ti­cal Advice: Con­sid­er sell­ing your vehi­cle to pri­or­i­tize your health. Opt­ing for a more active lifestyle is wide­ly rec­og­nized as ben­e­fi­cial. How­ev­er, we often stick to what’s con­ve­nient unless forced to make a change. Sell­ing your car could com­pel you to choose modes of trans­porta­tion that involve phys­i­cal activity.

To see the poten­tial ben­e­fits of this lifestyle change on health, think about the inhab­i­tants of some moun­tain­ous islands where road con­struc­tion was imprac­ti­cal. With­out cars as an option, the res­i­dents walk or bike for trans­porta­tion. Con­se­quent­ly, these islanders tend to live longer, health­i­er lives than their main­land counterparts.

Rate article
( No ratings yet )
Add a comment

three × three =