Paul Saladino· MD
I do believe that humans are facultative carnivores and that some people can tolerate plans we can to plants during times of starvation but I think that it's it's not something that we should be doing long term
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
I do believe that humans are facultative carnivores and that some people can tolerate plans we can to plants during times of starvation but I think that it's it's not something that we should be doing long term
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I would posit I would create create a thesis a hypothesis at this point that humans May in fact be facultative carnivores
I think humans are probably facultative pond of ores which means that we that me provide that animals provide the optimal food but one of the cool things about being a human is that we're so well adapted we're so versatile is that we can eat plants during times of starvation
I really think of humans as facultative carnivores the idea that we could eat plants during times of starvation and I think that it's reasonable to assume or reasonable to suggest that many human populations will eat some plants
the idea of humans as facultative carnivores yeah I know there are that you have a couple of chapters of your book which is called facultative carnivore on line what does it mean to be a facultative carnivore I gave you a shout-out in my talk today about that by the way thank you and I'm so glad that you asked well it sounds like a technical term is a bit jargony but I really like the term because as as opposed to an obligate carnivore well every term has different ways of using it let me back up a little bit there's a certain sense in which we are obligate carnivores we need meat to thrive and meat is I don't think it's fair to say that meat is an optional food
Humans are facultative carnivores rather than omnivores and this is just a distinction that I would make as a teaching point for people but I would say that an omnivore is an animal that that gets unique nutrients from plants that I can't get other places and I don't think that's the case I think that humans are most well adapted to eat animals
I mean by facultative karma means that an animal uses meat as its primary optimal food source but has this really cool genetic evolutionary adaptation where they can use some plant foods for survival during times of starvation
the argument that I am making in car never E is that those are not the optimal foods for humans and if we really want to be truly optimal we would eat mostly our all animal foods avoiding the toxins there in plants we are so advanced evolutionarily or we are so cool as humans as Homo sapiens and Homo erectus and Homo habilis now we can eat plants if we need to but those are not the optimal food so we can use them during times of starvation if there's berries around we'll probably eat them occasionally but the animal foods are the optimal foods
I think that throughout having human evolution we've eaten some plants but I think that what makes most sense to me and a lot of other people is that it was just during times of starvation like a facultative carnivore approach
the idea that humans may in fact be facultative carnivores that there are these obligate and facultative carnivores and maybe I'd be curious about your opinion on this and that that humans can probably eat plants for survival I think you even talked about this in some of your presentations that plants may be like survival food