About protein and Neanderthals...

If your interest doesn't fit anywhere else, leave it here.
Teegan
Posts: 2
https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
Joined: Sun 15 Jan 2006 00:46

About protein and Neanderthals...

Post by Teegan »

In the article about fruits containing all required protein, this was written:
Consuming more protein in general, does not at all enhance growth, for processing more protein requires extra vitamins and energy. Logically, Neanderthals consuming much more animal food ,were less tall than earlier Homo erectus, who consumed less animal food and more fruits.
Homo erectus was built much differently than neanderthal because erectus lived in a different environment. Having evolved directly in Africa and then moving towards Asia, erectus was built for speed nd a hot environment.

Homo neanderthal, however, was in Europe durng the ICE AGE. So being short and stocky helped him to retain body heat. Neanderthal did not have advanced sewing practices, which would have made any skin clothes he wore for the most part ineffective. The skins found near neanderthal sites were used mostly for bedding.

Also, lack of height was in no way a problem for neanderthal, because he was obviously NOT lacking in vitamins and nutrients, and suffered very few deficiencies as that quoted text would have readers believe. Neanderthal had bones 25% more denser thant he most ardent body-builders of today. Yes that's right; neanderthal's bones were 25% denser, thicker, and sturdier than Sylvester Stallone or Mr. Universe. They were probably just as strong, but with smaller sized, denser muscles. THey had much larger joints, allowing for more connectivie tissues. Their hands were larger, and their forarms and forlegs were much shorter and more densly packed with muscles and tendons. Neanderthal's jaw was also thicker and more robust. His skull was thicker, and he had a larger brain. His structure was built for power, and it is postulated that he was capable of great acceleration, speed, feats of strength, and climbing. He was the Superman of human evolution.

Truth be told, if a modern human met up with a neanderthal and the two got into a fight, the modern human wouldn't have a chance in heck. Neanderthal was that well evolved and developed. Sadly we has adapted for an ice-age which was on it's way out. There is no evidence modern humans killed him off our replaced him. No one knows why neanderthal became extinct.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: About protein and Neanderthals...

Post by RRM »

Teegan wrote:Also, lack of height was in no way a problem for neanderthal
It was never said that lack of height was a problem, just that Neanderthals were shorter...
, because he was obviously NOT lacking in vitamins and nutrients, and suffered very few deficiencies as that quoted text would have readers believe.
Wai never said Neanderthals were deficient, just that their (high protein) diet does not support growth in HEIGHT (nor lifespan), contrary to what many belief.

neanderthal's bones were 25% denser, thicker, and sturdier than Sylvester Stallone or Mr. Universe.
So?
In countries where human bones are most dense, osteoporosis incidence is highest...
He was the Superman of human evolution.
Thats kind of off topic (the topic was "height"), but...
If he was, why didnt he make it?
Thomas
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun 30 Oct 2005 00:01

Post by Thomas »

What exactly constitutes "high protein"?
Teegan
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun 15 Jan 2006 00:46

Post by Teegan »

Yea but look at it this way.

The site is saying "You won't grow tall with a high protein diet."

Well why not?

There's a few possible answers:

It uses up more energy so you can't develop bones (which is clearly not the case in neanderthalensis, who had more bone mass at 5'4" than humans of 6'4")

The diet is defficient in minerals and nutrients and unable to support the mass (yet neanderthalensis were very bulky)

There's a lack of growth hormone, or the protein diet interfers with growth hormone (than why were neanderthalensis 'overdeveloped' for their height?)

Also, I already stated why neanderthalensis may have died out: they were adapted to the ice-age, which has been over for some time now.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

Thomas wrote:What exactly constitutes "high protein"?
A diet relatively high in protein (eg carnivore diet)
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

Teegan wrote:
The site is saying "You won't grow tall with a high protein diet."
No, it doesnt say so.
It says: "more protein inhibited rather than enhanced growth"
This because for growth especially extra energy is required, and fats and sugars are better sources of energy. Consuming relatively more protein means relatively less sugars / fats.
The biggest animals on earth (elephants, whales) consume relatively little protein.

It uses up more energy so you can't develop bones
What a nonsense. where do you get this from?
The diet is defficient in minerals and nutrients and unable to support the mass
Strange way of reasoning...

There's a lack of growth hormone, or the protein diet interfers with growth hormone


What?
Please try to maintain some logic; you have completely lost me...
Also, I already stated why neanderthalensis may have died out: they were adapted to the ice-age, which has been over for some time now.
So, unlike other animals they could not evolve?
As in losing the extra hair?
PliestoceneMan
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue 18 Aug 2009 00:48

Post by PliestoceneMan »

Losing the extra hair? For 1, it's already confirmed that Neanderthal was not hirsuit...

Also, RMM, the things you disagreed with Teegan on in his last post are things that you have written in your articles. :lol: Ironic.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

PliestoceneMan wrote: Also, RMM, the things you disagreed with Teegan on in his last post are things that you have written in your articles. :lol: Ironic.
Do you mean that i disagreed with something i had written previously?
summerwave
Posts: 274
Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47

protein metabolism in cetacean mammals

Post by summerwave »

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... -medicine/


This is not really linked to the discussion about Neanderthals (above), but relates to the overall hypothesis on this site about why humans developed the way they did, the importance of sugar to feed a large brain, and why obligate carnivores are so different from us in metabolism.

I've always wondered-- with reference to all of the above-- why dolphins eat a high-protein diet, have an enormous brain (requiring glucose ravenously, as the human brain does), yet do not sleep all the time due to the difficulty of obtaining adequate glucose from a protein and fat-based diet. Other large carnivores do (I suppose I had not really extended this discussion beyond land-based carnivores like tigers, etc.). Marine mammals, though-- how does this work? Much less marine mammals with enormous, glucose-fueled brains like a dolphin has?
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: protein metabolism in cetacean mammals

Post by RRM »

summerwave wrote:
why dolphins eat a high-protein diet, have an enormous brain (requiring glucose ravenously, as the human brain does), yet do not sleep all the time
How much do they sleep?
due to the difficulty of obtaining adequate glucose from a protein and fat-based diet.
I think its more due to having to get rid of the nitrogen > ammonium > ureum.
summerwave
Posts: 274
Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47

dolphin rest

Post by summerwave »

They are always in motion, but the hemispheres of their brain are radically different from ours:

One half can sleep while the other is awake.

It still seems impossible to support an enormous brain on only protein and fat while in constant motion. They must eat a very lot indeed, and be constantly at it to feed their brain's needs (even with the built-in 'insulin resistance' response their bodies seem to have mastered to tide them over when glucose is running low).

Fascinating.
summerwave
Posts: 274
Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47

diabetes

Post by summerwave »

And I'm skeptical that it can really shed that much light on diabetes in humans.... They seem similar in some ways (the striking resemblance to being large-brained mammals with a glucose-based brain) but I am not sure, reading this research, how their adaptations could help human diabetics.

Again-- interesting.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

Humans can convert most amino acids in glucose.
Maybe dolphins can convert all amino acids into glucose.
Maybe they have an extra (/more efficient) means to dispose of nitrogen.
summerwave
Posts: 274
Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47

energy needs

Post by summerwave »

Whatever they do is quite amazing, as they do not have gills:

They are diving anaerobically (in apnea)-- that is, breathing at surface between immersions.

This takes tremendous energy; one's energy needs are relatively larger in this state.

This is why, too, they remain "halfway" resting (1/2 of the brain area rests to "sleep"), as they have to stay alert at some level in order to surface to breathe.

Very instructive-- not just for human diabetes studies... It still seems almost beyond what is physiologically possible.
summerwave
Posts: 274
Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47

Protein and size; protein and longevity

Post by summerwave »

I was recently reading another post on here by RRM about size (body morphology/height of hominids and other organisms) and protein.

I am wondering what the studies overall show about protein and longevity.

Some animals are now the focus of "negligible senescence" studies. They live to 200 years or more, do not show aging, and keep increasing in size indefinitely. (They usually die of simply being in the wild (sudden accidents or predation), rather than old age). Such organisms include sea turtles, rockfish, lobsters, and others.

This quality of the organisms does not seem to be linked to protein intake, as many consume protein only. I was wondering though if protein is USED as sugar, if it has a different profile. For example, rockfish eat crustaceans and other fish-- they are not vegetarian. And again, they grow indefinitely: the oldest are the largest. They also become more fertile with age.

I just wondered if RRM knew more about this type of research, and what observations, if any, he has, as he is always up to date in information, and so good at bringing new angles to any information already available.
Post Reply