Milk in Human Evolution

The reasons why it's excluded from this diet
Post Reply
avalon
Posts: 818
https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
Joined: Thu 23 Feb 2006 17:51

Milk in Human Evolution

Post by avalon »

I found this article very interesting and have a question...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/scien ... yt&emc=rss
A surprisingly recent instance of human evolution has been detected among the peoples of East Africa. It is the ability to digest milk in adulthood, conferred by genetic changes that occurred as recently as 3,000 years ago, a team of geneticists has found.
With this whole evolution thing going on, could it be that those who can digest milk, should keep drinking milk because of the evolutionary process? What if say my Family line has been drinking milk for centuries, and I suddenly decide milk is bad because I'm past weaning :shock: Could this not perhaps cause a problem? And that those whose 'switch' to digest milk is off, shouldn't drink milk.

p.s. Shouldn't the 'Excluded: (raw) milk/dairy' caption be:

The reasons why it's excluded from the Sample diet.

Since cottage cheese and ice cream, are clearly allowed as munchfoods- and listed in the recipe section.
avalon
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu 23 Feb 2006 17:51

Post by avalon »

To quote the Free Acne Book:
Because all animals are adapted to - and depend solely upon - the foods they naturally eat.
So what if 'some ' of us are now adapted to consuming Milk?

Just thinking outloud.
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4350
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Post by Oscar »

I guess if we adapted, it means it wasn't our natural food to begin with. If it is possible doesn't mean it is healthy or that we have to do it.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

avalon wrote:So what if 'some ' of us are now adapted to consuming Milk?
Here the word "adapted" is meant in the sense of 'evolutionary wise', because that is how adaptation of our biochemistry takes place. And when we are talking 'evolutionary wise', we are talking millions of years. Agriculture got introduced about only 0.01 (to 0.03?) million years ago, which is absolutely nothing on the scale of evolution.
avalon
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu 23 Feb 2006 17:51

Post by avalon »

I don't think it took millions of years to adapt to digesting milk.

I can, and have no problems, and I don't even drink milk anymore(though I do raw cheese sometimes), while others are still intolerant.

I agree, just because we can, should we? This applies to the world at large- Hey, my neighbor has wireless internet- I could get it for free if they don't know... Is it the healthy thing to do? I can kill the cow vs eating temphe and B12... is it the healthy thing to do?

Could it hurt us to stop, is what I was asking sorta kinda maybe? It is easy perhaps to dismiss milk now, but maybe at one time it allowed us to survive. That, alone, deserves some respect. If a people are used to getting this 'Milk' substance for generations, and we abruptly stop on a whim of a notion from a book we just read...

...could this be dangerous?
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4350
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Post by Oscar »

The same goes for cooked foods. People aren't even intolerant for that. Survived on that for far longer than for instance on blended greens, since the blender was only invented in 1922... ;)
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

avalon wrote:I don't think it took millions of years to adapt to digesting milk.
Being able to digest it, doesnt mean we can cope with all aspects of it.
(growth hormones, excessive calcium, partial lactose intolerance)
I can, and have no problems
You cannot see what those growth hormones do inside your body.
You dont know what the calcium does either.
You can smoke 2 packs of cigarettes and feel you 'have no problems'.
In fact, there might not be apparent problems, but that doesnt mean it cant hurt you.

maybe at one time it allowed us to survive. That, alone, deserves some respect.
Sometimes people survive by killing each other.
So, the sole survival doesnt necessarily deserve respect.
..we abruptly stop on a whim of a notion from a book we just read...
Growth hormones are not a whim of a notion. They have been scientifically proven to be in the milk, and ingested by us when we consume milk.
avalon
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu 23 Feb 2006 17:51

Post by avalon »

RRM wrote:
Growth hormones are not a whim of a notion. They have been scientifically proven to be in the milk, and ingested by us when we consume milk.
You are right. And though Oraganic milk may be free of rBGH the natural Hormones present in Milk could be of concern. I'm only speaking of the fact that we've adapted at all to drink it in the first place.
dandate2
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2011 12:34

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by dandate2 »

i'll suck on the udder myself. pasteurized milk is nasty
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by RRM »

Luckily, there is no need for that, as we dont need any more milk a few years after we are born.
And certainly not the mother's milk from other species.
dandate2
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2011 12:34

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by dandate2 »

i quit drinking raw milk a few days ago and had some withdrawal symptoms. what exactly do those hormones do to humans?
dime
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon 14 Feb 2011 09:24

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by dime »

They make you addicted, so it's similar like when you stop smoking.
panacea
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed 23 Jun 2010 22:08

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by panacea »

you got some mental problems if you feel the urge to suck on another species udder.. just saying
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4350
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Re: Milk in Human Evolution

Post by Oscar »

Opioid peptides in milk (i.c. casomorphin) are akin to the opium family of drugs.
Post Reply