2025-01 - Three million years ago, our ancestors were vegetarian - Wits University
www.wits.ac.za

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/24943429

Human ancestors like Australopithecus – which lived around 3.5 million years ago in southern Africa – ate very little to no meat, according to new research published in the scientific journal Science. This conclusion comes from an analysis of nitrogen isotope isotopes in the fossilized tooth enamel of seven Australopithecus individuals. The data revealed that these early hominins primarily relied on plant-based diets, with little to no evidence of meat consumption.

  • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    RCTs measuring CVD biomarkers also pretty consistently show that reducing meat consumption, especially red meat, decreases well-established CVD biomarkers, so, if these results combined don’t convince you, what results would convince you?

    May I see these RCTs please? What do you consider a CVD biomarker? Not LDL hopefully. CAC scores, insulin resistance, or all cause mortality please.

    then it’s pretty clear that eating ASF in large amounts is suboptimal.

    I do not agree with this, a abundance of weak observational studies do not make causation. But the point of this discussion isn’t to get us to agree, just to indicate that people well versed in the literature and looking at the evidence strength would not agree that the evidence is overwhelming… which is to say there has not been a casual link established.

    • AntiThesis@leminal.spaceEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      The study Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Red Meat Consumption in Comparison With Various Comparison Diets on Cardiovascular Risk Factors analyzed 6 RCT’s that compared red meat to plant-based protein sources and finds that the plant-based protein sources consistently result in better blood lipids and lipoproteins compared with red meat:

      1. Wiebe SL, 1984 - https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/40.5.982
      2. Sinclair AJ, 1987 - https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02540369
      3. Prescott DA, 1988 - https://doi.org/10.1042/cs0740665
      4. Wolmarans P, 1991 - https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/53.5.1171
      5. Haub MD, 2005 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2005.01.019
      6. Hosseinpour-Niazi S, 2014 - https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2014.228

      As to your comments about CVD markers, there are of course contrarians, but the evidence linking both LDL-C and apoB with CVD risk is strong. Look at mendelian randomization studies for both.

      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12916-020-01792-7

      https://www.neurology.org/doi/full/10.1212/WNL.0000000000007091

      https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1003062

      https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2814089

      Substitution of animal with plant protein lowers apo-B https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/JAHA.117.006659

      In comparison with control diets, plant-based diets improved Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/13/2110

      All cause mortality was reduced by plant-based diet in the meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies I shared earlier, nobody tries to measure that for dietary RCT’s…

      Low carb diets high in animal products result in increased CAC scores and the animal-based but not plant-based LCD score is significantly associated with a higher risk of CAC progression (animal-based LCD score: hazard ratio, 1.456 [95% CI, 1.015–2.089]; P=0.041; plant-based LCD score: hazard ratio, 1.016 [95% CI, 0.821–1.257]; P=0.884 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.314838 (observational)

      • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
        1·
        21 hours ago

        The study Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Red Meat Consumption in Comparison With Various Comparison Diets on Cardiovascular Risk Factors analyzed 6 RCT’s that compared red meat to plant-based protein sources and finds that the plant-based protein sources consistently result in better blood lipids and lipoproteins compared with red meat

        Thats a interesting paper, unfortunately the endpoints they used where lipoproteins and not all cause mortality. LDL is not the villain it has been made out to be. https://hackertalks.com/post/6054186

        I agree if you want to lower your LDL PBF and Seed oils are a great way to do it. I don’t agree that lowering your LDL as the only goal is healthy.

        In comparison with control diets, plant-based diets improved Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/13/2110

        Yes! Reducing sugar and carbs is great for metabolic health. Totally agreed

        https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.314838 (observational)

        Right, Observational and FFQs.

        interviewers asked the participants open-ended questions about dietary consumption of 100 food categories that referenced 1609 separate food items within the past month. Foods consumed were assigned to 1 of 166 food groups devised by the Minnesota Nutrition Coordinating Center.

        In this study Low Carbohydrate group was defined as 43% carbs, or 161 Carbs per day. Which is well above a ketogenic metabolism, so does not apply to LCHF/Keto or Carnivore.

        Thanks for all the links and papers, its a little overwhelming when you throw so many at once. One paper at a time will make discussion easier. I’ve look at the data and I’m still comfortable with my choices, and stand behind my statements that ASF is being incorrectly vilified.

        • AntiThesis@leminal.spaceEnglish
          1·
          13 hours ago

          You’re setting up impossible criteria for what studies you will accept as evidence against your position by saying you will only accept RCT’s with all-cause mortality as the end point as evidence. Like I said, nobody does this for studying diet…

          You seem to have a double standard for what qualifies as sufficient evidence against your view vs. for your view, as evidenced by the fact you think that the context of a keto or carnivore diet would completely reverse clearly evident trends despite a complete lack of evidence. Where are your RCT’s with all-cause mortality as an end point studying the keto diet? Where are your RCT’s showing that increasing LDL-C and apo-B does not increase CVD risk over lifespan-scale experiments?

          You conveniently chose to ignore the Mendelian randomization studies on LDL-C and apo-B.

          Your view on ldl-c and apo-b goes against expert consensus (https://www.lipidjournal.com/article/S1933-2874(24)00240-X/fulltext, https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.07.006, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28444290/), there is very compelling evidence that both, especially apo-b, have a causal role in long-term CVD progression.

          While the conversation has been interesting, I feel that continued exchange will not be particularly productive.

          • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
            1·
            13 hours ago

            Again, I’m not trying to change your mind. I frankly am happy you have chosen a different path.

            Where are your RCT’s showing that increasing LDL-C and apo-B does not increase CVD risk over lifespan-scale experiments?

            I literally linked you a RCT in the above post showing LDL being protective for all cause mortality

            Mendelian randomization

            I do not consider this any more serious evidence than observational. Randomizing observational studies is an interesting way to determine where your next research should be, but not to draw conclusions.

            evidence pyramid

            While the conversation has been interesting, I feel that continued exchange will not be particularly productive.

            Agreed. I don’t think either of us are making progress with the other. And that’s okay. We can both exist taking separate choices.

            keto or carnivore diet would completely reverse clearly evident trends despite a complete lack of evidence.

            This is unfair, because I have provided that information above, I’ve read all of your links. I don’t think you’ve read any of mine. To be quite frank, I think you’ve already decided what the right outcome is, you’re going through the motions to overwhelm me, but not to engage in an actual intellectual discovery. We’re not having a conversation, you’re throwing papers at me. That’s why we’re not progressing