Are humans herbivores, omnivores or carnivores?

[Raver]

The argument for humans being herbivores is the anatomical similarities that humans share with other herbivores, such as intestine length and facial muscles. The idea that we're omnivores stems from the fact that we're capable of eating both kinds of food without too many problems. The notion that we could be carnivorous is the fact that there are groups such as Eskimos that can survive solely on fish and meat if they desire. Imo, I think humans are omnivores due to the fact that not only are we capable of eating both meat and vegetables, but we can survive solely on pure meat or pure vegan if we desire, however not without health complications if we don't supplement it.

In your opinion: are humans herbivores, omnivores or carnivores and why?

[Pa3s]

Imo, I think humans are omnivores due to the fact that not only are we capable of eating both meat and vegetables, but we can survive solely on pure meat or pure vegan if we desire, however not without health complications if we don't supplement it.

I agree with this.

[Aquagraph]

What does it matter what we call them?

[Raver]

What does it matter what we call them?

You`re right, it may not matter. However, it`s interesting to think about regardless at least for me and some other people.

[Aquagraph]

Look, words are our invention to describe and communicate reality. If they don't serve that purpose, they are useless.

Omnivore is an organism that can eat and digest meat, plants, fungi and algae. Humans can eat all of those. Vegetarian is an omnivore since it can eat meat but chooses not to.

To me the only interesting aspect in this conversation would be the possible evolutionary traces relating to our bodies.

[Words]

Look, words are our invention to describe and communicate reality. If they don't serve that purpose, they are useless.

Omnivore is an organism that can eat and digest meat, plants, fungi and algae. Humans can eat all of those. Vegetarian is an omnivore since it can eat meat but chooses not to.

To me the only interesting aspect in this conversation would be the possible evolutionary traces relating to our bodies.

It seems these people can't digest meat

http://www.livestrong.com/article/52...stomachs-hurt/

It says 'large quantities', but what's a large quantity? It says, "See your health care provider if you experience adverse reactions every time you eat meat.", so i'm willing to wager what's classed as a normal amout of meat, which is a dinner.

Anyway, my point is, if a human can't digest meat, what are they? Not an Ominvore? Last I checked they were still human.

[DirectorAbbie]

Whales, for example, probably have humans beat drastically for intestine length, despite all the fish they consume.

My whales eat krill. What have you been doing to your whales?

[Absurd]

I see you're learning new words, William.

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

[RedBeard]

The best argument in favor of humans being herbivores is simply based on the fact that we are concerned about meat intake from a cultural, ethical, and ecological POV.

The basic premise rests on the fact that we've developed an intellect of higher reasoning faculties, which wouldn't have emerged if it wasn't for meat-eating behavior.

The study of our anatomy alone offers insufficient information if we're to make conclusions about our eating preferences. It can lead to fallacies. For instance, while gorillas and baboons sport more robust incisors than homo sapiens do, they almost exclusively eat plant matter. Like humans, their eye sockets are directly positioned on the fronts of their skulls, which would suggest that they are more carnivorous than they truly are. Presumably, they've retained these features because they've served to visually communicate with others of their species.

I think we're omnivores, but without our intellect, both food groups probably would have killed us a long time ago.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

We are omnivores but with a bias toward herbivoring. The healthiest I ever felt was when I cut down on meat w/o avoiding it completely, 2 servings a day (portion size deck of cards) and about 5-7 servings of fruit and veggies a day.

The average American has at least double the meat though making them obese and weighted down.

[Beautiful sky]

I'm an omnivore.

[krieger]

i'm not sure why this question should be complicated. omnivores.

[InvisibleJim]

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

[Absurd]

Humans are omnivores and ILE are vegetarian. There.

[RedBeard]

i'm not sure why this question should be complicated.

We're not physiologically obligated to either eat meat or plants/fungae/etc. There are also plenty of creatures scientists consider to be either carnivores or herbivores despite evidence that they occasionally treat themselves to the opposite of their respective food group. Therefore, the how we fit into the dichotomy (or at least how it's typically applied) is rather fuzzy.

[Absurd]

We're not physiologically obligated to either eat meat or plants/fungae/etc. There are also plenty of creatures scientists consider to be either carnivores or herbivores despite evidence that they occasionally treat themselves to the opposite of their respective food group. Therefore, the how we fit into the dichotomy (or at least how it's typically applied) is rather fuzzy.

You are what you eat.

[RedBeard]

You are what you eat.

Feel this beard.

Just feel it.

So many bloody sheep died just to make it.

[krieger]

We're not physiologically obligated to either eat meat or plants/fungae/etc. There are also plenty of creatures scientists consider to be either carnivores or herbivores despite evidence that they occasionally treat themselves to the opposite of their respective food group. Therefore, the how we fit into the dichotomy (or at least how it's typically applied) is rather fuzzy.

nop. u r wrong.

[RedBeard]

nop. u r wrong.

Define "carnivore" and "herbivore". okemon:

[krieger]

you just lost all effective pretense to being non-retarded by implying you need help to find a dictionary site.

[Absurd]

Feel this beard.

Just feel it.

So many bloody sheep died just to make it.

[RedBeard]

you just lost all effective pretense to being non-retarded by implying you need help to find a dictionary site.

That implication was not intended. The implication is that our definitions are different.

[Words]

It seems these people can't digest meat

http://www.livestrong.com/article/52...stomachs-hurt/

It says 'large quantities', but what's a large quantity? It says, "See your health care provider if you experience adverse reactions every time you eat meat.", so i'm willing to wager what's classed as a normal amout of meat, which is a dinner.

Anyway, my point is, if a human can't digest meat, what are they? Not an Ominvore? Last I checked they were still human.

lol, Aqua fighting for individual rights..........

These guys despite their (honourable) intentions, always end up classifying and therefore discriminating,

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

i'm not sure why this question should be complicated. omnivores.

It's only complex because pure omnivore sorta implies that it means you should eat as much meat as you do veggies and that's just not really the truth. You should ideally, for a fit healthy body, eat a little meat and a lot more veggies/fruits. Even though I know this I don't really practice it as much as I should. oh well.

so technically we are Herbiomnialittlecarnivorish. Self-righteous vegans are really annoying but I only really encounter them in uppity faggity cities where everything is about being rich and socially astute.

[Words]

It's only complex because pure omnivore sorta implies that it means you should eat as much meat as you do veggies and that's just not really the truth. You should ideally, for a fit healthy body, eat a little meat and a lot more veggies/fruits. Even though I know this I don't really practice it as much as I should. oh well.

so technically we are Herbiomnialittlecarnivorish. Self-righteous vegans are really annoying but I only really encounter them in uppity faggity cities where everything is about being rich and socially astute.

The 'evidence' for this is debatable, it's just current recommendations, based on some tangential research I will add. Couple of decades ago meat and dairy produce was recommended as the main healthy things to eat.

Anyway, in US 70% of plant based food now contains some genetic modification, so that changes things for mainly veggie eaters regardless of the right or wrong way.

Can't remember the studies i've read, pretty sure wiki will cover the bases, here's something on low fat diets, which is meant to be good for you

In recent years the exact health benefits of a low-fat diet have been debated. A 2006 study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association concludes that a low-fat diet did not result in weight gain and did not reduce risk of colorectal or breast cancer among postmenopausal women.[3][4][5] However, this study was criticized by several epidemiologists for its lack of validity (see "Criticisms" in the Women's Health Initiative article). Recently, the Nurses' Health Study from the Harvard School of Public Health reported from a Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH), and found that a diet "with high intake of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, moderate intake of legumes, nuts, and low-fat dairy products, and low intake of red and processed meats and sodium, was significantly associated with lower risk of coronary heart disease and stroke in women."[6] A 2002 Cochrane Review found low-fat diets to be no more effective than other weight loss diets in achieving lasting weight loss,[7] two newer studies concluding the same, published 2008.[8][9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-fat_diet

[Raver]

i'm not sure why this question should be complicated. omnivores.

I agree. It shouldn't be, but I have found sites showing ridiculous charts like this: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html. I think it's baloney, but it seems like even people with PHDs think we're herbivores and like to complicate things. I agree with the posts stating that we're mostly herbivores and slightly carnivores, which makes us omnivores.

[mu4]

I think herbivore/carnivore/cannibal(lol?) are social constructs much like race and ethnicity is. Also the way most of these concepts are constructed is not in a positive fashion but negative exclusionary fashion. The prohibition of a certain food source. This is no different than halal, kosher, jehova's witness, and any number of food prohibitions of that nature.

Even asking this question is like asking are humans black, white or asian.

I view omnivore as more or less outside of this as it is a absence of food preference/prohibition. It's a null value for that. This is probably the only property of human diet that is not a social construct, but an evolutionary adaptive mechanism so that humans can survive in very different environments.

People have to go to extraordinary lengths to avoid all animal product in their diets, often failing to do so no matter how hard they try, and is virtually impossible in poorer regions without exposure to malnutrition.

Food choice is a choice due to markets and social systems which allows for this choice, without such constructs it's virtually impossible to actually choose what you eat, and will largely be determined by what is immediately available. Given that most primitive society are omnivores and humans have the ability to digest a large variety of food, there doesn't seem to be any universal food prohibition/preference for humans.

[Absurd]

Even asking this question is like asking are humans black, white or asian.

Ask yourself the question what kind of car you drive first.

[Capitalist Pig]

It seems these people can't digest meat

http://www.livestrong.com/article/52...stomachs-hurt/

It says 'large quantities', but what's a large quantity? It says, "See your health care provider if you experience adverse reactions every time you eat meat.", so i'm willing to wager what's classed as a normal amout of meat, which is a dinner.

Anyway, my point is, if a human can't digest meat, what are they? Not an Ominvore? Last I checked they were still human.

I don't think the presence of food allergies in certain specimens necessarily changes the classification of the entire species.

[Aquagraph]

lol, Aqua fighting for individual rights..........

These guys despite their (honourable) intentions, always end up classifying and therefore discriminating,

Umm.. what?

[anndelise]

Don't forget that muscle meat wasn't the primier take-away from a dead animal. It's organs were. Organs from herbivorous specimens. Which includes, what...fermented or pre-partially digested grass, grains, stalks, leaves, fruits/berries, and roots/tubers, depending on what was 'available'.

Oh yeah, and fats.

And, of course, the insects in fruits and meats.

[xerx]

Humans are obviously omnivores. That said, obnoxiously die-hard anti-vegetarians are some of the biggest douchebags on the planet.