Do plants feel pain?

[knightofalbion]

Originally Posted by Time

There are 2 gross misconceptions that are reiterated again and again in this realm of questioning.

1 - "Humans are naturally herbavorious" is misappropriation of the facts. Yes we are "natural" plant eaters to a point, but we are also natural carnivors, and also natural insectavors, as well as fungus. We are naturally "opurtunistic omnivores. That means we tend to adapt to what our environment gives us. No where in the humans diet in all of history were we (as a species) strict carnivore or strict herbavore and we do not to too well (generally speaking) only eating one for the long term isnt the best for us - we do much better eating a vast array of foods.

Physically and spiritually man is designed to be herbivore.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/94656/The-...tomy-Of-Eating

'We' may have the capacity to eat other things - technically we have the capacity to eat cardboard, though I wouldn't recommend it - but it is not man's true and intended diet.

NO, that is the misconception, as well as lack of context.

Herbivore by definition is an animal who ONLY eats plant matter, that means its body cannot digest meat by any means.

Carnivore by definition means any animal who can only digest meat, and wont survive on plant matter.

Carnivores have one stomach generally, and very short digestive systems, while herbivores generally have multiple stomachs, and very, very large digestive systems. The only thing "long" about our digestive system, is our small intestine. We always ate meat as a species and throughout our evolution, whether that is insects or scavanged meat. Generally speaking though, our primary diets is indeed plant matter ..

That is until we developed and found out how to utilize fire. This was used even before homo sapiens evolved. It not only opened up the ability to easily digest meat, it helped break down starches and carbs in plants, specifically grains that we have a very, very hard time digesting raw. Cooking liberated BOTH plants and meat. The only thing is, the meat we got gave us more readily available protiens and amino acids then plants, while eating less.

You cant even base the notion of huan=herbivores on anatomy. It doesnt show that we are either or for the most part. Mostly predator due to our front facing eyes, and tool use. We also have practiced persistance hunting for 100 000 years or more.

There are many, many reasons, biological, evolutionary, and phonically why we are not herbivores or carnivores. We are oppertunistic omnivores, with a highish dependance on plants but utilize any available food in any environment. The key is understanding the definitions of herbivore and carnivore and understanding evolution.

Originally Posted by Time

NO, that is the misconception, as well as lack of context.

Herbivore by definition is an animal who ONLY eats plant matter, that means its body cannot digest meat by any means.

Carnivore by definition means any animal who can only digest meat, and wont survive on plant matter.

Carnivores have one stomach generally, and very short digestive systems, while herbivores generally have multiple stomachs, and very, very large digestive systems. The only thing "long" about our digestive system, is our small intestine. We always ate meat as a species and throughout our evolution, whether that is insects or scavanged meat. Generally speaking though, our primary diets is indeed plant matter ..

That is until we developed and found out how to utilize fire. This was used even before homo sapiens evolved. It not only opened up the ability to easily digest meat, it helped break down starches and carbs in plants, specifically grains that we have a very, very hard time digesting raw. Cooking liberated BOTH plants and meat. The only thing is, the meat we got gave us more readily available protiens and amino acids then plants, while eating less.

You cant even base the notion of huan=herbivores on anatomy. It doesnt show that we are either or for the most part. Mostly predator due to our front facing eyes, and tool use. We also have practiced persistance hunting for 100 000 years or more.

There are many, many reasons, biological, evolutionary, and phonically why we are not herbivores or carnivores. We are oppertunistic omnivores, with a highish dependance on plants but utilize any available food in any environment. The key is understanding the definitions of herbivore and carnivore and understanding evolution.

There are no many, many reasons, biological, evolutionary, and phonically why we are not herbivores or carnivores. Don't misguide others...We were naturally herbivores but became omnivores by adapting to harsh conditions..This is not evolution..This is Adaptation..Our internal body system continuously adapts to external conditions and so our digestive system,as you stated above, adapted to digest both veg as well as meat...Even cats have adapted themselves to eat vegan food but they are still carnivores.. Scientists have done detailed study on our anatomy and have concluded that humans are naturally designed to be herbivores but have adapted to become omnivores.. this this topic is about plants feeling pain...So let's sticks to the topic and not on humans is carnivores or herbivores..

Ive never bothered asking one before.. if its a chilli.. its asking for pain as its giving me just as much in return :P lol

[knightofalbion]

Originally Posted by sarinmall

There are no many, many reasons, biological, evolutionary, and phonically why we are not herbivores or carnivores. Don't misguide others...We were naturally herbivores but became omnivores by adapting to harsh conditions..This is not evolution..This is Adaptation..Our internal body system continuously adapts to external conditions and so our digestive system,as you stated above, adapted to digest both veg as well as meat...Even cats have adapted themselves to eat vegan food but they are still carnivores.. Scientists have done detailed study on our anatomy and have concluded that humans are naturally designed to be herbivores but have adapted to become omnivores.. this this topic is about plants feeling pain...So let's sticks to the topic and not on humans is carnivores or herbivores..

Quite right and well said. Man is naturally a herbivore, or more precisely a fruitarian.
This great truth is understood even more so when coupled with an understanding of spiritual evolution.

Lets look at some proper definitions then shall we?

A herbivore is an organism anatomically and physiologically adapted to plant material, for example foliage, as the main component of its diet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore

A carnivore (pron.: /ˈkɑrnɪvɔər/) meaning 'meat eater' (Latin, carne meaning 'flesh' and vorare meaning 'to devour') is an organism that derives its energy and nutrient requirements from a diet consisting mainly or exclusively of animal tissue, whether through predation or scavenging

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore

An Omnivore, meaning 'all-eater' (Latin omni, vorare: "all, everything", "to devour"), is a polyphage ("many foods") species that is a consumer of a variety of material as significant food sources in their natural diet. These foods may include plants, animals, algae and fungi.[1]
Omnivores often are opportunistic, general feeders with neither carnivore nor herbivore specializations for acquiring or processing food, and are capable of consuming and do consume both animal protein and vegetation.[2] Many omnivores depend on a suitable mix of animal and plant food for long-term good health and reproduction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnivore


Which one sounds like humans/hominids over the last 100 000 years?

Lets look at some more data about human nutrition":

umans have evolved as omnivorous hunter-gatherers over the past 250,000 years. The diet of early modern humans varied significantly depending on location and climate. The diet in the tropics tended to be based more heavily on plant foods, while the diet at higher latitudes tended more towards animal products. Analysis of postcranial and cranial remains of humans and animals from the Neolithic, along with detailed bone modification studies have shown that cannibalism was also prevalent among prehistoric humans.[54]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_diet

Dont like Wikipedia? No reason not to but just in case:

Carnivorous humans go back a long way. Stone tools for butchering meat, and animal bones with corresponding cut marks on them, first appear in the fossil record about 2.5 million years ago. **** note when this says "Carnivorous, it is referencing to eating meat i general, not exclusive diet of meat


We have an obsession today with fat and cholesterol because we can go to the market and stuff ourselves with it," Stanford said. "But as a species we are relatively immune to the harmful effects of fat and cholesterol. Compared to the great apes, we can handle a diet that's high in fat and cholesterol, and the great apes cannot.

****** THis may mean any real dietary comparisons betwee humans and apes is redundant


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...an_diet_2.html


The basics of it is - the further we moved north, the more we adapted to eating more meat. The fact that inuits diets are primarily meat, and say, tropical tribes in the Amazon eat primarily fruit proves that we are not herbivores or carnivores - We are omnivores. THis is also because we eat insects, eggs as well as fungi (which are not usually included in herbavores diet by definition).


I am also not misleading people. I said many times our diet should consist more of fruits and veggies, or at least was heavily based on it due to our tropical evolution. It is more misleading to use words in the wrong context.

ALso, "Adaptation" is part of darwins theory of evolution.

Also, also. This topic. as the OP started stated that this topic ill probably bring this up, as well as in almost any vegan topic as well. It is also apt, because we always anthropimorphize everything. Plants dont feel pain (persay) because they arent animals, plain and simple. But that does not mean in any way that they dont react in a way, that we would associate with pain (if only because thats how we can explain it)

Originally Posted by Time

Lets look at some proper definitions then shall we?

A herbivore is an organism anatomically and physiologically adapted to plant material, for example foliage, as the main component of its diet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore

A carnivore (pron.: /ˈkɑrnɪvɔər/) meaning 'meat eater' (Latin, carne meaning 'flesh' and vorare meaning 'to devour') is an organism that derives its energy and nutrient requirements from a diet consisting mainly or exclusively of animal tissue, whether through predation or scavenging

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore

An Omnivore, meaning 'all-eater' (Latin omni, vorare: "all, everything", "to devour"), is a polyphage ("many foods") species that is a consumer of a variety of material as significant food sources in their natural diet. These foods may include plants, animals, algae and fungi.[1]
Omnivores often are opportunistic, general feeders with neither carnivore nor herbivore specializations for acquiring or processing food, and are capable of consuming and do consume both animal protein and vegetation.[2] Many omnivores depend on a suitable mix of animal and plant food for long-term good health and reproduction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnivore


Which one sounds like humans/hominids over the last 100 000 years?

Lets look at some more data about human nutrition":

umans have evolved as omnivorous hunter-gatherers over the past 250,000 years. The diet of early modern humans varied significantly depending on location and climate. The diet in the tropics tended to be based more heavily on plant foods, while the diet at higher latitudes tended more towards animal products. Analysis of postcranial and cranial remains of humans and animals from the Neolithic, along with detailed bone modification studies have shown that cannibalism was also prevalent among prehistoric humans.[54]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_diet

Dont like Wikipedia? No reason not to but just in case:

Carnivorous humans go back a long way. Stone tools for butchering meat, and animal bones with corresponding cut marks on them, first appear in the fossil record about 2.5 million years ago. **** note when this says "Carnivorous, it is referencing to eating meat i general, not exclusive diet of meat


We have an obsession today with fat and cholesterol because we can go to the market and stuff ourselves with it," Stanford said. "But as a species we are relatively immune to the harmful effects of fat and cholesterol. Compared to the great apes, we can handle a diet that's high in fat and cholesterol, and the great apes cannot.

****** THis may mean any real dietary comparisons betwee humans and apes is redundant


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...an_diet_2.html


The basics of it is - the further we moved north, the more we adapted to eating more meat. The fact that inuits diets are primarily meat, and say, tropical tribes in the Amazon eat primarily fruit proves that we are not herbivores or carnivores - We are omnivores. THis is also because we eat insects, eggs as well as fungi (which are not usually included in herbavores diet by definition).


I am also not misleading people. I said many times our diet should consist more of fruits and veggies, or at least was heavily based on it due to our tropical evolution. It is more misleading to use words in the wrong context.

ALso, "Adaptation" is part of darwins theory of evolution.

Also, also. This topic. as the OP started stated that this topic ill probably bring this up, as well as in almost any vegan topic as well. It is also apt, because we always anthropimorphize everything. Plants dont feel pain (persay) because they arent animals, plain and simple. But that does not mean in any way that they dont react in a way, that we would associate with pain (if only because thats how we can explain it)

Everyone here knows the meaning of herbivores, carnivores and omnivores..That links doesn't prove anything relative to humans. Darwin theory of evolution is wrong. Wait for few more decades before genetical study reaches a stage where it will defy theory of evolution. The stats you mentioned is partially right and showcase adaptation which i was talking about...The problem is you haven't read my article and I can post my links to explain you in details but the problem is that administrator removes my link because "asking for Donation for NGO's who works for poor orphans, childrens etc" subjects to Commercial sales component as per the rules of Spiritual forums..So, that kinda limits my participation in this forum..

It seems like the definitions had to reiterated because the terms are being used out of context. Saying we are naturally herbivorious is ignoring more then half the human population in the northern part of the world, whom primarily ate meat.

Just because we are a large portion of our diet in plant material does not mean that we were herbivores. We ate insects and fungi, and there is even evidence we scavanged for meat.

Now, for adaptation, you do realize that adaptations are part of the theory of evolution right? Where are adaptations to the environent shape the future generations and selects certain genetic traits (alleals) and then expresses those traits which are successful for surviving in that environment.


"An adaptation in biology is a trait with a current functional role in the life history of an organism that is maintained and evolved by means of natural selection"

Notice the word "evolved".

The way you seem to be thinking is that humans are "adapted" to only eat plants. If that is true we should not be able to get any benefits from eating meat at all, and all signs show this is wrong. Meat helped our brains grow (along with new diets as we spread through africa, some grains helped as well). As a species we could ot get the proper fats and nutrition to evolve out massive brains without the use of meat.

You can look at humans, in almost anytime, and compare northern peoples to southern peoples, the southerners mostly ate veggies (still hunted) and the northern peoples mostly ate meat (also ate veggies when available). We eat what is available, which by definition is an adaptation to our environment.

The real problem is, we have never, ever relied on one form of meat, besides the far north peoples. Even them, they eat kelp and annual plants that are available during the growing season.

Lastly, I can post dozens of articles to show my points, im sure you can fine more then your one article, if your point is proven?

Originally Posted by Time

It seems like the definitions had to reiterated because the terms are being used out of context. Saying we are naturally herbivorious is ignoring more then half the human population in the northern part of the world, whom primarily ate meat.

Just because we are a large portion of our diet in plant material does not mean that we were herbivores. We ate insects and fungi, and there is even evidence we scavanged for meat.

Now, for adaptation, you do realize that adaptations are part of the theory of evolution right? Where are adaptations to the environent shape the future generations and selects certain genetic traits (alleals) and then expresses those traits which are successful for surviving in that environment.


"An adaptation in biology is a trait with a current functional role in the life history of an organism that is maintained and evolved by means of natural selection"

Notice the word "evolved".

The way you seem to be thinking is that humans are "adapted" to only eat plants. If that is true we should not be able to get any benefits from eating meat at all, and all signs show this is wrong. Meat helped our brains grow (along with new diets as we spread through africa, some grains helped as well). As a species we could ot get the proper fats and nutrition to evolve out massive brains without the use of meat.

You can look at humans, in almost anytime, and compare northern peoples to southern peoples, the southerners mostly ate veggies (still hunted) and the northern peoples mostly ate meat (also ate veggies when available). We eat what is available, which by definition is an adaptation to our environment.

The real problem is, we have never, ever relied on one form of meat, besides the far north peoples. Even them, they eat kelp and annual plants that are available during the growing season.

Lastly, I can post dozens of articles to show my points, im sure you can fine more then your one article, if your point is proven?

Nope time..You are very wrong...You are still living in the nineteenth century..It's a very wrong thinking that most of the population ate meat..So, we are carnivores. I have done detailed study on science and Darwin theory of evolution is one of blunderer theory of science. There were two kinds of people in this world. 1) Civilized 2) uncivilized
Civilized people ate meat sparingly while uncivilized adapted themselves to survive primarily on meat..What you are saying is about uncivilized people.
I don't buy Darwin theory of evolution. I don't believe in evolution at all..According to evolution theory, Humans were neanderthal man 10000 years ago. And everybody believed in this <snip>..Now there are evidences of many advanced civilization with some dating back to 30000 years. Check out discovery of dwaraka. Recently, in south africa, there is discovery of civilization atleast 1,00,000 years old..They were humans not neanderthal man..If You come to India and says about Darwin theory of evolution, they will say it's a absurd nonsense...Neanderthal,homo erectus and other species, which survived on meat, co-existed with man..There was no evolution, only adaptation..Check for the latest genetic studies..Don't go by what you were taught in schools. Still, if you believe in evolution, then note the following fact about our ancestors

Chimpanzees-Leaf and fruit eater veg
Howler monkeys - Leaf eaters
Marmosets - gum eaters
Sportive lemurs - Leaf eaters
Gelada baboons- Leaf eaters
Black-and-white colobuses - Leaf eaters
Gelada - grass eater
Mantled guereza- Leaf eaters

Why you are looking for evidences in fossil fuels and archaeology?..They are no concrete evidences..Look at the anatomy and traits of humans with omnivores or carnivores and then tell me Which traits of humans matches with carnivores/omnivores..I listed out more than thirty similarities between
humans and herbivores in my articles. You show me similarities of humans with carnivores/omnivores.
I have done detailed study on humans traits and have written many articles
on this topic..So, your outdated links is of no meaning to me..I am not allowed to post links of my website and the links which i post of other sites is removed..So, I leave out to you to research for latest evidences in Google.


edited by SF staff

Check the below link for scientific study of our anatomy
http://bodyscience.org/are-humans-ca...or-herbivores/

You can find many more similarties between humans and herbivores in the below link
http://agnvegglobal.blogspot.in/2011...umans-are.html

Off course, we have couple of similarities with omnivores too but that is because of adaptation just like cats adapted to vegan food..