Can we talk about this?

[Sapphirez]

Hello everyone ❤️ I am wondering if anybody can make heads or tails of this comparative species chart within this article & available elsewhere. I don't know how accurate it is, but fruit as our primary food makes sense to me. I spent a long time researching health & illness before this became clear to me.
It works every angle you approach it from, except the fact we haven't been living how we're supposed to.. I have been digging deeper into history recently and I think that catastrophic conditions caused humans to resort to eating meat actually.. like in the Southwest desert and canyon type areas there's evidence of civilizations living there in more recent ancient years, (like in super high up "caves" though there's also plentiful underground caves, and manmade building remnants but those are other stories..) and prior to that most lands had lush forestry and were "somehow" basically turned to stone. I'm sorry for that deviation but it might be important that we understand why humanity ever chose to eat meat, aside from corruption..


I used to share the comparative anatomy chart that only had up to herbivore and no frugivore on there.. years later I knew better and found the same chart was shared with the frugivorous inclusion. I'm sharing that to attest to knowing how fooled we can be. I know that despite this being such a spiritual place most people are unaware or even uninterested in what we are and what's best for us.. so don't shoot the messenger if you're put off by this revelation or field of study. please just try to look into it for yourself. We could have some great world-changing discussions 🍑

https://steemit.com/animals/@veganis...-be-frugivores

One more caveat, I am in favor of other foods besides fruit, especially herbs. I think vegetables are supposed to be treated like herbs, and especially in these darker, denser times they can help us get a certain kind of groundedness when fruit makes us feel too "high" or too spiritually oriented, if that's a thing.. I also think that seaweed is important for us, though some land produce apparently does have iodine and fatty acids.

[Gem]

The article is strange in that it claims we are frugivores, but the science they referenced claims "The dietary status of the human species is that of an unspecialized frugivore, having a flexible diet that includes seeds and meat (omnivorous diet)".

People back in the day, and still recently, were primarily concerned with getting enough calories, so they ate what was available and favoured calorie dense food, especially fat. Since animals were edible, they ate them, and made stuff from bones, leather, pelts and fur. It's consistent with people who lived where there were more plants ate more plants and people who lived where there aren't many plants ate more meat, fish etc. I dare say the plant eaters were better off because they had plenty of plants and animals, both.

Once we start becoming too restrictive, such as only plants, but raw, and only fruit, we've limited our nutrient supply or food variety, and restrictive diets can be so bad that you don't even get enough calories, so I encourage a sensible approach to eating, which could be vegan with a few essential supplements, but the requirements of human nutrition do not match plant only diets very well. Dietary Supplements/fortified food is a must.

[Podshell]

Whatever peoples beliefs, that includes those beliefs based on scientific evidence, mostly all lead to a human diet based on little or no meat. that doesn't mean zero animal products though as proper milk(which is very rare now) and it's multitude of products are a good source of most nutrients.

Many animals have a limited diet, bulls mainly eat grass and herbs but do very well in a natural environment, bears like pandas and koalas do well, don't think even the big bulky silver back gorillas have much variety but also have meat/protein in the form of termites

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Podshell

Whatever peoples beliefs,
Many animals have a limited diet, bulls mainly eat grass and herbs but do very well in a natural environment, bears like pandas and koalas do well, don't think even the big bulky silver back gorillas have much variety but also have meat/protein in the form of termites

Well, beliefs aren't always valid, so the rationale is important. What you say about evidence leading to plant heavy diet is true in a sense, but one that excludes environmental conditions. I do the same because I'm assuming people who can get their hands on near enough anything, and exclude poor people around the world.

Environmentally, the reason we can get all the stuff is because highways and ships and electricity and shops and the rest of the industry systems, and I don't know how healthy that is on a species longevity level, or if tribal hearders would be better off without their cattle.

I view the 'natural human diet' as a fallacy simply because in nature it is geographically dependent. The reason I talk about pure nutrients and calories is solely based on man-made technology. Veganism is part of that because it is not a sustainable diet in eras prior to the industrial revolution. In today's environment, it's fine. 500 years ago, impossible. In the future, who's to say.

Variation in human diet is the key.

Hence, I agree with your position, I mean I think it's very reasonable. It's just some minor caveats in the sense that it's contextual.

[Shrek]

Thank you for sharing the article,

I agree with many points raised, especially the anatomical and health-related arguments that suggest our bodies function optimally on a mostly plant-based diet. The comparison between carnivores, herbivores, and frugivores is quite compelling when it comes to digestive tract length, jaw structure, and enzyme production.

However, I also see that humans are highly adaptive and conditioned beings. While we may not be anatomically pure carnivores, evolution has allowed us to survive in diverse environments with mixed diets. The fact that we can digest meat, even if not optimally, shows the extent of our biological flexibility.

But perhaps the more interesting dimension for me is this: what we eat is not only biological, but also karmic. Every bite carries intention, consequence, and interconnection. Whether we choose to eat fruits, vegetables, or even animal products, it's important to see the deeper conditioning behind our choices.

And beyond what we eat, there’s also how we obtain our food, and how much of it we consume. Are we taking more than we need? Are our choices causing unnecessary harm? The question isn’t just about the food itself, but also about the mindset behind it.

For those who walk a spiritual path, diet becomes less about ideology and more about awareness. If a frugivorous diet supports that awareness, wonderful.

So I appreciate the article and the reminder to reflect more deeply on what we consume and why. At the end of the day, our relationship with food, like everything else, is not separate from the path toward freedom.

[Podshell]

Gem, we don't usually grow food on roads,shops or in factories, natural environments thrive , coral reef and rainforest are awash with Diversity and a abundances, if we used our noggin we could make them even better, no need to import loads of junk that much ends up in landfill

[Altair]

We're not ''frugivores'' but omnivores. Wouldn't have eyes in front and so good at hunting and digesting animal food if we weren't. It does not mean humans should just close their eyes to the reality of slaughterhouses, which is practically just a daily holocaust for animals. Ethics is part of the human condition as well and we ignore that at our own peril.

But veganism and fruitarianism are extreme diets, and we have seen a counter response from conservative crazies that now go full meat, ignoring any and all suffering (as well as further deforestation).

I think we should minimize animal suffering, whilst understanding there's no complete nonviolence in this world. Go for yogurt instead of beef, and look for other vegetarian options. It's not perfect but it's the middle road.