© Dominguez-Rodrigo MA fragment of a child's skull discovered at Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania, shows the oldest known evidence of anemia caused by a nutritional deficiency.
Fragments of a 1.5-million-year-old skull from a child recently found in Tanzania suggest early hominids weren't just occasional carnivores but regular meat eaters, researchers say.
The finding helps build the case that meat-eating helped the human lineage evolve large brains, scientists added.
"I know this will sound awful to vegetarians, but meat made us human," said researcher Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo, an archaeologist at Complutense University in Madrid.
Past research suggested prehuman hominids such as australopithecines
may have eaten some meat. However, it is the
regular consumption of meat that often is thought to have triggered major changes in the human lineage, the genus
Homo, with this high-energy food supporting
large human brains.
Given its importance to human evolution, scientists want to learn when eating flesh became a regular activity. Stone tools dating back about 2.6 million years to Gona in Ethiopia are often considered the earliest signs of the human lineage butchering meat, and
contentious evidence suggests butchery may have existed at least 3.4 million years ago. "Despite this ample evidence, some archaeologists still argue that meat was eaten sporadically and played a minor role in the diet of those hominins," Domínguez-Rodrigo said. (Hominins include humans and their relatives after they split from the chimpanzee lineage.)
Now shards of a child's skull found in Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania suggest the infant suffered from a form of malnutrition seen in meat-poor diets. This hints that meat-eating was normally a regular part of the human diet at the time.
The skull fragment is thought to belong to a child somewhat younger than 2. It remains unclear what hominin it belonged to - likely candidates include extinct human species such as
Homo habilis or
Homo erectus, or perhaps the "
Nutcracker Man"
Paranthropus boisei.
The kind of bone lesions the researchers saw in this fossil are known as porotic hyperostosis, which typically results from a lack of vitamins B9 and B12 in the diet. This kind of nutritional deficiency is most common at weaning, when children switch to solid foods. The researchers suggested this particular infant died because of lack of meat, which is rich in B-vitamins. Alternatively, if the child still depended on the mother for milk, it may have been the mother who lacked meat.
These findings suggest that "human brain development could not have existed without a diet based on
regular consumption of meat," Domínguez-Rodrigo said. "Regular consumption of meat at that time implied that humans were hunters by then. Scavenging only rarely provides access to meat and is only feasible in African savannas on a seasonal basis."
However, there are other potential causes for porotic hyperostosis besides malnourishment, such as malaria or
parasites. "Basically, anything that correlates with low red-cell count - either due to an infection of the blood or blood loss, or nutritional insufficiency - can cause the marrow of the skull to ramp up its production massively, causing the hyperostosis," said paleoanthropologist John Hawks at the University of Wisconsin, who did not take part in this study.
Still, Hawks noted that Domínguez-Rodrigo and his colleagues took alternative explanations for these bone lesions into account and were reasonably cautious in their interpretation of this data. "This is an interesting addition to what we know," Hawks told LiveScience.
Now, Domínguez-Rodrigo said, "research should try to find out how humans were acquiring meat regularly. What hunting strategies were used?"
The scientists detailed their findings online Oct. 3 in the journal
PLoS ONE.
It's the other way around, unless you subscribe to a religion(science) that preaches that we were hunter gatherers and became humans gradually, eating meat actually degrades us from the compassionate humane platform and brings us down to the animalistic platform....
[Link]
Today, with increasing evidence of diet's critical effect on good health and longevity, more and more people are investigating this question: Is the human body better suited to a vegetarian diet or one that includes meat?
In the search for answers, two areas should be considered - the anatomical structure of the human body, and the physical effects of meat consumption.
Since eating begins with the hands and mouth, what can the anatomy of these bodily parts tell us? Human teeth, like those of the herbivorous creatures, are designed for grinding and chewing vegetable matter. Humans lack the sharp front teeth for tearing flesh that are characteristic of carnivores. Meat-eating animals generally swallow their food without chewing it and therefore do not require molars or a jaw capable of moving sideways. Also, the human hand, with no sharp claws and with its opposable thumb, is better suited to harvesting fruits and vegetables than to killing prey.
PHYSIOLOGICAL COMPARISONS
MEAT-EATER
===========
Has claws
No skin pores, perspires through tongue
Sharp front teeth for tearing, no flat molar teeth for grinding
Intestinal tract 3 times body length so rapidly decaying meat can pass out quickly
Strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
HERBIVORE
==========
No claws
Perspires through skin pores
No sharp front teeth has flat rear molars
Intestinal tract 10-12 times body length
Stomach acid 20 times less strong than meat-eaters
MAN
===
No claws
Perspires through skin pores
No sharp front teeth has flat rear molars
Intestinal tract 12 times body length
Stomach acid 20 times less strong than meat-eaters
What's more.. Jesus, who preached message of compassion and forgiveness was a vegetarian too [Link]