ant and dec wrote:

> S. Maizlich wrote:
>
>> ant and dec wrote:
>>
>>> pearl wrote:
>>>
>>>> "ant and dec" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <..>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for that. Very interesting; of particular personal interest was
>>>>> the anthropological articles on calcium and osteoporosis.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're welcome.
>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The theory I was thinking of was the "brain food theory":
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brain food
>>>>>
>>>>> Because meat is rich in calories and nutrients, easy-to-digest food,
>>>>> early Homo lost the need for big intestines like apes and earlier
>>>>> hominids had. This freed up energy for use by other organs. This
>>>>> surplus
>>>>> of energy seems to have been diverted to one organ in particular - the
>>>>> brain. But scavenging meat from under the noses of big cats is a risky
>>>>> business, so good scavengers needed to be smart. At this stage in our
>>>>> evolution, a big brain was associated with greater intellect. Big
>>>>> brains
>>>>> require lots of energy to operate: the human brain uses 20% of the
>>>>> body's total energy production. But the massive calorific hit provided
>>>>> by meat kick-started an increase in the brain size of early humans.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_...thought1.shtml
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If that were the case, carnivores should have massive brains!
>>>>
>>>>> Mind you, this was written by Robert Winston who's has sold himself to
>>>>> the food industry.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://politics.guardian.co.uk/lords...560223,00.html
>>>>> http://www.omega3.co.uk/omega3/pages/omega_3.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Oct 22;265(1409):1933-7.
>>>> Visual specialization and brain evolution in primates.
>>>> Barton RA.
>>>> Department of Anthropology, University of Durham, UK.
>>>>
>>>> Several theories have been proposed to explain the evolution of
>>>> species differences in brain size, but no consensus has emerged.
>>>> One unresolved question is whether brain size differences are a
>>>> result of neural specializations or of biological constraints
>>>> affecting the whole brain. Here I show that, among primates,
>>>> brain size variation is associated with visual specialization.
>>>> Primates with large brains for their body size have relatively
>>>> expanded visual brain areas, including the primary visual cortex
>>>> and lateral geniculate nucleus. Within the visual system, it is, in
>>>> particular, one functionally specialized pathway upon which
>>>> selection has acted: evolutionary changes in the number of
>>>> neurons in parvocellular, but not magnocellular, layers of the
>>>> lateral geniculate nucleus are correlated with changes in both
>>>> brain size and ecological variables (diet and social group size).
>>>> Given the known functions of the parvocellular pathway, these
>>>> results suggest that the relatively large brains of frugivorous
>>>> species are products of selection on the ability to perceive
>>>> and select fruits using specific visual cues such as colour.
>>>> The separate correlation between group size and visual brain
>>>> evolution, on the other hand, may indicate the visual basis of
>>>> social information processing in the primate brain.
>>>>
>>>> PMID: 9821360 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
>>>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>>> I have moved my position on whether meat had a major part to play in
>>> human evolution. I will read more, but on balance there seems little
>>> evidence to support that it did.
>>
>>
>> It is UNDISPUTED by evolutionary biologists that meat played an
>> indispensable role in human evolution. Meat's role was both direct and
>> indirect. The direct role was in providing the massive amount of
>> protein needed for brain development. The indirect role is as an
>> organizing principle of human activity.
>
>
> I need to investigate more. The reference above seems to give a strong
> case for a "visual specialization" evolution and it states that "no
> consensus has emerged", but I'm happy learn and admit my ignorance on
> brain evolution theories.

What is not in dispute is that the earliest hominids
and their pre-hominid ancestors *all* naturally ate
meat. To say then that meat played no role in their
evolution is just factually wrong.