this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2025
120 points (87.0% liked)

science

27340 readers
399 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

lemmy.world rules

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pageflight@lemmy.world 74 points 9 months ago (4 children)

mice were fed three types of red meat – pork, beef and mutton

I assume most mice don't regularly eat large livestock.

Are mice evolved to eat red meat? The article doesn't really say.

However, there were limitations to the study. As well as it being a mice model [...]

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, mice eat red meat.

Mice are omnivores and are opportunistic eaters. They’ll eat whatever they can find.

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 16 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Mice do not eat that much meat of other mammals.

Giving an over abundance of it, for a long time, will shock the mouse.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Humans historically, also didn't eat much meat up until very recently. More recent research suggests our ancient human ancestors were eating far more plants than meat

EDIT: For example:

Here we present the isotopic evidence of pronounced plant reliance among Late Stone Age hunter-gatherers from North Africa (15,000–13,000 cal BP), predating the advent of agriculture by several millennia

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-024-02382-z

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Primates in general are designed to eat red meat. Chimps, our closest cousin, go on regular hunts against other primates, and eat them

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

My point is that it was way more rare than what people's diets look like today. Not zero but not dominant. Wide reliance on plants is even true before modern agriculture. For example:

Here we present the isotopic evidence of pronounced plant reliance among Late Stone Age hunter-gatherers from North Africa (15,000–13,000 cal BP), predating the advent of agriculture by several millennia

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-024-02382-z

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I myself am a victim of the modern diet, and lack of exercise. I almost died of high cholesterol and other related factors, before I started to eat better and be physically active.

I’m a firm believer in a varied diet, and that most people should have a less meaty intake.

Just, we are designed to be hunters and eat red meat

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My parents fed me red meat for almost every dinner I can recall growing up. I’m early 30s and my cholesterol is very high. I was able to drop my cholesterol significantly in one month by changing my diet to mostly vegan with chicken and fish once or twice a week. Switched my morning eggs out to egg whites. Cooked in avocado oil instead of butter.

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

I tend to eat very little red meat now, maybe once a month. I used to eat it every day

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

This is just not true in the bigger picture of human evolution. That paper focuses on humans in North Africa 15,000–13,000  years ago which is a very tiny snapshot in time and geography.

Eating meat is a major part of what separated archaic humans from other primates; it is theorized that the calories from meat is part of what helped us grow our larger brains. Homo Erectus was hunting large game maybe up to 2 million years ago, well before Homo Sapiens even existed. They hunted to the point of wiping out many large herbivores of that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_erectus#Subsistence

Since common modern human tapeworms began to diverge from those of other predators roughly 1.7 million years ago (specifically the pork tapeworm, beef tapeworm, and Asian tapeworm), not only was H. erectus consuming meat regularly enough for speciation to occur in these parasites, but meat was probably consumed raw more often than not.[80]

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Humans and human ancestors have also been consuming large quantities of plants for far earlier than that. Here's another paper looking 780,000 years ago finding a wide amount of plants consumed

we demonstrate that a wide variety of plants were processed by Middle Pleistocene hominins at the site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov in Israel (33° 00’ 30” N, 35° 37’ 30” E), at least 780,000 y ago. These results further indicate the advanced cognitive abilities of our early ancestors, including their ability to collect plants from varying distances and from a wide range of habitats and to mechanically process them using percussive tools.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2418661121

I am not saying that hunting didn't happen (it definitely did). I am just saying that more recent research is painting a very different picture of the level of consumption of it

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

yes, of course we ate lots of plants as well, that was never disputed. We were hunters and gatherers. The point is meat has absolutely been a significant part of our diets for millions of years (the exact ratio depending on the environment humans found themselves in). it is well documented by many direct lines of evidence as i laid out above.

I am not saying that hunting didn’t happen (it definitely did).

it didn't just "happen" like once in a while. we are/were probably the best hunters ever seen on planet earth. we basically wiped out global megafauna over the last 1.5 million years.

I am just saying that more recent research is painting a very different picture of the level of consumption of it

what exactly do you mean by "very different picture"? that's an extremely vague statement that could mean almost anything.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 3 points 9 months ago

It depends on the populations.

Steppe populations from modern Ukraine easy through to the Urals lived mainly on meat and dairy 5000 years ago (even if they didn’t yet have the lactose tolerance adaptation).

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

In the animal study, mice were fed three types of red meat – pork, beef and mutton – every day for two weeks. Then, the researchers triggered colitis (a model for IBD) using a chemical called dextran sulfate sodium (DSS).

They definitely aren't evolved to eat dextran sulfate sodium.

[–] some_guy 11 points 9 months ago

Was the first thing I thought of. “Standard diets,” vs non-standard pretty quickly calls into question how much we need to account for the divergence from typical. If I go to India (I’m from the USA), there will be meals that aren’t standard for me that might cause distress that are nonetheless fine for the local population.

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 42 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Look I'm all for the idea that we eat too much meat currently and all, but are mice really good analogs for humans in this instance? I'm not a scientist of any sort, so I really don't know, but it seems to me like a creature that doesn't naturally eat, like, any red meat would be a bad analog here.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Humans also don't generally eat poison. But the mice in this study were poisoned with DSS after eating meat. Maybe meat is not the real culprit here...

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 9 months ago

Honey I don't know bout you but it's Friday night this human is absolutely gonna be enjoying some poison!

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 2 points 9 months ago

They will eat anything... It is a rodent.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 30 points 9 months ago (2 children)

That's it! Uninviting all the mice from the next BBQ.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 9 months ago

They do terrible, terrible things to the guest bathroom

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What if I eat the red meat without stuffing it into a mouse first?

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Need a new study for that.

[–] lanigerous@feddit.uk 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Where's that old Twitter bot that would append in mice to reports of these bullshit studies?

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Does the Lemmy post title not have "in mice" in it for you? I added it to the title of the post to clarify this. It should show as

Red meat wreaks havoc on gut and drives inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in study on mice

Whereas the original title of the article was:

Red meat wreaks havoc on gut and drives inflammatory bowel disease

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 10 points 9 months ago
[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

That's fine, we already know how to cure any disease in mice.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well… I guess we’re just not going to bother taking into account that red meat isn’t part of a mouse’s diet? And that maybe they’re going to react poorly when force fed things they generally don’t eat? This type of bullshit science needs to be called out for what it is.

Next, maybe we should see how well whales react if we feed them 3,000lbs of french fries.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 9 months ago

I didn't know we had so many PhD level gastroenterologists on Lemmy, I'm glad we've attracted such an educated community and we're not filled with reactionary nerds who vaguely remember their freshman zoology class.

[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Anecdotally, I've had way less stomach issues since shifting largely to white meat and a mostly plant based diet.