Dr. Atkins, pioneer of the ketogenic diet

[Over and Out 29]

11 hours ago, Creekimp13 said:

If we're being absolutely technical....since humans ARE great apes...indeed, our ancestors are great apes as well. I could have technically said Hominidea, our taxonomic family of great apes (which includes humans and the other great apes and our combined ancestors)...but I wanted to keep things simple for the sake of conversation.

Human beings are one such example.

A hominoid, commonly called an ape, is a member of the superfamily Hominoidea: extant members are the gibbons (lesser apes, family Hylobatidae) and the hominids. A hominid is a member of the family Hominidae, the great apes: orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and humans.

We ARE great apes.

Yes, we are members of the taxonomic family Hominidae, and thus are great apes. Humans are also primates, mammals, chordates, animals, and Eukaryotes.

A taxonomic family is, according to the Biology Online Dictionary, "A taxonomic group of one or more genera, especially sharing a common attribute. . . Organisms belonging to the same family would have evolved from the same ancestors and share relatively common characteristics" (my emphasis).

12 hours ago, Creekimp13 said:

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics

From the perspective of this powerful test of biological kinship (DNA), humans are not only related to the great apes – we are one. The DNA evidence leaves us with one of the greatest surprises in biology: the wall between human, on the one hand, and ape, on the other, has been breached. The human evolutionary tree is embedded within the great apes.

Well, in your own words:

The quote. . . Here's what follows in the text (my emphasis):

The strong similarities between humans and the African great apes led Charles Darwin in 1871 to predict that Africa was the likely place where the human lineage branched off from other animals – that is, the place where the common ancestor of chimpanzees, humans, and gorillas once lived. The DNA evidence shows an amazing confirmation of this daring prediction. The African great apes, including humans, have a closer kinship bond with one another than the African apes have with orangutans or other primates. Hardly ever has a scientific prediction so bold, so ‘out there’ for its time, been upheld as the one made in 1871 – that human evolution began in Africa.

The DNA evidence informs this conclusion, and the fossils do, too. Even though Europe and Asia were scoured for early human fossils long before Africa was even thought of, ongoing fossil discoveries confirm that the first 4 million years or so of human evolutionary history took place exclusively on the African continent. It is there that the search continues for fossils at or near the branching point of the chimpanzee and human lineages from our last common ancestor.

And the chart. Here's what it says above it (my emphasis):

"Primate Family Tree

Due to billions of years of evolution, humans share genes with all living organisms. The percentage of genes or DNA that organisms share records their similarities. We share more genes with organisms that are more closely related to us.

Humans belong to the biological group known as Primates, and are classified with the great apes, one of the major groups of the primate evolutionary tree. Besides similarities in anatomy and behavior, our close biological kinship with other primate species is indicated by DNA evidence. It confirms that our closest living biological relatives are chimpanzees and bonobos, with whom we share many traits. But we did not evolve directly from any primates living today.

DNA also shows that our species and chimpanzees diverged from a common ancestor species that lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. The last common ancestor of monkeys and apes lived about 25 million years ago"

[Over and Out 29]

14 hours ago, Creekimp13 said:

If we're being absolutely technical

I suspect we are splitting hairs. But thanks for giving me something to think about besides my terror of gastric bypass! I don't work, so it's fun for me to be challenged a bit rather than surfing the web and watching TV. Stretching the brain feels good!

[clsumrall 535]

Charles Darwin also shared on his death bed no scientific

Proof of his original claim. And carbon dating was found to be not accurate in the mid 1970’s. No proof of the earth being more than 40-50 thousand years old. There was a huge study done on the 1968-75 proving previous Darwin theories non conclusive. Fyi

[Over and Out 29]

15 minutes ago, clsumrall said:

Charles Darwin also shared on his death bed no scientific

Proof of his original claim. And carbon dating was found to be not accurate in the mid 1970’s. No proof of the earth being more than 40-50 thousand years old. There was a huge study done on the 1968-75 proving previous Darwin theories non conclusive. Fyi

What does Darwin have to do with modern evolutionary theory?

[Over and Out 29]

1 hour ago, clsumrall said:

Charles Darwin also shared on his death bed no scientific

Proof of his original claim. And carbon dating was found to be not accurate in the mid 1970’s. No proof of the earth being more than 40-50 thousand years old. There was a huge study done on the 1968-75 proving previous Darwin theories non conclusive. Fyi

Also:

Creationist literature itself disproves the "deathbed conversion" baloney: https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/darwins-deathbed-conversion-a-legend/

Regarding carbon dating: radiocarbon dating is also known as C14 dating, since it depends upon measuring the half-life of C-14, a radioactive isotope of carbon. When I was an archaeologist, we used it all the time when we found burned material, to get a date on the site we were excavating. That's because C14 dating only works within a timespan of up to about 60,000 years ago. Since it only works in that time frame, it has no bearing whatsoever on the age of the earth.

However, other kinds of radiometric dating work just fine, and prove the earth is over 4 billion years old. https://www.space.com/24854-how-old-is-earth.html

and if you want to get really technical:

https://ncse.com/cej/3/2/answers-to-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating

I can't answer to your "huge study" because you cite no evidence.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Conflicted
trying to create links.

[Creekimp13 5,838]

3 hours ago, clsumrall said:

No proof of the earth being more than 40-50 thousand years old.

BAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Creekimp13 5,838]

20 hours ago, Conflicted said:

But we did not evolve directly from any primates living today.

Um...we're primates. So, we did. We're also Great Apes. So, again...we did:)

But you are correct that we did not evolve "from" animals like chimpanzees and gorillas.... However, we do share ancestors with them. Our family trees are intermingled. We're all Great Apes.

My point was not an origins discussion. (Though, I do enjoy that discussion!)

My point was that none of us are carnivores. None of us are meat-heavy omnivores, either.

Let's look at chimps and bonobos...with whom we share almost all of our DNA.

Only about 3% of a chimpanzee diet is composed of meat and about 2% eggs and insects. And this is very opportunistic. Chimps will eat meat about 9 days per year. Bonobos eat meat even more seldom than Chimps.

So, what do they eat regularly?

A metric feck-ton of Figs. fruit in volume. Nuts and seeds. Foliage, blossoms, leaves,bark, stems, fungus, roughage. And more figs. Lots and lots....of figs. Oh! And palm wine, sitting fermented in leaves. And honey and bugs. Did I mention figs?

My point....was that the natural Great Ape diet....is extremely carb dense. Our kidneys are set up to deal with a carb based diet, not a Protein based diet.

Protein is tough on the kidneys long term. Particularly, if you're not an animal who has a genetically evolved renal system to handle massive amounts of it.

Likewise....wheat and refined grains and refined sugars are not something our digestive systems were originally set up to handle. So, there's certainly a dark side to indiscriminate carb eating as well.

Eat more figs.

And, as always with crazy shite you read on the internet......take what you like, and leave the rest:)

food for thought.

[Over and Out 29]

7 minutes ago, Creekimp13 said:

21 hours ago, Conflicted said:

But we did not evolve directly from any primates living today.

Um...we're primates. So, we did. We're also Great Apes. So, again...we did:)

You are misquoting me. I did not say that; I was quoting the article you posted to prove your point. But it specifically contradicts what you say.

[Creekimp13 5,838]

It's not a contradiction at all....but it's funny:) The crux is that human beings are great apes. Our ancestors ARE great apes because that's what we are.

When the author of the article says "we did not evolve from any primates living today" I had to giggle...because I certainly evolved from my family...and last I checked...they were all primates! And heck...my mom is still living! LOL

(because...yes...human beings are primates...and great apes...even my mom!)

But what the author meant is that we didn't evolve directly "from" chimps and bonobos.....though we do share common ancestors with them...which is 100% in support of what I've said.

I think there's a lack of following each other's humor here...

And that's ok.

And again...none of this has anything to do with my point..... that nutritionally....human beings following Atkin's ideas....are taking a HUGE step away from what our bodies are designed to handle, and many in the medical community have deep concerns about that.

In particular....there are concerns about what a high animal Protein diet will do to the cardiovascular and renal system long term.

Time will tell. Lot of cool studies going on.

But if I had to place a bet....looking at the evidence available on what diets globally are correlated with the best health outcomes....best longevity, lowest incidence of cardiovascular disease, lowest incidence of cancer.....I'd put my money on the Mediterranean Diet or Japanese Diet....that coincidentally enough....have a strong emphasis on fruit, vegetation, plant protein, and Fiber and very moderate/rare animal protein consumption......just like Chimps and Bonobos:)

Edited May 1, 2018 by Creekimp13

[Creekimp13 5,838]

My husband the other day goes......taxonomy is really mean to the gibbons.

And I laughed.

Because for whatever reason...the poor gibbons are the ONLY apes who are "lesser apes". And it's not like there's some huge difference. They're a little smaller. They have less sexual dimorphism, and they don't make nests.

Is that really a reason to call someone 'Lesser"? LOL:)

Poor gibbons:)

Does he really think that that's "mean"? No...he was being conversationally charming.

This whole silly thread has reinforced the virtue that it's important to remember who your audience is when you write conversationally.

I will remember this in the future:)

Edited May 1, 2018 by Creekimp13

[Over and Out 29]

On 4/30/2018 at 11:23 AM, Conflicted said:

If we're being absolutely technical....since humans ARE great apes...indeed, our ancestors are great apes as well.

I asked our local (masters-level) biology teacher about your logic here. I also asked my doctor, since I had an appointment today. Both say we share a common ancestor, from which point we took divergent paths (which is what I've been saying all along). They made me feel quite silly for asking. I was using your words, which you now say you did not mean.

3 hours ago, Creekimp13 said:

This whole silly thread has reinforced the virtue that it's important to remember who your audience is when you write conversationally.

You are very specific and seemingly scientific (not "conversational") when talking about your diet and human biology; why not do the same when talking of evolution?

I also resent your clear implication that remembering "who your audience is" means that I am somehow of lower intelligence. Though I will say I don't see a bit of humor in your tone, if that's what you were going for. This conversation is over. I suggest you spend 10 minutes talking to a biologist instead of cherrypicking internet articles to support your presuppositions.

[Creekimp13 5,838]

I'm not implying you have lower intelligence. I'm implying you're not comprehending what I'm saying. Two very different things:) Your lack of ability to follow what I'm saying could easily be my fault. Absolutely!

I intend to spend hours talking to my biologist daughter tonight:) LOL. She's not at masters level yet (though she has taken graduate level anthropology courses as electives), but she'll have her Bachelors in a premed Microbiology program at the University of Michigan next fall. She's taking the GRE and MCAT this summer, going to grad school in 2019, and will study medical Entomology for her PhD. This summer she's working on a biological station research campus attempting to seduce a lab for a post doc position:) She's also going to an arachnology conference this summer in Yipsilanti because she's a spider nut.

If you'd like, I could also call my two biologist brothers. One is an MD, and one works in biochemical engineering.

I really have no idea why you're defensive and angry, nor do I particularly care:)

Good luck to ya! And best wishes on your weight loss journey!

Edited May 1, 2018 by Creekimp13

[Creekimp13 5,838]

1 hour ago, Conflicted said:

I asked our local (masters-level) biology teacher about your logic here. I also asked my doctor, since I had an appointment today.

Ok...I once had a stalker who didn't think about me this much. I find it fascinating that I'm living rent free in your head.

I'm flattered, Love, but I'm a taken woman

25 years this year to the man who thinks gibbons got a rough deal

Edited May 1, 2018 by Creekimp13

[Over and Out 29]

On 5/1/2018 at 6:31 PM, Creekimp13 said:

Ok...I once had a stalker who didn't think about me this much. I find it fascinating that I'm living rent free in your head.

I'm flattered, Love, but I'm a taken woman

25 years this year to the man who thinks gibbons got a rough deal

Oh, don't be silly. I asked them because I wanted to make sure I wasn't wrong. It's been a while since grad school, and science is always expanding its knowledge.

Plus the biology teacher is my brother so I talk to him daily anyways (My other brothers? Engineers. Weird). It just sounded better to say I talked to a biology teacher than "I asked my brother. . . ." or "I asked my dad. . . ." (Context, ya know. )

No stalking here, I assure you.

(Although I just realized the post I responded to on the mayo Clinic diet was yours--no stalking intended, I am genuinely curious.)

[Over and Out 29]

Just now, Conflicted said:

I find it fascinating that I'm living rent free in your head.

Not happening. Right now that guy from NCIS and his friend from New Orleans are living rent-free in my head, so there's no room for you.