Skip to comments.The benefits of eating bugs
Posted on 03/02/2014 7:16:51 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARD of the Stone Age diet craze known as the Paleolithic Diet, made popular most recently by Dr. Loren Cordain's best-seller The Paleo Diet. The premise is simple: If our early human ancestors couldn't have eaten it, we shouldn't, either. It's the one time, it seems, that being like a caveman is a good thing.
The theory goes (and archaeological evidence corroborates) that early hunter-gatherers, while they may not have lived as long, still had some major health advantages on most of us modern humans. They were much taller, averaging 6-foot-5 to our 5-foot-11; had stronger, heavier bones; had more robust immune systems; and were leaner, tougher, and hardier than we are today. Higher levels of physical activity also played a vital role in cave people's vitality, and so did their high levels of wild food consumption: wild game meat, gathered greens and fruits, and healthy fats such as nuts.
Cordain suggests that prior to the agricultural revolution, early humans ate this Paleo Diet for 2.5 million years. The 10,000 years since the popularization of farming or just 333 human generations he says, is clearly a drop in the chronological bucket when compared with the millennia leading up to it. Thus, he maintains, the hunter-gatherer diet our ancestors lived on is far more deeply and indelibly imprinted into our DNA than our habits of the last few thousand years. I'm inclined to agree with him. In fact, I'm going to see his 2.5 million years and raise him a few millennia, and show you what we were really designed to eat. The real Paleo Diet would have included bugs. Lots and lots of bugs.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
Lighter fare for a Sunday night...
[Rest of article at website]
... more great pictures at link. Mmmmmmm. Tasty!
“Slimy, yet satisfying.”
I think eating lobster was akin to eating an insect at one time . . .
Yet they died of old age at 25.
Damn fine eatin’!
what utter rot
Better than Soylent Green, I guess.
> This is what the elites want us to eat, while they feast on Wagyu steaks, heritage pork, arugula, lobster and crab.
My thought exactly. Why notjust promote African refugee eating of 3 meals a week as normal and the elites will have a lot more of the good stuff to eat
My very first job was at KFC and it is my personal opinion that more people buy chicken.
Yep. You have that exactly right.
Screw all those people.
So this is what it’s come to, eh? With Obama’s war on the American working people..... Eating bugs?! Yuck! Even mcD’s sounds ( ever so slightly) better to me than eating bugs. (And I already barf up mcD’s, alas .).
Mmm, best bugs on the planet.
Too many people getting healthy on the Paleo diet.
So they gotta freak out potential new Paleo people with pictures of bugs (which of course have nothing whatsoever to do with the Paleo diet).
It’s an ugly thing when punks with money get ahold of a word processor.
They’re really good on pizza...
This is exactly opposite to what the Hebrew Bible tells us. According to that tome, every moving non-aquatic creature’s antediluvian diet was green herbs (Gen. 1:30, 9:3), including tyrannosaurus rex as well as homo sapiens. Interesting —
You first, Michelle. :^*
Now where have I heard that before?
No, they got a Mastodon tusk shoved through their chest by then, or the weeping eye sickness, or rotting arm sickness, or liquid bowel syndrome, etc...
Hudsons, Kresgees and Winkleman were the Kings of Woodward Ave. back then. Under new leadership, Detroit may attract new business, I hope. I no longer live in that part of the country. I used to walk from my High School Cass Tech downtown during lunch and visit a carmel corn shop called The Nut House
It's safe to say that conditions and the nutritional content of plants was significantly different pre-flood, insofar as meat was not on the menu, for it was unneeded. In addition, pre-flood biblical characters lived significantly longer than post flood ones.
Yes, my lizards really enjoy their Paleo diet crickets. So my cats, if any crickets escape my lizards’ tanks.
The perfect liberal diet. Infinitely sustainable. Locally produced. Leads to everybody dying by age 30 so you don’t strain the government’s “health care” system. You’ll expend thousands of calories hunting down the creepy crawlies so you’ll stay lean and trim, pleasing your government overlords.
OK, libs. You first.
You should youtube Kent Hovind. He has many videos concerning The Flood & creation.
When your attitude is positive your energy is up, your immune system works better and stressors have less affect on you.
Conch is a snail and delicious. At $40/lb, it should be.
A remember Michael Savage talking about how locusts are kosher.
I thinl this kook ate termites that been having lunch on his brain.
I have it on good authority that roasted grasshoppers taste like shrimp.
That said, I’ll process them through the chicken first :)
I'm not a bible expert, but I seem to remember that Abel became a shepherd of a flock, while Cain cultivated the land. I don't think that it's too much of a stretch to assume that the flock was used for food, and also for offerings to the Lord.
Yep. That is too much of a stretch, IMHO. That is not what the context calls for. There was no death before Adam's disobedience. By man came death, not vice versa.
Mankind was not eating flesh meat until after the flood they survived. That has been in force since then. From Adam's sin, up through Noah's time, people became a little more careful about what they were eating.
No sin was forgiven without a blood sacrifice. Obviously, Elohim did not accept vegetables as a substitute. The blood covered their sins, and the sheep skins covered their bodies as clothing.
But when the Messiah's earthly kingdom is established, the original practices will be reinstituted. See Isaiah 65:18-25.
But you see how the concept of theistic evolution turns a blind eye to these impossible contradictions, and is not a workable solution.
Is that somewhere in the Bible?
Cheap and plentiful . . . in restaurants in Puerto Rico. It's the air fare that's expensive, to go there or bring it here, I'd bet. < big grin >
(Please note that in the KJV or DRB Bibles with language of the 17th century, the word "meat" means what you and I call "food." In our language today, the "meat" only means "animal flesh, not "food" in the general sense." When reading these translations, put our word "food" in where those translators used "meat.")
OK, I got it- meat doesn’t mean meat. Now I understand.
Here's another curious one:
To us, "prevent" means "to stop" or "to keep something from happening." But to the DRB or KJV translators, "pre-" meant "before", and "-vent" meant "go" (from the Latin verb venire = "to go"). So to them, "prevent" meant "go before". To give the right sense, we should replace it with our equivalent word, which would be "precede."
That appears in the passage regarding the resurrection of believers at the Lord's second appearance:
>> 1Thess. 4:15-17 KJV
>> 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that
>> we which are alive and remain unto the coming
>> of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
>> 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,
>> with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God:
>>and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
>> 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together
>> with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air:
>> and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Here, one needs to mentally replace the word "prevent" (which I've underlined, and which to us now means something else) with our word "precede"; which restores the correct interpretation of verse 15, and brings the correct sense to the passage.
Just one word makes a difference!
(However, in the Old Testament Hebrew the word translated as "prevent" meant to us "anticipate" or "confront.")