Does anyone here have a soda addiction?

[Geof Nanto]

My purpose in entering this discussion was to post some information about the traditional diet of Aboriginal Australians - an ancient and still surviving culture I've experienced first-hand.  My post above yours has information on seed cakes made from crushing seeds into dough. The seeds used were from grasses or acacia trees; their usage nothing like the spices you mention from your pantry. I've included an article below with more information.

 

However it seems pointless arguing about diet on this level when the average diet is atrocious. After all, the OP is about soda addiction. And even though I live in a semi-wilderness area, surrounded by wildlife, I'm not about to embark on a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. 

 

 

Damper Seed   

 

Damper, also known as bush bread or seedcake, is a European term that refers to the bread made by Australian Aborigines for many thousands of years by crushing a variety of native seeds, and sometimes nuts and roots, into a dough and then baking the dough in the coals of a fire. The bread is high in protein and carbohydrate and helped form part of a balanced traditional diet.  Millstones for grinding seeds into flour have been discovered which have dated to be 50,000 years old.  

 

Although women living in remote communities may still bake damper, the arrival of pre-milled white flour has mostly replaced the use of ground native seeds. Sadly this, along with the introduction of white sugar, has contributed to health problems such as diabetes among Aboriginal people.

 

Traditionally, bread-making, a labour intensive task, was a woman’s job and was generally carried out by several women at once. It involved collecting seasonal seeds, grain, legumes, roots or nuts, grinding these into a flour, then usually adding water to form a dough. Sometimes, as with Spinifex seeds, there would be enough moisture in the seeds to form the dough directly.

 

Seeds varied depending on the time of year and the area in Australia in which the people lived. In Central Australia, native millet (Panicum decompositum; Panicum australianse) and Spinifex (Triodia) were commonly used. Wattleseed, from various species of Acacia, could also be used in the flour mix. Some seeds (such as the seed of acacia) need to be heated, hulled and then ground dry, while others (such as those of grasses) would be ground with water.

 

Women harvested the fully ripe, dry seeds of the plant by beating the grass, or pod-laden trees in the case of wattleseed, with sticks to dislodge the seeds. Some species were eaten at the green stage and, when ground, would produce a juice at the side of the millstone, which was drunk directly. Acacia seed flour has recently gained popularity throughout Australia due to its high nutritional content, hardiness, availability, and low toxicity. Due to its low glycemic index it is also often incorporated into diabetic foods.

 

In the Kimberley region of Western Australia, women observed that, after the dry season, many seeds would be gathered around the opening of harvester ants’ nests. The ants had effectively collected and husked the seed for them, and they were able to collect just the seed, making their job a lot easier. After allowing the grain to dry, they could begin to prepare the flour.

 

Some other seeds used by aboriginal women for making dough are: Pigface (Portulaca oleracea), Prickly/Elegant wattle (Acacia victoriae), Mulga (Acacia aneura), Dead finish seed (Acacia tetragonophylla) and Bush bean (Rhyncharrhena linearis).

 

 Making the flour

 

After the grain was collected, it needed to be winnowed, which was done using a coolamon, a multi-purpose wooden carrying vessel. Sometimes it needed to be winnowed several times. Once the grain was winnowed, it was ground using a millstone, to create flour. The flour was then mixed with water to make a dough and placed in hot ashes for baking, either into small buns, today referred to as johnny cakes, or a large loaf, known today as damper. The dough could also be eaten raw. Cooking was a good way to prepare the bread if the group was about to travel for some time.

 

Bread could also be made from roots and corms of plants. In the Top End of Australia, people such as the Yolngu used the lotus root and wild taro. These were ground and then mixed to a paste to make bread.

 

Water lily seed bread was also popular in the Top End. The two species of water lily used were Nelumbo nucifera and Nymphaea macrosperma. During the early part of the dry season, water lilies form an important part of the diet, with seed pods eaten raw or ground into paste.

 

Women had expert knowledge of how to de-toxify certain plant foods. The seeds of the cycad palm, Cycas media, are highly carcinogenic when raw and require elaborate treatment including shelling, crushing, leaching in running water for up to five days, then cooking. After this they are made into small loaves, which can keep for a number of weeks.

 

In Queensland, the people of the Mount Tamborine area used the Bunya Pine cone (bunya nut) endemic to the area, to make bread in this way.

 

Janet Long Nakamarra, a Warlpiri artist from Willowra in Central Australia, describes Spinifex grass damper. “Spinifex grasses are long and yellow. People used to go out hunting and collect seeds from the spinifex. They put the seeds in the coolamon, then they clean (away) the dirt, sticks and grass.

 

Once the seeds are clean, they put them on the grinding stone and grind them with a little water. They grind and grind until the seeds become very sticky and pasty. When the seeds (have) been ground then they put the damper seeds into a wooden dish and put coals on top. It takes a few hours until the damper seed is cooked. They then take the dish from the fire and prick the damper with the stick to see whether it is cooked or not. If the stick is dry they put the dish with the damper out to let it cool off. When the damper is cool then they cut the damper and eat it.

 

The creator of the damper seeds (Ngurlu) was the crested pidgeon. It had to gather seeds and put them in a pile for people to collect. It also sang creation song of the seeds. The seeds are called ‘Lukarrara/Warripinyi’.”

 

By: David Wroth, Japingka Gallery, 2015

 

(From http://www.japingka.com.au/articles/damper-seed/ 

Edited September 8, 2015 by Yueya

[Stosh]

Wild wheats are edible, similar to red wheats ,Otzi had some in his gut several thousand years ago, and for domestication of wheat to make sense , they had to be eating wild wheats before it. So how far does one have to go back to call something a proper paleo diet? 10000 years , advent of agriculture, pre amylase mutation? (or perhaps pre lactose persistance mutation? It appears people made cheese of the same milk that would give them digestive issues un treated , suggesting to me that humans have had enough time to adapt away from requiring a more ancient diet , but also suggests people ate foods that may seem inappropriate ) Wheat is problematic, but so is milk and meat and taro and .....

[dust]

In the Food Street in Beijing, I've seen it all, but couldn't eat it all. Not the skewered live scorpions anyway.

 

The scorpions are fairly tasteless. You're not missing much.

 

When I first went to Wangfujing (the famous food street), my Chinese was quite poor. I was up for eating anything back then, and purchased a skewer of what I thought was horse meat. The crunching of sharp bone alerted me to the fact that I'd just bitten the head off a little bird. Not pleasant.

 

Tonight I had roasted grouse, shot (by someone else) on the moors in the north of England. A very strange flavour, not like any other game bird I've tasted.

 

 

Scientific references are provided in the book.  Conclusions do not rely on one particular method but are, rather, interdisciplinary (as is the author's schooling), some of them from areas not under dispute, others providing circumstantial or corroborating evidence, but none of it is a matter of agenda -- she had none starting out her research, beyond trying to figure out why her originally very healthy and very scientific family eating according to all the accepted scientific recommendations were dying young of degenerative disease.   My interest was also piqued by her putting her research to the test by living for a few years with Innuit communities in the North Pole and even with a pack of wolves.  (And looking a picture of health, strength, and natural beauty at around 60.  A far cry from the emaciated look of the older vegetarians, the flabby carb addicts, and the knotted and convoluted "sports nutrition" victims alike.) 

 

Yes, many people's diets do not seem to see them comfortably into their later years. My belief, though, is not that vegetarianism itself is healthy -- a veggie diet could consist entirely of lettuce and tomatoes, which would of course be atrocious -- but that a vegetarian diet, if properly balanced, can be as healthy as any other, and perhaps even suit certain people in certain places better than any other diet. Most vegetarians and vegans are unaware of how to manage this.

 

 

Nutrition is the single most complex subject in existence, make no mistake.  It's a lifelong study for me, and I take it seriously.  "Paleo" is just a word, and it means different things to different people -- just a label, nothing more.  ("Atkins" is very wrong from my POV, though not as wrong as "macrobiotics" or "fruitarianism" or the like -- there's shades of wrong and shades of right, of course -- but it's also just a label.  What to actually put in one's mouth and what not to put in one's mouth for optimal health is the real question.  I was ultimately satisfied with the answer I got, for now.  It is always a work in progress for me, has always been, and I adjust and modify beliefs to practice and comprehension continuously -- not vice versa.  I wouldn't wish the opposite approach on the worst enemy. )

 

 

I very much agree with a large part of your outlook.

 

Thanks for your response. I'll keep the book in mind.

Edited September 9, 2015 by dustybeijing

[Karl]

Depends how long the grouse is hung. I once ate a very ripe one. Too much for me. Please, please take it away and bring me some mouse or river rat shrieked I.

 

It's usually served with bread sauce- that's the grouse not the mouse. There should also have been a mild warning about shot from the gun. It's not the done thing to shout 'what the hell is this in my grouse I've just broken a tooth.

[dust]

Depends how long the grouse is hung. I once ate a very ripe one. Too much for me. Please, please take it away and bring me some mouse or river rat shrieked I. It's usually served with bread sauce- that's the grouse not the mouse. There should also have been a mild warning about shot from the gun. It's not the done thing to shout 'what the hell is this in my grouse I've just broken a tooth.

 

I'm curious to know what curried grouse would taste like. But not particularly keen on trying it again any time soon.

[Karl]

I'm curious to know what curried grouse would taste like. But not particularly keen on trying it again any time soon.

 

If it was well ripe it has a flavour which must take a lot of getting used to. My friend tried it and didn't mind it, but then he ate a kind of sausage in France that really was quite nasty. The Chef told him it was only on the menu because the locals wanted it, but ever stubborn Dave had to have it. It was a kind of tripe sausage full of some vile smelling fatty concoction. I'm not normally that squeamish and have had the usual snail, frogs legs, Zebra, antelope, alligator, snake etc, but the sausage I couldn't even try. He managed two mouthfuls then gave up. We had to watch him devour a guinea pig in Peru- it was splayed out on the plate. That tasted all right- bit chickeny

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Grouse huh? Never ate it, only drank it, not that convinced

Guinea pig is edible and worth it?

Tried pheasant once, in calvados sauce. I was 10, out of place, forced to hang out with posh people i'd never met and they told me it'd taste just like chicken

Needless to say the poor creature was wasted on me. Everyone else who had it said it was excellent though.

 

Been vegetarian for 15 years now but i still remember game very fondly. Roe deer, rabbit, hare and boar. Italian rabbit stew with white wine, (maybe) scallions and i cant remember what else, my grandma knew a hunter and tons of recipes that sadly died with her.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Rocky Lionmouth

[Stosh]

I ate my moms cooking, I can send recipes, and challenge anyone to eat them Like jellied vegetables with chicken skin... What can I say? we were poor and the magazine said you could make it with leftovers.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Stosh

[voidisyinyang]

I hope people are noticing that grains or legumes weren't part of their diet.  They weren't part of anyone's natural diet. 

 

Wild wheat is inedible, but modified, edible modern wheat is not exactly food either.  NIH researchers showed that gluten-derived polypeptides cross into the brain and bind to the brain’s opiate receptors.  This is a super drug -- given the euphoria from eating it is mild and the alterations to the thinking process subtle and gradual enough to go unnoticed, a lifelong addiction is guaranteed.  Sugar doesn't come close -- it only stimulates serotonin receptors.  Nicotine doesn't come close -- it only binds to proprietary nicotine receptors (yes we have those in the brain) and stimulates (and also preserves) dopamine receptors.  The only things that come close to the milder but metabolically identical effects of wheat are opium, heroin, cocaine, LSD (because the gut also releases LSD-like substances in response to being exposed to gluten) and crystal meth.  Bon appetit...    

 

wheat monoculture is also the cause of white people.

 

If anyone doesn't believe me I'll post the references - but I don't want to get off topic too much.

 

If you want to cure the soda addiction then I would say deprogramming the mind control is key.

 

The key is to research exactly why corn syrup is so evil.

 

It's not just sugar here - corn syrup - not even just HFCS which is the "meme" that every one types.

 

Nope - CORN SYRUP.

 

It's not food - it's a synthetic chemical!

 

And guess what - that's why the corn association created t.v. ads saying the exact opposite - that corn syrup is the same as sugar.

 

Nope - it's a synthetic chemical.

 

Because corn syrup is a synthetic chemical when you drink soda - the addiction you get is especially nasty.

 

Corn syrup, of course is not just in soda - it's also in the buns for fast food and its in ketchup.

 

Now as a synthetic chemical how is it so nasty?

 

Well it's kind of complicated.

 

http://innersoundqigong.blogspot.com/2014/09/insulin-vagus-nerve-and-leptin.html

 

I hoped I had blogged on it to explain the details - and indeed I did.

 

Insulin, the Vagus Nerve and Leptin Resistance: The Secret of Metabolic Syndrome Epidemic and Corn Syrup

 

 

But if you do corn syrup you get increased insulin and this is inverse to leptin - so you are still hungry - and so you want to eat MORE corn syrup - and the insulin kicks in your vagus nerve to store more fat.

 

 

 the damage to the hypothalamus yes, it leads to obesity, but because it turns on that vagus nerve, because you can’t see your leptin. And when you turn on the vagus nerve that tells your pancreas to release more insulin, and that extra insulin drives energy into fat, energy deposition, not energy balance, because of the high insulin, and the insulin is driving the obesity,

 

 

Dr. Robert Lustig is the expert.

 

Anyway you can read the blog for more details.

 

Also I recommend watching that Children of the Corn Syrup vid lecture I linked - by a doctor proving that this corn syrup addiction has nothing to do with exercise - it's even an epidemic among infants!!

[Stosh]

Wheat mononoculture is the cause of white people?

What the F is that supposed to mean ?

 

[Karl]

Wheat mononoculture is the cause of white people?

What the F is that supposed to mean ?

It sounds quite funny.

Wheat flour is mostly pale in colour so that's why it created white people. Native Africans mainly ate meat which is a much darker brown when cooked, so they retained their skin colour.

 

I'm sure there is some scientific argument for it.

 

However one thing is certainly right-corn syrup is nasty stuff as is corn derived ethanol for fuel.

 

The weird thing about corn is that no one really wants it. It's as if farmers had to discover things to do with it in order for people to want to eat it. There is something inherently objectionable to corn as a food. Now they are being subsidised to plant huge acerages of the stuff- which consumes lots of water-chopping down rain forests and planting it in areas of magical top soil sustainability. It's eating human beings alive and it eats motor vehicles alive by clogging filters on newer models and corroding engine parts on older models.

 

Corn-just say no.

Edited September 12, 2015 by Karl

[Taomeow]

Well, there's some serious scientific basis for this assertion.  You would need to study the work of some renowned geneticists, notably L.L. Cavalli-Sforza and Marcus Feldman, who pioneered the field of cultural antropology, also known as gene-culture coevolution.  A bit of a minefield for the entrenched orthodoxy, this vibrant young science.  A bit of a heavy gun against agriculture, which is why a silencer was installed for purposes of mass indoctrination, which is why the masses under indoctrination haven't heard about it.  The inquiring minds may have, some of them.  "Cultural Transmission and Evolution: A Quantitative Approach" (1981) is the source of these ideas far as I recall -- been a while. 

 

White skin evolved three times in different populations, via unrelated genetic routes and not sharing the same genetic architecture.  Once in Neanderthals, to whom we are not related, and twice in our own species -- in East Asians (similar lightness, different genes underlying the effect) and Europeans.  The last and surprising one, in Europeans, for which the two genes SLC24A5 and OCA2 are responsible, is the outcome of very recent selection events, around (or less than) 10,000 years.  Which neatly dovetails with the time frame of the advent of agriculture.  Which rapidly leads to drastically impoverished diets compared to those enjoyed by hunter-gatherers.  Whose unbelievably variegated and nutrient-dense natural diets were, among other things, particularly rich in vitamin D, a crucial player in melanin production in the skin. 

 

This explains, among many other interesting things, why peoples that lived around the North Pole at the same time agriculture descended upon Europe, and proceeded to live an unchanged lifestyle for another 10,000 years, up until Europeans came to shove their agricultural blessings down their throats, are pretty dark in complexion.  This simple observable fact flies in the face of all those theories (which we are taught as "fact" as usual) about white skin being an adaptive trait to make up for the lack of sun-derived vitamin D production in northern populations.  Nope -- it's adaptive to a poor diet chronically deficient in vitamin D.  The pretty dark-skinned Inniuts, Chukchi and so on live much farther north than Scandinavians and get much less sun, but they did consume marine and land animal foods extraordinarily rich in vitamin D while Europeans were munching on bread for ten thousand years -- and so the former were getting enough of it from their diet to not need to sacrifice the protection of a darker skin shade (which curbs the excessive mutagenic effects of the sun's radiation) in order to compensate for a culturally induced chronic, transmittable generation to generation, nutritional deficiency.

Edited September 12, 2015 by Taomeow

[Stosh]

Oh, well those theories are painting with some pretty broad strokes. As far as Neander not being the same species, thats conceptual error IMO, since my ancestry probably has several percent neander genes . If one wants to draw the hominid tree properly , branches moved out of africa continuing to evolve into Neanderthal and Denisovans representing the apex of human development , later , more primitive hominids followed and numerically swamped those bigger brain evolved lines whose DNA lives on in many people today. Or one could just not claim any one line as being truly human vs the rest being some kind of dead end. As evidence compiles I think this last view is the one that will prevail. That there have always been divergences and reincorporations back into the hominid line, both within and outside africa. There are both light and dark skinned versions of caucasians africans and asians all of whom had a tendency to interbreed move around ,adapt to local circumstance, or genetically drift without adaptive cause. The color distribution hodepodge we see in recent times need not have a particular environmental or dietary cause , due to the adaptive primacy of cultural development over genetic.

But if dietetic or solar concerns foster light skin, so be it.

[Taomeow]

You are having yet another conversation with yourself, pretending something was said that was never said, and then triumphantly, indignantly, or whateverly, striking it down.  Another impressive victory over a straw man of your own making.  Maestro, trumpets please! 

[Stosh]

Thanks. But you said ,Once in neanderthals , to whom we are not related... furthermore light skinned Saami people have lived circumpolar for maybe 20000 years , much like the innuit , not growing bread.

And the innuit only recently ,1 to 5000 years moved north havent had much time to adapt, and also dont grow wheat in snow. So skin color clearly isnt about eating wheat , since the agricultural dependence on wheat ,in places, post dates light skin by thousands of years. Its just a baseless speculation. If you need more proof, note that worldwide, skin color is roughly clinal regardless of wheat consumption.I thought the end of my post was fairly accommodating, graceful even , not to point out the silliness of the wheat based skin color idea. I understand that a person not cognizant of my delicacy might construe my post off point though. (see! did it again.)

[Solefald]

You are having yet another conversation with yourself, pretending something was said that was never said, and then triumphantly, indignantly, or whateverly, striking it down.  Another impressive victory over a straw man of your own making.  Maestro, trumpets please! 

 

Hey Taomeow:

 

I'm trying to send you a PM but it says you cannot receive any new messages ?

[voidisyinyang]

Due to white racist freak-outs this will be the third time I post the references for this new science.

 

Yes it's new DNA science - it's mainstream hard science - white skin is from monocultural wheat farming.

 

In the case of skin color, the team speculates that these populations, which represented early farmers, had previously received a lot of vitamin D from their food, such as vitamin D-rich fish and animal livers, when they were hunter-gatherers. But after the advent of farming, when grains such as wheat and barley became a major part of their dinner plates, early Europeans needed to synthesize a larger amount of vitamin D in their skins. That’s when lightening up became very advantageous. The study “provides evidence that loss of regular dietary vitamin D as a result of the transition to a more strongly agricultural lifestyle may have triggered” the evolution of lighter skin, says Nina Jablonski, a leading skin color researcher at Pennsylvania State University, University Park.

 

http://news.sciencem...ns-lighter-skin

 

Johan Moan, of the university's Institute of Physics, said in a research paper: ‘In England, from 5,500-5,200 years ago the food changed rapidly away from fish as an important food source. This led to a rapid development of ... light skin.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz3ZYF2keRx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

The Mesolithic period, or Middle Stone Age was followed by the Neolithic era, when hunter-gatherers became farmers and started eating a lot more grains.

This dietary switch could be the reason Europeans developed lighter skin.

"In the food-production theory, the cereal-rich diet of Neolithic farmers lacked vitamin D," LiveScience explains, "so Europeans rapidly lost their dark-skin pigmentation only once they switched to agriculture, because it was only at that point that they had to synthesize vitamin D from the sun more readily."

Read more: http://www.businessi...1#ixzz3ZYFdWYU5

 

The two major forms are vitamin D

2

and vitamin D

3

.

Vitamin D

2

(ergocalciferol) is largely human-made and added to foods, whereas vitamin D

3

(cholecalciferol) is synthesized in the skin of humans from 7-dehydrocholesterol and is also consumed in the diet via the intake of animal-based foods. Both vitamin D

3

and vitamin D

2

are synthesized commercially and found in dietary supplements or fortified foods. The D

2

and D

3

forms differ only in their side chain structure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....books/NBK56061/

 

By comparing key parts of the DNA across the genomes of 83 ancient individuals from archaeological sites throughout Europe, the international team of researchers reported earlier this year that Europeans today are a mix of the blending of at least three ancient populations of hunter-gatherers and farmers who moved into Europe in separate migrations over the past 8000 years. The study revealed that a

massive migration of Yamnaya herders from the steppes north of the Black Sea may have brought Indo-European languages to Europe

about 4500 years ago.

Now, a new study from the same team drills down further into that remarkable data to search for genes that were under strong natural selection–including traits so favorable that they spread rapidly throughout Europe in the past 8000 years. By comparing the ancient European genomes with those of recent ones from the 1000 Genomes Project, population geneticist Iain Mathieson, a postdoc in the Harvard University lab of population geneticist David Reich, found five genes associated with changes in diet and skin pigmentation that underwent strong natural selection.

http://www.amren.com...ved-white-skin/

 

 

And the new data confirm that about 8500 years ago, early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had darker skin: They lacked versions of two genes–SLC24A5 and SLC45A2–that lead to depigmentation and, therefore, pale skin in Europeans today.

 

 

In Scandinavia the Sami are darker than the peoples to the south, and the Inuit are generally a light brown skinned people. It seems that the fairest peoples in the world reside around the shores of the Baltic sea, not in the circumpolar regions.

 

and

 

 

Quote

>In short, Sweet argues that the diets of pre-farming peoples were richer in meats and fish which provided sufficient Vitamin D so that skin color was likely light brown as opposed to pink. But with the spread of agriculture Vitamin D disappeared from the diets of northern European peoples and so only by reducing their melanin levels could they produce sufficient amounts of this nutrient to keep at bay the deleterious consequences of deficiencies. This explains why the Sami, who never adopted agriculture, remained darker. One could hypothesize that the relative swarthiness of groups like the Welsh might be due to greater reliance on fish and game as opposed to agriculture, but the point is not to explain every last detail but to clarify the overall trend.

Sweet’s essay was written in 2002. In 2005 a gene,

SLC24A5

, was implicated in explaining a large proportion (25-38%) of the between population difference in skin color for Europeans and Africans. It seems that on this locus the two populations were disjoint, they exhibited no substantial overlap. In European it seems that

6 to 10 thousand

years ago a new variant arose which subsequently swept to fixation. In the model above it seems likely that the mutation was just there at “the right place and right time.” Interestingly in East Asians

SLC24A5

exhibits the same sequence as it does in Africans. But, it seems that other loci are responsible for the lightening of the skin of East Asians recently as well, though not to the same extent as Europeans. The reason for this is likely the fact that temperate East Asia as at a far lower latitude than Europe.

 

http://blogs.discove...e/#.VU1S7EZjcxI

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

https://6000generati...7000-years-old/

 

 

Quote

“It has been assumed that it is something that happens in response to going from Africa to higher latitudes where the UV radiation is very low and you need to synthesise vitamin D in your skin. Your skin becomes lighter quite soon,” explained Dr Lalueza-Fox.

“It is obvious that this is not the case, because this guy has been in Europe for 40,000 years and he still has dark skin.” …..

[voidisyinyang]

The genetic mutation in SLC24A5 is known to be pivotal in the evolution of light skin, and is responsible for a significant part of the skin colour differences between Europeans and Africans.

Now, a new study has examined for the first time a large, uniform genetic sample collected directly in south India, and suggests that natural selection is not the sole factor in skin tone variation across the Indian sub-continent, and that cultural and linguistic traits still delineate this skin pigment genetic mutation. 

The results show that the gene is found with much higher frequency in Indo-European speaking groups that are more prevalent in the north-west of the country.

 

https://6000generations.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/distribution-of-the-light-skin-gene-in-india-shows-an-ancient-pre-agriculture-coalescence-with-europeans/#more-274

 

So it's also been proven that the wheat monoculture IndoEuropean culture spread into India, along with it white skin spreading south into South India ....

 

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/light-skin-gene-mirrors-socio-cultural-boundaries-in-indian-population

 

 

 

How Europeans Evolved White Skin

Ann Gibbons, Science Mag, April 2, 2015

 

 the new data confirm that about 8500 years ago, early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had darker skin: They lacked versions of two genes–SLC24A5 and SLC45A2–that lead to depigmentation and, therefore, pale skin in Europeans today.

 

So in Sweden you have African Alibinism as being adaptive - blue and green eyes are from an albino gene that also is linked to light skin - but this was still not dominant in central and southern Europe.

 

Seven people from the 7700-year-old Motala archaeological site in southern Sweden had both light skin gene variants, SLC24A5 and SLC45A2. They also had a third gene, HERC2/OCA2, which causes blue eyes and may also contribute to light skin and blond hair. Thus ancient hunter-gatherers of the far north were already pale and blue-eyed, but those of central and southern Europe had darker skin.

Then, the first farmers from the Near East arrived in Europe; they carried both genes for light skin. As they interbred with the indigenous hunter-gatherers, one of their light-skin genes swept through Europe, so that central and southern Europeans also began to have lighter skin. The other gene variant, SLC45A2, was at low levels until about 5800 years ago when it swept up to high frequency.

[voidisyinyang]

http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/MC1R

 

• oculocutaneous albinism - course of condition modified by mutations in the MC1R gene

• Certain genetic changes in the MC1R gene modify the appearance of people with oculocutaneous albinism type 2. This form of albinism, which is caused by mutations in the OCA2 gene, is characterized by fair hair, light-colored eyes, creamy white skin, and vision problems. People with genetic changes in both the OCA2 and MC1R genes have many of the usual features of oculocutaneous albinism type 2; however, they typically have red hair instead of the usual yellow, blond, or light brown hair seen with this condition.

[Stosh]

Nothing I said claims racial superiority for myself ,nor inferiority for anyone else. Thats a cheap and false accusation. Its slander.

This may blow your mind, but heres the fact, the scientific community is in continual flux regarding many things and naively swallowing hogwash because someone wrote a recent paper promoting it , is the error of the reader.

 

That which I already outlined should be sufficient to dispel the conclusions youre promoting, the trend of paler skin color in situations where agriculture development necessitates greater production of vitamin D, doesnt hold true in either the New World nor in the Orient. Neither would it apply to Neanderthals adaptation.

Finally, if you looked at some saami, youd see what it was that some people chose to call swarthy is no darker than I am. Youve managed to make the unhealthy consumption of high fructose corn syrup into some kind of race issue by ignoring that which doesnt fit the paper you read naively.

[Rara]

I'm addicted to soda and I'm trying to stop drinking it. Everyday I get a craving. Any suggestions?

Yo, I used to have a HUGE sugar problem. My main motivation for kicking the habit was learning about the hereditary heart conditions and diabetes in my family. I was never too big on soda, but chocolate....MY GOD!

 

The work-around? Brainwashing myself with social media of my favourite athletes/sport people. Subscribing on Youtube to various fitness and wellbeing channels.

 

Basically, I pick role models and research their diets and try my best to copy them. Like, obsessively. It's done the trick now.

 

To satisfy my sweet tooth now, I have a daily "Trek" protein bar. Sugar free with natural sweeteners. I have the odd bit of honey here or there but my diet is now mainly meat, vegetables, oats, and potatoes or rice.

[Rara]

Oh and juicing is good once over the binge. Carrot, Apple, celery.

I would say cutting fruit for a bit would help....worked for me

[Karl]

I would say cutting fruit for a bit would help....worked for me

 

Personally it's one of the only ways to get fruit into me. Never been a big fan.

[voidisyinyang]

Europeans did not inherit pale skins from Neanderthals

 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22308-europeans-did-not-inherit-pale-skins-from-neanderthals/

 

Notice the defensive diversionary reactions to white skin from malnutrition!

 

haha.

 

No - it's from Neanderthals! Nope.

 

 

 

Two mutations responsible for light skin, however, tell quite a different story. Both seem to have been rare in the Mesolithic, but present in a large majority by the Bronze Age (3,000 years later), both in Europe and the steppe. As both areas received a significant influx of Middle Eastern farmers during this time, one might speculate that the mutations arose in the Middle East. They were probably then driven to high levels by natural selection, as they allowed the production of sufficient vitamin D further north despite relatively little sunlight, and/or better suited people to the new diet associated with farming.

 

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-06-ancient-dna-reveals-europeans-skin.html#jCp

 

http://phys.org/news/2015-06-ancient-dna-reveals-europeans-skin.html