• Putrid meat was quite likely on the menu

    From Primum Sapienti@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 28 22:44:16 2023
    https://www.academia.edu/76351480/2022_Speth_and_Morin_Putrid_Meat_in_the_Tropics_It_Wasnt_Just_for_Inuit_

    Paleo Anthropology
    2022:2: 327−383. https://doi.org/10.48738/2022.iss2.114

    Putrid Meat in the Tropics: It Wasn’t Just for Inuit
    John Speth; Eugene Morin

    ABSTRACT
    It is widely known that traditional northern
    hunter–gatherers such as the Inuit included putrid meat,
    fish, and fat in their diet, although the ubiquity and
    dietary importance of decomposing animal foods seem
    often to have been underappreciated. There is no evidence
    that these arctic and subarctic foragers suffered from major
    outbreaks of botulism (Clostridium botulinum), or from the
    toxic metabolites of other pathogens such as Listeria
    monocytogenes or Salmonella spp., until the 1970s and
    1980s when Euroamericans introduced more "sanitary"
    methods for putrefying native foods. While many ethnologists,
    nutritionists, and public health officials working in these
    high-latitude regions are generally aware of the importance
    of putrefied foods among such peoples, most scholars,
    regardless of discipline, would not expect similar practices
    to have been commonplace in the tropics, especially in hot,
    humid environments like the lowland rainforests of the Congo
    Basin. And yet a "deep dive" into the ethnohistoric literature
    of sub-Saharan Africa, and elsewhere in the tropics and
    sub-tropics of the Old and New World, shows that both
    hunter–gatherers and traditional small-scale rural farmers
    commonly ate thoroughly putrefied meat, fish, and fat with
    relative impunity, consuming some of it raw, frequently
    cooking it, but often barely so. Not only did tropical peoples
    regularly eat putrefied animal foods, these ethnohistoric
    accounts make it clear that, at least in many regions, the
    Indigenous populations generally preferred it that way.
    Equally surprising, perhaps, is the fact that this preference
    for putrid meat remained widespread in equatorial Africa
    and in many other tropical and sub-tropical regions well into
    the first quarter of the 20th century, only fading from view
    around the time of WWI or thereabouts. Combining the
    insights gained by looking at the consumption of putrid meat
    in both northern and tropical environments, several
    interesting implications become evident. First, it is clear that
    the disgust response with regard to the taste, smell, and sight
    of rotten meat and maggots is not a hardwired human
    universal, but more likely a learned cultural response, one
    that is closely linked to European colonization, Westernization,
    urbanization, and industrialization. Second, the capacity for
    both northern and tropical peoples to consume putrid meat with
    impunity suggests that their ability to resist the toxic effects of
    the metabolites of C. botulinum and other pathogens most likely
    stems in large part from the environmental priming of their gut
    floras and immune systems through early childhood exposure to
    pathogens rather than from genetic factors. This conclusion fits
    well with findings from recent microbiome studies, including
    studies of the gut floras of monozygotic twins living in different
    households. Third, putrefaction provides many of the same
    benefits that one gets by cooking, because it effectively
    "pre-digests" meat and fat prior to ingesting them. Moreover, in
    tropical environments putrefaction occurs very rapidly and
    automatically, and requires little investment of time and energy
    on the part of the consumer. Finally, we suggest that, by eating
    putrid meat and fat, early hominins could have acquired many of
    the benefits of cooking, but at much lower cost, and quite likely
    long before they gained control of fire.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From littoral.homo@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 29 04:17:47 2023
    Op woensdag 29 maart 2023 om 06:44:19 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:

    Putrid Meat in the Tropics: It Wasn’t Just for Inuit

    No, also for kudu runners... :-DDD

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to Primum Sapienti on Wed Mar 29 05:10:12 2023
    Primum Sapienti wrote:

    Putrid Meat in the Tropics: It Wasn’t Just for Inuit

    There are some who claim that the Romans seemed to favor their beef either putrid or "on the verge," so to speak. But do the Google: Sailors, the poor.. you
    name it and they ate things that would cause you to vomit profusely.

    Meat was expensive, and rare, for the poor and refrigerators haven't been around for long, out of the more than 2 million year history of our genus.

    "Putrid" meat was the norm!

    ...the great scene from the Battleship Potemkin where, was it the doctor? Anyhow, the officer explains that it's "Just maggots" and then tells the sailors
    to wash them off the meat with sea water. Hey! Why am I working from
    memory here when I have Google:

    https://youtu.be/7UWX0oFPJak

    When you kill a game bird you're supposed to let it "Age" for one to three days.

    Some say longer. Here:

    https://www.gundogmag.com/editorial/why-you-should-age-game-birds/462439

    We're not talking something that looks like a chicken in the fridge. This is the
    bird. The plucking & gutting comes AFTER the aging... YUM!

    But no matter what, they needed DHA to grow the large brains and they never were going to get it from fresh, putrid or even freeze dried meats.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/713001423881797632

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)