Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Neanderthals wouldn't have eaten their sprouts either
PhysOrg.com ^ | August 12th, 2009 | Denholm Barnetson

Posted on 08/12/2009 11:42:29 AM PDT by decimon

They have found that a gene in modern humans that makes some people dislike a bitter chemical called phenylthiocarbamide, or PTC, was also present in Neanderthals hundreds of thousands of years ago.

The scientists made the discovery after recovering and sequencing a fragment of the TAS2R38 gene taken from 48,000-year-old Neanderthal bones found at a site in El Sidron, in northern Spain, they said in a report released Wednesday by the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC).

"This indicates that variation in bitter taste perception predates the divergence of the lineages leading to Neanderthals and modern humans," they said.

Substances similar to PTC give a bitter taste to green vegetables such as Brussels sprouts, broccoli and cabbage as well as some fruits.

But they are also present in some poisonous plants, so having a distaste for it makes evolutionary sense.

"The sense of bitter taste protects us from ingesting toxic substances," the report said.

(Excerpt) Read more at physorg.com ...


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: beansprouts; creation; dietandcuisine; evolution; godsgravesglyphs; neandertal; neandertals; neanderthal; neanderthaldiet; neanderthals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-55 next last

1 posted on 08/12/2009 11:42:30 AM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Bitter harvest ping.


2 posted on 08/12/2009 11:43:26 AM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Sweet tooth?


3 posted on 08/12/2009 11:43:57 AM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: decimon
"The sense of bitter taste protects us from ingesting toxic substances"

That describes broccoli to a 'T'.

4 posted on 08/12/2009 11:45:45 AM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear (These fragments I have shored against my ruins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon; GodGunsGuts; metmom
"This indicates that variation in bitter taste perception predates the divergence of the lineages leading to Neanderthals and modern humans," they said.

Humans and neanderthals are unrelated. The neanderthal has been ruled out as a plausible ancestor for modern man simply and precisely because the genetic gulf is too wide and the genetic gap between us and anything preceeding the neanderthal would have been wider. There is precisely nothing on this planet which we could be descended from via anything resembling evolution.

There has never been any "divergence of the lineages leading to Neanderthals and modern humans" and any similarities between us and neanderthals amount to similar design principles having been used.

5 posted on 08/12/2009 11:52:07 AM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon
"These (bitter) compounds can be toxic if ingested in large quantities and it is therefore difficult to understand the evolutionary existence of individuals who cannot detect them."

And then there are people like me that not only don't taste the bitter but think the sprouts taste sweet. What sort of evolutionary advantage is it supposed to give me to think that something that might be poisonous is candy?
6 posted on 08/12/2009 11:58:01 AM PDT by TomOnTheRun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Ecoli scare.


7 posted on 08/12/2009 11:59:13 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wendy1946
Substances similar to PTC give a bitter taste to green vegetables such as Brussels sprouts, broccoli and cabbage as well as some fruits. But they are also present in some poisonous plants, so having a distaste for it makes evolutionary sense. "The sense of bitter taste protects us from ingesting toxic substances," the report said.

They've never seen a two year old in action.

8 posted on 08/12/2009 11:59:43 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: decimon; Slings and Arrows
So is there someone who has made a life's work out of examining fossilized neanderthal scat?

"Don't become an archeologist, little girl. You'll just grow up to brush the teeth of old monsters." < /Simpsons >

9 posted on 08/12/2009 12:01:01 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon
"Sweet tooth?"

There was no such thing as Brussel Sprouts, Cauliflower or Broccoli around when there were Neanderthals. These (and others) were all developed from the wild English cabbage plant in recent times.

10 posted on 08/12/2009 1:37:29 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam
There was no such thing as Brussel Sprouts, Cauliflower or Broccoli around when there were Neanderthals.

Rereading, I see they don't claim there were such vegetables then. Those are just examples of plants carrying the bitter chemical.

11 posted on 08/12/2009 2:06:21 PM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: blam
These (and others) were all developed from the wild English cabbage plant in recent times.

What were the cultivators thinking? Maybe it was a way to sell more butter or cheese, or as cheap pig food.

12 posted on 08/12/2009 2:08:01 PM PDT by Reeses (Leftism is powered by the evil force of envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: metmom

The whole world knows a little kid’s reaction to alcohol and tobacco is correct; why would anybody think that same kid’s reaction to green vegetables was wrong??


13 posted on 08/12/2009 5:10:35 PM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
So is there someone who has made a life's work out of examining fossilized neanderthal scat?

Did you ever have any doubts?

14 posted on 08/12/2009 6:08:03 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows (Crazy is the new sane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wendy1946
Humans and neanderthals are unrelated. The neanderthal has been ruled out as a plausible ancestor for modern man simply and precisely because the genetic gulf is too wide and the genetic gap between us and anything preceeding the neanderthal would have been wider. There is precisely nothing on this planet which we could be descended from via anything resembling evolution.

If I understand you correctly, you seem to be under the impression that the article is saying that homo-sapiens descended from neandethals. 

Without addressing what appears to be your skeptisism in the theory of evolution, that's not what the article said.  Its saying (and this is the currently accepted view among evolution believers (of which I am one)) that homo-sapiens and neanderthals each diverged from a common line of ancensters, a third undetermined clasification of hominid, not one from the other. 



15 posted on 08/12/2009 6:22:03 PM PDT by MichiganMan (Oprah: Commercial Beef Agriculture=Bad, Commercial Chicken Agriculture=Good...Wait, WTF???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MichiganMan
skeptisism

Yep, that's me, spelling champ. sigh.

Anyways, reading over my post (which I obviously didn't do enough of before posting) I see that my statement regarding a third undetermined classification of hominid implies that there were no human species between the common ancestral species of homo-sapiens and neanderthals. I don't believe that has yet be determined one way or the other.

16 posted on 08/12/2009 6:31:38 PM PDT by MichiganMan (Oprah: Commercial Beef Agriculture=Bad, Commercial Chicken Agriculture=Good...Wait, WTF???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MichiganMan

That’s not what I claimed. What I DID claim is that “too remote to be descended from” is a transitive relationship, i.e. that if the neanderthal is too remote for us to be descended from (he is), then so is anything further back in history.


17 posted on 08/12/2009 6:38:35 PM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wendy1946
That’s not what I claimed. What I DID claim is that “too remote to be descended from” is a transitive relationship, i.e. that if the neanderthal is too remote for us to be descended from (he is), then so is anything further back in history.

Huh?  Why?  

18 posted on 08/12/2009 6:45:03 PM PDT by MichiganMan (Oprah: Commercial Beef Agriculture=Bad, Commercial Chicken Agriculture=Good...Wait, WTF???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MichiganMan

If the proposition doesn’t seem obvious enough on the face of it, try looking at pictures of the so-called common ancestor (”archaic homo sapiens”). A neanderthal in a white shirt and tie would get funny looks in NYC in daylight but people wouldn’t turn tail and run. The archaic homo sapiens.... everybody would run.


19 posted on 08/12/2009 7:09:24 PM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wendy1946

YEah......SOOOOOOOOOOO different.

Too different to even be related in any manner.

20 posted on 08/13/2009 5:04:40 AM PDT by ElectricStrawberry (27th Infantry Regiment....cut in half during the Clinton years...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson