[decimon]

The article fails to mention what effect vitamin D (or lack thereof) had on melanin or melanotropin production. Pigmentation is controlled by melanotropin and the relative lack of constant sunlight in northern climes could cause a reduction in melanotropin release from the pituitary gland, thus causing less melanin pigmentation.

I don't think they're saying that vitamin D effects melanin production. This would be survival of the fittest and the fittest would have been the lighter skinned in a northern agricultural society.

[Mogollon]

I don't think they're saying that vitamin D effects melanin production.

But that was the point I was making! The degree of pigmentation is determined by the amount of melanin in the skin not the amount of vitamin D that a person ingests. The article is saying that since they switched food sources that may (or may not have) reduced the intake of vitamin D, their skin became lighter in complexion. That does not make scientific sense. Also, there are several farm grown foods that have adequate minimum daily requirements of vitamin D (milk, grains, etc.). I think the article is B.S..

[Grimmy]

Didn’t domestication of food critters and animal husbandry develop along side cultivation?

I don’t understand why settling down and growing food would, necessarily, mean going meatless or less meaty at supper time.

It seems to me, if anything, that the settled food growers would have had steadier and more consistent access to foods, seeing as how they were no longer dependant on critter migrations and only eating what they managed to chase down and catch.

Also, what was to keep the grower dudes from hunting between growing and harvesting seasons?

Maybe the first batch of growers were vegan? Vegans tend to be rather pale and listless.