Skip to content

Cooking food: Humanity’s “killer app”

February 21, 2009
Field kitchen

Field kitchen

I’m going to a potluck dinner tonight and was thinking about what I should bring.  Creamed spinach?  Roasted brussels sprouts?  Can’t decide.  Cooking is fun.  Turns out we’ve been doing it a long time, and Richard Wrangham over at Harvard University has gone so far as to say that cooking food is humanity’s “killer app,” and has been for over 200,000 years:

YOU are what you eat, or so the saying goes…It is not just you who are what you eat, but the entire human species. And with Homo sapiens, what makes the species unique in Dr Wrangham’s opinion is that its food is so often cooked.

Cooking is a human universal. No society is without it. No one other than a few faddists tries to survive on raw food alone. And the consumption of a cooked meal in the evening, usually in the company of family and friends, is normal in every known society. Moreover, without cooking, the human brain (which consumes 20-25% of the body’s energy) could not keep running. Dr Wrangham thus believes that cooking and humanity are coeval.

In fact, as he outlined to the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), in Chicago, he thinks that cooking and other forms of preparing food are humanity’s “killer app”: the evolutionary change that underpins all of the other—and subsequent—changes that have made people such unusual animals.

Humans became human, as it were, with the emergence 1.8m years ago of a species called Homo erectus. This had a skeleton much like modern man’s—a big, brain-filled skull and a narrow pelvis and rib cage, which imply a small abdomen and thus a small gut. Hitherto, the explanation for this shift from the smaller skulls and wider pelvises of man’s apelike ancestors has been a shift from a vegetable-based diet to a meat-based one. Meat has more calories than plant matter, the theory went. A smaller gut could therefore support a larger brain.

Dr Wrangham disagrees. When you do the sums, he argues, raw meat is still insufficient to bridge the gap. He points out that even modern “raw foodists”, members of a town-dwelling, back-to-nature social movement, struggle to maintain their weight—and they have access to animals and plants that have been bred for the table. Pre-agricultural man confined to raw food would have starved.

Head over to the Economist for the rest of the story.

Image thanks to the Midieval/Renaissance Food Clip-Art Collection.

Advertisements
One Comment leave one →
  1. July 10, 2014 3:38 pm

    I have been browsing online more than 4 hours today, yet I never
    found any interesting article like yours. It’s pretty worth enough for me.
    Personally, if all website owners and bloggers made good
    content as you did, the internet will be a lot more useful than ever before.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: