When did our species start eating meat? The case of vegan proponent Dr Marcus Vinnari

A lecturer in economics at Helsingfors university recently claimed that meat-eating is a new thing. The lecturer belong to those outliers (~1 %) who abstain from animal source food in favor of a vegan alternative. His reference is a chart from statistics Finland spanning from 1950 and forward. Common knowledge in anthropology, on the other hand, dates the introduction of animal source food (ASF) 3.5 million years before the present. Science also demonstrates that cognitive functioning depends on the nutrients found in ASF. The lecturer's behavior demonstrates lack of rational prospective thinking and is consistent with confirmation bias and/or cognitive dissonance. Is the lecturer's approach ethical in the academic environment?

Please support the blog via Swish (Sweden) or MobilePay (Finland).

Marcus Vinnari, an economist employed as lecturer at University of Helsingfors, and a supporter of veganism, recently claimed that meat-eating is a new thing.

"Every now and then you come across the argument that in food culture there should be a reason to consider "pericent" Chinese. That would certainly be a very good direction. For example, the current consumption of meat is a fairly recent trend #broiler" (Google translate).

Dr Vinnari's claim was communicated on Twitter in uralfinnish, a remote language spoken mostly by the northern and northeast part of the Finland, as opposed to Swedish which for the past 1000 years has been the language around the Baltic sea, including southern part of Finland, or English which is the Lingua franca in the Academy.

When questioned about the validity of his statement, a common tradition between scholars, Dr Vinnari opted to block the conversation.

As a psychological scientist I'm used to open-minded conversations and viewpoint diversity, as well as rejection in favor of cherry picking. Disagreement is the very reason we should reason so to speak. But in order to do so we have to tame the devil within us (Pinker, 2011).

For the past years I have established a network with other scientists across the globe. And to my knowledge, also economists and historians have the similar mindset for openness for conversations and viewpoint diversity.

So why on Earth would a lecturer in economics at Helsingfors university block a conversation with a psychological scientist?

Here's some important things to take into account.

Economists and scientists use different approaches.

Link tog source.

Link tog source.

Dr Vinnari use economics, I use science.

Language is important. The Lingua franca of the academy is English. Uralfinnish culture is known to be based on tribalism (Pagel, 2019).

I use English whereas Dr Vinnari uses uralfinnish for his communication. That means that ze blocks 99,9 % of the academics who are active on Twitter. Whether this is on purpose or not is hard to know.

There's another import difference, the one between Finland long-standing Swedish culture, which is based on renaissance- and enlightenment thinking, which brought the universities to Finland, and ural-Finnish which is based fennomani and romantic nationalism. I belong to the Swedish part, and Dr. Vinnari to uralfinnish part.

In a later conversation, where another expert asked about the references used for the claim that meat-eating is a new thing, Dr Vinnari gave the following respons, and I quote:

"It's a chart from Statistics Finland. We have the best statistics in the world" (Vinnari).

When facts from a blog were presented, Dr Vinnari made the following response ...

And when confronted with some common knowledge, for example Mann (2018), Dr Vinnari replied:

According to anthropological research, our ancestors started eating meat and bone marrow some 3.5 million years ago (McPherron et al. 2010; Mann, 2018; Thompson et al. 2019). One implication is that, as a consequence, their brains started to expand, from the occipetal Lobe and forward, and their guts reduced (Aiello and Wheeler, 1995). Eventually, our genus and species emerges 2.8 and 0.32 million years before the present respectively (Callaway, 2017; Villmoare et al. 2015). Another implication is that social cognition, symbolic thinking, and executive functioning, including prospective thinking, emerged (Coolidge and Wynn, 2018; Gilbert and Wilson, 2007; Szpunar et al. 2014).

Veganism, that is, the idea to abstain from the animal source diet that opened the door för our species was originally introduced as a means to clean the body in preparation för the second coming of Jesus (Swedenborg (1688- 1772)), and to suppress carnal urges (White (1827-1915); Seventh Day Adventist church) (Österberg, 2019).

2019. BBC reported about är baby girl that suffered from veganism.

Link to source.

In Aug 2022, a vegan mother was jailed after her Chile died because of veganism.

Link to source.

A recent systemic review and a meta-analys concluded that the decision to abstain from animal source food is associated with lack of mental wellbeing (Dobersek et al. 2020, 2021). Plante et al  2019 showed that people who abstain from ASF has issues with social relations. Ede (2019) made a case that The brain needs animal fat.

In 1979, psychologist's Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky (1937-1996) published one of several papers that showed how humans' inborn capacity for prospection was interrupted by a combination of perceptions and memories (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979).  These are biases or mental fallacies.

In a famous study from the 1950s, researchers Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schacter infiltrated a sect who had conformed to the idea that a flood would swamp the planet in the near future. On page three the researcher famously wrote:

Link to source here.

Conclusion. Our species rely on animal source food to acquire the many (>30) micro nutrients we need to sustain physical and mental health. People who abstain from animal source food (1-2 %) report lack of mental well-being, neuroticism, and issues with social relations. Dr Vinnari is a Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and like other Sapiens who abstain from animal source food (1-2%), Dr Vinnari seems to be stuck in his conviction, lack rational prospective thinking, and have issues with social relations. When:

• encounter viewpoint diversity, he turns away (blocking).
• presented with facts and figures he questions the sources (Its very nice that we have blogs. People can write what they like; Nah).
• appealed to take Logic into account, Dr Vinnari ends the conversation:

Is it really ethical for a lecturer to promote the idea that meat-eating started seventy years ago?

What do Finns' eating habits look like? the answer varies with the choice of references (Swedish below)

Please support the blog via Swish (Sweden) or MobilePay (Finland).