What if I told you, in the US, the opposite is true? That, on average, people ate more meat in 1830
Then I would ask you what your sources are.
If people aren't eating meat, what are they eating? grains? sugars? Vegetables, fruits, legumes, whole grains, nuts, etc. Most people in the US who eat tons of sugar are not vegetarians.
> Most people in the US who eat tons of sugar are not vegetarians.
How do you know this? Have you studied the sugar consumption of vegetarians?
Really? Is that true? What groups are you talking about?
> It's only when the 20th century rolled around, and meat became cheap/available everywhere, that people started eating meat once a day, leading to a spread of all kinds of diseases, heart attacks, cholesterol, cancer, etc.
Ok, interesting hypothesis. So assuming this is true, people in 1830 ate less meat and had less heart disease than people in 1930, right?
What if I told you, in the US, the opposite is true? That, on average, people ate more meat in 1830 and had less heart disease than people in 1930?
If people aren't eating meat, what are they eating? grains? sugars? How would you create a study to test your hypothesis than meat consumption causes heart disease? Has this been studied? What were the results?