Well, yes and no. A lot of cultures live almost exclusively on carnivorous diets, in which vegetable fiber is extremely rare (if eaten at all). Evidently the fats in the diet serve as lubricants in the absence of the mechanical action that fibers serve in the intestines.

I'm not disputing that fibers help "push things along" by absorbing water, adding bulk, etc. But are we overeating them? Do we really need to be making a conscious effort to add or supplement them in our diets?

FWIW: I'm not pushing some sort of anti-fiber claim or agenda here. I'm neutral on the subject. I'm simply inquiring.

> A lot of cultures live almost exclusively on carnivorous diets, in which vegetable fiber is extremely rare (if eaten at all).

Eskimos' diet is not a parameter to anyone other than Eskimos. Those populations have adapted to survive on those diets, and even then, with drawbacks to health and life expectancy. Also, Eskimos are certainly the exception, saying a lot of cultures live on meat only is a stretch.

> I'm not disputing that fibers help "push things along" by absorbing water, adding bulk, etc. But are we overeating them? Do we really need to be making a conscious effort to add or supplement them in our diets?

Fibers are integral part of a diet with minimal amounts of fruits, vegetables or grains. You don't need to add fibers unless all you eat is processed food.

I think that depends in part on who your ancestors are -- I.e. do you have genes from a carnivorous culture?

My exhusband is part Viking, basically. They ate a lot of meat, in part because they lived so far north that you couldn't grow enough plantbased foods. My ex ate a very high meat diet. Our sons eat less meat than he did, but they are 1/4 Norwegian whereas he is 1/2. Still, they tolerate more meat in their diet than I do. I am convinced there is a genetic component here.

(Yes I know: Anecdotal and all that.)

The vikings actually were mostly crop farmers. Due to the weird way Caribbean waters flow up through the Atlantic and past Brittian.

http://www.danishnet.com/info.php/vikings/farming-152.html

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that Vikings only ate meat. Just that they appear to have eaten a lot more meat than most other Europeans (I am mostly German and Irish in ancestory). That isn't inconsistent with my point that genes likely influence one's tolerance in this regard.

Even the site you link to talks about lamb and other meat being a regular part of the Viking diet. In Europe, the children's rhyme "peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold" refers to the common practice of serving some sort of hot meal at lunch and cold leftovers at dinner. Peas porridge was likely either vegetarian or had very little meat in it. When I had some poetry class in college, it pointed out that "Greasy Jane stirs the pot" suggested a servant in an upper class household preparing a dish containing meat, which was something of a luxury item. The "greasy" imagery indicates it contained meat. Peasants could not afford meat on a routine basis. Further back in history, Romans ate far more eggs than meat.

My ex was a history buff. We talked a fair amount about things like that.

Sorry for the sloppy wording earlier.

"We were not created to evacuate bricks."

"Created?" This is definitely the wrong concept to refer to here. The correct sentence is (correct because it takes mountains of scientific evidence into account):

"We were not evolved to evacuate bricks."

Non-digestible fiber helps your bowels move. Digestible fiber actually slows bowel action.