It's everywhere. Why not just eat it instead of searching for veggies and meat which are more difficult to have?

top 56 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 59 points 7 months ago (5 children)

There's a reason grass is so common - it's because it's a wildly effective life strategy. Grass is actually quite hard to eat - there's basically no nutrition in the leaves themselves, and grass evolved to incorporate silica "needles" in its leaves, so that it wears down your teeth when you try to eat it anyways.

Not to say that it's impossible to eat grass, but you need to undergo a ton of highly specialized adaptations to make it possible. For most animals (including humans), it's just not worth the effort

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    I'd like a source on the silica needles?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Basically all grasses contain silica phytoliths but they likely don't significantly contribute to teeth wear. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305440306001245

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 7 months ago

    Smarts required more calories.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Grass is mostly cellulose and lignin. Those molecules are difficult to break down.

    Animals that can digest the cellulose either need a really long digestive track or to do something really gross to keep the stuff in their digestive track longer.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Any chemistry we could perform to make it more viable? E.g. cook it with alcohol?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    A lot of grass. Like lawn grass. Is wheat.

    If you let it grow more.

    So actually we did evolve to eat grass.

    Cat grass is wheat grass.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Rye, barley, oats, and rice are also grasses.

    Rye used to be a weed that evolved to resemble wheat so early farmers wouldn't uproot it. But it evolved to resemble wheat so much that it became an edible crop in its own right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 7 months ago

    It's all down to the way the brain works. Our brains use up something like 20% of our calories when standing still doing nothing.

    Grass does not supply the amount of calories and micronutrients needed to keep the human brain running, simply because it is low on both of those things.

    Grass eaters have multiple stomachs, slow digestion and graze pretty much the whole time they're awake, and because their brains use a lot less energy than human brains, the balance works out.

  • source
  • [–] 36 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    All forms of grass:

    • Corn
    • Wheat
    • Barley
    • Rice
    • etc
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    We eat the seeds, I presume OP refers to the leaves/blades of grass which are also present in species that aren't cereals

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Good point. This made me look further, but some of these also are just the seeds:

    • Bamboo
    • Bluegrass
    • Crabgrass
    • Foxtail Grass
    • Goosegrass
    • Lemongrass
    • Wood Millet
    • Orchardgrass

    https://smartgardenhome.com/edible-plants/grasses/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago*

    Plants are selected to not be great to eat, basically. Cellulose in particular is almost impossible to biochemically break back down (but not completely), and is a pretty good structural material, too.

    Seeds are often still palatable once you get through the shell, basically because turning into a baby plant is an already tough design constraint. Some plants still have tricks - notice that it's the spiciest part of a hot pepper.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    The thing is that cows can't digest grass either. They have an extra stomach along their oesophagus which is basically just a pouch where the grass goes in first. There are a lot of bacteria and they can digest grass. Then these bacteria grow because they eat the grass.

    Then the cow swallows these bacteria and digests those. That's where a cow gets their calories from.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Humans can't digest anything without bacteria either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Take the tier zoo aproach. Would you rather use evelution points on grass or evolution points on being big brain.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 7 months ago

    Because it requires a lot of biological investment to eat it. It's rough on teeth and requires rumination or similar calorically expensive techniques to extract much nutrition. We evolved in the opposite path and optimized heavily for easily digested foods. We then take it a step further and cook them breaking the difficult to digest parts into an easer to digest form.

    Also we do eat grasses, but only their seeds and fruits. Wheat, maize, rice, and bananas are all grasses

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago

    I'd rather evolve the ability to photosynthesize, now that we have indoor lighting. It'd save a whole bunch of time and grocery bills.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    Grass is nutritionally poor. The reason we are smart in many ways is due to our varied diet. Even if we had evolutionary gone in that direction we would be dumber. Eating grass is a specialisation.

    Also, we would not look like we do. If you look at the digestive track of a horse or a cow, you will see that they are longer. Carnivores have the shortest and we as omnivores are in between. Being an omnivote is a good thing and in the end, we can get more nutrition by hunting and gathering than by grassing.

    Worth noting, while individual cows' behaviour and preferences vary greatly, the time spent feeding and ruminating usually adds up to 4-7 hours a day. Our society would be were we are today if we spent 7 hours as a species eating grass in order to make ir worthwhile.

    Evolution can only evolve so much within an existing animal especies in order to specialise or fit in a survival niche. Hence you do not see sea crabs that can fly or flies that live in the bottom of the sea.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago

    Return to cow

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 7 months ago

    It’s more efficient to let others eat the grass, and then eat them

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    Why haven’t cows evolved sentience?

    Grazing lifestyle doesn’t favor big expensive brains.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago

    Essentially as others said, because you need to invest heavily in your gut and metabolism to get enough energy out of grass alone. You don't evolve into what you want, you evolve into what you can while you are pressured to do so. There is currently no pressure to rely solely on grass, that pressure hasn't been on us for millions of years. Our foods may be trickier to find but on average they yield more energy compared to grass.

    But don't get me wrong. It's a valid strategy. Our ancestors did have the window of opportunity at some point, and they took it... We were something more like rats back then, the grass eaters niche had room. Grass was everywhere. And our cousins back then adapted and spent practically the whole day foraging for grass in order to get by. But you know what also was everywhere? Trees. And our ratlike ancestors that were more inclined to climb, jump, and spot predators from above found it easier to stick to the omnivore diet.

    Adapting to trees lets you move into places with less grass... Like jungles and swamps. And while you are there for a couple million years you will have other problems to solve, problems that require wits, sharp vision, and social skills. You don't have time to forage 18hrs every day and grass isn't as abundant here anyway.

    If you don't rely solely on grass you will probably fare better during winter. Especially during those ice ages. By the time you have grass as an option again you are pretty much an ape and pivoting back to it makes no sense.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    We evoled away from eating grass and other such things, it's why our appendix are now almost useless.

  • source
  • I think that grass don’t have enough energy to sustain our brain and its development.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Not after chicken nuggies tho?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    Yeah, that was the lazy answer. The more correct is, because grass contains stuff (mainly lignin, reminds me of this i found this morning) that's hard to digest with a normal stomach. So cows & co. have multiple gastric ... sections(? MΓ€gen), the first of which contains microrganisms specialized in breaking down lignin. The following gastrics are more the usual bio-chemical kind, to digest the microorganisms.

    In short, eating grass needs a specialized process and you can't eat anything else as main food source, (they do occasionally eat a chicken or critter).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    That random mutation didn't happen, basically.

    Evolution is a purely subtractive process. It doesn't design things in, it just removes poorly-designed creatures (and all hypothetical offspring) until only things equipped to survive are left. And obviously, there are things to eat that aren't grass.

    Edit: Herbivores can be smart, even the grazers. Look at elephants.

    I can't believe how many other replies heap that fallacy on top of teleological evolution. Apes are mostly herbivorous anyway, WTF.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Evolution is not subtractive. Bacteria didn't evolve from humans

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    In the sense humans are "better" or "greater" or something? Well, consider the global biomass of bacteria compared to humans - they seem to be doing okay. Or that there's more bacterial cells in you than human cells. Single-celled yeast evolved from mushrooms, barnacles evolved from something like shrimp or crabs, and there are eukaryotes that lost eukaryotic features like mitochondria because they didn't need them to survive.

    Buuut that's besides the point. I'm not sure how to make it more clear, but I meant subtractive as in selection is just about who dies. Random mutation is what adds features and new species.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago

    Because yo mama so fat she'd eat it all

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • If you look at all the other animals in the world that do eat grass, we did. But the "we" that eat grass, look like those animals, with those traits.
    The "we" that became smart became so due to what we evolved to eat and do.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    We used to be able to eat grass.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Why? Because otherwise we wouldn't exist and that wouldn't be in line with the future.

  • source