Tall Tales: Earth.com Serves Evolutionary Clickbait

Another meat-apologist headline is doing the rounds, this time from Earth.com, claiming that early humans took a "giant evolutionary leap" when they started eating meat. The article clings to a new study like it's proof that burgers built civilisation. But if you actually read the research, it's clear this isn't science, it's storytelling.

Here’s what the study actually found: a genetic variant (rs34590044-A) that boosts expression of the ACSF3 gene, which helps cells process certain amino acids, particularly threonine. This can increase basal metabolic rate (BMR) and potentially contribute to greater height. Mice with the variant grew longer and used more energy, especially on high-threonine diets. That’s it.

Nowhere do the researchers claim that meat made humans smart, tall, or socially advanced. In fact, the variant predates modern humans, it arose about 653,000 years ago, before Homo sapiens even existed. What the study suggests is that this gene might’ve helped humans make better metabolic use of certain nutrients, nutrients which exist in both animal and plant sources.

Threonine isn’t some meat-exclusive miracle. It’s also found in soy, lentils, peas, quinoa, sunflower seeds, and leafy greens. So the idea that this gene is evidence we evolved to eat meat is about as sound as claiming we evolved to eat tofu.

But Earth.com turns this into an evolutionary fairytale. They conjure up a world where meat swept across the globe, carrying tall, energetic humans with it. They point to ancient meat-eating cultures like the Yamnaya as if meat was the sole reason they thrived, ignoring the complex web of social, environmental, and nutritional factors that affect human development. And they conveniently forget that plenty of high-meat cultures had low average height, poor health, and short lifespans.

This is classic reverse logic: We’re tall and smart, meat is calorically dense, therefore meat did it.

Reality:

1. Bipedalism and reduced gut length precede heavy meat consumption and may have been driven by cooking or foraging efficiency.

2. Brain expansion aligns more with access to carbohydrates, especially cooked starches (see Richard Wrangham’s cooking hypothypothesis.

3. Jaw reduction relates more to food processing, not meat — people eating grains have smaller molars too.

4. Longevity and social cohesion are social and environmental developments, not meat-based miracles.

Giving mice a human gene variant and a diet high in one amino acid proves only that the gene interacts with that nutrient in energy metabolism and growth. It doesn't prove humans evolved to eat meat or require it now. In fact, this kind of logic would also support the consumption of fortified cereals or legumes, if they showed similar results in trials. Nutrient availability isn't unique to meat.

Finding one gene that works better in the presence of certain nutrients doesn’t mean thar those sources are ethically acceptable to produce and consume today.

So why the hype?

Because this research is being spun by a meat-normalising, clickbait-driven outlet. It cherry-picks one interesting genetic discovery and layers on an evolutionary narrative that supports the idea humans are meant to eat animals.

This is how scientific nuance gets weaponised to maintain the status quo. And it’s precisely why animal exploitation continues unchecked — we keep pretending our choices are baked into our biology, even when we know they’re cultural, optional, and entirely changeable.

Yes, the study is interesting. It adds to our understanding of how genes and diet interact. But it doesn’t vindicate meat. It doesn’t excuse factory farms. It doesn’t justify turning sentient lives into property just because of one gene.

Humans have always been opportunistic eaters. That’s our evolutionary superpower—flexibility, not flesh. Our closest relatives get along just fine on mostly plants. And in today’s world, we certainly don’t need flesh to grow, think, move, or thrive.

A gene that works efficiently with a nutrient is not a moral permission slip. The fact that a mouse burns more energy on a high-threonine diet doesn’t mean we’re destined to eat animals. It doesn’t mean it’s ethical, sustainable, or just.

Let’s stop rewriting history to excuse present-day violence.

Meat didn’t make us. If anything will define the next leap in human evolution, it’ll be learning to stop exploiting others just because we can.