We are told that red meat is carcinogen; fish and white meat are not. What make us not "compatible" to red meat after thousands of years of evolution and meat eating, and yet seafood is opposite ?
closed as unclear what you're asking by anongoodnurse, JM97, Bryan Krause♦, iayork, kmm Sep 5 '18 at 18:26
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
Interesting question that reveals a very common misconception about evolution. Evolution is not the same as optimization or advancement. It is about selection. Cancer and heart disease mostly kill people AFTER they have had their offspring. Selection does not generally act upon post-reproductives. So anything high in fat, calories and proteins would be likely to help humans survive starvation, and live to reproduce. We do not evolve to beat the diseases of old age, and our genes can be 10,000 years behind present optima. We don't evolve to be happy, live long lives, or be nice, unless these things help more of our offspring to survive.