To elaborate a little further. “Just not eating” something is a modern luxury. For most of our history, you ate everything that was available or (someone, usually your youngest kids first) starved. The argument isn’t that spices cover the taste of rotten food, but that they actually kill the pathogens that make humans sick, making more food edible for longer. This is a spill over from these plants’ long evolutionary arms race with phytotoxins. Cultures in places with high food pathogen prevalence, where spicing makes a real difference to survival, develop a preference for spicy food, despite their initially aversive taste. Cultures in cold climates with few food pathogens don’t.
I’m skeptical of this. It seems more likely that they’re simply correlated because biodiversity is higher in warmer climates, both of microorganisms and plants.
Ask yourself these two questions. One, why would there be any spoiled meat around? Why was it not consumed or preserved immediately? People knew meat spoiled quickly and would treat it accordingly.
Two, have you ever smelled or tasted rotten meat? It’s quite literally repulsive, it’s hard to even get near. No amount of chili or black pepper is covering it. And if you were able to stomach it it wouldn’t be worth the vomiting and diarrhea it might cause. Food poisoning could be a death sentence in premodern times, and in fact diarrhea is one of the most common causes of death in undeveloped regions today.
Billing and Sherman have some pretty robust statistical controls to address these kinds of alternatives. Worth reading the paper.
Fully spoiled food is inedible, but there’s a long window of pathogen growth before that point, which can be lengthened further by spices. Why would some meat not be consumed immediately? Because life is messy, people make mistakes, and animals are large.
Then why does people’s preference for spicy food correlate to local food pathogen prevalence?
See: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9586227/
To elaborate a little further. “Just not eating” something is a modern luxury. For most of our history, you ate everything that was available or (someone, usually your youngest kids first) starved. The argument isn’t that spices cover the taste of rotten food, but that they actually kill the pathogens that make humans sick, making more food edible for longer. This is a spill over from these plants’ long evolutionary arms race with phytotoxins. Cultures in places with high food pathogen prevalence, where spicing makes a real difference to survival, develop a preference for spicy food, despite their initially aversive taste. Cultures in cold climates with few food pathogens don’t.
I’m skeptical of this. It seems more likely that they’re simply correlated because biodiversity is higher in warmer climates, both of microorganisms and plants.
Ask yourself these two questions. One, why would there be any spoiled meat around? Why was it not consumed or preserved immediately? People knew meat spoiled quickly and would treat it accordingly.
Two, have you ever smelled or tasted rotten meat? It’s quite literally repulsive, it’s hard to even get near. No amount of chili or black pepper is covering it. And if you were able to stomach it it wouldn’t be worth the vomiting and diarrhea it might cause. Food poisoning could be a death sentence in premodern times, and in fact diarrhea is one of the most common causes of death in undeveloped regions today.
Billing and Sherman have some pretty robust statistical controls to address these kinds of alternatives. Worth reading the paper.
Fully spoiled food is inedible, but there’s a long window of pathogen growth before that point, which can be lengthened further by spices. Why would some meat not be consumed immediately? Because life is messy, people make mistakes, and animals are large.