Smelly Pigs

[Jack Knave]

I heard on the programme BBC Inside Science about human's sense of smell. One smell, in our sweat, is also produced by pigs and has a rather rancid odour to it and is solely due to one gene (which means we can know if, say Neanderthals, could smell it) . Since we domesticated pigs we have gradually lost this sense of smell. The reason I'm doing this thread is that those in the past who could smell this found eating pork very distasteful - like licking a tramps armpit - and this may be why some religions like Judaism saw it as unclean food.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b060bf69

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3148389/Did-farming-pigs-change-sense-SMELL-Domestication-animals-thousands-years-ago-driven-evolution-detect-odours.html

[trippymonkey]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

[Jack Knave]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

That was true of all meats in those days.

[Shaker]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

That was true of all meats in those days.

Exactly.

I've seen it suggested by more than one anthropologist that the (first) Jewish and (later) Muslim prohibition on pork has no such proto-scientific rationale, but was simply a means of creating and enforcing and perpetuating tribal identity and identification - the idol worshipping heathens (them) may eat pork but we worshippers of the one true God (us) do not.

[trippymonkey]

Very true & we ALL seen who's caused the most damage to the world SINCE that time, eh.
Don't think it was those awful idol worshippers, was it. NOOOOOO

[Gonnagle]

Dear Jack,

Ah yes! The question being when did we domesticate pigs, according to Karen Armstrong, the difference between clean and unclean in Judaism was simply domesticated were clean.

Gonnagle.

[Anchorman]

Dear Jack,

Ah yes! The question being when did we domesticate pigs, according to Karen Armstrong, the difference between clean and unclean in Judaism was simply domesticated were clean.

Gonnagle.

-
Egypt domesticated pigs by the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt (if not before)
around 3200BC
http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/timelines/topics/domesticated_animals.htm

There were never any prohibitions (except social status) regarding eating meat, fish or poultry.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Very true & we ALL seen who's caused the most damage to the world SINCE that time, eh.
Don't think it was those awful idol worshippers, was it. NOOOOOO

If the Aztecs had developed science it is unlikely that the world would have been a nicer place.

[trippymonkey]

MMMM?? But they DIDN'T though, did they.
Certain groups among Christians & Muslims are blatently idol-worshippers & I don't mean using images or imagery.
I AM, of course, referring to how certain adherents treat their prophets & leaders !!!!

[Jack Knave]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

That was true of all meats in those days.

Exactly.

I've seen it suggested by more than one anthropologist that the (first) Jewish and (later) Muslim prohibition on pork has no such proto-scientific rationale, but was simply a means of creating and enforcing and perpetuating tribal identity and identification - the idol worshipping heathens (them) may eat pork but we worshippers of the one true God (us) do not.

But my OP was not about keeping meat fresh in the heat but that our sense of smell made pork smell, and therefore taste, awful and so it was avoided. Those however who kept pigs had lost this sense of smelling this particular pig odour. So I'm not too sure what Trippy was trying to comment on.

[trippymonkey]

Well don't things usually 'smell off' if they ARE off???

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Very true & we ALL seen who's caused the most damage to the world SINCE that time, eh.

Western Consumerism?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

That was true of all meats in those days.

Exactly.

I've seen it suggested by more than one anthropologist that the (first) Jewish and (later) Muslim prohibition on pork has no such proto-scientific rationale, but was simply a means of creating and enforcing and perpetuating tribal identity and identification - the idol worshipping heathens (them) may eat pork but we worshippers of the one true God (us) do not.

Any names for these anthropologists?

[Shaker]

Oh yes, they'll definitely have names.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Oh yes, they'll definitely have names.

Don't tell me..........Anne Thropologist.
                             B. Haviourist.
                             E. Thologist
                             R.Soul
                             R, Dawkins
                             

[Shaker]

500 points!

[Jack Knave]

Well don't things usually 'smell off' if they ARE off???

But the OP was about eating cooked meat. But because some in the past could smell a certain pig odour they found pork smelled and tasted rancid.

[Hope]

Very true & we ALL seen who's caused the most damage to the world SINCE that time, eh.
Don't think it was those awful idol worshippers, was it. NOOOOOO

From my anthropological reading, Nick, a lot of the world's food regulations started out life as common-sense animal husbandry rules.  For instance, the Hindu ban on beef has more to do with the fact that people were killing cows faster than they could be replaced, meaning that supplies of milk - which was/is an important part of their diet.  It came into existence before Hinduism, but Hindu leaders took it on board and built it into their religious thinking.

[trippymonkey]

Once again Good Reply.
We so often see with religions 'developing' over centuries, attitudes changing either for better OR for worse.
It's only when SOME plonkers say & feel THEIR religion has to be literally true & 100% adhered too & obeyed that we start getting serious problems.

It begins INSIDE the religion itself which is why there's no such thing as a Christian or a Muslim as a single entity name. We've got sects which as we now know within Islam re IS etc, they start to eradicate each other.
MY 'version' of religion is better-purer-cleaner-more worthy of my god than YOURS is so I can destroy you.

Nick

[Jack Knave]

Once again Good Reply.
We so often see with religions 'developing' over centuries, attitudes changing either for better OR for worse.
It's only when SOME plonkers say & feel THEIR religion has to be literally true & 100% adhered too & obeyed that we start getting serious problems.

It begins INSIDE the religion itself which is why there's no such thing as a Christian or a Muslim as a single entity name. We've got sects which as we now know within Islam re IS etc, they start to eradicate each other.
MY 'version' of religion is better-purer-cleaner-more worthy of my god than YOURS is so I can destroy you.

Nick

This made me think of Animal Farm as in the way cults and ideologies evolve.

[trippymonkey]

JK
EXACTLY !!!!

[trippymonkey]

Rose
GOOD POINTS.
Another major point people miss here is that pigs will eat ANYTHING, Even humans.
Bodies have been disposed of in this way, by murderers. 

[BashfulAnthony]

My understanding is that pork has to be cooked thoroughly, unlike other meats as it was more likely to harm your health if underdone.

You never eat pork rare, like you would with beef or lamb.

People probably noticed others were more likely to be ill with pork.

Trichinosis is one issue.

I don't suppose they knew enough about heat killing it off or even why it happened, but just that if it was a bit red you were likely to be ill wheras with beef you weren't.

So probably it got a reputation of being a bit unclean and might explain an adversion to seeing blood within the meat.

It might have been sensible in those days to have avoided it altogether.

In Judaism, draining the blood from the meat, might have also originally stemmed from trying to have standards that kept a group of people safe from a range of illnesses, which they could see a connection ( even if they did not understood why).

 Because they think it contains the soul of the animal, as I understand, and that belongs to God  -  it does not, apparently, extend to refusing to take blood in transfusions, though:  slight inconsistency there!!

[Sebastian Toe]

My understanding is that pork has to be cooked thoroughly, unlike other meats as it was more likely to harm your health if underdone.

You never eat pork rare, like you would with beef or lamb.

Depends where it is sourced seemingly!

Can pork be served rare? E. Brown

In Australia we have a cultural memory that extends back to the northern hemisphere, where the bulk of our population originated. There you'll find a nasty little parasitic worm called Trichinella spiralis. It lives in pigs but also in bears, horses, foxes and other furry animals.

If one were to eat the raw flesh of one of those animals (unlikely unless your name was Bear Grylls), you could contract trichinosis, which is like being taken over by hundreds of tiny aliens. Not pleasant.

Thoroughly cooking pork infected with Trichinella spiralis kills the parasites. According to Animal Health Australia, "Trichinella spiralis has never been diagnosed in animals in Australia." Mitch Edwards from Australian Pork says, "Pork is as safe or safer to eat rare than almost any other meat".

With those little facts under your belt, you should actually consider cooking the prime cuts of pork slightly rare. During cooking, fat equals both flavour and moisture. Modern pigs are bred to be lean.

If you cook lean pork until well done it can become dry, so Edwards recommends serving grilled and roasted pork dishes a little on the pink side.

http://www.goodfood.com.au/good-food/cook/can-pork-be-served-rare-20140222-338bw.html

[cyberman]

MMMM ?!!??
And didn't pig meat go off very quick in the temperatures out there too.
No fridges etc.

That was true of all meats in those days.

Exactly.

I've seen it suggested by more than one anthropologist that the (first) Jewish and (later) Muslim prohibition on pork has no such proto-scientific rationale, but was simply a means of creating and enforcing and perpetuating tribal identity and identification - the idol worshipping heathens (them) may eat pork but we worshippers of the one true God (us) do not.

I think that's very plausible - same with circumcision etc.

Another factor might have been economic, a kind of brand loyalty. The people who later came to self identify as Israel were largely sheep-farmers. They perhaps didn't want people developing a taste for foreign muck (or indeed for wearing fancy colourful clothes when simple self-coloured homespun would do nicely)