this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2026
59 points (92.8% liked)

Asklemmy

54310 readers
595 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 62 points 1 month ago (2 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

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 month ago

Ruminants that eat it have like several stomachs, they regurgitate the food they eat to re-eat it, and they require specialized gut bacteria to digest it. They have to spend like all of their time eating.

[–] doomsdayrs@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'd like a source on the silica needles?

[–] Cyteseer@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month 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

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Interesting, thanks for sharing that. I wasn't aware that there has been newer research countering the tooth wear model

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 40 points 1 month ago (2 children)

All forms of grass:

  • Corn
  • Wheat
  • Barley
  • Rice
  • etc
[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 23 points 1 month ago (1 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

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month 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/

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 7 points 1 month ago

Bamboo shoots are a common ingredient.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 40 points 1 month ago

Smarts required more calories.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 24 points 1 month ago (4 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.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

or to do something really gross to keep the stuff in their digestive track longer.

Looking at you, rabbits.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 4 points 1 month ago

Deer too, but slightly less gross, and some others.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] daannii@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (2 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.

[–] Infrapink@thebrainbin.org 24 points 1 month 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.

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

they faked it until they made it!

[–] 100_kg_90_de_belin@feddit.it 8 points 1 month ago

Vavilovian mimicry goes brrr

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

Bamboo is also grass, we can eat the shoots/sprouts

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 month ago (2 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.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Humans can't digest anything without bacteria either.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

they can

when you eat fruit, the sugar can enter your bloodstream directly through the mucosa in your mouth, you don't even need to swallow it. although the main part of the absorption happens in the colon still.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 month 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.

[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 16 points 1 month ago

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

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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

[–] Karl@literature.cafe 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] webp@mander.xyz 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some of us did that and they are horses now.

[–] racoon@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

big guts, short brains

[–] thatsnomayo@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Vegetables have pretty limited availability for protein, as an animal you have sit there eating grass all day. Our ways allow us plenty of time to be smart & stuff

[–] scutiger@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean we've got the time, but we still don't do it.

[–] thatsnomayo@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

I mean pandaz tried going back 2 the bark and kt takes their whole ass day. No phone time. Imagine?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] basket@pie.gravitywell.xyz 13 points 1 month ago

Return to cow

[–] Quilotoa@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month 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.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month 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

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 8 points 1 month 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.

[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 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.

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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.

[–] TachyonTele@piefed.social 6 points 1 month ago

Because yo mama so fat she'd eat it all

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

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.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why haven’t cows evolved sentience?

Grazing lifestyle doesn’t favor big expensive brains.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 8 points 1 month ago

Sentience is the ability to perceive your surroundings using your senses. What cows (probably) haven't achieved is sapience, roughly the ability to think about more than your immediate sensual impressions, in the abstract. Modern humans have decided they are extra sapient, hence "homo sapiens sapiens" whereas Neanderthals are "homo sapiens neanderthalensis".

[–] lemmylump@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

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

[–] metakrakalaka@lemmychan.org 4 points 1 month ago

We used to be able to eat grass.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tlekiteki@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Justified and Ancient?

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί