
Discovered: A Neanderthal ‘fat factory' from 125,000 years ago
Archaeologists uncovered the factory by analyzing some 120,000 bone fragments and 16,000 flint tools unearthed over several years at a site known as Neumark-Nord, south of the city of Halle, they reported in a study published Wednesday in the journal Science Advances. Excavators found the artifacts alongside evidence of fire use.
The researchers believe that Neanderthals, an extinct species of human known to have lived in that area as far back as 125,000 years ago, smashed the marrow-rich bones into fragments with stone hammers, then boiled them for several hours to extract the fat, which floats to the surface and can be skimmed off upon cooling.
Since this feat would have involved planning hunts, transporting and storing carcasses beyond immediate food needs, and rendering the fat in an area designated specially for the task, the finding helps paint a picture of the group's organization, strategy and deeply honed survival skills.
'This attitude that Neanderthals were dumb — this is another data point that proves otherwise,' said Wil Roebroeks, study coauthor and professor of Paleolithic archaeology at Leiden University in the Netherlands.
A string of archaeological discoveries in recent decades have showed that Neanderthals were smarter than their original brutish stereotype might suggest. The ancient humans lived across Eurasia and disappeared 40,000 years ago, and previous studies have found they made yarn and glue, engraved bones and cave walls, and assembled jewelry from eagle talons.
Details in the new research suggest that Neanderthals may have been unexpectedly sophisticated in their approach to nutrition, too.
The Neanderthals living at the German site over a 300-year period also clearly understood the nutritional value of the bone grease they produced, according to the study.
A small amount of fat is an essential part of a healthy, balanced diet. The substance was even more essential for hunter-gatherers, such as Neanderthals, who likely depended heavily on animal foods.
A diet dominated by lean meat and deficient in fatty acids can lead to a debilitating and sometimes lethal form of malnutrition, in which the capacity of liver enzymes to break down the protein and get rid of excess nitrogen is impaired, the researchers noted in their paper. Known today as protein poisoning, the condition earned a reputation among early European explorers of North America as 'rabbit poisoning' or 'mal de caribou.'
Hunter-gatherers such as Neanderthals, with average body weights between 50 kilograms and 80 kilograms (110 pounds and 175 pounds), would have had to keep their consumption of dietary protein below 300 grams (about 10 ounces) per day to avoid the condition. That amounts to around 1,200 calories — a level of intake far short of daily energy needs, according to the research. As a result, the Neanderthals likely needed to source the remaining calories from a nonprotein source, either fat or carbohydrate.
Cuts of meat from animal muscle contain very little fat, making bones — which contain marrow and other fatty tissue even when an animal is malnourished — a more important resource.
The researchers discovered that the overwhelming majority of remains at the site came from 172 individual large animals, including horses, deer and aurochs, large cow-like creatures that are now extinct. Neanderthals had selected the longest bones that would have contained the most marrow, the study found.
Exactly how the Neanderthals processed the bones isn't clear, according to the study authors. The ancient humans likely fashioned containers or pots from birch bark, animal skins or other body parts such as stomach linings, filling them with water and hanging them over a fire, Roebroeks said.
Neanderthals could have consumed the fat they produced as a 'greasy broth' to which plants may have been added for flavor as well as nutritional value, suggested study coauthor Geoff Smith, a senior researcher in zooarchaeology at the University of Reading. The charred remains of hazelnut, acorn and sloe plum were also found during the excavations, he noted.
'These weren't simple hunter-gatherers just getting by day to day — they were master planners who could look ahead, organise complex tasks, and squeeze every last calorie from their environment,' Smith said.
The findings are 'exciting,' according to Ludovic Slimak, an archaeologist at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) and Paul Sabatier University in Toulouse, France. Slimak wasn't involved in the study.
'They finally offer clear archaeological confirmation of what many of us had long suspected: that Neanderthals not only valued within-bone lipids but developed specific strategies to extract and process them,' said Slimak, who is the author of the 'The Last Neanderthal,' which will be published in English later this year.
Discover your world
Go beyond the headlines and explore the latest scientific achievements and fascinating discoveries. Sign up for CNN's Wonder Theory science newsletter. 'This aligns closely with the broader archaeological record, which shows Neanderthals as highly skilled big-game hunters with a refined sense of ecological adaptation,' he added.
The Neumark-Nord site is 'the best example yet of bone-grease rendering,' from this period of the Stone Age, said Bruce Hardy, the J. Kenneth Smail Professor of Anthropology at Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio. Hardy also was not involved in the research.
'The combination of evidence presented here at Neumark-Nord is impressive,' Hardy said. 'It may well represent the smoldering gun, or simmering bone broth, of Neanderthal bone-grease rendering.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Alpha males are rare among our fellow primates: scientists
New research on Monday contradicted the commonly held idea that males dominate females among primates, revealing far more nuanced power dynamics in the relationships of our close relatives. "For a long time we have had a completely binary view of this issue: we thought that a species was either dominated by males or females -- and that this was a fixed trait," Elise Huchard, a primatologist at the University of Montpellier in France, told AFP. "Recently, this idea has been challenged by studies showing that the truth is much more complicated," said the lead author of a new study published in the journal PNAS. The French-German team of researchers combed through scientific literature for interactions between male and female primates that revealed their hierarchical relationships. These included aggression, threats and signs of dominant or submissive behaviour, such as when one primate spontaneously moved out of the way of another. Over five years, the team gathered data from 253 populations across 121 primate species, including a range of monkeys, lemurs, tarsiers and lorises. They found that confrontations between members of the opposite sex were much more frequent than had been previously thought. On average, more than half of these interactions within a group involved a male and a female. Males clearly dominating females, which was defined as winning more than 90 percent of these confrontations, was only observed in 17 percent of the populations. Among this minority were baboons and chimpanzees, which are the closest living relatives to humans. Clear female domination was recorded in 13 percent of the primate populations, including lemurs and bonobos. This meant that for 70 percent of the primates, either males or females could be at the top of the pecking order. - Battle of the sexes - When male domination was particularly pronounced, it was usually in a species where males have a clear physical advantage, such as bigger bodies or teeth. It was also more common among ground-bound species, in which females are less able to run and hide compared to their relatives living in the trees. Females, meanwhile, tended to dominate over societies when they exerted control over reproduction. For example, the genitals of female baboons swell when they are ovulating. Males jealously guard females during these few days of their menstrual cycle, making sure that other competitors cannot mate with them. However in bonobos, this sexual swelling is less obvious. "Males never know when they are ovulating or not. As a result, (the female bonobos) can mate with whoever they want, whenever they want, much more easily," Huchard said. Female dominance is also more common when females compete with each other, and when males provide more care for the young. In these species, females are often solitary or only live in male-female pairs. This means that monogamy is closely linked to female dominance. Can these results be extrapolated to our own species? There are a great many differences between humans and our fellow primates, Huchard emphasised. But we would broadly fall into the middle category in which neither males nor females always have strict dominance over the other. "These results corroborate quite well with what we know about male-female relationships among hunter-gatherers, which were more egalitarian than in the agricultural societies that emerged later" in human history, Huchard said. ber/dl/giv
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
This Viral, At-Home Fitness Test Claims to Predict Longevity—but There's a Catch
Dimensions/Getty Images New blood tests, scans, and fitness trackers that purport to predict longevity are rolling out all the time, but if you've scrolled TikTok recently, you might be surprised to see a much lower-tech way getting some buzz: how well you fare in simply trying to haul your butt off the floor. It's all based on the takeaway from a study published in the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology that's been making the rounds. In it, researchers had more than 4,000 people do something they dubbed the 'sitting-rising' test and then followed up with them for over a decade. They found a link between how easily people were able to get up off the floor and how long they lived. The task sounds simple, but, as I learned firsthand, it's really not. To get a perfect score on the test, you need to be able to get from a position on the floor—usually cross-legged—to standing without using a hand, elbow, or knee to help. As a former competitive athlete who can't say no to a challenge, I needed to try this (and gain a perfect score) once it came across my FYP. To my surprise, it was hard. While I was able to get it done, I had to give myself a mental pep talk before each attempt. Pulling this test off is trickier than it sounds—it requires a combination of strength, balance, and flexibility, and I struggle to even touch my toes. So that made me wonder: How legit is it, really, in predicting your, um, ultimate demise? Does bombing the test mean you're going to keel over any second? I checked in with longevity experts and fitness pros to find out. One of the benefits of the sitting-rising test is you can do it right at home: Sit on the floor with your legs crossed in front of you and then try to get back up unassisted. The goal is to do this with as little support as possible, test inventor and lead study author Claudio Gil S Araújo, MD, a sports and exercise physician from the Exercise Medicine Clinic Clinimex in Rio de Janeiro, tells SELF. (Check out this handy YouTube video Dr. Araújo and his fellow researchers created to break it down in more detail.) The test is scored from zero to 10, with points assigned for sitting and rising added together. You'll be docked a point for each knee, hand, or forearm you use during the test, along with half-points if you're unsteady (say, you stumble when you get up). 'If you're an eight, why did you lose a point? It may mean that you used one hand to sit and one hand to rise,' Dr. Araújo says. In the study, the researchers discovered a link between how well people scored on the test and their risk of dying during a follow-up of about 12 years. In all, about 16% of the participants died during that period—but only 4% of folks who aced the test with a perfect 10 did so. (On the other end of the spectrum, people who got a four or less had a death rate of 42% during that time.) Okay, but…why? The test measures a few different things that are linked to better health and longevity, study co-author Jonathan Myers, PhD, a clinical professor at Stanford University and a health research scientist at the Palo Alto VA Health Care System, tells SELF. 'When we think of 'fitness,' people usually think of 'aerobic' or cardiorespiratory fitness,' he says. 'Over the last three decades or so, cardiorespiratory fitness has become recognized as a powerful predictor of health outcomes—in many studies, it is even more powerful than the traditional risk factors such as smoking, hypertension, or [high cholesterol].' Cardiorespiratory fitness is important, sure—it's considered a strong indicator of overall health, along with being linked to a lower risk of developing certain diseases. But fitness is more broad than that, and includes things like strength and balance, Dr. Myers says. Strength has been shown to help with daily living (think: being able to carry your own groceries), while balance helps to protect against falls, Dr. Araújo explains. These skills are important for longevity, and they're something that Hannah Koch, PT, DPT, physical therapist at Michigan State University Health Care, tells SELF she checks with older patients, along with their range of motion. The sitting-rising test looks at strength, power, and balance, all in one move. So basically, you're getting more bang for your buck, looking at all of these factors at once. Added bonus: It can also give some insight on your cardiovascular health, Jennifer Wong, MD, cardiologist and medical director of Non-Invasive Cardiology at MemorialCare Heart and Vascular Institute at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, California, tells SELF. 'One could not do this after certain types of strokes or if too weak from poor overall health,' she adds. While the test is predictive, it's by no means perfect: There are some flaws with it. 'The test does not identify the underlying cause of poor performance,' Anna A. Manns, PT, DPT, lead physical therapist at University Hospital in New Jersey, tells SELF. Meaning, it can't tell if you struggle with getting up due to joint pain, an injury, or the fact that you went hard at the gym yesterday—and those factors don't necessarily have an impact on your longevity. It's also possible to game the test, say, by 'compensating with upper-body movement or momentum by using arm swings or trunk movement to 'cheat' the test,' Dr. Mann says, which would 'mask true lower-limb weakness.' The test also only looks at lower-body function and core strength, so it doesn't gauge your overall fitness, upper-body strength or endurance, 'all of which are important for full functional capacity,' she adds. While the sitting-rising test has a link with longevity, there are plenty of others that healthcare providers use regularly. Simple hand-grip tests, which measure grip strength, are a 'powerful predictor of mortality,' Dr. Myers says. Case in point: A 2015 study published in The Lancet found that grip strength was better at predicting someone's odds of dying from heart disease or other causes during the follow-up than systolic blood pressure, which is usually used to gauge cardiovascular health. Balance tests, like the ability to stand on one leg for 10 seconds or longer, can also be helpful, Dr. Myers says. Koch also flags the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (5TSTS) as a useful way to check a person's lower-body strength and balance. It's similar to the sitting-rising test, but has people get up from a chair versus the floor five different times. The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, which has people get up from a chair, walk a short distance, turn around, walk back, and sit back down while being timed, is useful too, says Manns. 'Together, these tests provide a patient picture of overall physical function and longevity,' Manns says. That said, they're still only a part of the overall picture of your health. There's no reason to get down on yourself if you don't do well on the sitting-rising test—not getting a perfect 10 on the sitting-rising test certainly doesn't mean you're doomed. But it could clue you in on areas of fitness to work on, Dr. Araújo says. That may mean working on balance training, flexibility, or building power. 'This helps a lot to get people motivated,' Dr. Araújo says. Dr. Myers agrees that your mobility, strength, flexibility, and balance can usually be improved with practice and training. 'Individuals who don't perform well on these tests can improve their performance by strengthening lower body muscles, and specific exercises can be targeted to improve flexibility, balance, gait, and mobility,' he says. Albert Matheny, CSCS, cofounder of SoHo Strength Lab, suggests focusing on things like squats, single-leg exercises like lunges, and even balancing on one leg to hit these areas. It's also important to remember that these tests are only part of the puzzle: There are a bunch of health-promoting behaviors out there that have nothing to do with how well you can get up off the floor—or even how well you move in general. While physical activity is important, other things, like eating a high-quality diet, minimizing stress, getting plenty of sleep, and adopting other healthy lifestyle habits like avoiding smoking and minimizing alcohol, also come in handy. Together, these can help you be your healthiest self. 'The sitting-rising test is a good screening tool,' Dr. Araújo says. 'There's a lot we can do to move forward after that.' Related: 6 Daily Habits Doctors Say Will Help You Live Longer 5 Ways Strong Friendships Can Benefit Your Health as You Get Older Exactly How Your Skin Changes in Your 40s, 50s, and 60s Get more of SELF's great fitness coverage delivered right to your inbox—for free. Originally Appeared on Self
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Your dog is ignoring you and staring at nothing? It could be dementia
Sometimes Jackie just stands there and stares. "He looks off into nothingness," is how his owner describes the state of her 15-year-old Jack Russell Terrier. The small white dog is physically very fit, but he suffers from dementia. Sometimes he seems not to recognise family members and growls at them. Or he goes from the house into the garden, immediately returns and shortly afterwards stands at the door again, wanting to go out. "And this happens 15 times in a row. As if he has forgotten that he was just outside." Pets are living longer in many parts of the world, and dementia is no longer uncommon among them. According to one study, 68% of dogs at Jackie's age are affected. "It can start from the age of eight," said Julia Hauer, senior neurologist at a veterinary clinic in western Germany. The disease develops gradually over months. Initially, the symptoms are so non-specific that owners often do not realise something is wrong with their pet. Moreover, these symptoms could also be signs of a normal ageing process. Affected animals may wander around a lot, especially at night. They no longer interact with their humans as they used to; some become incontinent, and they fail to understand common commands like "sit" or "stay." They may no longer be able to find food on the floor, get scared in familiar situations, bark or whine without any apparent reason, or repeatedly stare at nothing. "When animals suspected of having dementia come to the consultation, I often ask their owners if they try to enter through the wrong side of a familiar door," the veterinarian explained as another possible symptom. Additionally, there are questionnaires for owners to fill out, covering topics such as anxiety, sleep patterns and house training. Diagnosing dementia is not easy, as there are numerous possible causes for behavioural changes. "Ultimately, it is a diagnosis of exclusion," says veterinarian Klaus Kutschmann. Initially, the vet will discuss the symptoms and their progression with the owner, followed by physical examinations — general, neurological and orthopaedic. The eyes and teeth are also checked. "The decisive examinations are MRI and cerebrospinal fluid analysis," Kutschmann says. However, these require the animal to be put under general anaesthesia, which is not always advisable given their age. What happens if the diagnosis is dementia? "There is no pill you can give to make everything better," says Hauer. However, there are many ways to make life easier for the dog. The first question is how the dog is doing apart from the dementia. Does it perhaps have toothache or chronic pain from arthritis? Pain exacerbates dementia symptoms. Addressing this improves its quality of life. Or could the dog maybe have impaired vision or hearing? In such cases, the owner can adapt their communication, for example, by speaking louder or using visual commands. To help the dog sleep through the night again, melatonin can be given, but only in consultation with a vet. But melatonin approved for humans is not suitable for dogs, vets say. Treats containing this sleep hormone are also not recommended, as the dosage is too low. Studies have also shown that supplements like Aktivait or Senilife improve brain activity, Hauer says. The same goes for MCT oil. Additionally, there are medications like selegiline, although not all animals respond to them. A stable daily routine is essential for four-legged dementia patients. Everything should happen at the same time each day: waking up, walks, feeding and sleeping. However, some variety should also be included, says Hauer, suggesting taking walks in different places or hiding treats. New toys, like a sniffing mat, can also provide mental stimulation. Kutschmann also advised "lots of attention and activity." "Interestingly, there are many parallels between dogs with dementia and human Alzheimer's patients," says Hauer. As with humans, dementia progresses very differently in animals. It's entirely possible for a dog to live well with the condition until its death. In some cases, however, the disease progresses rapidly, causing the dog to suffer from confusion, sleep deprivation or constant wandering. In these cases, some vets may give you the choice to euthanize the animal to end its suffering.