Why so aggressive? I realize my original comment was maybe not clear and lacked context because I honestly just typed it in a bit of a rush without thinking too hard about it, but that's no reason to put words in my mouth and attack me.

Obviously, wild animals can carry parasites and we certainly started dying from food born illnesses much less often once we figured out to cook the meat, that's so basic I didn't even think my comment could be interpreted that way. But that has little to do with the topic (which was whether we can digest raw meat) and ignores the myriad of dishes that are made of raw meat like steak tartare, torisashi, charcuterie, carpaccio, sushi, poisson cru a la tahitienne, etc etc.

The common theme of all these dishes is the meat is of high quality, butchered and prepared well (Vs minced meat full of cow shit because they don't bother butchering them properly, for example). That was my only point.

Who talked about laboratory conditions? Just normal conditions like being outside, instead of the pool of shit battery chickens are raised in.

I'm just assuming that you are, in fact, aware that the likely primary advantage of inventing cooking was that the food is partially broken down before we consume it, meaning we need much less time and energy digesting it, which leaves us with more time to do other things, which is a huge evolutionary advantage. Right? Of course, every child knows that most animals spend a significant amount of time just digesting food, far more than humans.

Well, since you're clearly a well educated person that knows these things, I can't find any other reasoning behind what you posted here than that you're arguing in bad faith, or trolling. Please either read a book or stop trolling. In any case, don't post about shit you know nothing about.