The comparison of hunting with gathering evaluates the nutritional consequences for the people that belong to foraging societies. Foragers have necessitated meeting their caloric needs through long-standing supplies of food, both qualitatively and quantitatively, to avoid malnutrition or starvation. Hunting and gathering have provided them with about the same amount of proteins, although they have needed to collect large quantities of edible plants to equal the outcome of proteins supplied by the relatively small pieces of meat. However, gathering has been less energy consuming than hunting because foragers could more simply locate vegetables in the forest or in the open ground than animals but even the scavenged animals have required humans covered longer distances to amass available carcasses than to cover distances to accumulate vegetable food. The major suggestion of the simultaneous use of hunting and gathering has been the development of a generalized alimentation through a mixed diet. Such a varied nutritional regime offers the foragers flexible eating habits that allow them to preserve a high income of proteins, even in times of scarcity of either animal flesh or eatable vegetation, and consequently escape starvation.

Secondly, the contrast between hunt and gathering allows appraising the structural repercussions in foraging societies. In the light of the foraging techniques, including hunting and gathering, one is not amazed to discover that the foragers give emphasis to a division of labor based on gender. For example, in general, the men hunt and the women gather. Nonetheless, the labor specialization is not the rule, because individuals, separate of their genders, may perform the usual duty that is assigned to other genders. Subsequently, social equality is the normality for there are no formal differences between individuals in a group. Such parity