> I think no one doubts that humans ate aquatic creatures
> when they could get them.  Is anyone arguing against eating
> seafood?
there seems to be little emphasis on them. whereas there is considerable
emphasis on taking flax and using grass-fed beef to balance Om-3 and Om-6.
This strategy is not paleo, and is unnecessary, and inefficient. In my view
using even grass-fed beef will not give you enough Om-3. and taking flax
will suplly even more LA, while converting very inefficiently the ALA to
DHA.


> ALA is present in some nuts, seeds, and greens.  It >accumulates in
various forms in the tissues of the animals that eat these.
I wasn;t commenting about ALA. there seems to be no use for it except to
change it to DHA. AFAIK, ALA is not essential.  someone else may be able to
come up with data showing otherwise but i have lookedd in good faith.

>
> >what we see here:
> >http://www.wapiti.net/news/default2.cfm?articleID=97
> >
> >is no conculsion other than the well-known one that conventionally-fed
> >mamals have too much Om-6. Since i have not been able to find any other
> >concluson, please inform me otherwise.
>
> Did you bother to read the abstract?  The omega fat ratio was not the
only thing measured, nor was it the only difference between the fat of  the
game animals and feedlot animals.
what other specific conclusion does he draw? pray tell me. none.

>  As I've mentioned more than once, the composition of the
> wild game fats doesn't stray much from MUFA=SFA+PUFA.
the fat content of how many wild animals have you  - or Cordain - researched
to come to this conclusion? where is the info on eel, turtle, bear, wood
duck, wolverine, dugong, etc etc etc?  you just made this up didnt you. it
may well be right for all we know, but we don't know.

> i am troubled by the unstated hypothesis that elk and wild deer > an
antelope were the only mammals ever eaten by primitive
> man.

It's unstated and not implied either.
It means simply his 'research' is meaningless junk.

> Here's what he recommends: lean meats, seafood, fruits and > vegetables.
well we know this is not remotely paleo. do u ascribe to it?

> Use olive oil and flax oil to make up not only for the leanness > of the
meat
yes, and you believe this? after all this time?

>but also to come closer to the right omega   ratio and MUFA:PUFA:SFA
ratio.
based on nothing except elk, wild deer...


> Maybe you should read more before delivering your opinions.
why so? you are an able expositor of his position. howevrr i notice you are
reluctant to say whether you agree with him. tell me which of these areas do
u agreee with him and which not:

1. use lean meat only. cut away the visible fat.
2. use olive oil
3. flax oil.
4. eat plenty of fruits
5. eat plenty of vegetables



> I want to make it clear to all that in  your view this makes all of > them
either incompetent or liars.
yes. i repeat: since its not paleo, why do they recommend it?
BTW..i know of no negative attribute i olive oil, and the question as to
whether it is healthy/unhealthy is a different one. In my view caucasian man
also adapted very well to drinking milk, since most caucasians can digest
raw milk without problems, and to their great advantage. but i dont argue
its merits on this list, since it is not paleo. i am consistent. these
authors are not.  in doing so they minimise, by omission,  the role marrow,
suet, fish liver oil sould play in a paleo-reconstructed diet.


> Try to focus on the question, then answer it:  It's not a low fat > diet,
so why are we discussing it as if it is?
the issue is, it's not a paleo diet. surely even you can work that out.

andrew