Phosphor wrote:

>  > So what do you think about the people in the grasslands and
>> steppe-tundras where the bulk of our evolutionary history was
>> spent, according to Audette and others?
>i think its pure, idle speculation. better to settle for what we can be
>certain about...man ate aquatic creatures ever since he could hold a
stick.
>under your scenario, little Ugdug is forbidden by his mother to pick up
the
>delicious mussel because "if I've told you a millon times, we are NOT
in the
>mesolithic age yet!"

It's unclear what elevates your option to "certain" and demotes the
position of Audette, Cordain, Nicholson and others to "idle
speculation."  I think no one doubts that humans ate aquatic creatures
when they could get them.  Is anyone arguing against eating seafood?

>i tihnk only the brains has Om-3 in any meaningful proportions. The
reindeer
>may have more though. it all comes down to the food chain. phytoplankton
>accumulates the fatty acids. On land, lichen does. reindeer eat lichen.
i
>dont know what other mammals do.

ALA is present in some nuts, seeds, and greens.  It accumulates in
various forms in the tissues of the animals that eat these.

>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.  The P/S ratio is also very
different.  As I've mentioned more than once, the composition of the
wild game fats doesn't stray much from MUFA=SFA+PUFA.

>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.

>im damned sure i read somewhere they ate bison,
>turtles, eel, ect etc.

That's an interesting list of mammals.

>> But that's not what he recommends, so what is the point of
>> the straw man argument.  Let me aske again: Did you read
>> Cordain's book?
>no i haven't. you can summarise any point i have missed.
>i rleid on yu to tell me he recommens olive oil to make up for the
leanness
>of the meat. did u trick me?

Here's what he recommends: lean meats, seafood, fruits and vegetables.
Use olive oil and flax oil to make up not only for the leanness of the
meat but also to come closer to the right omega ratio and MUFA:PUFA:SFA
ratio.  By doing this, Cordain believe you will come closer to a fat
intake that resembles what paleolithic people were eating in its fatty
acid composition.

>> Have you read his published research?
>some of it.

Maybe you should read more before delivering your opinions.

>> You didn't answer my question.  Audette endorses olive oil.
>> You claimed Cordain was incompetent or a liar for doing so,
>>  so the  same must apply to Audette.  Which is it?
>not sure, as i have not read any of his stuff. One or other will do.
Olive
>is not paleo. so why does a paleo author recommend it?

I just wanted to make your position clear.  Since Audette, Cordain, and
the Eades all endorse olive oil, and they are the four paleo authors
most discussed on this list, I want to make it clear to all that in
your view this makes all of them either incompetent or liars.

>> ALA is an om-3 fat, though not VLC.  But then we weren't
>> discussing VLC until now.
>well, by implication we were. these are the bugaboos that have brought
on
>the whole debate.

No, what brought on the whole debate was your opinion that it is
ludicrous to prefer lean meats or trim the fat from meat.

>i have read nothing that states why ALA is essential in
>itself.  What does it do apart from convert - at considerable
inefficency -
>to DHA?

Nobody said it is essential, but it is an option.  That's all.

>> No, I don't agree with that, and I agree that it is a careless
>> remark.  But I have the benefit of having read his book and his
>> research, rather than fixating on a single statement.  It's not a
>> low-fat diet, so why are we discussing it as if it is?
>it's not a careless remark. it's symptomatic of either his
incomprehensible
>stupidity or his deliberate deception.  since high fat is the sine qua
non
>of paleo eating, saying that 'lean meat' is the core of paleo eating is
like
>saying paedophilia is the core of the catholic church.

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?

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]