>I don't see any of these figures even approaching a 50:50 >ratio for
protein:fat content. but I still can't imagine the typical >hunter gatherer
being able to consume fats, year-round, as >more than about 20% by weight
without discarding a large >portion of each carcass.

There's not a lot of point in giving us figures for lean buffalo carcass and
then saying it's low in fat. may we assume you just playing the clown?
if u are serious, perhaps you could take a few months off and study a few
different indigenous societies, examine all the animals they eat, and
ascerain the quantities of the several different kinds of fats therein
[strangly youve admitted nothing about cavity fat etc].  meanwhile the rest
of us can stick to the well-known facts that indigenous tribes hunted and
targetted animals specifically when they were fat, in order to get the most
benefit. yes, amazingly, they wanted to boost their survival chances.  what
makes you think they must eat the carcass in exactly the same ratio of
fat/protein as is presented? left over meat can be dried. maybe thats where
the tradition of drying developed.


> One of the largest extant ruminants is the moose, and it's also >one of
the leanest meats you can get: 22.24%
>protein and 0.74% fat (meat only), or a 97%/3% ratio!
speak on o clown! your dam right than once you throw all all the fat there's
not much fat left!


>Beef heart:
>Fatty acids, total saturated 1.130 g
>Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 0.840 g
>Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 0.920 g
is this fat within the muscle, or fat surrounding the muscle? can u
understand the distinction?

andrew