PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Richard Archer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 13 Oct 2002 11:45:44 +1000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (115 lines)
At 15:52 +1000 12/10/02, Phosphor wrote:

>Richard, your confusion is understandable. it stems from the fact that what
>you are relying on for data is nonsense, to wit, that it neglects
>[conveniently] the bulk of the fat in an animal.

and

At 3:17 -0400 12/10/02, Elizabeth Miller wrote:

>On the one hand Cordain and Eaton tell us that one of the factors leading to
>agriculture was that humans were reduced to eating animals that had very
>little fat which led to our hitting our protein ceiling and getting ill. Then
>they turn around and extoll the virtues of high protein/low fat pastured fed
>animals.


Since both of these arguments are heading in the same direction, I hope
you won't mind if I respond to both together.

It is very hard to find figures for total carcass fat content of game
meats. The ratios from some of the whole-of-carcass figures I've found
at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/x5557e/x5557e0a.htm
and: http://www.deer.rr.ualberta.ca/library/biolelk/growth.html

Horse, whole carcass: 15% protein, 4% fat (83%/17%)
Lean Buffalo carcass: 12.8% protein, 2.6% fat (83/16%)
Red Deer (farmed, 15 month): 24% protein, 3.5% fat (87%/13%)
Red Deer (feral, 27 month): 24% protein, 3.5% fat (87%/13%) (approx)

I don't see any of these figures even approaching a 50:50 ratio for
protein:fat content. In fact it seems that for these animals a 20%
fat content is typical. I don't doubt that an autumn bear or beaver
would be significantly higher in fat (as are farm-fattened animals),
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.


And is there any evidence that the megafauna was any richer in fat
than their smaller cousins? 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!


As a point of comparison, some farmed meats:

"Commercial" grade beef, excl kidney fat: 15% prot, 17% fat
Choice/Prime grade beef, excl kidney fat: 12% prot, 32% fat
"Commercial" lamb, incl kidney fat: 12% prot, 21.1% fat
Choice/Prime lamb, incl kidney fat: 10% prot, 32.2% fat

Given the comparatively enormous amounts of fat available in farmed
meats, I assert that you would be consuming *more* fat eating just
prime steaks than a hunter gatherer would even if they were picking out
the fats and organs of a carcass.


Phosphor also wrote:

>there can only be so much PUFA in any of these fats, otherwise they would
>not be a fat anymore but an oil. Organ fats are highly saturated, since
>organs burn saturated fats preferentially.

This statement is plainly incorrect. Some randomly chosen figures for
organ meats from the USDA SR14 database:

Beef heart:
Fatty acids, total saturated 1.130 g
Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 0.840 g
Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 0.920 g

Lamb kidney:
Fatty acids, total saturated 1.000 g
Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 0.630 g
Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 0.550 g

Pork lungs:
Fatty acids, total saturated 0.960 g
Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 0.610 g
Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 0.340 g

Beef pancreas:
Fatty acids, total saturated 6.410 g
Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 6.440 g
Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 3.470 g

lamb brain:
Fatty acids, total saturated 2.600 g
Fatty acids, total monounsaturated 1.840 g
Fatty acids, total polyunsaturated 1.040 g

The ratio here is typically 2:2:1.


Liz also wrote:

>fat stores. I can't for an instant believe that we have evolved to store fat
>to provide energy and materials to us that is harmful. It just doesn't
>compute!!!

Isn't it somewhat disingenuous to compare fat ingestion to metabolizing
our fat stores? Of course the human body can make use of saturated fat,
just as it can make use of MFA, PFA, protein and carbs.

The body has evolved to be able to survive in a range of climates, with
a range of food sources. Modern technology allows us to consume foods
in patterns way outside the range of what was possible as hunter
gatherers. I believe that a high-fat low-carb diet is just as much a
modern construct as a low-fat high-carb diet is.

It would be impossible to sustain either diet in the "wild".

 ...Richard.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2