At 12:02 +1000 13/10/02, Phosphor wrote:

>>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.

OK, ignoring your ad hominum attacks, let's look at the data I've been
able to locate for full carcass fat content. I would welcome further
additions to this list, should you have access to any data regarding
whole-of-carcass compostion of game animals.

Horse, whole carcass: 15% protein, 4% fat (83%/17%)
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 have just found some rough figures for farmed buffalo. I suspect
the fat content for farmed beasts would be higher than wild beasts.
http://www.france-bison.com/gb/cadprodu.htm

Warm carcass: 72% meat, 11% adipose deposits.
Buffalo meat is 35% protein, 3% fat.
Adipose tissue (USDA database "beef suet") is 94% fat, 1% protein.
Overall: 25.3% protein, 12.5% fat, or a 2:1 protein to fat ratio.

These figures,even for farmed buffalo, are still nowhere near the
1:1 protein to fat ratio of a prime steak trimmed of all peripheral
fat. Leave that subcutaneous fat on the steak and your protein:fat
ratio from steaks would tend towards 1:2.

This is clearly nothing like the ratio available in a whole carcass
(adipose fat deposits included) of wild game.

I don't believe hunter gatherers would have gone through the energy
expenditure and danger of killing a buffalo only to leave the half the
carcass lying on the ground. Except in extreme cases (such as
Australian aborigines discarding some of the meat of a kangaroo when it
is *extremely* lean and retaining the fatty portions) I have not seen
evidence or anecdotes of hunter-gatherer people discarding significant
portions of their kills. Quite the opposite in fact; the anecdotes I've
read all describe how the full carcass was used with hardly any waste.


>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.

Presumably dried so it can be eaten at a later date. Probably combined
with some of the adipose fats from a fresh kill to make it more
palatable. Nevertheless, the high-protein portion of the carcass is
being consumed.


>>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?

Those figures are for the meat portion of the organ. There is much
evidence to suggest that hunter gatherers prized the organ meats more
highly than any other part of a carcass, and the figures presented
describe those meats. The adipose deposits have been considered above
in my discussion of the whole-of-carcass composition of game meats.

 ...Richard.