On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 20:40:32 -0400, Mark Labbee <[log in to unmask]> wrote:



>Amadeus seems to feel a
>diet high in meat will be lacking pufa's. Since a diet high in pufa's seem
>to correlate with increased cancer risk I prefer to keep mine on the low
>side and the above seems to indicate it is right where I want it to be.

Hi Mark,

could you outline or reference some text where you take from a cancer risk
from the PUFAs?
As I recall there was only a weak correspondence which can arise from the
additional need of vitamin E necessary to protect the PUFAs.
Vitamin E is an important antioxidant which protects against free radicals
and therefore against cancer.

However this would be a problem in only diets low in Vitamin E and C
(and other antioxidants like carotenes).
Generally diets high in meat tend to be a little low in E and C  without
further provisions. You seem to provide well for that.

I think if you take natural sources of PUFAs then these already have high
levels of vitamin E which the plant (or wild animal) accumulates to protect
it's fats properly.
If you are heated (flavourless) sunflower oil for example, you get a lot of
PUFA (w-6) without the vitamin E.  This could make a antioxidant lack in
otherwise poor diets. (explains suchalike studies).

Was it this what you ment?

Cheers,
Amadeus