On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Phosphor wrote:

> 1. which is more paleo, lean meat or fatty meat?
> 2. are marrow, tallow more paleo than olive oil?
> 3. are fish oils more paleo than flax oil/seed?
> 4. which modern fats are unacceptably skewed in terms of MUFA/SAF/PUFA
> ratio?

Frankly, I have given up the game of trying to figure out what is
"more paleo" and what is "less paleo."  Humans or hominids have
been around for at least 2.5 million years, in quite a wide
variety of environments.  I'm pretty sure they ate plenty of lean
meats, and plenty of fatty meats too.  I imagine they ate olives
when they were available.  I don't think they ate flax oil.  They
probably didn't get much fish oil until fairly late in that time
span.

As for fats, let's keep it simple and just look at the ratio of
PUFA to SFA.  Here's a quick list of the P:S ratio of some game
meats from USDA, rounded to the nearest tenth.

Moose           1.1
Water buffalo   .6
Antelope        .6
Wild boar       .5
Caribou         .4
Venison         .5
Elk             .6
Horse           .5
Opossum         2.5
Rabbit          .7
Raccoon         .5
Squirrel        2.5

Well, this is only meat, not total carcass fat, but those are the
values. The mean P:S ratio for the group is .9.  The P:S ratio of
beef (composite of trimmed retail cuts, separable lean and fat,
trimmed to 1/8" fat, all grades, raw) is .09 -- a tenfold
difference from the average of the game meats.  Turkey, on the
other hand, which Cordain recommends as more similar to game
meats, has a P:S ratio of .9 (just meat) or .8 (meat and skin).
For chicken (meat and skin) the ratio is .7 (just meat is 1.0).
For pork (whole carcass) the P:S ratio is .3.  I haven't made any
attempt to factor in MUFA content.

On the face of it, I'd say that beef is the least acceptable of
the bunch, on the assumption that the P:S ratio should be at
least as high as the lowest of the game meats.  There should be
no objection to chicken, and pork is borderline.

This, of course, is assuming that these ratios matter.

But after five years of experimenting, with very mixed results, I
am less interested in paleo purity than I am in finding what
works for me.  Weight control continues to be a problem, and I
slowly but inexorably regained almost all the weight that I
originally lost -- all while staying "paleo".  Although I don't
believe elevated cholesterol is a cause of any disease, I do
think it is a marker of some sort of metabolic abnormality,
probably insulin resistance.  I think there is a plausible case
that insulin resistance is affected by the composition of dietary
fats.

I have managed, with some difficulty, to drop 13 pounds of fat in
the last six weeks or so.  I have about 30 to go.  I have
modified my diet somewhat along the lines that Cordain suggests:
leaner meats, more fruits and veggies.  I don't use flax oil.  I
don't use much olive oil either, for that matter, just
occasionally.  I eat some fish and use fish oil supplements.  I
don't know if this will affect cholesterol levels or insulin
resistance, but at least I'm dropping some excess weight.  I
don't much care if it is more paleo or less paleo to eat this
way.  What I previously thought was more paleo didn't seem to be
helping very much.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]