>I can see no conspiracy in Cordain's recommendations. I don't >believe he
is "adjusting" his dietary recommendations due to >the popular appeal (mass
hysteria?) surrounding the low fat >diet.

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.
Your data refers only to intramuscular fat. animals also have subcutaneous
fat, which is the ring of fat we see on the outside a steak. they also have
organ fat, mainly round the heart and kidney.  they may also have other
specific fat deposit sites, such as back humps in caribou.
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.
since most of use dont eat kidney fat or cavity fat we have to eat very
fatty meat in order to approximately replicate the paleo eating habits.
it's true sometime paleo man had only thin animals to eat, in which case he
starved. personally i prefer to follow the 'well-fed' rather than 'starving'
paleo model.

as for Om-6/Om-3, to know the exact ratio and amounts eaten by paleo man we
would have to go back in time to survey every different paleo tribe and
examine every different animal eaten and each class of fat within each
animal. or we could approximate by resting on the common knowledge that our
land animals have much less Om-3 than they used to, so we should supplement
with fish oils or eat considerably more oily fish. and stay away from
vegetable oils, such as flax, which have considerable amounts of Om-6 in
them.

andrew