Robert McGlohon wrote:
> Actually, up until about 60 years ago, dogfood was leftover people food.  And while I'm sure our paleo-ancestors were eating the fatty parts of the game they killed, that's a far cry from eating the obese cattle we eat today.
>   
Yes, and IMO our paleo-ancestors were eating the fatty parts and the 
leftovers were lean .


> So if you don't have a good supply of venison, wouldn't a lean-meat diet be the closest approximation of paleo you can get?
>
>   
I love tongue, probably would like buffalo hump, never had a chance to 
eat brain - these are all fatty parts, there are probably others I don't 
know about.

The Lewis and Clark expedition killed far more buffalo than they could 
eat, bet they only ate the good (fatty) parts.
This seems shockingly wasteful until we consider that they were 
responsible adults in the sense that they were providing food for dogs, 
wolves, foxes, birds and whatever scavengers, all lof them delighted to 
have the lean meat.

So I think no, lean meat is not paleo. Also consider the energy 
-efficient design of human body which is fuelled by fat. It takes extra 
energy/work to turn protein into fat.

William