PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Todd Moody <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 2 Nov 2008 22:47:30 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Kidney fat is harder, with more stearic acid. 



Todd Moody

-----Original Message-----

From: Paleo Phil <[log in to unmask]>



Date:         Sun, 2 Nov 2008 17:15:01 

To: <[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Kidney fat vs intramuscular fat





> Time better spent on the difference between kidney fat and muscle fat

> in

> beef.

> 

> William



This is a good question, William, and perhaps behind much of the

misunderstanding between pro-fat and anti-fat folks. It's true that there

are fat stores in wild animals in adipose tissues, such as the fat around

the kidneys and in the hump on camels and bison, but I have never seen as

much intramuscular fat in wild animals as I have in domesticated ones. I

think this is part of the reason why people like Cordain and Eaton recommend

trimming fat from meat. I believe it is mostly saturated fat in both cases,

but perhaps there is a difference in the fatty acid composition of the

saturated intramuscular fat in domestic animals vs. the normal saturated fat

stores in wild animals. Any variation from the wild norm is suspect, from a

Paleolithic/evolutionary perspective. Does anyone know what if any

differences there are in the fatty acid composition of domestic

intramuscular fat vs. wild kidney and hump fats?


ATOM RSS1 RSS2