On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:04:58 +0300, Phosphor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>
>> There are dozends of different tubers, about 50% of them are edible
>> uncooked.
>
>and which aborigines ate comparatively little of, compared with meat from a
>variety of sources. This was my original point which you seem to have
>trouble dealing with.

So, where are your numbers how much kangaroo and other meats aborigines
eat, compared to tubers?
I didn't doubt that aborigines eat meat,how do you come to this idea?
Aborigines in a harsh desert or semi-desert eat *anything* that is edible.
However to my information aborigines have a relative high plant part in the
diet, including all varieties of plants and also including tubers of course.
They also eat snails insects maggots and marsupials.
I invite you to come up with actual data from aboriginals.

>> Given this it's easy to understand why aborigines are reported to just
>leave
>> a hunted kangaroo if it is not fat enough.
>
>yes,  which proves my point about the premium of fat in the diet. they went
>for other kangaroos, not tubers, and could leave the carcass *after* taking
>the fat.   Perhaps it is too obvious to point out even for you that kidney
>fat is a good source of fat?

Kangaroos are so low in fat, including kidney fat that they are a lousy
fat source. Have you seen an aboriginal killing a 44pound kangaroo just to
take 100grams of kidney fat, some organs, brain and 2 lbs of meat?
I invite you to just eat up one whole kangaroo.
I want to hear if you can stand it without mixing in some fatty steaks
nuts or other fatty items (fry fat) for even a few days.
What about a lifetime?

Eating animal carcass in a warm climate (like Australia and Africa) is a
reasonable food for gatherhunting people there.
Up to a certain percentage of the diet. Low protein and high fat food is
required to to equal out it's unphysiological composition for humans.

I think the meat and paleo story suffers from the common SAD nutrition
biased view. In the SAD, meat is expensive and of relative high nutritional
value in a world of lowest value junk food like sweets, bad fat and
allergens. People react relieved to hear that the stone agers also had some
meat, because this is what they know and understand.

Gatherhunting people of today or of the millions of years back have access
to paleo unmodified plant resources and they have no need of additional
protein. What they need is additional food energy, and the fat percentage of
huntable animals decides how far the carcass is usable as food.
Artic people like Inuit or ice age hunters on the ice could consume much.
And our anchestors evolving in warm and arid places like Africa?

Without the additional fat we have frankensteinized to lean animals like
boar or auer, meat is a very low density food.
Comparable to tubers in density (2500 kcal is in about 2.3 kg of rabbit or
2.4 kg sweetpotatoe).
But most game kcal come from protein and that is quite a burden for our
organs.

Gatherhunters may see the lean meat of game as a wellcome addon, depending
on their fattyness.
Go ask some aborigines, down under.

Amadeus S.
http://www.newcrops.uq.edu.au/newslett/ncnl4-7.htm
bottom page has some down under aboriginal food items.