At 11:22 -0500 10/12/02, Adrienne Smith wrote:

>Also, the analysis did not specify
>which parts of the meat were tested. Anyone know if a significantly different
>result would be expected if organ meats were sampled?

Did you manage to find the first two pages of that article (hidden
amongst about a zillion other links on that poorly designed site):
http://cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/food/beef/index.html
http://cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/food/beef/index2.html

The test was performed on a rib eye steak.

So yes, the fat profile would be markedly different if organ meats were
tested. Organ meats are generally much higher in MUFA and PUFA. Typical
ratios of SFA:MUFA:PUFA are 2:2:1 in organ meats (compared to 12:11:1
in the rib eye steak tested).

When considering fat consumption it is perhaps more important to look
at the ratios of different types of fats than fat quantities.

Taking yesterday's Pecan discussion for example. 1% omega 3 fat content
is pretty good, so you might think eating Pecans is a good way to
supplement omega 3 fats. But you also need to look at the omega 6
content, and you find that this is 20%. So eating pecans would actually
have a deleterious effect on your w3:w6 ratio.

 ...Richard.