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:
Amadeus Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 4 Feb 2003 10:21:58 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (82 lines)
Phosphor wrote:
 >>But you can find a *total* fat analysis, including subcutaneous,
 >>bones, marrow and organs too. Like in Figure 2, total fat of deer.

 > Table 2 refers only to the fatty acid composition within biceps femoris
 > muscle.

Read on.
After Table 2 you'll proceed to Figure 2 sometime.
It contains all 4 examined fatty parts.

 > Hence it is titled "fatty acid composition of biceps femoris
 > muscle." ie intermuscular fat, as I said.  the fat contribution of this is
 > small compared to the overall amount found in adipose fat, in a fat beast.
 > maybe 10 times less.

Well Figure 2 doesn't multiply the compositions of the examined parts
with the weigth to be expected for each.
Furtunately we have a table that shows how big various parts of an
animal are for example. (
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind0008&L=paleodiet&P=416 )
Tissue    % carcass wt.   Organ wt. (g)    %fat     total fat (g)
muscle   0.50 22,000 0.02 440
bones   0.13 5720 .03 172
liver,organs   0.075 3300 0.04 132
washed GI tract  0.06 2640 0.02 53
blood    0.012 526 0.02 11
marrow   0.004 176 0.51 90
brain   0.0014 62 .093 6
skin     0.13 5720 0.10 572
storage fat 0.0026 114 0.82 94
GI contents, hair,nails etc 0.085 3740 na na
Total    1.00 44000 na 1568

I see the skin had 572g fat, compared to 440g in the muscles.
you're right, the skin has more fat than muscles. But not much.
And in farmed beasts you have adipose cells inside of muscles.

 > Obese animals exist only for short times of the year (before >hibernating
 > or egg-watching).
 > incorrect. an animal is obese for a certain period. some animals are always
 > fat, specifically marine mammals. different animals have different seasons
 > and times, hence hunters moved to take advantage of the best fat options.

Marine mammals you can skip or humans wouldn't have developed inlands
(like rift valley, east africa). I wouldn't believe either that dougongs
   were enough to fill the gap after male emus have left the egg, or were
all killed. Thanks god there are some dougongs left.

What were the next fat items in the summer?
Cordain's elks were butchered at fall, a fatty season where the winter
is cold, btw..

 >farm animals used to be fattened up on corn. high carbs.

Farm animals are fattened with the *cheapest* calories. Mostly this is
corn, right. But feeding fat fattens even better. And it's done with any
fatty waste. Expeller pulps (e.g. from sunflower). Ground meat waste. ..

 > interesting. can you provide a reference? at 2000 calories that would be 22
 > grams of combined DHA/EPA, which is surely sufficient.

I think I saw the citation a few days ago at BenBests or one of the
Cordaine articles.
With 22 g DHA/EPA I'd surely fear for my brain and AA depletion.
AA smells dangerous when used to make bad eicosanoids.
But the brain seems to need it. And it is displaced by DHA.

If EPA intake is so high I'd fear imune suppression (read at Ben Best
about it).

I don't think it's advisable to play around with such non-paleo
supplements like fish oil too much.
The 1-2 daily grams Ben Best recommends are already based on therapeutic
considerations. They would be hard to eat even when eating all reachable
brains (the only inland source of DHA).
Brain has 0.5 g DHA per 100g (
http://www.juggernaut.com.au/food/?f=brain&n=13318 )
And a  kangaroo brain is only 68 grams "heavy".

Amadeus

ATOM RSS1 RSS2