On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:54:40 -0400, matesz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Amadeus said:
>>80 g of saturated fat per day are pretty much, even for the western
>>average. Saturated fats are identified as the culprits promoting some
>>deadly diseases.

>Rachel:
>Perhaps you did not know that if one takes in 80 gram of animal fat per day
>from chicken breast, beef, and pork loin, it will not be all SATURATED FAT.
>...

Rachel, please reread. My figures were 220g fat for all 3 meats of Philip
and 80 of it saturated.
Chicken breast looked paleo-like in fat content - i stated that.

Although homo erectus would probably have devoured the whole animal
especially liver, maybe brain. Or only the organs.

Eating only the muscle of an animal would be rather useless for
a homo erectus if other food-choices were available. Because fat, as well
as carbohydrates provide better available energy than protein.

And all paleo plant food choices provide more energy per unit of protein. To
get your 2600 kcal you only need to eat 90% RDA protein on fruits,
100% RDA protein on nuts and tubers (sweet potatoe)
and  Very much vegetables 400% (with the smallest volume on nuts , then
tubers and unbelievable amouts of vegetables)

Philip's diet, obviously heading for ketosis with almost zero
carb in the diet needs that much protein to have enough
for producing glucose out of. That's thinuit. Not homo erectus.

>Guess what?  It's similar for beef fat. Only 47% of the fat in beef is
>saturated, primarily stearic acid, af fat that has no effect on cholesterol
>levels and actually lowers blood pressure.
Can you give reference of a study that stearic acid is beneficial
as you suppose? I never heared of.
Maybe it's not the fat, that correlates saturated fat to CHD deaths.
Maybe it's acidification or excess iron (then men would be betrayed more).
Or do all saturated fat eaters smoke more?

Or: saturated fats encourage growth of bacteria in the gut,
which produce female hormones. That?

Whatever. The connection of saturated fat to disease is strong.
Probably someone else can give better ideas for that.
I bet that Todd has superb references for fat information.

>Btw:  I am well aware of S. Boyd Eaton's work and the fact that wild game
>animals are low in fat ...
>Yes the cut of meat on eats makes a difference.  Yes, the balance of fatty
>acids in one's diet is important.  (Thrift said he takes fish oil capsules.
>)
That's the main difference between real inuits and simulations with
fat from industry animals.
Not that the fat amount was bad. Fat is essential to equal out
the high protein meat, which is much too low in energy.

Its exactely just the balance of the cattle fat, that makes the
difference to Eatons findings.
Fat never was so high in saturated fat, and never was so low in omega-3 fat
(Eatons findings) in evolutionary times. *That's* an argument.
Not to mention, that the fat of farmed animals accumulates some other
nasty things like pesticides.

cheers

Amadeus
(now for the late Rachel post answer my first 5. posting a day, today
it should be private, but i hope for contributions)