Hillary wrote:
> Also that LA 
>and ALA may not even be essential, as previously believed.

LA/LNA not essential?
This is the first time that I hear such things from LA/LNA.
Could you please point to some sort of reference, where I could find it?
I tried to google it, but couldn't find anything like this for humans.

>Looks like Cordain is no longer promoting flax oil, judging by a Q&A 
>from his March 12th newsletter. He's saying that you need the longer 
>chain n3, not flax ALA. And that the body doesn't convert ALA well to 
>DHA or EPA, which are what you need. Also that flax and other seed 
>sources of ALA may have other toxins and antinutrients, and that they 
>are not now and never were consumed by hunter gatherers.

I recall a discussion here (~10 years ago), where I gathered the fact, that LNA plays an essential role in limiting AA (Arachidonic Acid) and "bad" Series-2 prostaglandins.
Because *both*, "good" Series-1 PG and "bad" Series-2 PG come from omega-6 LA.
The difference is only from one enzymatic step, delta-5-desaturase, wich makes AA out of DGLA.
And this, d5d, processes either LNA(derivate), making EPA out of it
or the LA(derivate) DGLA, making AA out out it.
And d5d preferres omega-3 substrates by a factor of 4.
So, it LNA is present there's less AA in production.
I consider this as the main anti-inflammatory effect of LNA or flax oil.

While EPA only limits the release of AA from cell membranes.

So, if Loren Cordain attempted to simulate a huntergatherer-like fat composition from farmed meat, I still think that adding LNA+LA was the appropriate approach. 

Looking up a wild game meat
http://www.juggernaut.com.au/food/index.php?f=moose&n=17172
does show that PUFA are even more than SFA (e.g. in the moose).

regards,

Amadeus