Re: Cordain and Fat (was probiotics FOS)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/21/05 2:18:09 AM Eastern Standard Time,

heidis@... writes:

> Actually, if you read the article, he doesn't say that. He says they would

> eat the whole animal, most likely. Based on the elk that I've seen hunters

> bring in, Cordain's numbers seem about right. Some animals, like buffalo,

> have more fat, which would be prized. But none of that has to do with his

> numbers for vegie stuff, which is also borne out by fecal research. Early

> humans ate a lot of meat ... but they also ate roots, fruit, and plants,

> which were full of carbs.

______

His numbers could be thrown off by assumptions about the age hunters would

choose to kill an animal. For example, most hunters with modern tastes (or

people eating farmed meat, for that matter) prefer a younger animal, while Price

noted that the N.A. hunters he studied deliberately went after older animals

for the extra subcutaneous fat on the back of the animal.

I haven't read Cordain's work; I'm just throwing that out there.

Chris

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them

make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion,

which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of

the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray

ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for

those

who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

[Guest guest]

>His numbers could be thrown off by assumptions about the age hunters would

>choose to kill an animal. For example, most hunters with modern tastes (or

>people eating farmed meat, for that matter) prefer a younger animal, while

Price

>noted that the N.A. hunters he studied deliberately went after older animals

>for the extra subcutaneous fat on the back of the animal.

>

>I haven't read Cordain's work; I'm just throwing that out there.

>

>Chris

They might be, but he also goes to really obssessive detail about this stuff.

And he also says that the average amount of fat in the diet is higher than the

average American's, so I wouldn't characterize him as " anti fat " . He IS

anti-grain-fed beef, as am I, and in his book basically says it's impossible to

get grass fed beef so he doesn't bother with it as dietary advice (if I'm

recalling correctly). The same bias is in a lot of the stuff I've read: they say

wild animals are great, but then go on to figure that no one is going to " eat

wild " in their dietary advice.

Anyway, I DO think grain-fed beef is bad for folks to eat: the fat content isn't

right. Plus it tastes weird if you are used to the other kind. It wouldn't

surprise me if it causes inflammation.

2b7bfc6.jpg

2b7c00c.jpg

Anyway, as the above shows, he is neither anti-fat nor pro-carb, but even at his

low rates, you still have hunter-gatherers eating 22-40% of their calories from

*carbs* which is what the discussion was all about. That's a lower carb rate

than in the SAD, but it's enough to " feed the gut bacteria " , esp. since most of

those carbs were slower-digesting.

If you read the work, you can see he was very meticulous, and mostly what he

says agrees with NT thoughts.

Heidi Jean