Maybe he’s just gnawing on sticks of butter and coconuts, and washing them down with cream.
Not a cite for that. A cite for “tailor your fat intake to your climate. In cold weather, eat more fatty cold-water fish. In very hot weather, you can probably eat a little coconut oil (hopefully unrefined) and other saturated fats safely.”
What? Humans are cold-blooded? That’s the only way this would make sense, and fats in the body aren’t stored as pure fat (as in a bottle of vegetable oil or a chunk of lard). In any case, the melting points of pure saturated fats are as high as 70°C - far higher than any animal’s body temperature. Even unsaturated oleic acid will turn solid at 16°C (a look at salmon (more details under fat, oleic is 18:1) shows that oleic acid is the main unsaturated fat, they also have a lot of saturated fat, comparable to mammal meats).
I was just about to post the same thing:cool:
Since we have answered the op and are down the hijack road …
But modern factory farmed beef is much higher in fat, and in particular saturated fats, than the game meats (usually including marrow and organ meats) that our ancestors ate (which were relatively leaner and higher in MUFA and PUFAs).
Yes, and “primal” diets (in their various incarnations) are usually careful to specify non-factory-farmed meat as being the ideal option.
Unsaturated facts break down in response to UV radiation precisly because they do absorb radiation. Saturated fats don’t absorb UV radiation at all, so they would not be protective at all. But this really only applies if you are rubbing hem on as sunblock. What this has to do with dietary fats is yet to be determned.
Really? You can get lean meat you know (as opposed to the nasty stuff used in hamburgers, sausages and other gross greasy meats). Also, a look at NutritionData shows that 90% lean beef is 39% saturated and grass-fed beef is 38% saturated. Not a significant difference really, except for some extra omega-3 in the grass-fed beef (but you can get far more from other foods).
Also, as previously posted (a recent Scientific American magazine article reported similar findings):
So with that, not eating processed meat is far more important that eating organic grass-fed meat (although the latter should be eaten more for other reasons).
Compare that, or even tenderloin, to say, elk. Match serving size and compare total fat, saturated fat, other fats, amount of protein per calorie …
“Grass fed” aint much better. True.
[emphasis mine]
Because it ensures that more cows have to suffer if they get sick?
(Seriously, raising beef to be organic is not good for the cow.)
To make it easy for everyone:
90% lean ground beef 100g serving: 214 Cal, 11 g fat, 4 g Saturated fat, 27 g protein.
Elk 100g serving: 146 Cal, 2 g fat, 1 g saturated fat, 30 g protein.
Marrow and organ meats are particular high in MUFAs.
Yeah, but my points about eating high saturated fat meats not being as bad as popularly thought still stands (and while eating elk might cut out some fat from our diet, it is far more important to cut out added fats, which are the majority of fats consumed, alone equal to the recommended (upper limit) RDA, some 600 calories per day, elimination of which would reduce caloric intake to under 2,000 a day). Also, beef can have even lower fat content than 90% lean; at least the beef and vegetable soups I often eat have around 1-2 grams of total fat per serving, 0 (<0.5)-1 grams saturated and around 10 grams of protein (some, but not much, from vegetables, somewhat more if there are noodles) and 100-150 calories (2 servings per can, usually reduced sodium, some have over 1,000 mg of potassium per serving), not much different from soups made with chicken (of course, I eat other meats, including fish, and more than the recommended twice a week).
Also, is organic grass-fed beef really worse for cows? I have heard stuff (maybe not entirely true) like they need to be pumped full of antibiotics when fed corn because they get sick from eating it. Not to mention diseases like mad cow disease which spread from feeding cows parts of other cows.
So you think climate and amount of sunlight should have no effect on the ratios of your fat intake? I’m just talking common sense. Yes, I can probably dig up some studies, but…if you’re looking for an excuse to ignore dietary common sense, you don’t need scientific studies to do that.
Are you talking about grassfed or organic? Grassfed cows are much healthier than grainfed. Did you not know that?
Specifically, I’m talking about flow rates in colder temps. Saturated fats mostly don’t have as clearly-defined a melting point. In cold weather, your extremities can be QUITE a bit colder than regular body temp. If you’ve got saturated fats flowing through your bloodstream (versus unsaturated), they will not flow as easily through your extremities, assuming your extremities are noticeably below body temp.
Certainly the tips of my finger, nose, ears, and toes get quite cold when I’m outside in cold weather. Definitely colder than body temp.
The temperature of the human body is not dependent on climate, so why should ones diet? I’m not at all sure how you think sunlight effects anything. Your understanding of UV absorbtion is backwards. Saturated fats don’t absorb UV.
What’s “added fats” to one person is the olive oil mainstay of a Mediterranean Diet to another. Defining terms is not easy in these discussions!
Again, the attempt to find individual nutritional villains guilty beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt is difficult, even if it markets well. Highly processed food is one of the few that can be identified pretty dang conclusively. But nutritional patterns associated with better or worse outcomes are clear. Your pattern (which seems to be moderate amounts of meats, fish, lots of vegetables and probably fruits, little processed foods, little added fats, little refined carbs) seems reasonable. The one that seems the worst is the standard American diet. Replacing higher saturated fat real foods with simple carbs, or lower fat processed meats, I agree, is a foolish tactic.
I have no beef, so to speak, with your position. I do object to how some of the blogs present what is known and what is not. And those (in many of those blogs linked to) who use the word “Paleo” to justify nutrition plans that are very divergent from anything at all similar to any ancestral set of nutritional habits.
The concentration of fat in the blood is so low that I can’t see any significant effect from temperature; as measured by triglycerides, the normal level is 150 mg/dl or less, equivalent to 1.5 grams per liter (about 1 kg), or 0.15% by weight.
Also, I happened to come across this article while searching for the composition of human blood (something more detailed than just triglycerides):
Butter Leads to Lower Blood Fats Than Olive Oil, Study Finds
This is pretty accurate, haha. Except I am female.
Of course my original statement was an exaggeration, but caloric staples for me are egg yolks, butter, cream, cheese, whole-fat yogurt and kefir, 85% lean factory-farmed ground beef, and I fry everything in leaf lard and coconut oil.
I just got new health testing done, we’ll see how my cholesterol is looking. Last year at this time it was total in the high 170s, HDL 90 and LDL 76. I’ve been eating a lot of sugar and grains lately, which I don’t usually, so I’m wondering if I’ll see an increase in total (from my triglycerides going up - these are pretty directly tied to intake of sugars) and a decrease in HDL because I’ve been eating so much junk besides my usual coconut-and-animal-fat-laden fare. I’m paying for it, too - been breaking out and I’ve gotten sick twice already this winter.