The consumption of saturated fat by "ancient hunter-gatherers" was likely quite high (and quite likely higher than Cordain thinks even now). But the idea that he could put an exact figure on it is ridiculous. I mean ... you know ... they're all dead, and the same goes for the game they pursued.
This is the man who said previously that wild game was lean. He did base this on game he'd shot. But then he wasn't in a position to shoot game that would have been around in a landscape that hadn't been impacted on by agricultural, and then industrial, man. The fecundity of parts of the Americas pre-contact is truly staggering. People used to kill deer in parts of what's now the U.S. where white men hadn't yet been and find it had four inches of fat on it. Of course, as settlers encroached and hunted and fished the game out and destroyed its habitat, it began very rapidly to get both scarcer and smaller. There are accounts of people moving into newly opened areas from the East and writing in disbelief about the quantity of game and its sizeónot knowing that a hundred or so years before people newly arrived from Europe were writing in the same way about the East coast.
And he says "yet they were non-atherogenic". Well, again, he can't look at the arteries of "ancient hunter gatherers", so he doesn't know what state they were in. That's just speculation. (I'm sure their arteries would have been fine, but no one can claim to know what they were like. As i said, they're all, you know, dead. Their heads have been cold for millennia.)