Cordain revising his recommendations is not something to be frowned upon. That's whats annoying about the whole low-carb vs low-fat camps is that no one gives the other side any leverage. I actually think more of him because he is now changing his recommendations due to emerging data.
Do you really think a guy like Cordain would advise against saturated fat without ample evidence? I just don't see the position you're coming from, as if he has some kind of ulterior motive behind this revision.
He actually went so far as putting it all into a paleo perspective by saying that the stone-agers probably ate leaner meats, instead of just saying "well maybe grok didn't have the best of arteries." It's interesting to see guys like Bork trying to throw the guy who made this way of lifestyle/eating under the bus as soon as his favorite tasting foods are put under scrutiny.
Sounds like Cordain is honing in on a more correct understanding of nutrition.
I don't think you can compare eating saturated fat from coconut to eating saturated fat from beef for example. Isn't most of the fat in coconut, medium Chain triglycerides (MCT), which is quite different from long chain fatty acids?? Cordain differentiates between different types of long chain fatty acids. Most of the studies showing no or mixed effects from sat fat in the diet do not break down different types. It is possible that some sat fats are good and some are not so good. Or perhaps they are good in certain ratios like O6 and O3(both of which are essential but can be problematic in the wrong ratios). There is a lot we don't know yet.
Tags for this Thread