We all love eating saturated fat. Saturated fat is stable when heated and tastes great. Saturated fat is unfairly blamed for a lot of things. Kurt Harris eats a ton of saturated fat, and he has forgotten more than most of us will ever know.
Saturated fat is often compared to eating too many carbs or too much PUFA. I already know that carbs and PUFA aren't great in high amounts, but how does saturated fat stack up against MUFA? I have seen many more peer-reviewed articles pointing to saturated fat detriments than MUFA detriments. Part of this is due to publication bias, but part of it is real research. I'm not talking dumb cohort studies, I mean well-conducted trials that show some detriment with high saturated fat diets or individual meals, with regards to inflammation, carcinogenesis, etc. Of course, the evidence goes both ways, but it it not 100% pro saturated fat.
MORE IMPORTANTLY...it did not seem like ancient paleos ate quite as much saturated fat as we do. We douse our veggies in butter, pan-fry things in ghee and coconut oil, and savor whole cream and coconut milk. Paleos probably ate game meat, muscle and organ, with some tubers, fruit, veggies, etc. That menu appears to contain more MUFA and less saturated fat than our typical modern paleo diets. I'm not talking a lean-meat diet like early Loren Cordain, but I don't imagine they pan-fried stuff in added fat as much as we do.
Has anybody delved more into this? Except for the occasional population who ate tons of coconut, I can't see that many areas where people ate as much saturated fat as I do on a daily basis. Some genotypes may be more susceptible to things like familial hypercholesterolimia, and I wonder if some of us are eating too much saturated fat for our genotype unwittingly. Especially if epigenetic changes, or even normal genetic changes, have made our response to saturated fat different in the last 10,000 years. I'm reminded of that dubious saying that has a kernel of truth...you are what your grandparents ate.