I find it interesting that most paleo and LC advocates vigorously maintain the position that high saturated fat consumption is harmless. In spite of the fact that lots of people continually pop up on this forum with high cholesterol levels, apparently brought about by their high sat-fat intake.
Of course the usual reply to this fact is that it's the benign large-fluffy LDL which is rising, so no harm done, even if your high LDL numbers freak out your lipophobic doctor.
It is my understanding that most of the HG's studied have had LOW LDL levels? Perhaps why Cordain and Wolf do NOT agree with high sat-fat intake. In fact, Cordain references two separate "autopsies" done on ancient Intuit "mummies" which showed they had seriously clogged up arteries. (Though their high intake of POLY-fats may also have played a role in that?)
Another disturbing trend I notice among LC/Paleo folks is high fasting blood sugar levels. Some even being diagnosed as "pre-diabetic" while on the very diet that is supposed to CURE high blood sugar!
I'm aware of the 'physiological insulin resistance" theory which is supposedly the body's way of ensuring the brain gets enough glucose while on LC diet. But I truly wonder if perhaps high sat-fat intake is causing insulin resistance in folks?
So all in all, I'm currently a bit wary of a high sat-fat version of LC/Paleo. As is Cordain, Devaney, and Wolf, so I'm in good company.
I'd love to be proved wrong on this, as I LOVE fatty meats and cream in my coffee. (<:
But I'm curious if any of you follow a lower sat-fat version of paleo for any of the reason I've cited above, or for other reasons?