Emeira's Diary

[Emeira]

stop eating 'raw' pork.

ok, i will

[dime]

Emeira, I don't think a lot of raw animal fat is harmful.
I'm eating much less because I stopped slow-cooking my meat, and when eating raw meat it just happens that I prefer leaner meat like organs.

[Emeira]

...

[Emeira]

Trichinella occur in the muscle tissue. Salo is not meat - it is raw salty pig fat (without meat)

[RRM]

Then for you its still not good, because where the fat is, is the cholesterol,
which may be oxidized cholesterol.

[overkees]

Pig fat is very bad for cholesterol yeah. A lot worse than innocent egg yolks that have not been open to light and air so oxidation is not occurring there.

[Emeira]

is the cholesterol, which may be oxidized cholesterol.

"may be"? You are not 100% (or 99%) sure?

Pig fat is very bad for cholesterol yeah. A lot worse than innocent egg yolks that have not been open to light and air so oxidation is not occurring there.

i thought only heated food is bad.
So raw beef fat is bad too?
By the way, "salo" is stored in a dark and cold place

[RRM]

is the cholesterol, which may be oxidized cholesterol.

"may be"? You are not 100% (or 99%) sure?

No, im not 100% sure, as this oxidation will greatly be a gradual process,
but why would you want to take any risk?
Leave out the pork and you are 100% safe.
During storage and due to (salt) treatment always some oxidation will occur,
and as its the fatty part, there is much cholesterol to be oxidized.
The raw beef that we normally eat on this diet is fresh raw beef.
Not treated, not stored. (and mine is also not fatty)

[dime]

and as its the fatty part, there is much cholesterol to be oxidized.

I think that muscle meat would contain much more cholesterol per calorie than the fat. Haven't checked though.

[Emeira]

Leave out the pork and you are 100% safe.

I've been craving fatty foods lately
Salted pork was all I had.

[overkees]

and as its the fatty part, there is much cholesterol to be oxidized.

I think that muscle meat would contain much more cholesterol per calorie than the fat. Haven't checked though.

Lard: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/fats-and-oils/483/2
Cured ham: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/por ... cts/2246/2

Twice as much cholesterol as the cured ham. So, regarding calories, it's about the same cholesterol.

[dime]

So, regarding calories, it's about the same cholesterol.

The ham has 33mg cholesterol per 100 kcal, the lard has 10.5mg per 100 kcal, that doesn't look quite the same to me.

[RRM]

Too bad it can't be consumed as fresh as beef (which is consumed 4-5 weeks after it has been killed).

Are you seriously suggesting that this is true for all beef all over the world?

I've been craving fatty foods lately
Salted pork was all I had.

Buy raw beef, and put salt on it.
Or put salt on your egg yolks.

I think that muscle meat would contain much more cholesterol per calorie than the fat. Haven't checked though.

Pork muscle tissue may contain quite a lot of cholesterol as well, indeed.

Pork, cholesterol in mg/100g.
385 kidney
354 liver
154 heart
76 fat, intermuscular
65 muscles only
57 fat, subcutaneous

[overkees]

Too bad it can't be consumed as fresh as beef (which is consumed 4-5 weeks after it has been killed).

Are you seriously suggesting that this is true for all beef all over the world?

No, I'm jokingly denying that it is false for some beef somewhere in the world...

RRM, you always think something I say is absolute. What I mean here is that alot of supermarket beef is that old, yes. It needs to hang after it has been killed for the meat to soften up, enzymes will do this. But of course, in FranceI read that it takes less longer before the slaughtered cow reaches your plate. And here in the Netherlands it takes longer (4-5 weeks sometimes). In fact it is considered more quality meat if the beef has been hung longer as the meat will contain less water, more taste and is more tender..

I think meat that has been properly hung is easier to digest and might be better for you. I don't believe the cholesterol that has been oxidized is a big part of the total cholesterol. Should probably see some statistics. Anyway, fresh fish is always better, tastewise (in my opinion) and nutrient wise. Except for the mercury maybe..? Mackerel and herring are just awesome.

[RRM]

Too bad it can't be consumed as fresh as beef (which is consumed 4-5 weeks after it has been killed).

Are you seriously suggesting that this is true for all beef all over the world?

RRM, you always think something I say is absolute.

Its the wording you use.
You might have written this: "which is often or mostly consumed 4-5 weeks after ..."
Just as much as you could have written: "here in the Netherlands it may take longer (4-5 weeks sometimes)"
, because here some butchers sometimes dont even let it ripen at all, depending on the wishes of the buyer.