Ingredients used to make soap and candlewax shouldn't really be used as foods.
Leaving aside candles for the moment (since they introduce the added variable of inhaled smoke), are you saying that all soaps must necessarily be highly toxic? In other words, it sounds like you're saying we should never use any soaps, yes? That would explain why you might think that something that can be made into soap should never be eaten. Also, to further my understanding of what you're saying, are you still eating raw suet?
It might help if in my explaining why I personally don't find the soap argument to be convincing I explain that I have found raw suet to be one of my most beneficial foods and if I expound some more on the fact that cooked meats and animal fats have had much less negative effect on me (mind you--I'm not saying NO negative effect) than raw carbs--with grains, dairy, sugars, nightshades and acidic foods having the worst effects on me (in some cases, worse when raw than cooked, and in some vice-versa). Maybe cooked foods will have more serious negative effects on me as I eat more raw. One thing I have noticed is that some foods don't produce noticeable symptoms unless you've been off them completely for 4 days or 4 weeks or longer.
When it comes to tallow, FOR ME, the negatives of heating it don't seem to totally negate the positives of the suet. I found that eliminating grains, dairy, sugars, nightshades and tropical fruits had huge benefits for me, whereas going raw seems to have produced substantial but lesser improvements. For me, the optimal diet currently seems to be raw meat/seafood, animal (including fish) fat, and water. My guess is that raw organs would be good to add, but I am not currently able to handle them raw.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a well-known pollutant and by-product of coal- and tar-pits, as well as a byproduct of smoking cigarettes, are also created by heat/cooking. So, every time one eats cooked food such as tallow, containing such polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, one is smoking a little(or a lot, depending) each time.
Do you have evidence that suet melted below 40 degrees celsius, over even at higher temps, contains significant quantities of that stuff? I'm gradually moving toward eating more of my suet raw anyway, but it would be good info to have to help motivate me further.
The 85% raw figure is a bare minimum, the agreed percentage , among most RAFers,below which there is negligible health-improvement.
So up to 15% of the diet can be tallow heated to cooking temps and still be considered acceptable by this forum (if an individual can handle it, of course), yes?
... Even then, it's generally recommended to go higher. As far as mentioning tallow as a 2nd-rate compromise food(eg:- used for travelling etc.) that's OK
Thanks. I don't recall ever claiming that tallow or pemmican was the equal of raw meat and fat. If I ever do that outside of hot topics, please do ask me to clarify.
So, there needs to be some sort of overall concensus.
Yes, I agree.
But recall how annoyed you got by that other, more recent pro-raw-dairy post, because it conflicted with your own highly negative experiences re raw dairy
I thought the other poster's characterization of my reaction was somewhat exaggerated and I was actually more put off by other things (that I won't get into to avoid starting a debate about it) than by his promotion of raw dairy. I've gotten along fine with some other people who eat and/or promote raw dairy and even pasteurized dairy at other forums--including a Paleo forum (I'm actually a big fan of Todd Moody's posts at another Paleo forum, and last I knew he was regularly eating dairy products).
So I don't even mind if someone promotes raw dairy here outside of the hot topics forum (though that is not acceptable to the forum, I know), as long as they don't act like it is equal or superior to the best RPD foods (which I don't believe I've ever done with tallow or pemmican) or behave as if raw dairy is generally accepted as Paleo. In that context I don't even mind if they argue that raw dairy is Paleo if they explain WHY they think it is and provide evidence instead of just stating absolutes as if anyone with any sense MUST accept them. If I do stuff like this I hope that people will call me on it.
and imagine how members like myself might react to posts, such as made in the past by various members recommending the supposed health-benefits of cooked, low-carb diets, grainfed meat or tallow(all of which I did very badly on, healthwise).
Yes, I've tried to be sensitive when discussing tallow, but I guess I need to be even more sensitive than I realized.
As for the issue of what is healthy or unhealthy, we will just have to agree to disagree.After all, I've found that , for me, while I suffer very badly from eating cooked fatty meats, I have no (immediately perceptible) trouble if I, instead, select a cooked vegetable dish(assuming no processed food is involved, just lightly-cooked veg).
Yes, I understood that your experience was different from mine and just added my own to the mix.
To return to the topic at hand, and summarize and clarify what I was trying to say: I eat more than once a day and eat some tallow heated below 40 degrees celsius because it helps me maintain and build my weight and for other personal reasons--not because I think it's necessarily Paleo or optimally healthy. I've noticed no ill effects from this (knock on wood).
Some evidence that was reported in this forum (such as the circadian rhythm thing) does suggest that general human biology MIGHT be more geared to two or more feedings a day than one, but I am by no means claiming that that has been proven, I have not studied it much, and am very open to other views on it. Plus, everyone's needs are not exactly the same, so there will be exceptions to the general rule anyway.