0

votes

Wild red salmon vs grass-fed beef/bison

Commented on November 13, 2015
Created October 29, 2015 at 11:37 PM

Let's pretend to play devil's advocate here and say that one of these food sources went extinct.

If you had to choose, which one is more nutritious?

  • 746b2d632e9fbae991144c98c5fa7078

    asked by

    (0)
  • Views
    1.8K
  • Last Activity
    593D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

3 Answers

1
Medium avatar

on November 12, 2015
at 09:18 PM

I'd go with salmon just because it personally feels nicer to eat for me, i prefer the taste and i feel like it doesn't slow down my digestion as much as beef... plus i'd kill a salmon a day guilt free, whereas i'd probably only take down a cow myself in extreme circumstances. Seafood over mammals here.

I know your question was about nutrition, not ethics etc... but i agree with raydawg, for all round nutrition you want a varied diet rather than sticking to one protein source.

If you want to check the nutritional values of salmon vs beef, you're probably on cronometer already... i don't think there's much in it, salmons probably a little more nutrient dense.

1
56c28e3654d4dd8a8abdb2c1f525202e

(1812)

on October 30, 2015
at 01:40 PM

but generally, meat is more nutritious than fish. Fish is a great supplement, providing crucial O3, iodine and selenium. Good to eat twice a week, beyond that its usefulness declines. Outdoors meat is a staple.

56c28e3654d4dd8a8abdb2c1f525202e

(1812)

on November 13, 2015
at 10:54 PM

I am saying that mammal fat was best for humans in temperate climates, on general principles. Salmon has too many PUFA.

As you go south you encounter a number of healthy fat sources from the vegetable world (avocado, olives, coconut, palm), but up here, it is mammals or nothing. I don't think low fat diets work well obviously.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on November 13, 2015
at 09:37 PM

Not to forget whales too. It looks like what you're trying to say is that salmon plus oysters = beef, except for the fat. What about fatty salmon vs non fatty. I always thought the difference between low fat chum and high fat sockeye was texture (rubbery vs succulent and tender), but would the fatty salmon be a better salmon healthwise?

56c28e3654d4dd8a8abdb2c1f525202e

(1812)

on November 13, 2015
at 05:21 AM

and seals. Meat is better than fish because of fat primarily, zinc and iron secondarily. The fattier the meat the better it is.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on November 12, 2015
at 10:34 PM

Out on the coast salmon was the staple, fresh and smoked. But there were also clams, oysters, crab, venison, elk and bear. A cornucopia of meat.

1
96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19397)

on October 30, 2015
at 10:35 AM

Let's not.

It's never a good thing to eat just one thing over and over.  Rather, get your nutrients from varied sources.  Not just beef, but also lamb, salmon, chicken, bison, goat, sheep, shellfish, fin-fish, eggs, all wild/pastured/etc. and rotate them around.  Sticking with just one is the way to getting in trouble by getting too much of some nutrients, and too few of others.  This applies more to plants than meats, but still.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!