Can't constantly do 3000 calories a day yet increase my lifts 2.5kg a session?

the foods they get, which are high in fats, will be completely natural and unprocessed.

The Inuit operate in sub-zero temperatures and have done for a very long time. They have adapted to the Arctic conditions in both metabolic and circulatory ways.

So you can't really throw these facts at someone from the UK for example. Otherwise they'll go stuff their face with McDonalds and continue with a sedentary lifestyle and think this is all fine because they are getting the same amount of fat intake as some of the healthiest people in the world.

I would also beg to differ than an hour in the gym is suffice to justify the fat intake from the x3 servings of mozzarella and the weekly recommended allowance of red meat and in a single sitting.

That's right; the only unnatural fat is trans fat.

Are you implying that environmental temperature alters the way our bodies utilise food?

Is this how you would react to a study about the benefits of exercise in reversing the otherwise negative effects of a high fat western diet? Are you isolating my Inuit example out of context?

I agree that people like to see what they want to see, and that doesn't detract from the science. The Inuit diet is essentially ketogenic. That is, devoid of any significant carbohydrates. I didn't mention it because it's on the wikipedia page and I was merely challenging the notion that a diet high in saturated fat is intrinsically unhealthy. Are you not guilty of jumping to conclusions in the same way you've criticised others may do in response to the same information?

You should read the study I cited if you're so invested on this point. The adverse affects of 16.5g of saturated fat was reversed and then improved from baseline in response to 45 minutes of walking. That's 20% more saturated fat than you get in 100g of mozzarella cheese, 1/3rd of the previous poster's example and more than most could consume in a single sitting. I wasn't trying to be patronising by saying "food for thought", so you can drop the passive aggressive attitude. I got involved in this thread to contribute, not argue.

Our bodies use up way more energy in colder climates. On average, their bodies will be working much harder than the average european, even those in the highlands. [...]
You mentioned going for a 45minute walk below for example. That just simply isn't comparable to what the Inuit would be doing each day, particularly when you factor in the sub-zero temperatures.

I never said that a diet high in saturated fat is unhealthy

Does the reversal of these adverse affects include things like skin spots from high fat diets?

What are you trying to say? That their physical activity prevents their diet from affecting their health? Are you saying it would be unhealthy for me? Or the Inuit women who stays at home and doesn't participate in hunting? What if I stopped exercising and started a keto diet? Are you saying my arteries would suffer? If your message doesn't lead to anywhere precise, it's hard to understand what you're trying to say.

Conserving body heat is physically more economical than the production or dissipation of heat, the latter of which only increases metabolic rate significantly when we have to shiver to maintain core temperature. Inuits favour insulation over shivering and movement, because it leads to sweating, and then they risk catching hyperthermia quicker. Beyond this, I'm unqualfied to discuss Inuit lifestyle. They're not as physically active a people as you might think, even considering the cold stress.

You explicitly identified one as unhealthy precisely due to its saturated fat content, so that was the conclusion I drew. Saturated fat + carbohydrates however, and without an active lifestyle, is intrinsically unhealthy for reasons you probably know intuitively, but with exercise, even minimal physical activity, the same diet has the complete opposite effect. I'm paraphrasing my first post. This isn't supposed to be new information; I think it would've been more sensible to examine the links I provided before responding to my statements. That way you can see if I've misconstrued something, or if the data itself is unreliable. I didn't share the study arbitrary as if it were a certificate to validate my opinion.

It's a study about arterial function after high fat meals. The researchers wouldn't be concerned with acne.

Yes, I am saying their physical activity allows them to have a high fat diet and not suffer cardiovascular problems. If you were to engage in such a diet and sit around doing nothing, then yes, I am willing to bet you would encounter some serious problems, even outside of cardiovascular ones such as type two diabetes or other conditions that the chance of forming are increased if you are overweight.

I'm sure eating a high fat diet meal won't give me a heart attack, eating it everyday for 30years though?

A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. More data are needed to elucidate whether CVD risks are likely to be influenced by the specific nutrients used to replace saturated fat.

I never said anything about cardiovascular health and high-fat diets in my initial post.

0.5 and 0.3 kilos of beef and mozzarella respectively is a **** load of saturated fat [...] that is not good for your heart.

I don't know anything about pancreatic cancer, and it would take a different discussion entirely, one that would have serious implications for everyone on keto but also one beyond our relative expertise. It was only for today and yesterday that I've been an armchair expert on the particular issues of saturated fat and the importance of exercise. I didn't intend to drag it out but I don't like to be rude. For now I'd like to consider it settled, because OP will do what he will do and it's not like he'll overeat himself into oblivion without training. phew