Results of epidemiological studies may be exaggerated. The importance and relevance of epidemiological data, especially the China Project, may be exaggerated by dietary advocates. This will be discussed in greater depth in a later section. Let us now begin our summary exploration of these topics. Due to the significant differences in composition of wild vs. domesticated meats, animal studies that use meat from feedlot animals cannot be used to reliably project the results of all possible omnivore diets.
Preference is given to internal fatty organs over the lean muscle meats.
In contrast, test animals in experiments may be fed nothing but marbled muscle meats. As the gut morphology of a rabbit is not adapted to a pure meat diet, the results of such tests must be interpreted with caution. The issues of reliability and projection in cross- species comparisons deserve some consideration. Due to the many differences in the composition of wild vs. domesticated meats, the results of animal studies based on the latter do not necessarily reflect results one might get on a hunter- gatherer type of diet, or any other omnivore diet that excludes feedlot meats. Unconscious double standard.