William, do you believe that cooked fats are better than raw fats? Or do you just assume that cooked fats are as good as raw fats in the sense that they are not "damaged" or harmful at all?
Löwenherz
A very wise man once said "Before you would speak with me, let us define our terms".
Also:
http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/journals/lex's-journal/So I defined my terms in a post on 26/3, and did a poor job, so here's another attempt at some definitions:
Define tallow: practically pure Essential Fatty Acids.
Define render: separate fatty acids from indigestible connective tissue and water.
Define fat: combined fatty acids and INDIGESTIBLE PROTEINS and water.
If you can do better, please do so. There is no copyright on truth.
To answer your question:"do you believe that cooked fats are better than raw fats? ", no.
I believe things after testing for truth; if it passes I will believe it until something better is perceived.
I did test as whether cooked fat is edible, and it made me sick, that's why I do not believe it to be better.
To answer the second question:"do you just assume that cooked fats are as good as raw fats in the sense that they are not "damaged" or harmful at all?"
I have never made such an assumption.
If you note the definition, you can see that cooked fat contains cooked protein which started out being waste and after cooking is poisonous to some of us, including me.
To belabour the point which seems to have confused you, cooked fat is not tallow, never was, never can be.