In Acts 8-10, Peter receives a vision of a big sheet, filled with unclean animals, lowered from God three times. God says to him- Arise, kill and eat. Peter responds- "nothing unclean has ever touched my lips", to which God says "whatever I have cleansed is now clean". In the immediate aftermath, Peter understands the vision to mean that in the Christian Church, the Jews are no longer to exclude themselves from befriending the Gentiles. But it likely also meant that all of the unclean meat is now OK too. Paul, who was the ultimate "super Jew" of his time, later said "nothing is unclean of itself, but consider the feelings and traditions of others when you eat and drink".

Another account, again in Acts, is the scene of the Church's first councel, where the Jewish Christians felt they had to deal with the issue of circumcision of the Gentile Christians. They concluded that these laws should not be applied to the Gentiles, and that the only rules should be to refrain form the meat of animals that had been strangled, from meat that was not properly drained of blood, and from fornication. So yes, the earliest Christians became far more liberal than what was commanded in the OT, and it has been that way for us ever since.

Do I understand it all? No. Like- why not strangled meat? Perhaps that's because it is the modern equivalent of road kill- we tend to not eat road kill because the shock to the animal's body causes hormonal release into the muscle tissue. Why not bloody meat? I don't know- I love my steak rare, but maybe it is slowly killing me. Why the difference between OT and NT? Again, I don't know. Wormy pork would have been just as much of a problem in 40 AD as it was in 200 BC. Yet, it was allowed solely on the basis that in the Church, the Gentiles were not required to adopt Jewish religious laws.

This probably wasn't very helpful. Are there any Seventh Day Adventists here that might be able to shed some light?

Dave