Log house in solid wood or post-and-beam construction - experiences?

Which U-value is economically optimal is always a question of assumptions, the used crystal ball, and also the respective construction method. If someone has no idea, it doesn’t matter for the questioner here anyway, because with the assumed construction method: log house ONLY solid wood in the wall, the most expensive construction method comes together with the highest U-value, meaning the worst thermal insulation. From a purely economic perspective, that makes no sense. For non-rational builders, according to the energy saving ordinance, it then has to be about 30 cm wall made of solid (glued) wood.

For log house enthusiasts, the cheapest construction method would be a double-log wall structure with twice approximately 8 cm log beams and insulation in between. The insulation can also be made from jute or similar without chemicals and wood preservatives and foils. Cheaper is of course also possible with only one layer of log beams and interior panels, but then you might as well leave it and build a timber frame.

I would not then do the timber frame with log beams as formwork, but only with a ventilated rainscreen facade. This can also be done without much fuss with jute and without foil. Price-wise, this probably does not differ much from the double log – so rather a matter of religion.

Can the consumer be sure that where it says "Holzhaus" there is actually "wood" inside? For example, the exterior walls of a prefabricated wooden house have a lot of inexpensive insulation, plasterboard and OSB panels, but only the supporting structure is made of wood.

Have you ever seen, planned, or built a real log house yourself?