Omega 3 Fatty Acids

Now, if that is true, and the modern western population is not consuming a huge amount of Omega-6, or at least not in their natural form, that opens a big can of worms...

This is the only study that shows such drastic difference between refined and cold pressed oils, so I don't know why is that so and is their method of analysis more accurate than the method of other groups, but if it is, then it makes a big difference on how we view many things when it comes to the connection between fats and human health.
Let me roughly summarise from the info we’ve got gathered here, please correct me if needed,

We saw that polyunsaturated omega 3 fats derivatives EPA and DHA (directly available from fish oil, unlike from plant sources where a lazy conversion from Omega 3 is needed) are easily prone to oxidation. We then saw that this oxidation can be countered by emulsion, when mixed with oleic acid and/or butter.

Theoretically, vegetable oils high in omega 6, being also polyunsaturated, are highly oxidative too.

1st question : Would an emulsion principle have the same restorative effect on the oxidation of say cold pressed vegetable oils ?

Later, in the referenced Table 2 above, we see that refined veggie oils lost much of their omega 6 FAs, suggesting that the SAD diet may finally not be as high in those fats as pretended. But does it change anything to the possibility that the other PUFAs left in there have probably been oxidised anyway, and to the fact that (unrefined) veggie oils are highly unstable by nature ?

I really haven’t any background in biology so what’s following is pure speculation : would it be possible that the Omega 6s somehow disappeared from the composition, or transformed, because of having oxidised to such an extend ?

We don't have a separate topic about Omega-6 fatty acids on the forum, because nobody in the world, it seems, is interested in Omega-6, because they are supposedly bad for us
To add to the interest in Omega 6, Georgia Ede made her point about the role and usefulness of Arachinoid Acid (ARA) in an article for PsychologyToday
 
1st question : Would an emulsion principle have the same restorative effect on the oxidation of say cold pressed vegetable oils ?

I think so. Mayonnaise is an emulsion of vegetable oils, and it has a long shelf life.

Later, in the referenced Table 2 above, we see that refined veggie oils lost much of their omega 6 FAs, suggesting that the SAD diet may finally not be as high in those fats as pretended. But does it change anything to the possibility that the other PUFAs left in there have probably been oxidised anyway, and to the fact that (unrefined) veggie oils are highly unstable by nature ?
I wouldn't say that veggie oils are highly unstable under room temperature and stored in a dark place in a closed bottle. Unless they are very rich with omega 3, like flaxseed oil. I was drinking recently my one-year-old unrefined sunflower oil, and it tasted and felt just fine.

Refined oils are made to improve the resistance to oxidation even more. So I don't think that what you get in the end is more oxidized oil, but something else. In that analysis, they found a completely different type of fatty acids. But we would need a confirmation of that from more studies.

I really haven’t any background in biology so what’s following is pure speculation : would it be possible that the Omega 6s somehow disappeared from the composition, or transformed, because of having oxidised to such an extend ?

I don't know. Whatever happens in the process, we would need a proof that refined oil is a very different product from crude oil. And so far I found only one such study.
 
Refined oils are made to improve the resistance to oxidation even more. So I don't think that what you get in the end is more oxidized oil, but something else.
But it would go against practically everything that's been shared on the forum so far, concerning this oil business... Would we start to put all the accumulated data in question just for one study ? "Big mess as usual."
I was again reading this from James DiNicolantonio, in a Dr Mercola article shared by @Uperios above:
When you consume these isolated oils, even if it's a cold-pressed omega-6, the acid in your stomach will oxidize those oils and create lipid hydroperoxides and aldehydes. We absorb these and they cause a ton of damage.
There seems indeed to be more studies needed on that, it never really stops then.
 
But it would go against practically everything that's been shared on the forum so far, concerning this oil business... Would we start to put all the accumulated data in question just for one study ? "Big mess as usual."

I wouldn't say that it would go against everything, but it would put more light on the topic of refined vegetable oils. Which would then raise some questions about more natural omega 6.

When you consume these isolated oils, even if it's a cold-pressed omega-6, the acid in your stomach will oxidize those oils and create lipid hydroperoxides and aldehydes. We absorb these and they cause a ton of damage.

If that is true, then the same can be said for fish oil, which oxidize even more easily than omega-6. But somehow, oxidized omega-3 are not a problem, according to James DiNicolantonio:

"Omega-3s oxidizing in the body is bad, but our bodies kind of know what to do with that signal, whereas omega-6, not so much, because we didn't have as much during Paleolithic times," DiNicolantonio says.

What?! Where is a proof of that?

And in the same article he mentions the problem with oxidized fish oils:

For example, about half of all fish oils have problems with oxidation. So, when buying a fish oil supplement, you really need to look for a product that tests the hydro peroxide levels. The lower the level the better, but I would not accept anything over 5 percent.

Why would oxidized fish oils be a problem when our bodies supposedly "know what to do with that signal"?
 
Yeah there are many red flags among this plethora of infos, with many assumptions about things we actually don't know.
As has been highlighted by Dr. Bill Harris in this other article, putting different amino acids in pre-defined bags of OM3 or OM6 and saying that the latter are bad is over-simplified.
Especially when "There are also seven different types of omega-6 fatty acids, and we don’t know a whole lot about them".
He says :
[...] it presumes that all the omega-3s behave the same and have the same health benefits, and all the omega-6s have the same health benefits or detriments, which is really not true, [...] there are certain metabolites of even arachidonic acid that are beneficial. For example, lipoxgenase A1 is anti-inflammatory, and prostacyclin prevents platelet aggregation. There are metabolites of linoleic acid itself that don't go through arachidonic that have at least beneficial relationships with blood pressure and inflammation. It's a much more complicated system, I think, than just omega-6 is bad, omega-3 is good. It's just much more nuanced than that.
 
Recently, there were some interesting studies from China where they compared the diets with lard, vegetable oils, and the blend of lard plus vegetable oils. And they claim that the healthiest diet is with the blend of those two sources of fats, which corresponds with the traditional diet of people in China.

 
Recently, there were some interesting studies from China where they compared the diets with lard, vegetable oils, and the blend of lard plus vegetable oils. And they claim that the healthiest diet is with the blend of those two sources of fats, which corresponds with the traditional diet of people in China.

Interesting that lard is regarded as a saturated fat. It is 60% unsaturated fat and 40% saturated fat. (this does depend on what the pig was fed) Soybean oil is 80% unsaturated and 15% saturated, and 5% "other"
The health affects of unsaturated fat are not so good.
Typical Fatty–Acid Compositions of Some Common Fats
 
Hello everyone!
I've just read through the whole thread and I've thrown out my krill omega3 capsules now :-) I'm thinking of getting my omega 3s through MCT oil, olive oil and (good quality grass fed) butter, this should surely suffice? I need to simplify my diet A LOT and I'm a bit scared of eating fatty fish as I'm in a city where fish mongers are plentyful (a city in Sweden) but I dont trust them completely, have I understood things right that if I eat the three previously mentioned fats above and grass fed meat and free range chicken (and eggs) I should be ok on the omega 3 aspect of things? Apologies if I've misunderstood the given information, I've had to use google translate here and there :umm:
Thankful for any feedback, and I will continue reading the other food threads untill bedtime to get more top noch advice and inspiration. Thank you also to all of the forum members above who have taken the time to provide all this information!! You guys are beyond amazing :cool2:
 
Interesting that lard is regarded as a saturated fat. It is 60% unsaturated fat and 40% saturated fat. (this does depend on what the pig was fed) Soybean oil is 80% unsaturated and 15% saturated, and 5% "other"
The health affects of unsaturated fat are not so good.
Typical Fatty–Acid Compositions of Some Common Fats

Well, since everything contains some amount of unsaturated fats, the only way to not consume the unsaturated fats is to not consume fats at all. Which is something that some people advocate.
 
A very interesting article came out recently:

Dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) are increasingly recognized for their health benefits, whereas a high production of endogenous fatty acids – a process called de novo lipogenesis (DNL) - is closely linked to metabolic diseases. Determinants of PUFA incorporation into complex lipids are insufficiently understood and may influence the onset and progression of metabolic diseases. Here we show that fatty acid synthase (FASN), the key enzyme of DNL, critically determines the use of dietary PUFA in mice and humans. Moreover, the combination of FASN inhibition and PUFA-supplementation decreases liver triacylglycerols (TAG) in mice fed with high-fat diet. Mechanistically, FASN inhibition causes higher PUFA uptake via the lysophosphatidylcholine transporter MFSD2A, and a diacylglycerol O-acyltransferase 2 (DGAT2)-dependent incorporation of PUFA into TAG. Overall, the outcome of PUFA supplementation may depend on the degree of endogenous DNL and combining PUFA supplementation and FASN inhibition might be a promising approach to target metabolic disease.


I talked in my previous posts about the importance of lysophosphatidylcholine transporter MFSD2A for the uptake of Omega 3 fatty acids into the brain. And this article says that if you want to put Omega 3 into your brain you need to stop your body from producing endogenous fatty acids. Now, the scientists will probably want to use some chemical inhibitor for that, but is there a natural way to do that? Well, it seems there is. The natural way to stop de novo lipogenesis is to consume enough fats.


So perhaps the reason why people do not get benefits from consuming Omega 3 fatty acids is because they are not consuming enough fats?

Now, in those two studies, the scientists unfortunately have not compared different fats in their power to inhibit de novo lipogenesis. They just used a mixture of lard, olive and corn oil. So they just concentrated on the amount of fat in the diet, not the type of fats. So that is something that can be followed in research.
 
Now, in those two studies, the scientists unfortunately have not compared different fats in their power to inhibit de novo lipogenesis. They just used a mixture of lard, olive and corn oil. So they just concentrated on the amount of fat in the diet, not the type of fats. So that is something that can be followed in research.

So I've read several studies about that, and I would say that I like this one the most. Basically, it seems that PUFA are the best for the inhibition of de novo lipogenesis, either Omega-6 (linoleic) or Omega-3 (linolenic).


So without enough PUFA in the diet, the fish oil won't go into the brain. Of course, somebody will have to confirm that in experiments.
 
However, doesn’t he contradict himself here ?
[...]
So he first says that vegetable oils are able to handle "far greater heat alteration" than butter, yet he proposes that the very same oils (from seeds, so well vegetable oils) caused the vascular diseases and diabetes in young indians...
He finally brings the fish oil in the picture, coming out of nowhere...
I don't grasp the logic here, have I misinterpreted something ?
I'd like to correct my previous misunderstanding concerning what Dr. Rowen might have meant by :
The French cook their food in BUTTER! Butter has a low smoke point and can’t be heated too high, risking the taste, and which would destroy other crucial nutrients like happens with the high heat of vegetable oil cooked food. Butter smokes around 160 C. Vegetable oils smoke at much higher temperatures, enabling far greater heat alteration of molecules into forms never found in nature.
What I now grasp from his logic is that, as butter has a lower smoking point than vegetable oils (omitting which one? Knowing how different they can be among them; ex: flax&coconut), people will be less prone to overcook it compared to vegetable oils. Therefore oxidizing and destroying it less (also omitting the composition of each).
Anyway, if it's what he meant, I still find the argument..."strange", for lack of a better word.
 
Well, since everything contains some amount of unsaturated fats, the only way to not consume the unsaturated fats is to not consume fats at all. Which is something that some people advocate.
That link points to a discussion on how diet contributes to the type of fatty acids the body stores. They ae not, from what I read, suggesting that we don't eat fat! They talk about the disaster that increasing consumption of PUFA's have been. Perhaps you thought you were linking to a different article?
 
That link points to a discussion on how diet contributes to the type of fatty acids the body stores. They ae not, from what I read, suggesting that we don't eat fat! They talk about the disaster that increasing consumption of PUFA's have been. Perhaps you thought you were linking to a different article?

Yes, he is not suggesting overtly to do that, but considering that PUFA are everywhere, that is what it comes down to. In one of his articles, he mentioned fasting in Orthodox Christians, who do not consume oil on some days. Here is what Orthodox Christians say about that:

Many Orthodox Christians are unfortunately totally misinformed about the position of the Russian Church regarding Fasting and Oil.

In the Russian Church (in the homeland or abroad) there is no distinction between olive oil and any other type of vegetable oil -- and there never was.

It is in fact many Greeks (both Old and New Calendar) who turn themselves inside out trying vainly to find some justification for their breaking the fasting rules of the Typikon and permitting the use of vegetable oils other than olive oil on non-oil days when the Typikon says plainly: no oil, period).

True, most Russians have no clue that the Church forbids the use of vegetable oil on certain days. We, as priests, try to educate them. In our parish, for example, I publish a monthly calendar which, in addition to the Schedule of Services, indicates the level of fasting indicated by the Typikon for each day (no oil or wine, wine and oil, or fish). Many people in our parish are beginning to try to follow these rules.

The bottom line is clear from the Typikon itself: days on which oil is not permitted are called "dry eating" days which means basically no fried foods, and no oil in the soups or salads. The Church Fathers knew perfectly well that fried foods tasted better than boiled ones; that soups with oil added tasted better than soups made without oil; and that salads with oil dressings tasted better than those without.

This is exactly why olives themselves are permitted on non-oil days, while olive oil isn't; and peanuts themselves are permitted on non-oil days while peanut oil is forbidden: you can't fry anything in olives or peanuts. It is not the essence of the vegetable/fruit itself -- it is what you can do with it to make other foods taste better.


As you can see, Christians are looking at it from their perspective, and that guy is looking at it from his perspective. But the fact remains, the best way to remove PUFA from your body, if that is what you want, is to not consume any oil at all, at least during some days, and just let your body make its own non-PUFA fat from carbohydrates.
 
Back
Top Bottom