Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: MasterJohn's Latest PUFA Article page

  1. #1
    Steve-O's Avatar
    Steve-O is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    112

    MasterJohn's Latest PUFA Article

    Primal Fuel
    http://www.westonaprice.org/know-you...-perilous.html

    He really seems to advocate very little PUFA, not just a balance betweeen O6:O3. I know people here seem to advocate a balance without regard for quantity.

    For instance, he recommends babies and growing children only need around .5% of their calories from PUFAs. He also says adult humans need much less than that.

    Take fish oil with caution, and not too much of it:

    "A randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial likewise showed that six grams per day of fish oil increased lipid peroxides and MDA in healthy men, regardless of whether they were supplemented with 900 IU of vitamin E."

    He also explains why Arachidonic and DHA are really the only two PUFAs you need and talks about why EPA can be harmful.

    Worth the read.

    Enjoy!

  2. #2
    muaythaimike's Avatar
    muaythaimike is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    London U.K
    Posts
    283
    I enjoyed that post, thanks for sharing. It gave me some things to think about. Do you think consuming high dose fish oils to normalise 3/6 tissue ratio quicker worth it?

    Although that study showed an increase of lipid peroxides and MDA, the subjects probably didn't have a protective diet like the Inuit, and could have been eating the SAD so would have a high intake of PUFAs before supplementation. It seems minimising all PUFAs including lots of omega 3's is a really important aspect of your diet.

    I don't even think getting 0.5% of calories from PUFAs is possible. What would you eat?!?!?! He said you need less to prevent deficiency but it doesn't mean that it is optimal. The most omega 3s I get in per day is around 3 grams and on a normal day my omega 6/3 ratio is about 1.5-1. PUFAs come to about 4% of calories and TBH I don't think I can do any better than that without cutting out some very nutritious food and it probably isn't worth it.

    Having a nutritious diet based on whole foods decreases your requirements for essential fatty acids. If your diet is protective then I can't see eating around 2-3grams of omega 3's a day being an issue, especially considering the traditional peoples that ate similar amounts.


    P.S. I am definitely going to change my fish oil to one with more DHA than EPA as soon as mine runs out.

    2nd edit : Think he means DHA and AA requirement is only 0.5% of calories and not total omega 3's.... not sure
    Last edited by muaythaimike; 10-08-2010 at 02:11 PM.
    "My mom made two dishes: Take it or Leave it." -- Stephen Wright, comedian

  3. #3
    Stabby's Avatar
    Stabby is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Stabsville
    Posts
    2,462
    I hope nobody is advocating tons of omega 6 balanced with tons of fish oil. That seems foolish to me. Certainly if you have tons of tissue omega 6 then tons of fish oil is better than less fish oil and is needed to balance the ratio, the balance is truly more important, but after it is balanced we really don't want to be getting more than 5% of energy from all PUFAs. So it is a good article. .5% is how much is needed to avoid death for growing children but so long as we are keeping PUFAs low and saturated fat high (very important) I see little problem with getting 5g of omega 6 and some DHA heavy fish oil, or simply fish or brains. We should be favoring ruminant, dairy, coconut and possibly macadamia fat like guys like Kurt Harris recommend. A very high saturated fat diet is likely protective against lipid peroxidation and possibly even inflammation.
    Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

    Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

  4. #4
    Hilary's Avatar
    Hilary is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,278
    Completely fascinating article, thank you.

    (Comic moment:
    A second trial found that replacing animal fats with polyunsaturated vegetable oils increased mortality by 39 percent. Rather than considering the possibility that the lipid hypothesis might be false, the investigators concluded that “men who have had myocardial infarction are not a good choice for testing the lipid hypothesis.”
    And again I'm feeling the shortage of emoticons.)

  5. #5
    SerialSinner's Avatar
    SerialSinner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    286
    nice, thanks for sharing
    “Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.” -Oscar Wilde
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." -George Bernard Shaw
    "The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass." -Martin Mull

  6. #6
    peril's Avatar
    peril is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    2,679
    Thanks very much. Plenty of thought provoking material there. Particularly:

    1) Details on the virtues of the various types of n-3 and n-6 fatty acids

    2) Required amounts

    3) Danger of EPA - I'd thought that all n-3 was good

    Based on this, I'm going to stop taking fish oil, keep eating fish and eggs and increase my organ meat intake. Another fun trip to the butcher!

  7. #7
    Hilary's Avatar
    Hilary is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,278
    Agreed... if you base what you do on this, you'd stop taking fish oil. So... is this really a good summary of the science and studies? If not, what's left out? And if so, on what basis do some good people (like Robb Wolf, who's not exactly a lightweight) recommend taking large quantities of fish oil?

  8. #8
    Stabby's Avatar
    Stabby is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Stabsville
    Posts
    2,462
    We do need a certain amount of EPA but interestingly enough fish is 1:1-1.5, EPA to DHA which is a million times better than none but the optimal ratio is probably more akin to what is found in.......BRAINS. Thus suggesting to me that optimal paleo emphasizes eating the ruminant in its entirety rather than eating more fish, even though homo sapiens evolved to what it is now on more marine-based food. We either didn't have time to adapt to more EPA or simply didn't have the evolutionary pressure to since while more EPA is sub-optimal it isn't like it's going to screw people up anywhere near what the SAD would, and people seem to free their genitalia from their adipose tissue to be able to mate successfully on that.



    edit: also I have a hunch that all of that cholesterol and saturated fat protects against lipid peroxidation. I will ask Chris about it.
    Last edited by Stabby; 10-10-2010 at 01:00 PM.
    Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

    Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

  9. #9
    Rip City's Avatar
    Rip City is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Salem, OR
    Posts
    194
    Chris is the man. Thanks for linking this!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •