In one of the threads on freetheanimal, some 'paleo' vegans were talking about getting their omega-3 DHA from algae instead of fish. The only research I could find was a 28 day study that appeared to be by people with connections to sellers of algae-DHA. The 28 day study suggested bioavailability was identical, but it just doesn't add up to me.
Am I missing something, or should we all be getting our DHA directly from algae? I suspect there are synergistic effects to getting DHA from fish/meat/etc. that would obviously be missing from a 28 day study, but I can't prove it. It just doesn't 'feel' like the right way to source omega-3.
Does anyone have more data on the whole DHA from algae thing?
ETA: did a little more googling, found a 14 day study claiming DHA from cooked salmon was identical to DHA from algae. I am beginning to see a pattern here regarding research on algae-sourced DHA (usually referred to as algal oil)...
Last edited by fbw; 05-05-2010 at 07:57 PM. Reason: a bit more googling
I could look later for you but I immediately put it in the whole "protein from beans" and "O3 from Flax" and "Protein from Soy" category! I cant imagine the bioavailibility would be similar. In addition, are the paleo vegans even getting enough O3 at all? I would wager that my fish oil (or really in my case herring and sardines!) and grassfedness would be better for total O3 intake. Just my thoughts.
Life on Earth may be punishing, but it includes an annual free trip around the sun!