top | item 46936742

(no title)

MarkMarine | 21 days ago

What’s missing from this is how much omega 3 containing food, how often you need to get this protective result.

Do I need to eat fish twice a week? 5 times? Do I need to supplement because there is no way to eat enough fish?

Would love some practical guidance tacked on to this

discuss

order

svara|21 days ago

It's really unclear unfortunately.

The correlative effect is quite clear, i.e people who have high omega 3 levels (eat a lot of fish) have health benefits.

But in random controlled trials Omega 3 supplements have not had convincing effects.

It might be because the supplements aren't very good, or because there's actually something completely different going on, like fish displaces less healthy foods from the diet.

terribleperson|21 days ago

'the supplements aren't very good' would be believable - a quick glance at the market shows a whole lot of fish oil supplements that provide low amounts of Omega 3s in large amounts of fish oil. Look closer, and you realize a bunch of them are rancid too.

MarkMarine|21 days ago

what is "a lot of fish" in this context? Sushi for lunch every day? Thanks for engaging with this in a helpful way.

darkerside|21 days ago

I wonder about cultural and ethnic confounding factors

boston_clone|21 days ago

I like to get my omegas from the following sources, no fish needed!

- hemp hearts (complete protein, goes best with oatmeal for breakfast, on salads, or in soups for an extra bit of nutty / fatty flavor)

- pumpkin seeds (also good source of iron, iirc)

- algae-based supplement (currently taking an omega3 + vit D + vit K combo capsule from nordic naturals)

CWIZO|21 days ago

It's really surprising how many people don't realise where omegas come from and just default to "more fish". Fish get omegas from alge. Simply skip the middle man and all the nasty side effects that has in the form of animal exploitation and harmful substances for humans they contain.

Finnucane|21 days ago

Note that one of the authors received funding from Big Walnut.

cromka|21 days ago

What's also interesting that some recent studies show eating eggs every day actually is harmful, most likely due to the Omega3 to Omega6 ratio.

So here we go again. First it was cholesterol, which was then rebutted, so people (myself included) started eating eggs every day. And now this. You can't win!

KempyKolibri|20 days ago

As I understand it there's no good evidence that n3:n6 ratio matters, _as long as both are at adequate levels_. Studies showing the ratio to be of concern achieve a "low n3:n6 ratio" by low n3, rather than high n6.

Eggs are believed to lead to adverse outcomes because of: 1. Their high cholesterol content. 2. Their SFA content.

I'm not sure what you mean by cholesterol being rebutted. The only thing like that I'm really aware of is the dietary guidelines de-prioritising dietary cholesterol, but that decision was made because when making DGs, people want to focus on the biggest levers we can pull. Dietary cholesterol _does_ have a negative impact on health, but it also has a threshold effect at around 400mg/d after which it has considerably less impact (unless you're part of the ~20% of the population who are "cholesterol hyper responders").

Because most people eating a SAD are already at that threshold, the decision was made to take dietary cholesterol off the headline recommendations, but if you read the details in the DGs and the meta-analyses that drive them, they still point to lowering dietary cholesterol as a smart health move.

I frequently see this change portrayed as "no longer recommending the lowering of dietary cholesterol" or "admitting they were wrong about dietary cholesterol", but that's not really what happened.

mixmastamyk|21 days ago

Well, don’t eat the same things every day.