Fish Oil

Alzheimer's, cardiovascular, and other chronic diseases; biomarkers, lifestyle, supplements, drugs, and health care.
User avatar
Russ
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 543
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 10:33 am

Re: Fish Oil

Postby Russ » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:09 am

Russ
E3/4
Eat whole, real, flavorful food - fresh and in season... and mix it up once in a while.

User avatar
Julie G
Mod
Mod
Posts: 6588
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: Fish Oil

Postby Julie G » Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:05 pm

Thanks for full-text, Russ.

On one hand, it's gratifying to see how our understanding here has advanced in the short time since I've been following the science. On the other hand, it's extremely frustrating to see the lack of research on HOW to better increase cerebral DHA transport for E4 carriers.

For instance, it would be interesting to do a retrospective look at vegan vs. omnivorous E4 carriers to see whether ALA is any more successful than DHA in maintaining cognition. These VERY basic premises have yet to be explored :? If we could spend a fraction of the money Big Pharma spends looking for a cure; addressing basic prevention strategies, we wouldn't need the cure.

User avatar
Stavia
Mod
Mod
Posts: 4523
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:47 pm
Location: Middle Earth

Re: Fish Oil

Postby Stavia » Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:26 pm

in the light of Dr Dayspring's recommendation to "drown ourselves in omega 3's", and the worry the purity of omega3 supplement capsules, I was wondering what people are doing.
I'm slowly making my way through his recommendations and here is the second, the omega 3's

I am anaphylactic to sulphites. There are sulphites in gelatine. The fish oil capsules are in gelatine capsules.
So....

Here are my options in my country:
what do you guys think if one of these a day every day is enough?
The teeny can says 249mg EPA and 490mg DHA total so I guess the bigger one is double, ie 500 and 1gram.
Please note they are in olive oil lol.

sardines.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

marthaNH
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 510
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Fish Oil

Postby marthaNH » Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:11 pm

I will just chime in as one more uncertain person trying to figure out what to do and take. I was so frustrated with various supplements being first approved then frowned upon that I had just about quit all of them.

I keep a bottle of Carlson Fish Oil in the refrigerator and take a teaspoon each night. I'm about to run out and may buy one of the ones at Costco next time but haven't looked into them yet.

I also eat very small amounts of salmon, anchovies, oysters, and trout, sometimes sardines, most days of the week but only a couple of ounces a day. Walnuts every day plus other nuts and some ground chia seed most days. Lots of greens. I hope I'm covered, one way or another.

For me, I'm going to probably keep taking the fish oil because I had gotten to the point that I took a lot of "missed beats" -- noticeable heartbeat irregularity -- as something I was just going to have to live with, until I started the fish oil routine. I also take magnesium, a baby aspirin, and D3 in the winter. Having that anxiety-producing issue off my mind is worth taking it right there, for me. I also had my last migraine two days before I started this supplement routine mid-November. Who knows whether it's just a coincidence?

Good luck and share what you learn.

User avatar
Julie G
Mod
Mod
Posts: 6588
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: Fish Oil

Postby Julie G » Fri Jun 19, 2015 11:26 am

We’ve been slowly collecting evidence that E4 carriers may need higher levels of Omega-3s to achieve the same serum levels as other ApoE genotypes…not so fast. Here’s a new paper demonstrating that BMI seems to play a part in our metabolism of DHA. Perhaps only E4 carriers with a BMI above 25.5 need a higher intake of DHA to glean the same health benefits as other ApoE genotypes.

I’m not quite understanding why participants were concurrently fed a HSF diet...I’d love to see full-text to try to better understand. I’m also curious about the lipid results from the various diets.

Interaction between BMI and APOE genotype is associated with changes in the plasma long-chain-PUFA response to a fish-oil supplement in healthy participants.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26085515

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Carriers of the apolipoprotein E ɛ4 (APOE4) allele are lower responders to a docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplement than are noncarriers. This effect could be exacerbated in overweight individuals because DHA metabolism changes according to BMI.
OBJECTIVES:
We evaluated the plasma fatty acid (FA) response to a DHA-rich supplement in APOE4 carriers and noncarriers consuming a high-saturated fat diet (HSF diet) and, in addition, evaluated whether being overweight changed this response.
DESIGN:
This study was part of the SATgenɛ trial. Forty-one APOE4 carriers and 41 noncarriers were prospectively recruited and consumed an HSF diet for 8-wk followed by 8 wk consumption of an HSF diet with the addition of DHA and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) (HSF + DHA diet; 3.45 g DHA/d and 0.5 g EPA/d). Fasting plasma samples were collected at the end of each intervention diet. Plasma total lipids (TLs) were separated into free FAs, neutral lipids (NLs), and phospholipids by using solid-phase extraction, and FA profiles in each lipid class were quantified by using gas chromatography.
RESULTS:
Because the plasma FA response to the HSF + DHA diet was correlated with body mass index (BMI) in APOE4 carriers but not in noncarriers, the following 2 groups were formed according to the BMI median: low BMI (in kg/m2; <25.5) and high BMI (≥25.5). In response to the HSF + DHA diet, there were significant BMI × genotype interactions for changes in plasma concentrations of arachidonic acid and DHA in phospholipids and TLs and of EPA in NLs and TLs (P ≤ 0.05). APOE4 carriers were lower plasma responders to the DHA supplement than were noncarriers but only in the high-BMI group.
CONCLUSIONS:
Our findings indicate that apolipoprotein E genotype and BMI may be important variables that determine the plasma long-chain PUFA response to dietary fat manipulation. APOE4 carriers with BMI ≥25.5 may need higher intakes of DHA for cardiovascular or other health benefits than do noncarriers. The SATgenɛ trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01384032.

User avatar
Stavia
Mod
Mod
Posts: 4523
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:47 pm
Location: Middle Earth

Re: Fish Oil

Postby Stavia » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:48 pm

nope its epub ahead of print

circular
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 3637
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Fish Oil

Postby circular » Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:57 pm

Wow, thks for posting the new study! I look forward to some explanation about the saturated fat diet, and in particular why they don't mention that the BMI difference in E4 carriers might be influenced somehow by the high saturated fat context? Ie, would they get the same result in a low saturated fat diet?

It also makes me wonder what *else* is different among E4s based on BMI. Of course there's the somewhat obvious likelihood that with BMI over 25 an E4 individual has an even higher risk of AD, but what other treatment/prevention approaches might be substantially different due to higher BMI exerting a wonky effect on specific mechanisms. Maybe all studies should be stratified not just by Apoe genotype but also BMI, or would hip/waist ratio be even better? ... If ratio then maybe there is some unseen influence of insulin resistance on fatty acid metabolism. Okay, I'm out in left field now but home plate is still in sight :/)
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.

circular
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 3637
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Fish Oil

Postby circular » Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:32 pm

Is anyone familiar with this Nutrusta brand DHA supplement? I've never seen it and can't tell if it's a hoax of some sort. Googling "nutrustra reviews" and just scanning the results without clicking on them it looks a bit like a load of sales hype?

http://www.amazon.com/DHA-Omega-Fish-Oi ... MARTEK+DHA
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.

ApropoE4
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:43 pm

Re: Fish Oil

Postby ApropoE4 » Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:56 pm

We’ve been slowly collecting evidence that E4 carriers may need higher levels of Omega-3s to achieve the same serum levels as other ApoE genotypes…not so fast. Here’s a new paper demonstrating that BMI seems to play a part in our metabolism of DHA. Perhaps only E4 carriers with a BMI above 25.5 need a higher intake of DHA to glean the same health benefits as other ApoE genotypes.


To be accurate, this does not support or contradict any statement regarding the level of Omega-3 needed for higher BMI Omega-3, rather it supports my usual line that maintaining a lower-normal BMI and following the recommendations otherwise offered to the genreal population is the way to go. Of course a followup study could find that higher omega-3 levels work for heavier e4s, but it could also find the opposite.

circular
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 3637
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Fish Oil

Postby circular » Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:36 am

Okay, so I had an eye exam yesterday and have a common case of dry eye. The ophthalmologist suggested I take Physician Recommended Nutraceuticals' De (dry eye) fish oil formula. It's a bit pricey and I figured I could find something comparable for less. Along the way I noticed these things and I'm not sure if they've been discussed.

1)

First of all the PRN formula touts that it is the most bioavailable form - "re-esterified triglyceride (rTG)" after purification, where as many other brands, but not all, stop in their processing when the omegas are in ethyl ester form which is less biodegradable. I then thought about Dr. Isaacson's recommended brands. I should first mention he recommends getting as much nutrients as possible from food before supplements (p. 71). He recommends Carlson Super DHA Gems "based on the high amount of DHA per capsule balanced with a reasonable cost". I looked this up and it appears it is in the ethyl ester form, so less bioavailable. The other he recommends is Life's DHA by Martek. This is an algae form and he recommends it because "some of the most rigorous scientific studies used this exact brand of fish oil in their clinical trials. This also appears to be in the ethyl ester form, so less bioavailable.

If these most rigorous studies are the same that show E4s don't benefit from fish oil supplements, and if they used the ethyl ester form, one might wonder if the rTG form is preferable for us?

2)

Second, the PRN formula for dry eyes has 560 DHA omega 3 per serving, and 1680 EPA omega 3. It always seems the focus is on DHA and brain health and I got to wondering about the EPA form of omega 3. Are we supposed to avoid high levels of it in our supplements? Are we supposed to include high levels? What does it do?

Here's a very recent, months old, review of the three types of omegas for brain health http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4404917/. It concludes:

"It is vital to consider omega-3 PUFA specific effects when designing and undertaking systematic reviews and meta-analyses, so treatment effects are not lost in the aggregation of results. Overall, a greater understanding of the individual roles of EPA, DPA and DHA in brain health, protection and repair is needed in order to make appropriate dietary recommendations and targeted therapeutic interventions."

I haven't read the paper yet, but I think maybe we are missing huge pieces of the omega 3 puzzle!?

I'm inclined to take a supplement with "sufficient" EPA in it (although no target is known), however I read that EPA is highly oxidized (moreso than DHA) so I'm a little concerned about that, although I think I have a very good redox status. I also eat a ton of wild salmon, nearly every day of the week. I'm assuming it comes with EPA. In spit of all my anti-inflammatory efforts I still have high inflammation and brain fog. I'm now wondering if a lack of sufficient EPA or a poor DHA/EPA ratio (the target for which we have no information) may be at play.

I'm not familiar with Barry Sears work or orientation, but he has this to say at http://www.zonediet.com/blog/what-are-t ... a-and-dha/:

"Finally, it is often assumed since there are not high levels of EPA in the brain, that it is not important for neurological function. Actually, it is key for reducing neuro-inflammation by competing against AA for access to the same enzymes needed to produce inflammatory eicosanoids. However, once EPA enters into the brain, it is rapidly oxidized (2,3). This is not the case with DHA (4). The only way to control cellular inflammation in the brain is to maintain high levels of EPA in the blood. This is why all the work on depression, ADHD, brain trauma, etc., has demonstrated that EPA is superior to DHA (5)."

Here we might wonder if DHA hasn't worked well for us in part because not enough EPA was included in the studies to offset brain inflammation? (In addition to all the other holes in our roofs!) Martek's Life's DHA which was used in the rigorous studies contains no EPA at all. That would have helped isolate the effects of DHA, but left sooooo many unknowns about how it plays out in terms of the form it's in and relative to quantities of other omega 3, like the recent review describes.
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.


Return to “Prevention and Treatment”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eap1992 and 7 guests