Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / December 2004
Essential Fatty Acid Metabolism
|
|
Thread rating:  |
MikeV - 26 Nov 2004 20:43 GMT Another in depth review for anyone interested. (44 pages; 300+ refs)
http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/medicine/e.n.smit/c1.pdf
MikeV
montygram - 27 Nov 2004 06:35 GMT The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I learned to stay away from dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids a few years back. To all those who haven't, good luck - you're going to need it.
> Another in depth review for anyone interested. (44 pages; 300+ refs) > > http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/medicine/e.n.smit/c1.pdf > > MikeV William_Noyes - 27 Nov 2004 10:45 GMT Certain polyunsaturated fatty acids are essential but one doesn't need large amounts. One does well to avoid fats in general unless it is with the seed, grain, nut, or meat it comes in. Both human infants and lab animals can be deficient in linoleic acid which results in dermatitis, poor growth, reproductive failure, and fatty livers. Deficiency in linolenic acid results in adverse changes in nervous system function. Omega 3 deficiency can result in learning deficits and impaired vision.
One textbook says the 'optimal intake of omega-3 fatty acids is 1.1 to 1.5 grams per day with a ratio of 4 to 10 times more of the omega 6 fatty acids'. If you suspect that the ratio is better closer to 4 to 1 the amount are rather small. Trans fatty acids impair the desaturation and elongation of linoleic and linolenic acid into other critical fatty acids. So eat some walnuts, filbert, sunflower seeds, pumpkin seeds, almonds, flax seed, and then some oily deep sea fish, legumes, green leafy vegetables and you'll be fine. Cooking with oils, lard, bacon fat, hydrogenated grease is not a wise idea. Often one heats the oils and fat to high heat which oxidizes the fats, results in some trans fats, and forms some toxic chemicals in the food. Oil are often stripped of a large share of the related antioxidants found in unrefined fatty foods.
I suspect I do better when I avoid too regular consumption of beef and pork. I doubt baked goods with unsaturated fatty acids are that good. Fish at least several time a week is good. Freshly shelled nuts are much better than raw nuts which are much better than roasted nuts.
Skip the griddle cakes and bacon in the morning. Minimize the mayo on the lunch time sandwich. Don't deep fry dinner.
Boil and poach when you can. Raw is good. I suspect the occasional use of saturated fats in some cooking is moderately less dangerous the cooking with high polyun oils provided the former isn't a daily habit.
> The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these > extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > MikeV MikeV - 27 Nov 2004 14:03 GMT Thanks for the tip. You should tell the creator, so that she/he will not make any more brains with DHA, nor put it into the milk of young mothers feeding their infants all over the world. What do your brain cells use? Have you found a reliable substitute for membranes? If so it is your duty to pass it on to us all.! After many years ingesting these HAZMATS my doctor insists that I am still fit and healthy and refuses to treat me for it. Please tell him too. He and "Big Pharma" may need a whole new approach.
Hurry....Hurry.......wife ..and...I ...late ....sixties.....not....much.....time......left. (Exits quickly stage left).
MikeV
Sorry, People, my aging sense of humor has been critically damaged by gorging on black walnuts. Can't you see the headlines? "Omega 3 police raid Wal-Mart seeking Christmas Nuts." "Osama shipping Hazardous Flax-seed Materials (HFM) to US. Undetected in shipping Container." "Nuts banned on Nutrition news-group." Maybe Ashcroft should come back. :-(
MikeV (Just like old times, Nick :-))
> The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these > extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >> MikeV Larry Hoover - 27 Nov 2004 18:24 GMT > The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these > extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I > learned to stay away from dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids a few > years back. To all those who haven't, good luck - you're going to > need it. Why don't you tell us all about Mead's acid again? First, explain how 5,8,11-eicosatrienoic (20:3?9), also known as Mead's acid, is a MUFA (as you have repetitively asserted), and how it is that this marker of essential fatty acid deficiency is beneficial for health?
Lar
Wolfbrother - 28 Nov 2004 00:26 GMT > > The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these > > extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Lar Well lets see. He has eliminated "essential fatty acids" from his diet and has for several years yet he is not only not dead (which you would assume would be the case since they are supposedly essential) but he is in better health than he was before. It seems like you are the one who has some explaining to do. Then again you do not address realities that contradict your assumptions do you.
Larry Hoover - 28 Nov 2004 18:07 GMT >> > The more interesting issue is who in the world decided that these >> > extremely dangerous substances are "essential?" Fortunately, I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > would assume would be the case since they are supposedly essential) > but he is in better health than he was before. So he says. In any case, anecdote (individual experience) cannot be used for extrapolative purposes.
> It seems like you are > the one who has some explaining to do. I'll let the National Acadamies of Science, Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine, speak for me. They've done an excellent job of summarizing the available evidence. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309085373/html/609.html#pagetop
Note, after reading this chapter (Chapter 11), be sure and read chapter 8.
> Then again you do not address > realities that contradict your assumptions do you. I think that you are taking issue with me for exactly what you claim I do not do. I am asking Nick to address the aspects of contradiction, explicitly.
Lar
MikeV - 27 Nov 2004 19:33 GMT > who in the world decided that these extremely dangerous > substances are "essential?" >
>> Another in depth review for anyone interested. (44 pages; 300+ >> refs) >> >> http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/medicine/e.n.smit/c1.pdf >> >> MikeV Look it up. There are plenty of references out there. People like: AA Spector, and LS Harbige, I imagine:
1: Lipids. 1999;34 Suppl:S1-3. Related Articles, Links
Essentiality of fatty acids.
Spector AA.
Department of Biochemistry, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA. arthur-spector@uiowa.edu
All fatty acids have important functions, but the term "essential" is applied only to those polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) that are necessary for good health and cannot be completely synthesized in the body. The need for arachidonic acid, which is utilized for eicosanoid synthesis and is a constituent of membrane phospholipids involved in signal transduction, is the main reason why the n-6 class of PUFA are essential. Physiological data indicate that n-3 PUFA also are essential. Although eicosapentaenoic acid also is a substrate for eicosanoid synthesis, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is more likely to be the essential n-3 constituent because it is necessary for optimal visual acuity and neural development. DHA is present in large amounts in the ethanolamine and serine phospholipids, suggesting that its function involves membrane structure. Because the metabolism of n-6 PUFA is geared primarily to produce arachidonic acid, only small amounts of 22-carbon n-6 PUFA are ordinarily formed. Thus, the essentiality of n-3 PUFA may be due to their ability to supply enough 22-carbon PUFA for optimal membrane function rather than to a unique biochemical property of DHA.
Publication Types: a.. Review b.. Review, Tutorial
MeSH Terms: a.. Animals b.. Dietary Fats c.. Fatty Acids, Essential/pharmacology d.. Fatty Acids, Essential/physiology* e.. Fatty Acids, Unsaturated/pharmacology f.. Fatty Acids, Unsaturated/physiology* g.. Human h.. Signal Transduction i.. Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Substances: a.. Dietary Fats b.. Fatty Acids, Essential c.. Fatty Acids, Unsaturated
Grant Support: a.. CA 66081/CA/NCI b.. HL 49264/HL/NHLBI
PMID: 10419080 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Lipids. 2003 Apr;38(4):323-41. Related Articles, Links
Fatty acids, the immune response, and autoimmunity: a question of n-6 essentiality and the balance between n-6 and n-3.
Harbige LS.
School of Chemical and Life Sciences, University of Greenwich at Medway, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, United Kingdom. L.Harbige@gre.ac.uk
The essentiality of n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is described in relation to a thymus/thymocyte accretion of arachidonic acid (20:4n-6, AA) in early development, and the high requirement of lymphoid and other cells of the immune system for AA and linoleic acid (1 8:2n-6, LA) for membrane phospholipids. Low n-6 PUFA intakes enhance whereas high intakes decrease certain immune functions. Evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies for a role of AA metabolites in immune cell development and functions shows that they can limit or regulate cellular immune reactions and can induce deviation toward a T helper (Th)2-like immune response. In contrast to the effects of the oxidative metabolites of AA, the longer-chain n-6 PUFA produced by gamma-linolenic acid (18:3n-6, GLA) feeding decreases the Th2 cytokine and immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 antibody response. The n-6 PUFA, GLA, dihomo-gamma-linolenic acid (20:3n-6, DHLA) and AA, and certain oxidative metabolites of AA can also induce T-regulatory cell activity, e.g., transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta-producing T cells; GLA feeding studies also demonstrate reduced proinflammatory interleukin (IL)-1 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha production. Low intakes of long-chain n-3 fatty acids (fish oils) enhance certain immune functions, whereas high intakes are inhibitory on a wide range of functions, e.g., antigen presentation, adhesion molecule expression, Th1 and Th2 responses, proinflammatory cytokine and eicosanoid production, and they induce lymphocyte apoptosis. Vitamin E has a demonstrable critical role in long-chain n-3 PUFA interactions with immune functions, often reversing the effects of fish oil. The effect of dietary fatty acids on animal autoimmune disease models depends on both the autoimmune model and the amount and type of fatty acids fed. Diets low in fat, essential fatty acid deficient (EFAD), or high in long-chain n-3 PUFA from fish oils increase survival and reduce disease severity in spontaneous autoantibody-mediated disease, whereas high-fat LA-rich diets increase disease severity. In experimentally induced T cell-mediated autoimmune disease, EFAD diets or diets supplemented with long-chain n-3 PUFA augment disease, whereas n-6 PUFA prevent or reduce the severity. In contrast, in both T cell- and antibody-mediated autoimmune disease, the desaturated/elongated metabolites of LA are protective. PUFA of both the n-6 and n-3 families are clinically useful in human autoimmune-inflammatory disorders, but the precise mechanisms by which these fatty acids exert their clinical effects are not well understood. Finally, the view that all n-6 PUFA are proinflammatory requires revision, in part, and their essential regulatory and developmental role in the immune system warrants appreciation.
a..
PMID: 12848277 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
MikeV
montygram - 27 Nov 2004 23:53 GMT Go ahead and cite any evidence you want. I'll take a look at it. One guy put up a web site with over 300 studies supposedly "proving" that PUFAs are essential. All he actually did demonstrate is that omega 3s interfere with omega 6s. But it is true that pregnant women may need small amounts, which would explain the strange dietary urges. I'm talking about adults who don't want to get pregnant (or like men, can't). Aside from researching the evidence for the past 4 years, I have my family history. Nobody eats omega 3s. My great grandfather lived to be over 100, and my great grandmother was 97. My grandfather is in his early 90s now, and my grandmother in her mid 80s. They eat no omega 3s at all. They only eat at home, and I've gone through everything they've eaten for their entire lives. They are in very good health. If PUFAs are essential, they appear to be selectively so. Only a few people I know eat even small amounts of omega 3s. The whole thing goes back to a flawed experiment, Burr & Burr, 1930. Just another example of the pathetic biomedical "profession." How's the war on cancer going? It's past the thirty years war, and now going for the hundred year's war. I have no doubts it will pass that milestone by plenty. These people are really trustworthy - in my dreams, perhaps.
> > who in the world decided that these extremely dangerous > > substances are "essential?" > [quoted text clipped - 123 lines] > > MikeV MikeV - 28 Nov 2004 00:34 GMT > Go ahead and cite any evidence you want. I'll take a look at it. > One [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> Look it up. There are plenty of references out there. >> People like: AA Spector, and LS Harbige, I imagine:
>> PMID: 10419080 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] >> >> PMID: 12848277 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] >> >> MikeV Thats OK Nick old friend. I remember how the story goes: . " I've made up my mind, you idiots . . .so don't none of you go trying to confuse me with evidence."
In pacem requiescat.
MikeV
montygram - 29 Nov 2004 04:06 GMT Such studies as the one you cited below does not address the central issue: can you have better health if you avoid PUFAs in the diet and allow your body to make the Mead acid PUFA out of the MUFAs that are already there (and which can be made intially from SFAs). No experiment has been done to demonstrate this, but plenty of studies show that Mead acid has beneficial effects, whereas arachidonic acid is like a slow poison, which really begins to rip your body up once your body loses the antioxidant protection of young adulthood. Don't believe me or the thousands of studies? Who cares - go ahead and deal with the consequences.
1: Lipids. 1999;34 Suppl:S1-3. Related Articles, Links
Essentiality of fatty acids.
Spector AA.
Department of Biochemistry, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA. arthur-spector@uiowa.edu
All fatty acids have important functions, but the term "essential" is applied only to those polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) that are necessary for good health and cannot be completely synthesized in the body. The need for arachidonic acid, which is utilized for eicosanoid synthesis and is a constituent of membrane phospholipids involved in signal transduction, is the main reason why the n-6 class of PUFA are essential. Physiological data indicate that n-3 PUFA also are essential. Although eicosapentaenoic acid also is a substrate for eicosanoid synthesis, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is more likely to be the essential n-3 constituent because it is necessary for optimal visual acuity and neural development. DHA is present in large amounts in the ethanolamine and serine phospholipids, suggesting that its function involves membrane structure. Because the metabolism of n-6 PUFA is geared primarily to produce arachidonic acid, only small amounts of 22-carbon n-6 PUFA are ordinarily formed. Thus, the essentiality of n-3 PUFA may be due to their ability to supply enough 22-carbon PUFA for optimal membrane function rather than to a unique biochemical property of DHA.
> > Go ahead and cite any evidence you want. I'll take a look at it. > > One [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > MikeV MikeV - 29 Nov 2004 05:49 GMT > Such studies as the one you cited below does not address the > central [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > deal > with the consequences. Obviously you do! You care about being right, and being some sort of guru. I care about the best route to the truth. At the moment, the preponderance of the evidence does not appear to support you.
Having made it to my age in close to perfect health, perhaps you can advise me when I should expect the dreadful consequences to be visited upon me? 80? 90? 105? (Naturally, I would like to get my affairs in order).
Speaking of central issues, is it your position that your brain (and most other peoples) is not largely formed of DHA? That there is not an optimal level of DHA in the phospholipids of your muscle cell membranes to minimize diabetes risk? That there is not a level of DHA at which fetuses and babies thrive optimally? I have seen and cited evidence for all of those. None from you in rebuttal.
Can you cite evidence that I absorb excessive quantities of w6?
Somehow you always seem to avoid the issue of how humans survived pre-farming diets which included much higher than present day levels of 'poisonous' ALA, DHA, EPA. etc. if you and Gilbert are correct. If you want to educate us, the ignorant masses, explain that first.
There are not too many of us who argue against the propositions that modern diets contain excessive vegetable oils, or that excessive amounts, especially of w6 will bias the immune system towards inflammation, or that they can become oxidized, and produce free radicals. These are established. Nick, the world does not only come in black and white. The real one has finely graded shades of gray, and a whole lot of other hues besides. Nature has dealt with PUFAs for 20 million years. How come you can't?
MikeV
Mirek F?dler - 28 Nov 2004 09:16 GMT > is in his early 90s now, and my grandmother in her mid 80s. They eat > no omega 3s at all. How do you know? They do not eat any meat, diary?
It is virtually impossible to "eat no omega 3 at all".
Mirek
Larry Hoover - 28 Nov 2004 18:08 GMT > Go ahead and cite any evidence you want. I'll take a look at it. One > guy put up a web site with over 300 studies supposedly "proving" that > PUFAs are essential. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309085373/html/609.html#pagetop
Larry Hoover - 29 Nov 2004 16:29 GMT > Aside from researching the evidence for the past 4 years, I > have my family history. And what about the rest of us, who have studied the science of nutrition for much longer than that? It is only months ago that you were calling Mead acid a MUFA.
BTW, it can take years to fully express Essential Fatty Acid Deficiency Syndrome. It all depends on how replete your body was with the PUFAs in the beginning, diet (of course), along with genetic regulatory factors which have not yet been fully elucidated.
> Just another example of the pathetic biomedical "profession." If you lost the condescending tone, you might find that people have less difficulty trying to sort out your message.
You propose that high Mead acid is a sign of health. It is formed from delta-5 and delta-6 desaturase activity on the substrate oleic acid, with elongation.
Given the substrate affinity sequence, that omega-3 has more affinity than does omega-6 than does omega-9 for the delta-5 and delta-6 desturase enzymes, how is it that evolutionary pressure has created a situation which is the absolute converse of what you propose? Given the accessibility of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids in normal human foodstuffs, how is it that your grossly manipulated diet is essential for health? Without the knowledge provided by the "pathetic biomedical profession", it would not even be possible for you to propose an argument for your thesis.
You have frequently said that we should read your mentor's book. Did you read the passages of the online books which I referenced for you?
Lar
MikeV - 29 Nov 2004 19:24 GMT >> Aside from researching the evidence for the past 4 years, I >> have my family history. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Lar Larry: Thanks a bundle for the book references. I have just skimmed them, and they provide an excellent baseline for an amateur (me) to start from. Fortunately they confirm much of what I have struggled to pick up from studies and other sources. When you get time I would like to ask that you attempt to summarize Nick's (Monty's) philosophy, and show what (if any parts of it are soundly based, and where he starts going wrong. I need help! On second thoughts, I doubt it could be worth your time. Thanks again MikeV
montygram - 28 Nov 2004 00:55 GMT I should have mentioned that if you go to www.pubmed.com and look up arachidonic, lipid peroxidation, oxidative stress, etc., you'll see how dangerous PUFAs can be. I've haven't seen any evidence that demonstrates that allowing your body to make it's own PUFA, the Mead acid, will harm an adult human. On the contrary, Mead acid, a very stable fatty acid relative to dietary PUFAs, has been shown to attenuate conditions caused by excess arachidonic acid. Recently, AD researchers have drained the CSF out of AD patients, and found isoprostanes in very high amounts. Then you read studies such as the following, and you realize that the high dietary PUFA consumption of the past 30 years or so is likely the root cause of so many "chronic diseases."
Journal of Neurochemistry Volume 72 Issue 2 Page 734 - February 1999 doi:10.1046/j.1471-4159.1999.0720734.x F4 - Isoprostanes as Specific Marker of Docosahexaenoic Acid Peroxidation in Alzheimer's Disease Jaffar Nourooz-Zadeh, Edwin H. C. Liu*, B. Yhlen, Erik E. Änggåard & Barry Halliwell*
Abstract : F2-isoprostanes are prostaglandin-like compounds derived from free radical-catalysed peroxidation of arachidonic acid. Peroxidation of eicosapentaenoic acid produces F3-isoprostanes, whereas peroxidation of docosahexaenoic acid would give F4-isoprostanes. This study demonstrates the presence of esterified F4-isoprostanes in human brain and shows that levels are elevated in certain brain cortex regions in Alzheimer's disease. Our data with Alzheimer's disease suggest that analysis of F4-isoprostanes will provide new opportunities to study lipid peroxidation in the neurodegenerative diseases.
> > who in the world decided that these extremely dangerous > > substances are "essential?" > [quoted text clipped - 123 lines] > > MikeV montygram - 01 Dec 2004 05:36 GMT Regarding the study posted:
1: Lipids. 1999;34 Suppl:S1-3. Related Articles, Links
Essentiality of fatty acids.
Spector AA.
Department of Biochemistry, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA. arthur-spector@uiowa.edu
All fatty acids have important functions, but the term "essential" is applied only to those polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) that are necessary for good health and cannot be completely synthesized in the body. The need for arachidonic acid, which is utilized for eicosanoid synthesis and is a constituent of membrane phospholipids involved in signal transduction, is the main reason why the n-6 class of PUFA are essential. Physiological data indicate that n-3 PUFA also are essential. Although eicosapentaenoic acid also is a substrate for eicosanoid synthesis, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is more likely to be the essential n-3 constituent because it is necessary for optimal visual acuity and neural development. DHA is present in large amounts in the ethanolamine and serine phospholipids, suggesting that its function involves membrane structure. Because the metabolism of n-6 PUFA is geared primarily to produce arachidonic acid, only small amounts of 22-carbon n-6 PUFA are ordinarily formed. Thus, the essentiality of n-3 PUFA may be due to their ability to supply enough 22-carbon PUFA for optimal membrane function rather than to a unique biochemical property of DHA.
This study is worth addressing in more detail. First of all, where has it ever been demonstrated that an adult human’s “cell membranes” need 22 carbon PUFAs? A simple experiment could be done on dogs (since they metabolize fatty acids the way humans do). Just get some stray dogs and feed them a diet that contains too little PUFAs to supply all these supposed lipid bilayer membranes. If I were to do the experiment, the dogs would get fresh coconut oil (only 2% PUFAs), as well as organic eggs, nutritional yeast, along with other foods that have no more than trace amounts of PUFAs. According to theory, the dogs should stiffen up (due to too much saturated fatty acids), fall apart literatly (because their cells lack structural integrity), or something else really horrible. The only thing that will happen is that the dogs will live long and healthy lives. Studies have been done on pigs and chickens fed coconut, for example.
It is likely that arachidonic acid is not metabolized to omega 6 22 carbon PUFAs because it’s so biochemically unstable. The study is important in that the investigator admits that there is not likely a unique biochemical need for DHA, and since Gilbert Ling has demolished the “cell membrane/lipid bilayer” garbage, we have here another piece of evidence AGAINST the notion of “essentiality.” Some idiot nutritionist apparently decided to include this “essentiality” notion in a textbook, after the decades that passed with his “profession” ignoring this idea (first advanced by Burr & Burr, 1930, working with vitamin B deficient rats), and the PUFA oil industry eventually figured out that they could use the claim to sell their toxic products to an ignorant public. Why does the idea that a human body metabolizing its own PUFA, the Mead acid, produce so much cognitive dissonance to the Larry Hoovers of this world? That’s a psychological issue, not a physiological or biochemical one, so I’ll leave that out of this post. But show me some evidence that allowing your body to produce its own PUFA is such a terrible idea – if it were, there should be plenty of studies that demonstrate this clearly. What about the Pellagra episodes in history? Why hasn’t there been a similar episode involving so-called essential fatty acids? If it’s so easy to obtain these fatty acids, why even bother to talk about them? It would be like saying protein is essential. How many people in the USA need to worry about not getting enough protein? I was a vegan for 14 years, and ate poor quality protein, yet I played sports and didn’t have any major health problems, until the malabsorption started, which was apparently due to low stomach acid, which could have been related to the vegan diet, but that is questionable, considering it took 14 years to occur. The point is that if you are going to make an extraordinary claim, namely that people need PUFAs in the diet in more than trace amounts, there better be extraordinary evidence (considering we can make our own PUFA), not just a flawed rat study from 1930.
The idea of omega 6s being needed for signal transduction has been refuted by Gilbert Ling, but others have all done experiments demonstrating that this is the job of protein (though biochemically overactive fatty acids, like arachidonic, can cause major problems). For example: Membrane, action, and oscillatory potentials in simulated protocells. Przybylski AT; Stratten WP; Syren RM; Fox, S.W. Naturwissenschaften, 1982 Dec, 69:12, 561-3. "Electrical membrane potentials, oscillations, and action potentials are observed in proteinoid microspheres impaled with (3 M KC1) microelectrodes. Although effects are of greater magnitude when the vesicles contain glycerol and natural or synthetic lecithin, the results in the purely synthetic thermal protein structures are substantial, attaining 20 mV amplitude in some cases. The results add the property of electrical potential to the other known properties of proteinoid microspheres, in their role as models for protocells."
As for my relatives and others I know; if you are saying that they get enough omega 3s from the chicken and beef they eat, then, again, why should anyone worry about being “deficient?” In actuality, unless you eat beef raw, and from grass fed cows, I want to see the evidence that there is any measurable amount of omega 3 PUFAs from the beef they buy in the local supermarket. Also, after cooking the beef or chicken as most people do, many of the PUFAs will be oxidized and then they can’t be metabolized to longer chain PUFAs (though since there’s plenty of omega 6s, a few of them won’t get oxidized – the ones in the middle of the steak especially). You’ll have a better chance finding the proverbial needle in the haystack then finding more than a few molecules of non-oxidized omega 3 PUFAs in the beef or chicken products my friends and relatives are consuming. Why is common sense so uncommon with regard to PUFAs? If you do just a little research, you’ll see how dangerous arachidonic acid. One study concluded that it’s unlikely arachidonic acid is safe when it’s in your body, regardless of what it’s role is at any particular time or place. Here’s a good quotation: “The interior of a cell is filled with a gelatinous material that houses the nucleus, DNA, and protein ‘transcription factors.’ These proteins are nothing more than tiny molecular messengers that can move to the nucleus to stimulate our DNA to replicate RNA and make important proteins for cell function. Here we want to concentrate on two important transcription factors, nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kB) and activator protein 1 (AP-1). These transcription factors are not active in the cell unless the redox level of the cell changes and free radicals are about to overwhelm the cell’s defense mechanism, a state called oxidative stress. When cells undergo oxidative stress, the transcription factors are activated. NF-kB migrates to the nucleus and attaches to the DNA, resulting in cellular production of proinflammatory cytokines – chemicals that are the so-called ‘serial killers’ of the cellular world.” Source: Page 35. “The Perricone Prescription.” Nicholas Perricone. 2002.
Arachidonic acid is known to promote NF-kB. Here are some things worth reading:
Dynamic Chiropractic October 6, 2003, Volume 21, Issue 21
What Is NFkB? It Could Kill You by David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN, DACBN, FACC
The Saga of Inflammation
Earlier this year, I completed a six-part series on how diet drives inflammation, pain, subluxation and a host of diseases, including heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's.* Nearly all of the degenerative diseases are driven by chronic subclinical inflammation; essentially, nearly every condition that walks into a doctor's office is driven, at least in part, by inflammation.
The old view of inflammation is that it represents the healing response. This is true, to a point; however, once inflammation, becomes chronic, it becomes a disease. You will not find a statement as clear as this in typical physiology books, or even in pathology books. However, in pathology texts, we are led to believe that chronic inflammation plays a role in promoting the disease process. In journal articles, we are given more precise statements. Consider the following:
"Recent studies on diseases which involve insulin insensitivity (e.g. obesity, type 2 diabetes and atherosclerosis) also show increased cytokine production and markers of inflammation. Evidence at present favours chronic inflammation as a trigger for chronic insulin insensitivity, rather than the reverse situation."1
You will not find this type of statement in any physiology or pathology book anytime soon. Why? I don't know. Nonetheless, we can see that inflammation is definitively viewed as a driver of chronic disease.
The Reduction of Inflammation
In recent years, a massive volume of literature has supported the view that we need to halt chronic inflammation and its induction. Aspirin, NSAIDs and corticosteroids have been the main medical weapons against inflammation. These days, COX2 inhibitors are also being used.
Pharmacology texts tell us that aspirin, NSAIDs, and COX2 inhibitors act to reduce inflammation by blocking the cyclooxygenase enzyme that converts arachidonic prostaglandin E-2 (PGE2). In other words, these drugs inhibit inflammation by blocking PGE2. Corticosteroids work higher up the chain, inhibiting phospholipase A2, which inhibits arachidonic acid release from phospholipids in the cell membrane. These mechanisms have been known about for a long time. For example, in 1971, John Vane discovered that aspirin inhibits the COX enzyme.
In more recent years, the study of inflammation has gone deeper into the cell, to the point that cell-signaling molecules have been identified which stimulate genes that induce the expression of the COX enzyme. As it turns out, aspirin, NSAIDs, and corticosteroids can inhibit certain cell signaling molecules, such as nuclear factor kappa binding (NFkB) - which reduces inflammation.
On the natural end of the treatment spectrum, various botanicals have anti-inflammatory effects that work in the same manner as these drugs, except their actions are not as pronounced. Ginger and curcumin are the most well-known substances that possess significant anti-inflammatory actions.
Nuclear Factor Kappa B
NFkB is the "big cheese" cell-signaling molecule for inflammation; its activation induces the expression of COX-2, which leads to tissue inflammation. "Intriguingly, the expression of the COX-2-encoding gene, believed to be responsible for the massive production of prostaglandins at inflammatory sites, is transcriptionally regulated by NFkB."2
NFkB resides in the cytoplasm of the cell and is bound to its inhibitor. Injurious and inflammatory stimuli, such as free radicals, release NFkB from the inhibitor. NFkB moves into the nucleus and activates the genes responsible for expressing COX-2. Research has demonstrated that aspirin, NSAIDs, and corticosteroids can inhibit the activation of NFkB, which is why people derive relief from these drugs. Problems arise due to their nasty side-effects, which means that alternative ways need to be pursued to reduce NFkB activity.
As mentioned earlier, free radicals are examples of substances that activate NFkB. Cytokines such as interleukin-1 (IL-1) can also stimulate NFkB.2 Not surprisingly, antioxidants can reduce the activation of NFkB, including green tea polyphenols; resveratrol from red wine; vitamins C and E; curcumin; and glutathione.2 Whenever you see glutathione, you need to think of the substances that maintain glutathione in its active state, which includes supplements such as lipoic acid and coenzyme Q10.3
In all likelihood, the family of flavonoids and carotenoids found in fruits and vegetables that have antioxidant functions is capable of reducing free-radical activation of NFkB. So, our approach to keeping NFkB at bay should be a fruit- and vegetable-based diet that includes green tea, red wine, and antioxidant supplements.
Fatty acids (FAs) also need to be considered. The anti-inflammatory omega-3 FAs reduceNFkB activity,4,5 which means we need to reduce our grain, seed, and related oil intake. Omega-3 FAs also reduce IL-1,6 which is an activator of NFkB.2 Omega-3 fatty acids are found in green vegetables, most fish, wild game, and grass-fed meat. (See www.texasgrassfedbeef.com.) Supplementing with 1-2 grams of EPA/DHA from fish oil is also a good idea.
We must also be cognizant of glycemic regulation in controlling NFkB.7 An assessment of Type 1 diabetic patients found that inefficient glycemic control resulted in increases in NFkB activity in white cells - which results in inflammation. This means that, as alluded to earlier, inflammation causes diabetes,3 and the diabetic state promotes inflammation.7 It was determined that HbA1c and NFkB were correlated with each other, and also with hyperglycemia and lipid peroxidation.7
Diseases Driven by NFkB
We want to reduce the inappropriate activation of NFkB because it can drive so many seemingly unrelated diseases. We don't typically think of asthma and neurodegenerative diseases as having similar etiologies; however, NFkB plays a role in each disease. In fact, NFkB promotes asthma; neurodegeneration; ischemia/reperfusion injury; hepatitis; glomerulonephritis; inflammatory bowel disease; rheumatoid arthritis; and probably most other diseases driven by inflammation,2 including the subluxation complex.8,9 Consider that Faye's original model of the subluxation complex included an inflammatory component.
On a more lethal note, I searched MEDLINE for articles related to cancer and NFkB; 1,773 appeared. One paper stated that NFkB is strongly linked to inflammatory and immune responses, regulation of cell proliferation and apoptosis, suggesting its role in tumor development and many other diseases, including atherosclerosis.10 I suggest we adopt an anti-inflammatory diet and give ourselves a nutritional adjustment.
References Grimble RF. Inflammatory status and insulin resistance. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2002;5:551-9. D'Acquisto F, May MJ, Ghosh S. Inhibition of nuclear factor kappa B (NF_B): an emerging theme in anti-inflammatory therapies. Molec Interv 2002;2:22-35. Sen CK, Packer L. Thiol homeostasis and supplements in physical exercise. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;72(2 Suppl):653S-69S. Lo CJ, Chiu KC, Fu M, Lo R, Helton S. Fish oil decreases macrophage tumor necrosis factor gene transcription by altering the NF kappa B activity. J Surg Res 1999;82(2):216-21. Novak TE, Babcock TA, Jho DH, Helton WS, Espat NJ.NF-kappa B inhibition by omega -3 fatty acids modulates LPS-stimulated macrophage TNF-alpha transcription. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2003;284(1):L84-9. Simopoulos AP. Essential fatty acids in health and chronic disease. Am J Clin Nutr 1999;70(3 Suppl):560S-569S. Hofmann MA, Schiekofer S, Kanitz M, et al. Insufficient glycemic control increases nuclear factor _B binding activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 1998; 21:1310-16. Seaman DR. Joint complex dysfunction, a novel term to replace subluxation/subluxation complex: etiological and treatment considerations. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1997;20(9):634-44. Seaman DR. The diet-induced proinflammatory state: a cause of chronic pain and other degenerative diseases? J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2002;25 (3):168-79. Ignatowicz E, Baer-Dubowska W. Resveratrol, a natural chemopreven-tive agent against degenerative diseases. Pol J Pharmacol 2001;53(6):557-69.
David Seaman MS, DABCN, DACBN, FACC Port Orange, Florida
Editor's note: Dr. Seaman's six-part series on diet and inflammation is available online at www.chiroweb.com/archives/20/21/18.html.
Source: http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/21/21/19.html
As usual, this author never gave a second thought to the notion of the essentiality of dietary PUFA, but a scientist is supposed to question everything and ask for the evidence, which only a few scientists have in the case of dietary PUFAs, unfortunately.
And here’s more, though you can find plenty more like this by doing your own research:
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2004 Oct;287(4):C1139-51. Epub 2004 Jun 02.Related Articles,Links Novel effect of NF-kappaB activation: carbonylation and nitration injury to cytoskeleton and disruption of monolayer barrier in intestinal epithelium.
Banan A, Zhang LJ, Shaikh M, Fields JZ, Farhadi A, Keshavarzian A.
Rush University Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, 1725 W. Harrison, Suite 206, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. ali_banan@rush.edu
Using monolayers of intestinal cells, we reported that upregulation of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) is required for oxidative injury and that activation of NF-kappaB is key to cytoskeletal instability. In the present study, we hypothesized that NF-kappaB activation is crucial to oxidant-induced iNOS upregulation and its injurious consequences: cytoskeletal oxidation and nitration and monolayer dysfunction. Wild-type (WT) cells were pretreated with inhibitors of NF-kappaB, with or without exposure to oxidant (H(2)O(2)). Other cells were transfected with an IkappaBalpha mutant (an inhibitor of NF-kappaB). Relative to WT cells exposed to vehicle, oxidant exposure caused increases in IkappaBalpha instability, NF-kappaB subunit activation, iNOS-related activity (NO, oxidative stress, tubulin nitration), microtubule disassembly and instability (increased monomeric and decreased polymeric tubulin), and monolayer disruption. Monolayers pretreated with NF-kappaB inhibitors (MG-132, lactacystin) were protected against oxidation, showing decreases in all measures of the NF-kappaB --> iNOS --> NO pathway. Dominant mutant stabilization of IkappaBalpha to inactivate NF-kappaB suppressed all measures of the iNOS/NO upregulation while protecting monolayers against oxidant insult. In these mutants, we found prevention of tubulin nitration and oxidation and enhancement of cytoskeletal and monolayer stability. We concluded that 1) NF-kappaB is required for oxidant-induced iNOS upregulation and for the consequent nitration and oxidation of cytoskeleton; 2) NF-kappaB activation causes cytoskeletal injury following upregulation of NO-driven processes; and 3) the molecular event underlying the destabilizing effects of NF-kappaB appears to be increases in carbonylation and nitrotyrosination of the subunit components of cytoskeleton. The ability to promote NO overproduction and cytoskeletal nitration/oxidation is a novel mechanism not previously attributed to NF-kappaB in cells.
Free Radic Biol Med. 2003 Sep 15;35(6):636-47. Arachidonic acid activates a functional AP-1 and an inactive NF-kappaB complex in human HepG2 hepatoma cells.
Becuwe P, Bianchi A, Didelot C, Barberi-Heyob M, Dauca M.
Laboratoire de Biologie Cellulaire du Developpement, EA 3446, Universite Henri Poincare-Nancy I, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy Cedex, France. becuwe@scbiol.u-nancy.fr
Exogenous arachidonic acid (AA) has been shown to induce the antioxidant manganese superoxide dismutase gene by reactive oxygen species (ROS) derived from AA metabolism and the participation of the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in human HepG2 hepatoma cells. The goal of this study was to investigate the effect of AA on the activation of the two redox-sensitive transcription factors AP-1 and NF-kappaB in HepG2 cells. Using electrophoretic mobility shift assays, DNA-binding activities of AP-1 and NF-kappaB were markedly increased in AA-treated HepG2 cells. The c-Jun and c-Fos proteins were identified as components of the AA-induced AP-1 complex and their levels were increased. AA-activated NF-kappaB complex was constituted as a p50 homodimer resulting in a nuclear translocation for this protein only. Moreover, no degradation of IkappaBalpha was observed. These results were contrasted to the interleukin-1beta-activated p50/p65 complex used as a positive control. Using 5,8,11,14-eicosatetraynoic acid and inhibitors of AA metabolism, AP-1 and NF-kappaB activation required the lipoxygenase/cytochrome P450 monooxygenase pathways. In addition, antioxidants inhibited the AA-induced AP-1 and NF-kappaB activation, suggesting a role of ROS released from the AA metabolism. In reporter gene assays, AA induced the transcriptional activity of AP-1 but not that of NF-kappaB. Further investigations showed that the AA-induced transcriptional activity of AP-1 was regulated by protein kinase C and p38 MAPK pathways. These results suggest that the functional AP-1 activated by AA and coupled to that of p38 MAPK pathway may play an important role in response to ROS induced by AA metabolism in HepG2 cells without the involvement of the NF-kappaB pathway.
Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2003 Jul;71(3-4):189-204.
Platelet-type 12-lipoxygenase activates NF-kappaB in prostate cancer cells.
Kandouz M, Nie D, Pidgeon GP, Krishnamoorthy S, Maddipati KR, Honn KV.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Wayne State University, 431 Chemistry Bldg., Detroit, MI 48202, USA.
Platelet-type arachidonate 12-lipoxygenase (12-LOX) is highly expressed in many types of cancers and plays an important role in cancer pathophysiology. Arachidonic acid metabolism by 12-LOX results in the stable end product 12(S)-hydroxy eicosatetraenoic acid (12(S)-HETE), which is a signaling molecule with effects on cell proliferation, motility, invasiveness, angiogenesis, and inhibition of apoptosis. The myriad biological activities manifested by 12(S)-HETE appear to be mediated, at least in part, by the activation of NF-kappaB. Overexpression of the 12-LOX in PC-3 prostate cancer cells resulted in the constitutive activation of the transcription factor. The enzymatic product of arachidonic acid metabolism, 12(S)-HETE, mediates the activation of NF-kappaB by the 12-LOX. 12(S)-HETE treatment of PC-3 cells induced the degradation of IkappaB by the S6 proteasomal pathway and the activated NF-kappaB translocated to the nucleus causing kappaB-induced transcription. Specificity of the NF-kappaB activation by 12(S)-HETE was established by the use of a 12-LOX-specific inhibitor and 13(S)-HODE, a known 12(S)-HETE antagonist. Considering the known involvement of MAP kinase pathway in NF-kappaB activation and that of 12(S)-HETE in MAP kinase pathway, 12-LOX present in prostate cancer tissues may contribute to the constitutive activation of NF-kappaB in prostate cancer cells.
More of these kinds of studies are published each week, just go to www.pubmed.com and see for yourself.
Finally, I’ve already acknowledged in a previous post that saying Mead acid was a MUFA instead of saying it was derived from a MUFA was a mistake. Yes, even I make mistakes trying to write as much as I can in the little time that I have, though I’m willing to admit it, unlike, apparently, anyone else in this country. Or you can just listen to Mr. Hoover. He’s always right, even though he has little interest in citing evidence, and when he does, I absolutely tear it apart, piece by piece. He's got nothing, as they say, except perhaps, a mountain of agressive ignorance.
MikeV - 01 Dec 2004 14:24 GMT Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 21, No. 6, 495-505 (2002) Published by the American College of Nutrition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
REVIEW
Omega-3 Fatty Acids in Inflammation and Autoimmune Diseases Artemis P. Simopoulos, MD, FACN The Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health, Washington, D.C
Address correspondence to: Artemis P. Simopoulos, M.D., FACN, The Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health, 2001 S Street, N.W., Suite 530, Washington, D.C., 20009. E-mail: cgnh@bellatlantic.net
Conclusions TOP ABSTRACT Introduction Omega-6 and Omega-3 Fatty... Omega-3 Fatty Acids, Interleukin... Other Inflammatory Markers,... Fatty Acids, Cytokines, and... Rheumatoid Arthritis Inflammatory Bowel Disease Asthma Psoriasis Conclusions REFERENCES
The anti-inflammatory properties of 3 fatty acids, especially EPA, are due to competition with arachidonic acid (AA) as a substrate for cyclooxygenases and 5-lipoxygenase. The eicosanoids from the 6 and 3 fatty acids have opposing properties. The eicosanoids are considered a link between PUFA, inflammation and immunity. In addition to their effects on prostaglandins, thromboxanes and leukotrienes, 3 fatty acids suppress the production on interleukin 1 (IL-1?) by suppressing the IL-1? mRNA, as well as the expression of Cox2 (cytooxygenase) mRNA that is induced by IL-1?. Cox2 is overexpressed in colon cancer cells. Both ALA, and EPA and DHA are involved in immune function. The precise effect of ALA depends on the level of linoleic acid (LA) and total PUFA content of the diet. A high dose of ALA (about 15 g/day) will suppress human IL-1 and TNF (tumor necrosis factor). It is unclear whether ALA itself exerts these effects or whether they are the result of its conversion to EPA. Excessive intake of 6 fatty acids characteristic of Western diets produces an imbalance of 6 to 3 PUFAs which leads to an overproduction of the proinflammatory prostaglandins of the 6 series and cytokines. Supplements of LA rich vegetable oils increase IL-1 and TNF. Humans given 3-rich flax seed oil or fish oil supplements have sharply reduced stimulated production of IL-1, IL-2 and TNF, as well as suppressed mononuclear cell proliferation and expression of IL-2 receptors. Thus, in humans, LA increases proinflammatory cytokine secretion, whereas fish oil reduces proinflammatory cytokine secretion. ************************************* 1: Lipids. 2001 Nov;36(11):1183-93. Related Articles, Links
Influence of dietary supplementation with long-chain n-3 or n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids on blood inflammatory cell populations and functions and on plasma soluble adhesion molecules in healthy adults.
Thies F, Miles EA, Nebe-von-Caron G, Powell JR, Hurst TL, Newsholme EA, Calder PC.
Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Greatly increasing the amounts of flaxseed oil [rich in alpha-linolenic acid (ALNA)] or fish oil (FO); [rich in eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)] in the diet can decrease inflammatory cell functions and so might impair host defense. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of dietary supplementation with moderate levels of ALNA, gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), arachidonic acid (ARA), DHA, or FO on inflammatory cell numbers and functions and on circulating levels of soluble adhesion molecules. Healthy subjects aged 55 to 75 yr consumed nine capsules per day for 12 wk. The capsules contained placebo oil (an 80:20 mix of palm and sunflowerseed oils) or blends of placebo oil with oils rich in ALNA, GLA, ARA, or DHA or FO. Subjects in these groups consumed 2 g ALNA; approximately 700 mg GLA, ARA, or DHA; or 1 g EPA plus DHA (720 mg EPA + 280 mg DHA) daily from the capsules. Total fat intake from the capsules was 4 g per day. None of the treatments affected inflammatory cell numbers in the bloodstream; neutrophil and monocyte phagocytosis or respiratory burst in response to E. coli; production of tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-1beta, and interleukin-6 in response to bacterial lipopolysaccharide; or plasma concentrations of soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1. In contrast, the ALNA and FO treatments decreased the plasma concentrations of soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (16 and 28% decrease, respectively) and soluble E-selectin (23 and 17% decrease, respectively). It is concluded that, in contrast to previous reports using higher amounts of these fatty acids, a moderate increase in consumption of long-chain n-6 or n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids does not significantly affect inflammatory cell numbers or neutrophil and monocyte responses in humans and so would not be expected to cause immune impairment. Furthermore, we conclude that moderate levels of ALNA and FO, which could be incorporated into the diet, can decrease some markers of endothelial activation and that this mechanism of action may contribute to the reported health benefits of n-3 fatty acids.
Publication Types: a.. Clinical Trial b.. Randomized Controlled Trial
PMID: 11795850 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] ****************************************
1: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2004 Aug;14(4):180-5. Related Articles, Links
Soluble adhesion molecules in healthy subjects: a dose-response study using n-3 fatty acids.
Eschen O, Christensen JH, De Caterina R, Schmidt EB.
Department of Cardiology, Aalborg Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. d302015@inet.uni2.dk
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) may protect against atherosclerotic disease, and serum levels of soluble cellular adhesion molecules (sCAMs) possibly reflect the inflammatory process underlying atherosclerosis. We studied the effect of n-3 PUFA dietary supplementation on the serum levels of sP-selectin, soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1) and soluble vascular adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1), and the correlation between sCAMs and the fatty acid composition of granulocyte membranes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to receive a daily supplement of n-3 PUFA 6.6 g, n-3 PUFA 2.0 g, or olive oil for 12 weeks in a double blind design. A significant negative correlation was found between serum sICAM-1 levels and the DHA content of granulocyte membranes at entry. After supplementation with 6.6 g of n-3 PUFA, there was a significant decrease only in sP-selectin, which a gender subanalysis showed to be more marked in men. Among the women, there was a significant decrease in sICAM-1 in the PUFA 2.0 g group and a significant increase in sVCAM-1 in the PUFA 6.6 g group. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that high-dose supplementation with n-3 PUFA decreases sP-selectin levels in healthy subjects, thus suggesting a decrease in platelet reactivity or endothelial activation. However, the effect of n-3 PUFA on sCAMs is complex and may depend on gender and n-3 PUFA dose.
PMID: 15553594 [PubMed - in process]
MattLB - 01 Dec 2004 18:23 GMT > Regarding the study posted: > > 1: Lipids. 1999;34 Suppl:S1-3. Related Articles, Links
> This study is worth addressing in more detail. First of all, where > has it ever been demonstrated that an adult human’s “cell > membranes” need 22 carbon PUFAs? Or indeed Mead's acid.
> A simple experiment could be > done on dogs (since they metabolize fatty acids the way humans do). > Just get some stray dogs and feed them a diet that contains too little > PUFAs to supply all these supposed lipid bilayer membranes. If there aren't enough PUFAs others will be used for membranes.
> If I were > to do the experiment, the dogs would get fresh coconut oil (only 2% > PUFAs), as well as organic eggs, nutritional yeast, along with other > foods that have no more than trace amounts of PUFAs. According to > theory, the dogs should stiffen up (due to too much saturated fatty > acids), Membrane stiffness is not the same as whole body stiffness. Maybe you think joints and tendons are made of fat?
> fall apart literatly (because their cells lack structural > integrity), Bizarre. Now you're suggested saturated fats have less structural role than PUFAs, despite packing closer. Or did you mean fall apart like a book?
> or something else really horrible. The only thing that > will happen is that the dogs will live long and healthy lives. > Studies have been done on pigs and chickens fed coconut, for example. So the experiment by Burr and Burr using rats is nonsense (your words), because rats aren't humans, but ones with chickens are fine. You do realise rats are closer to humans than chickens, right?
> It is likely that arachidonic acid is not metabolized to omega 6 22 > carbon PUFAs because it’s so biochemically unstable. Define biochemically unstable, for once.
> The study > is important in that the investigator admits that there is not likely > a unique biochemical need for DHA, Biochemical is the key word there. DHA is more important as a structural membrane component than a source of metabolites. EPA on the other hand has biochemical activity, which is why levels affect mood.
> and since Gilbert Ling has > demolished the “cell membrane/lipid bilayer” garbage, we [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > industry eventually figured out that they could use the claim to sell > their toxic products to an ignorant public. I guess you never bothered to read the reference that MikeV started the thread with. That gives citations of human studies on the effects of EFA deficiency. This golden fallacy you cling to just doesn't wash. To save you the effort you never seem to put in anyway, here's a quote:
"Thirty years later, Hansen et al. [140] were the first to describe EFAD in humans. They observed unsatisfactory growth rates and dryness of the skin in many infants on low LA intakes. EFAD has been most extensively described in subjects on fat-free total parenteral nutrition (TPN) [141-147]. For example, O'Neill et al. [142] reported on 28 patients, ranging from newborns to 66 years old, who received fat-free TPN. LA levels fell rapidly, followed by AA. In most of the patients the 20:3ω9/20:4ω6 ratio (a biochemical marker for EFAD) had increased after a few weeks above the 0.4 criterion [148], followed approximately one week later by clinical signs of a scaly and thin skin, and hair loss. In addition to these classical EFAD symptoms, many other biological and behavioural changes have been documented [149-151]"
Just in case you missed it they said that when the Mead acid:Arachidonic acid ratio increased (more Mead acid) it led to clinical signs of scaly thin skin and hair loss. Oh dear.
> Why does the idea that a > human body metabolizing its own PUFA, the Mead acid, produce so much > cognitive dissonance to the Larry Hoovers of this world? It doesn't, it's the idea that it can do all the things the metabolites of omega 6 and 3 can do that is the problem. Why has evolution preserved all the enzymes that make the series 2/3 prostaglandins and series 4/5 leukotrienes (plus their receptors) if there's no need for them - as you claim?
> But show me some evidence > that allowing your body to produce its own PUFA is such a terrible > idea – No-one's ever said that. As usual you're attacking assertions that haven't been made.
> The idea of omega 6s being needed for signal transduction has been > refuted by Gilbert Ling, but others have all done experiments > demonstrating that this is the job of protein Who's ever claimed AA was a signal transducer? It's the *result* of signal transduction (i.e. a 2nd messenger).
> If you do just a little research, you’ll see how dangerous > arachidonic acid. One study concluded that it’s unlikely > arachidonic acid is safe when it’s in your body, regardless of > what it’s role is at any particular time or place. Here’s > a good quotation: You think it's good?
> “The interior of a cell is filled with a gelatinous material > that houses the nucleus, DNA, and protein ‘transcription > factors.’ The nucleus houses the DNA, not the gelatinous material (cytoplasm).
> These proteins are nothing more than tiny molecular > messengers that can move to the nucleus to stimulate Or inhibit
> our DNA to > replicate RNA RNA isn't replicated it's synthesised (transcribed) from a DNA template.
> and make important proteins for cell function. Here we > want to concentrate on two important transcription factors, nuclear [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Arachidonic acid is known to promote NF-kB. So would Mead's acid oxidation. All sorts of oxidative stress stimulate it.
> "Recent studies on diseases which involve insulin insensitivity (e.g. > obesity, type 2 diabetes and atherosclerosis) also show increased [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You will not find this type of statement in any physiology or > pathology book anytime soon. Why? I don't know. Because there's always a lag time between research being published and it ending up in textbooks. Nothing new there.
> Nonetheless, we can > see that inflammation is definitively viewed as a driver of chronic > disease. > > The Reduction of Inflammation <snip>
> Fatty acids (FAs) also need to be considered. The anti-inflammatory > omega-3 FAs reduceNFkB activity,4,5 which means we need to reduce our [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > www.texasgrassfedbeef.com.) Supplementing with 1-2 grams of EPA/DHA > from fish oil is also a good idea. Did you miss this paragraph? Hardly supports your view.
> Finally, I’ve already acknowledged in a previous post that > saying Mead acid was a MUFA instead of saying it was derived from a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > has little interest in citing evidence, and when he does, I absolutely > tear it apart, piece by piece. You've never torn anything apart. Feel free to quote one of your devastating rebuttals though, if you can find one.
MattLB
montygram - 03 Dec 2004 03:48 GMT Since MattLB always has to get the last word, and I don’t have time going over this ad infinitum, I’ll post this as my last rebuttal for those who fear that this nonentity of a scientist may be making any good points.
MattLB stated: Or indeed Mead's acid.
Yes, it’s not known for sure, but what is known for sure is that Mead acid is much more chemically stable than arachidonic acid (AA) and AA is implicated is just about every disease known to man. Do a www.pubmed.com search and see for yourself. When you search for Mead acid, on the other hand, you’ll find many studies that show how Mead acid has anti-inflammatory properties. The one possibly negative study you cited did not compare Mead acid to AA, which is the point you now decide to make the other way. You can’t even be consistent. After posting the anti-Mead acid study several weeks ago, which is just a lab artifact, unless they follow it up, it is disingenuous of you to make this statement that Mead acid can cause similar problems to AA. But you are so blinded by your precious textbooks that you’ll try to find some way to justify this blatantly anti-scientific way to support your notions. You’ve never addressed how AA can be healthy when there are hundreds of studies that demonstrate how it causes all kinds of incredible cellular damage, including a recent one that stated that they could not find any way AA could be in your body without being cytotoxic. Basic biochemistry is what it is. If you’ve got a very unstable molecule in the cells of your body, how is that good? If the more stable molecule gets the job done, what idiot would rather have the extremely biochemically active molecule instead? Why are you so much more afraid of dry skin than cancer (and who decides what dry skin means – one sweats out toxins, so this may be a sign of a detoxified body)? If Mead acid didn’t do what dietary PUFAs do, the skin would be falling off your body (and there are indeed disease conditions that produce this effect) – that would be a sign of a major deficiency, not what one or two investigators claim dry skin to be. As Berry once stated in one of his studies, there is no way to know what the baseline is when everyone is eating a diet high in omega 6 PUFAs. All the studies are skewered by this situation. Vitamin/mineral deficiencies and other problems would need to be excluded, which was one of the failings of those who claimed that HIV causes AIDS (see physiologist Robert Root-Bernstein’s Rethinking AIDS, for example).
MattLB: So the experiment by Burr and Burr using rats is nonsense (your words), because rats aren't humans, but ones with chickens are fine. You do realise rats are closer to humans than chickens, right?
And here you do it again! The study looked at pigs and chickens, and pigs are much closer to humans in this context than rats, but you choose the fact that chickens were also examined to support your points, when in fact, one couldn’t do better than pigs in an animal model. You are either shameless or were never taught the rudiments of the scientific process.
MattLB: No-one's ever said that. As usual you're attacking assertions that haven't been made.
If you allow your body to make Mead acid, by definition, that is essential fatty acid deficient (EFAD), because if you consume more than trace amounts of PUFAs, the Mead acid is displaced. Or are you ignorant of this fact?
MattLB: Who's ever claimed AA was a signal transducer? It's the *result* of signal transduction (i.e. a 2nd messenger).
AA is consumed in the diet or it can be produced by desaturase enzymes. What are you talking about here? As the author of that citation I quoted said: “reducing the production of selected inflammatory factors such as cytokines, prostaglandins will permit the T-Cells and TCRs to do their work in a better fashion, thereby short-circuiting the NF-kB activation.” This is the key point, because Mead acid metabolites do not have the biochemical activity of the dietary PUFAs – that point is not disputed. The only point disputed is whether Mead acid metabolites can do the job that dietary PUFA metabolites can do. If you only have to worry about dry skin, while you avoid cancer, heart disease, AD and other neurodegenerative diseases, etc., it would be a small price to pay. And of course dry skin can be caused by all kinds of things, though I haven’t experienced this horrible affliction for more than 3 years now. There is no dispute that the metabolites of dietary PUFAs would be necessary if your body couldn’t produce Mead acid (perhaps there is a rare genetic disorder, but if there isn’t, it’s certainly possible), though these metabolites would cause all kinds of problems at some point, but the opposite would then have to be true. In other words, because PUFAs are necessary for critical biological functions, the absence of dietary PUFAs should kill you fairly quickly if Mead acid couldn’t perform these functions. Keeping your skin from getting unpleasantly dry is not one of these critical functions (and one person’s dryness is another person’s non-greasiness). Check and mate here, MattLB. There’s no way to say that dietary PUFAs are essential, then say that dry skin is the horror that awaits – that kind of claim just makes one look like a moron.
If you want the latest, you can read Signal Transduction and Human Disease (2003) by Finkel and Gutkind (ed.s). On page 40, the point is made that NF-kB is activated by oxidative stress and LTB4, among other things. Mead acid is not metabolized into LTB4, and LTB4 is directly related to the common cancers. Consume omega 6s in more than trace amounts and deal yourself in for cancer. Have fun with it, MattLB.
MattLB: Bizarre. Now you're suggested saturated fats have less structural role than PUFAs, despite packing closer. Or did you mean fall apart like a book?
I don’t know where you got that from – you know I’ve posted that fatty acids do not have the role of providing structural integrity to cells (proteins like actin and myosin do this). I’m just reiterating things I’ve heard people say will happen to those who are supposedly EFAD. I have no idea what the actual theory is, because so many nutrition gurus make so may silly claims, so in the past I’ve quoted from several textbooks I own. Perhaps you can shed some light on this, since you’re such a genius. Exactly what will happen to those humans who are adults who do not want to, or cannot get pregnant, if they avoid PUFAs, except in the trace amounts found in foods like coconut oil (and how long will it take)? I’ve always said that pregnant women may need small amounts, and that is also possible for children, although trace amounts will likely suffice. I’ve done this experiment on myself for over 3 years. Over 40 and with the thickest head of hair that one could imagine, my skin is not scaly, and my rosacea is now gone, after over a decade with this condition, even though I supplemented with omega 3s as well as ate omega 3 foods.
As I said in a previous post, omega 3s interfere with omega 6 metabolization. Everyone agrees on that point, and that is what the studies that supposedly demonstrate essentiality reveal. I’ve looked at almost, if not all, of the studies that supposedly demonstrate essentiality, and they just don’t cut it, scientifically. In one study, there was an old man who it was claimed was EFAD, but there didn’t seem to be any major symptoms, and his minor symptoms could have been due to low stomach acid, vitamin/mineral deficiencies, or any number of other things. My grandparents only eat supermarket store food (in other words, no grass-fed beef, for example), and they never use canola, soy, or flax oils. They don’t eat fish. And they’ve eaten this way their entire lives! No EFAD in them, as far as their doctors can say (and they are well).
The metabolites of EPA and AA are killers, pure and simple. AIDS seems to be largely due to PGE2 production, whereas the common cancers are the result of LTB4. Do a www.pubmed.com search for AIDS PGE2 or cancer LTB4 and you’ll see what I mean. These are AA metabolites, and when you consume fish oil, you interfere with this to some degree, but fish oil has all kinds of deleterious effects in its own right. A recent study demonstrated extreme immunosuppression from fish oil, for example. Mead acid can be metabolized into molecules that do similar things, but not with the viciousness that the dietary PUFA metabolites do, meaning no cancer, no AIDS, no heart disease, etc. This is what the evidence suggests, but the establishment has vested interests in keeping things the way they are. One can follow the evidence, and live a healthy life, or one can continue to follow those who have failed decade after decade to cure diseases they said they could. For example, in the early days of AIDS, these clowns said a vaccine would be available in less than a year, then it was 5 years, then another 5, then under 10, and now, I guess, it’s go ask Magic and see what he says. Who is the bigger idiot, the person who makes ludicrous claims or the person who believes them? Get off dietary polyunsaturates and then your body can deal with most stressors (once the Mead acid replaces the AA, which takes about 2 years) successfully. Is it any surprise that the so-called AIDS epidemic began at exactly the time when most Americans had been switched over to using oils high in omega 6s? As far as the other points, you can contact the people themselves if you disagree with them. I supplied the sources.
Regarding the studies I refuted that Larry Hoover cited. He posted a study or two a long time ago. He was trying to show that so-called saturated fat is unhealthy. I remember one was on diabetes. As I’ve posted a few times, it all depends on how you define saturated fat. If you include lard, as everyone does, you are dealing with only 39% saturated fatty acids, whereas coconut oil is 92% saturated. Lard is used in lipid peroxidation experiments, whereas you couldn’t do that with coconut oil because it would take too long, and that is why coconut oil is healthy (though there are other good qualities to it, such as the medium-chain fatty acids). It’s all about oxidative stress, and the lipid peroxidation a human gets from eating too much PUFAs is a killer. I wouldn’t believe it myself if I hadn’t done years of research, but the evidence is what it is, even the studies that show cholesterol being unhealthy are really just showing what happens when you allow cholesterol to be oxidized. I recently challenged Hoover to produce the studies that he said proved his point, and he declined to do so, so you can take this point up with him. He’s such a buffoon that I won’t respond to his posts until he decides to cite actual evidence. When I cited several Mead acid studies, showing that it is beneficial, he said that the studies were taken out of context, even though the titles of the studies made clear the points I was making, but when challenged to explain (in his infinite wisdom) exactly what those studies meant, he ignored the request. What a laughingstock he is!
However, I did find a recent study saying that saturated fat was bad because it actually enhanced free radical production. When I took a good look at it, what actually happened was that the saturated fatty acids (in vitro, not in vivo) inhibited growth so much that the cell could not grow, so it went aptopic, and then of course, there were some free radicals generated (as the cell disintegrated, and lysosomes are released) that could be measured. In the body, which can make MUFAs, and from there Mead acid, this does not occur, as a follow-up study demonstrated (by using some oleic with the palmitic). The human body does not need these extremely dangerous substances. This experiment was just lab artifact, which brings up the point that unless done possesses an overall understanding, one just goes around cherry-picking studies that support one’s point, which is what you, Larry Hoover (who seems to be too lazy to even do that any more), and others do. But in this case, your claims make no sense whatsoever, from any perspective. All anyone has to do is ask themselves if they or anyone they know avoids omega 3 foods, and it’s very easy to find such people, which blows the whole notion out of the water. No need to worry about it beyond that, though I’m still waiting for a clear and detailed statement of this essential fatty acid theory is. Life exists between thresholds, and even a little AA is too much, whereas saturated fatty acids have an anti-growth effect, which means an anti-cancer effect, and only by overwhelming cells in a test tube with saturated fatty acids do the cells become overwhelmed and die. In the body, saturated fat gets converted to more biologically active fatty acids as is needed, but there’s nothing wrong with cell death, because old cells need to be replaced, and of course few people think uncontrolled cell growth is good.
Now, MattLB, you need to answer some questions if you expect anyone to take you seriously on this topic, for example:
How much omega 3 and omega 6 do people need each day? If it’s so important, why are there not plenty of experiments that demonstrate the amount needed? Also, if the amount of omega 3s my grandparents are getting (which is either zero, or as close to zero as is possible) is enough, why should anyone worry about deficiency (since it’s easy to get some omega 6s, but omega 3s are less common in the typical US diet)?
What exactly will happen if one is deficient in one, the other, or both?
How long will it take to see the so-called deficiency symptoms? So, for example, how many more years before I lose my incredibly thick hair, my rosacea comes back, my skin gets scaly, or whatever?
If an investigator were to gather a dozen dogs up and feed them on coconut oil as the only major fat source, with no source of omega 3s (I would feed them eggs, nutritional yeast, and other good sources of protein and vitamins/minerals, for example), what horrible things will happen to them, and how long will it take?
I will make a wager with you, MattLB. We will put $35,000 of your money in escrow, and get a lawyer to draw up an agreement. I will pay the cost of the experiment, but if the dogs are still healthy after a few years, as certified by a vet we both agree upon, I get that $35,000 in escrow. If not, I’ll pay you $35,000. Put your money where your mouth is. This is the only way to challenge gutless so-called scientists such as yourself, who hide behind textbook nonsense and studies done in a test tube that are just artifacts. I’ve put my life where my mouth is, by avoiding dietary PUFAs, but what we have these days are people who obtain credentials, but are then never compelled to actually produce results. When is the AIDS vaccine going to be ready? When is the war on cancer going to be won? Why is heart disease still the number one killer, even though it was the first non-infectious disease targeted by the military industrial complex, or whatever you want to call it (about 50 years ago)? The reason is people like you, MattLB, because you defend nonsense instead of saying to yourself something like, “wait a minute, he may have a point, because the massive use of PUFA oils coincides with all the steep rise in many of these diseases, exactly.” Stomach cancer used to be the number one cancer in the USA, but now colon cancer is very high (leaving aside lung cancer, due to the connection to smoking), and yet the great scientists we have working for us don’t even try to explain this phenomenon. They are too busy working for Big Pharma, directly or indirectly, hoping to make millions by designing drugs that will keep a few terminally-ill patients alive for an extra month while milking them for tens of thousands of dollars (not to mention the side-effects of the drugs).
For those of you who want to avoid the meat grinder, whether it’s bypass surgery, chemotherapy, or whatever, just avoid polyunsaturated fatty acids, and be sure not to expose foods high in cholesterol to air while you’re cooking them (eggs and shrimp, for example). Eat berries, dark chocolate, and other high-antioxidant foods. Use butter and coconut oil as your fats.
If you listen to these scientists, that is, people who can’t find their a.ses with both hands (who tell you to avoid cholesterol or to eat PUFAs), you will find yourself in a hospital bed, with them telling you about your options (and none of those will be pleasant). The evidence has been around a long time now, but now it’s crystal clear. Thomas Moore’s Heart Failure is a good book about how the establishment operates, though The Cholesterol Conspiracy is very interesting as well. Knowledge is indeed power, in that you can at least save your own butt by avoiding dietary PUFAs.
MattLB - 03 Dec 2004 12:58 GMT > Since MattLB always has to get the last word, and I don’t have > time going over this ad infinitum, I’ll post this as my last > rebuttal for those who fear that this nonentity of a scientist may be > making any good points. Well at least for once you're addressing some of the points made - although not the ones that really damage your position of course.
> MattLB stated: Or indeed Mead's acid. > > Yes, it’s not known for sure, but what is known for sure is that > Mead acid is much more chemically stable than arachidonic acid (AA) As usual you steer things back to AA. The C22 that you were claiming has never been shown to be important, was omega 3 derived.
> and AA is implicated is just about every disease known to man. Do a > www.pubmed.com search and see for yourself. I already know, and have told you I already know.
> When you search for Mead > acid, on the other hand, you’ll find many studies that show how > Mead acid has anti-inflammatory properties. The one possibly negative > study you cited did not compare Mead acid to AA, which is the point > you now decide to make the other way. You can’t even be > consistent. I haven't ever compared Mead acid to AA, beyond pointing out to you that they are both PUFAs. You can't expect me to be consistent about things you've imagined and I've never even said.
> After posting the anti-Mead acid study several weeks ago, > which is just a lab artifact, unless they follow it up, Talk about closed-minded.
> it is > disingenuous of you to make this statement that Mead acid can cause > similar problems to AA. I haven't made such a statement, beyond the fact that as PUFAs they are both capable of free radical chain reactions in a membrane. Of course since you don't believe in membranes you won't believe that either.
> But you are so blinded by your precious > textbooks that you’ll try to find some way to justify this > blatantly anti-scientific way to support your notions. I've also told you many times I have direct experience and don't rely on textbooks which are unavoidably out-of-date when published.
> You’ve > never addressed how AA can be healthy when there are hundreds of > studies that demonstrate how it causes all kinds of incredible > cellular damage, including a recent one that stated that they could > not find any way AA could be in your body without being cytotoxic. Excess AA is unhealthy. No AA at all is also unhealthy.
> Basic biochemistry is what it is. If you’ve got a very unstable > molecule in the cells of your body, how is that good? If the more > stable molecule gets the job done, what idiot would rather have the > extremely biochemically active molecule instead? Why are you so much > more afraid of dry skin than cancer More illogical conclusions.
>(and who decides what dry skin > means – one sweats out toxins, Such as? That sort of comment is straight from pop science.
> so this may be a sign of a > detoxified body)? If Mead acid didn’t do what dietary PUFAs do, > the skin would be falling off your body Skin falls off your body every day. That's how it works.
> MattLB: So the experiment by Burr and Burr using rats is nonsense > (your [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > animal model. You are either shameless or were never taught the > rudiments of the scientific process. Just giving you a taste of your own medicine. Pigs are certainly a better model than rats, so why mention chickens at all?
> MattLB: No-one's ever said that. As usual you're attacking assertions > that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > than trace amounts of PUFAs, the Mead acid is displaced. Or are you > ignorant of this fact? It's not so much displaced as not made.
> MattLB: Who's ever claimed AA was a signal transducer? It's the > *result* of > signal transduction (i.e. a 2nd messenger). > > AA is consumed in the diet or it can be produced by desaturase > enzymes. What are you talking about here? Okay, so you reveal that your basic biochemical knowledge is shakey. Arachidonic acid is found in membrane phospholipids, like any other fatty acid. In this form it doesn't do anything. When an AA-containing phospholipid is acted on by a phospholipase enzyme (in reponse to some sort of external signal) the AA is released from the phospholipid. The external signal (e.g. a hormone) has therefore been transduced into an internal chemical signal (free AA).
The free AA can either act directly to regulate certain enzymes, or be converted to prostaglandins, thrombane, leukotrienes or lipoxins.
> In other > words, because PUFAs are necessary for critical biological functions, > the absence of dietary PUFAs should kill you fairly quickly Why? Vitamin and mineral deficiencies don't kill you quickly. Even protein deficiency doesn't kill you quickly.
> Check and mate here, MattLB. There’s no way to say that dietary > PUFAs are essential, then say that dry skin is the horror that awaits > – that kind of claim just makes one look like a moron. You look more of a moron if you dismiss all the signalling molecules made from PUFAs (in particular AA) as being functionless.
If you could remove all the AA from your body you would end up with all the problems seen as side effects in anti-inflammatory drugs that act via the COX-1 pathways i.e. thinning of the gastric wall including perforation, excess acid production, peptic ulcers, impaired kidney function, reduced control of blood vessels, internal haemorrhage and prolonged bleeding, along with numerous minor aliments like headaches and skin rashes.
Individuals who genetically lack the lipooxygenase enzyme (which has AA as its substrate) are three times more likely to have bleeding complications (partly due to a reduced response to platelet activating factor). They also show reduced neutrophil response to immune complexes.
> If you want the latest, you can read Signal Transduction and Human > Disease (2003) by Finkel and Gutkind (ed.s). On page 40, the point is > made that NF-kB is activated by oxidative stress and LTB4, among other > things. Mead acid is not metabolized into LTB4, and LTB4 is directly > related to the common cancers. Consume omega 6s in more than trace > amounts and deal yourself in for cancer. Have fun with it, MattLB. NF-kB is essential for dealing with infection and radiation/UV damage too, but you seem to think its only job is to give you cancer.
> MattLB: Bizarre. Now you're suggested saturated fats have less > structural role [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I’m just reiterating things I’ve heard people say will > happen to those who are supposedly EFAD. So you just took on face value the idea that they would fall to bits? For a start saturated fats are solid at room temperature; unsaturated are liquid. That along should tell you something about which would make cells more robust.
> I have no idea what the > actual theory is, because so many nutrition gurus make so may silly > claims, so in the past I’ve quoted from several textbooks I own. Time for a quote from you:
"you are so blinded by your precious textbooks that you’ll try to find some way to justify this blatantly anti-scientific way to support your notions."
> Perhaps you can shed some light on this, since you’re such a > genius. Exactly what will happen to those humans who are adults who > do not want to, or cannot get pregnant, if they avoid PUFAs, except in > the trace amounts found in foods Whoever said you should be eating grams and grams of (all?) PUFAs?
> like coconut oil (and how long will > it take)? I’ve always said that pregnant women may need small > amounts, and that is also possible for children, although trace > amounts will likely suffice. Brains are 25% DHA. The growing baby brain has to get it from somewhere. You work it out.
Maternal Supplementation With Very-Long-Chain n-3 Fatty Acids During Pregnancy and Lactation Augments Children's IQ at 4 Years of Age Ingrid B. Helland, MD*,, Lars Smith, PhD, Kristin Saarem, PhD||, Ola D. Saugstad, MD, PhD and Christian A. Drevon, MD, PhD*
"At birth, Osbond and Mead acid correlated negatively with intelligence scores, and these fatty acids have been proposed to be markers of DHA depletion. High levels of these fatty acids might also represent nonoptimal ligands for transcription factors, substrates for enzymatic activities, or structural components in the central nervous system."
> The metabolites of EPA and AA are killers, pure and simple. Only in excess.
> AIDS > seems to be largely due to PGE2 production, whereas the common cancers > are the result of LTB4. That's overly simplistic, even for you.
> Magic and see what he says. Who is the bigger idiot, the person who > makes ludicrous claims or the person who believes them? Gilbert Ling, or you? Hmm.
> Get off > dietary polyunsaturates and then your body can deal with most > stressors (once the Mead acid replaces the AA, which takes about 2 > years) successfully. Is it any surprise that the so-called AIDS > epidemic began at exactly the time when most Americans had been > switched over to using oils high in omega 6s? And promiscuous gay men and intravenous drug users eat far more omega 6 do they?
> It’s all about oxidative stress, and the lipid peroxidation a > human gets from eating too much PUFAs is a killer. Eating oxidised Mead acid would do you in just the same.
> However, I did find a recent study saying that saturated fat was bad > because it actually enhanced free radical production. When I took a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > study demonstrated (by using some oleic with the palmitic). The human > body does not need these extremely dangerous substances. You almost seem to think that diet is the only source of AA.
> This > experiment was just lab artifact, which brings up the point that > unless done possesses an overall understanding, one just goes around > cherry-picking studies that support one’s point, which is what > you, Larry Hoover (who seems to be too lazy to even do that any more), > and others do. No, it's what you are forced to do and you usually chose references that aren't actually ansering the specific challenge to you, but are just another "AA is bad" telling us nothing new.
> Now, MattLB, you need to answer some questions if you expect anyone to > take you seriously on this topic, for example: > > How much omega 3 and omega 6 do people need each day? That depends on their genetic makeup and what their current lipid composition is. Although if you need some figures you could look here:
http://www.powerpak.com/index.asp?show=lesson&lsn_id=1861&page=courses/1861/tabl es.htm#table5
> What exactly will happen if one is deficient in one, the other, or > both? You get all the same disorders as are seen as side-effects of drugs that knock out eicosanoid production.
Here's a reference to a case where low LA and very low LNA lead to problems that were cured by supplementation with LNA: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=6801965
A good overview is here: "The slow discovery of the importance of omega 3 essential fatty acids in human health." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=9478042
> How long will it take to see the so-called deficiency symptoms? So, > for example, how many more years before I lose my incredibly thick > hair, my rosacea comes back, my skin gets scaly, or whatever? I'm not psychic. Maybe you are. How long before I lose my hair because I'm not trying to make myself EFA deficient?
> If an investigator were to gather a dozen dogs up and feed them on > coconut oil as the only major fat source, with no source of omega 3s > (I would feed them eggs, Egg yolk has EFA.
> nutritional yeast, and other good sources of > protein and vitamins/minerals, for example), what horrible things will > happen to them, and how long will it take? I'm not psychic with regard to dogs either.
> The > reason is people like you, MattLB, because you defend nonsense instead > of saying to yourself something like, “wait a minute, he may > have a point, because the massive use of PUFA oils coincides with all > the steep rise in many of these diseases, exactly.” I obviously need to remind you again that I'm not suggesting everyone eat lots of PUFA. I know all about the negative effects of peroxidised PUFA. I'm suggesting some PUFA are essential components of the body. The fat content of the retina is about half omega 3 PUFA. That's not by accident.
> Stomach > cancer used to be the number one cancer in the USA, but now colon > cancer is very high (leaving aside lung cancer, due to the connection > to smoking), and yet the great scientists we have working for us > don’t even try to explain this phenomenon. Lack of fibre is the standard explanation.
> For those of you who want to avoid the meat grinder, whether > it’s bypass surgery, chemotherapy, or whatever, just avoid > polyunsaturated fatty acids, and be sure not to expose foods high in > cholesterol to air while you’re cooking them (eggs and shrimp, > for example). Eat berries, dark chocolate, and other high-antioxidant > foods. Use butter and coconut oil as your fats. I see nothing controversial in this. Oxidised fat is bad, whatever type it is. Oxidised Mead acid is just as bad. I would go a step further and say never fry things, especially not in sunflower oil.
MattLB
MikeV - 03 Dec 2004 15:47 GMT , even for you. SNIPl.
> MattLB Matt: Boy! He really slaughtered you. I really like the novel bit about how good berries and dark chocolate are for you! I bet that one hurt! Sometimes I wonder about the wisdom of you and Larry Hoover bothering to reply to such streams of inanity, but I am glad that you do. For me and I suspect others, it is a continuing process of education. Thanks
Nick: Truly you are a lone voice in the wilderness, old friend. Do you ever feel like King Canute? Have you ever considered the possibility that substituting Mead Acid for DHA in your brain cells may have damaged your ability to organize your thoughts? A real downer for a true lipid scientist! I have heard that Mead acid has been associated with early onset of Alzheimer's. (Sorry but I seem to have mislaid my reference) Note: Your News Editor appears to be inserting strange codes (’) instead of apostrophes. I suggest you drop apostrophes. No clarity will be lost, I assure you. :-)
Regards MikeV
montygram - 06 Dec 2004 06:11 GMT Any body with a tiny amount of gray matter realizes that some individuals and companies are exploiting the notion of essential fatty acid deficiency to try to sell a lot of product, but this product is dangerous in more than trace amounts. If I’m not EFAD after about 3 years on my present diet (not only don’t I have any of those symptoms listed on the web page you referenced, and I just had an eye exam, an MRA, a CBC, etc., but my skin is better than ever), why should anyone talk of EFAD as if it’s such an important thing to avoid? I think this is the key point as far as you’re concerned. It’s true that from what I’ve experienced and read, EFAD is healthy, if you are an adult who doesn’t want to, or can’t get pregnant, but we can allow readers to decide for themselves. Don’t you see that there’s virtually no possibility of avoiding dietary PUFAs, and that the best advice is to make sure you don’t eat too much? If you eat eggs, you might as well get the organic omega 3 enriched (to interfere with AA metabolization), but other than that, I don’t see any need to go out of one’s way to eat PUFAs.
Since, as you yourself admit (by noting the small amount of PUFAs in eggs) that it’s difficult to avoid small amounts of PUFAs (in a typical American diet), the common American diet must be sufficient. Otherwise, we would see things like the pellagra epidemics or scurvy among sailors, which we don’t see. However, do you want AA as the primary stressor-induced fatty acid in your body? The evidence is overwhelmingly against this, and Mead acid, again from the evidence, seems like just what the doctor ordered (before doctors sold out to Big Pharma, that is). The web site you cited did not supply an original experiment to support its claims. However, the claim that omega 3s are needed for eye health is interesting. When I was a kid, hardly anyone ever ate fish, and there was little soy oil used, if any (canola wasn’t yet invented and flax was not in the stores), and yet none of the kids I knew had eye problems, yet Eskimo kids do (even though the media is telling us to eat more omega 3s – like the Eskimos do). Here is the frightening evidence:
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2003 Jun;81(3):304-8. Involvement of oxidative and nitrosative stress in promoting retinal vasculitis in patients with Eales' disease.
Rajesh M, Sulochana KN, Punitham R, Biswas J, Lakshmi S, Ramakrishnan S.
Biochemistry Research Department, Vision Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, 600006 Chennai, India.
Eales' disease in Inuit: report of four cases.
Moldow B, la Cour M.
PURPOSE: To report four cases of Eales' disease in Inuit from Greenland diagnosed within a 6.5-year Period… Four younger Inuit, three males and one female, were diagnosed with Eales' disease based on fundus changes and exclusion of possible differential diagnoses… CONCLUSION: Eales' disease seems to be rather common in the small population of Inuit (56,000) in Greenland. Attention is required to ensure diagnosis and appropriate treatment, including laser photocoagulation, leading to a reasonably good prognosis.
And:
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings from this study clearly reveal the involvement of RNS and ROS in the development of retinal vasculitis in ED. Based on our present study and earlier studies we confirm the role of free radicals in mediating retinal tissue damage in ED.
Source: Clin Biochem. 2003 Jul;36(5):377-85.
It's all about oxidative stress, though cofactors like iron sometimes play a role.
Your idea about stomach cancer is disappointing too, because most Americans eat less fiber today than they did in the early twentieth century (and the fiber studies are equivocal, at best). The Japanese still have high rates, and the answer seems quite clear: oxidative stress to the stomach |
|