What's the difference, besides Flax Seed being from a vegetable source?
Which is better for you, assuming it's wild fish and salmon oil?
MattLB - 20 Sep 2006 14:09 GMT
> What's the difference, besides Flax Seed being from a vegetable source?
In the simplest terms, fish oil contains the final product (EPA and
DHA) as used by the body and flax oil contains the starting material
(LNA). Your body can convert LNA into EPA and DHA but only very slowly,
so you're better off with fish.
MattLB
monty1945@lycos.com - 20 Sep 2006 18:29 GMT
Before you do serious damage to your body with these highly unstable
molecules, I suggest you read the following:
http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/fishoilquotesyoushouldread.msnw
David R. Throop - 29 Sep 2006 20:53 GMT
>What's the difference, besides Flax Seed being from a vegetable source?
>Which is better for you, assuming it's wild fish and salmon oil?
This just in: "Comparing Plant and Fish Omega-3s in Heart Health"
http://fatsoflife.com/fatsoflife/article.asp?nid=2&edition=this&id=350
To these reviewers, the findings on EPA plus DHA versus ALA were
clear: "Evidence suggests that increased consumption of omega-3
fatty acids from fish or fish-oil supplements, but not of ALA,
reduces the rates of all-cause mortality, cardiac and sudden
death, and possibly stroke" In their view, there is no
high-quality evidence to support a beneficial effect of ALA.
I continue to eat walnuts and use flax oil as a salad dressing. But
the evidence for a benefit for linolenic acid (over other short chain
PUFA) is weak and mixed.
DRT