The Permanent Supplement Regime

[MachineGhost]

Synthetic triglyceride oil. This form occurs when natural triglycerides are converted to ethyl esters for concentration (as above), but then re-converted into synthetic triglycerides. The original position of the triglyceride’s carbon bonds change and the molecule’s overall structure is altered, which impacts the bioavailability of the oil.

Do you have any references to evidence to back up this opinion from Kessler?

Kresser doesn't cite a reference, but I found a pharmacy website that states references on that...

http://www.whitmanpharmacy.com/nutriceuticals.php

None are relevant.  I'm not concerned with triglycerides vs free fatty acids vs ethyl esters as I already have that data, but specifically his claim that re-esterified triglycerides are inferior to natural triglycerides.  Since the body cleaves the EFA's off the glycerol backbone during digestion only to reassemble the whole enchilada later on, I find his unsupported claim to be baseless.  But I could be wrong.

[MachineGhost]

Just curious, but why do you try to get the "RDA" of LA? The Omega-6 chains are in practically everything these days, so I just assume that there's no point trying to get more of it beyond what's already in our everyday foods.

Well it was more of a reference to how "little" I was ingesting.  But one of the articles you provided indicated that the average LA amount was 15 grams a day before 1930's and the Oiling of America, so I think that puts the 17g in perspective.  To think that we all eat too much LA is really hard to come to terms with.

BTW, I didn't see anything that stated that LA doesn't increase AA past a certain point.  That doesn't make any sense to me as my AA is higher than the average overweight/obese American eating the S.A.D. of which I avoid.  I have trouble believing what little healthy food I eat has too much LA compared to whats in the S.A.D. trash.  Besides, if AA really was capped, why would I respond with inflammation to ingesting food with dominant sources of LA?  Its seems evident that the LA is going all the way down the Omega-6 chain directly into AA overexpression.

[Gumby]

Do you have any references to evidence to back up this opinion from Kessler?

Kresser doesn't cite a reference, but I found a pharmacy website that states references on that...

http://www.whitmanpharmacy.com/nutriceuticals.php

None are relevant.  I'm not concerned with triglycerides vs free fatty acids vs ethyl esters as I already have that data, but specifically his claim that re-esterified triglycerides are inferior to natural triglycerides.  Since the body cleaves the EFA's off the glycerol backbone during digestion only to reassemble the whole enchilada later on, I find his unsupported claim to be baseless.  But I could be wrong.

Okay... what about this? (and see abstracts under post)

http://pi-bill-articles.blogspot.com/20 ... rm-is.html

[Gumby]

BTW, I didn't see anything that stated that LA doesn't increase AA past a certain point.  That doesn't make any sense to me as my AA is higher than the average overweight/obese American eating the S.A.D. of which I avoid.  I have trouble believing what little healthy food I eat has too much LA compared to whats in the S.A.D. trash.

I gathered that from an observational comment that I read from Masterjohn, on his blog. It was nothing concrete. Here's what he wrote...

It looks like there has been a lot of research into cannabinoid receptor antagonists via pharmacology (which is not turning out to be the obesity panacea just yet), and/or the effect of omega 3 supplementation on the system. But even as a lay person, I couldn't help but wonder if this was another role that the high levels of dietary omega 6s played in the standard American diet as far as disrupting appetite and leading to weight gain. And presumably, whether this was yet another reason why a minimizing veggie oils is worthwhile. Curious!

Beth... I do not think that excess linoleic acid increases arachidonic acid (AA) levels much, because tissue levels of AA plateau very quickly at low intakes. I do think they cause other problems, and are likely to diminish tissue levels of the omega-3 DHA, and that might lead to dysregulation of the endocannabinoid system.

It's important to realize, though, that production of anadamide and the others is very regulated, so it's not the precursors that matter so much as the regulation, as long as the precursor levels are saturated, like they should be (as tissue levels of AA are highly regulated).

So... as a layperson (and from what I've previously read) it sounds like excess LA makes it harder for the body to create DHA/EPA, since it competes for the same enzymes required to make EPA/DHA. But, no, I guess that doesn't explain excess AA in your body — it just explains a shortage of EPA/DHA (which can also be explained by the inefficiency of ALA).

Besides, if AA really was capped, why would I respond with inflammation to ingesting food with dominant sources of LA?  Its seems evident that the LA is going all the way down the Omega-6 chain directly into AA overexpression.

It's not really "capped" — it just tends to plateau from what Masterjohn was hypothesizing in that the level of AA is apparently regulated by the body when LA is saturated (in a typical person). So, I guess your body is just regulating AA differently than a typical person, for whatever reason.

I'm not an expert in this area, but I sort of assumed that excess AA didn't automatically translate into an inflammation cascade. I mean, it could just be that AA-rich foods are permeating your gut more easily, or something of that nature, and that's what triggers the inflammation cascade in your body. But, that's just a hypothesis. Of course, it could be other non-gut triggers, but I wouldn't know what they might be (heavy metals, etc.).

I do think you will see improvement by ditching Flax Oil, but have you considered working with a functional medical practitioner to determine the cause of all this?

On the other hand, I can't help but wonder if the test is just wrong. I'd test again in a few months.

[MachineGhost]

I do think you will see improvement by ditching Flax Oil, but have you considered working with a functional medical practitioner to determine the cause of all this?

On the other hand, I can't help but wonder if the test is just wrong. I'd test again in a few months.

I've considered it, but I don't really see the cost effectiveness to pay someone a few hundred just to in turn charge me for expensive tests I can order myself cheaper or to receive patronizing advice I can read for free on blogs or research myself.  I mean, there's nothing earth-shattering in my tests so far that would require highly specialized advice to resolve.  I think perhaps you labor under the illusion that an alternative health practitioner is automatically going to be as smart and capable as we or Kessler and Masterjohn are.  I just have to laugh at that one!  Don't sell yourself short.

I note with sheer irony that if I ditch the flaxseed MEAL, I will no longer have any chance of achieving optimal ALA status.  I just don't see how its possible to have a high ALA to LA ratio, though I'm certainly not concerned about that vs EPA/DHA.  BTW, a new fish fat has been identified and practically extracted, called DPA that is about 10x more powerful than EPA.  Perhaps another reason to prefer natural over concentrated esters/re-esters?

Why is everyone so quick to dismiss test results because it didn't come wrapped via some "authoritative" flunky?  They all use the same few labs at the end of the day.  There's only a 2.5% probability that my hair test (uranium) is wrong.  Squeezing blood from a rock, people!

[MachineGhost]

http://pi-bill-articles.blogspot.com/20 ... rm-is.html

Great find!  So re-esterified is actually superior to natural.  So Kessler's pro-whole food bias is the real problem.  It's always good to question your premises, though.

[Gumby]

http://pi-bill-articles.blogspot.com/20 ... rm-is.html

Great find!  So re-esterified is actually superior to natural.  So Kessler's pro-whole food bias is the real problem.  It's always good to question your premises, though.

Actually, he spells is "Kresser" (not Kessler).

Here is how Kresser responded when he was pressed on the evidence that rTG is better absorbed than natural TG:

The literature is mixed on this, but this paper and this one both show higher absorption of natural triglycerides than ethyl esters. The second one shows that the absorption of ethyl esters improves with a high fat meal, as I stated in the article. There are other papers showing they are equally well absorbed. But what isn’t controversial is that triglycerides from whole fish are better absorbed than triglycerides from fish oil in any form. I prefer to take products in their least processed, most natural form, so in general I’d choose a natural triglyceride oil over an ethyl ester oil – provided it met standards for purity.
Source: http://chriskresser.com/the-definitive- ... mment-1860

In a later comment where the same commenter showed him evidence of the superior bioavailability of rTG he replied, "Not quite ready to change my opinion based on a single study."

I think he did stretch the evidence by drawing his own, unproven, conclusions. And he admits his natural foods bias — and frankly I can respect that. After all, synthetic forms of anything — with the exception of synthetic motor oil — tend to be inferior when given enough study.

When pressed again, he replied...

I understand very well the role of DHA and have written about it here and elsewhere. That doesn’t mean we need tremendous amounts of it through fish oil supplementation. Eating fish 2-3 times a week (6 oz. serving) and reducing omega-6 to 2-3% of calories (in line with evolutionary norms) is enough to balance the ratio. Think of it from an evolutionary perspective, Marshall. And consider the studies that suggest excess omega-3 (including DHA) may promote angiogenesis and cancer in susceptible individuals. N-3s are fragile and vulnerable to oxidative damage. It’s not a “more is better”? type of thing.
Source: http://chriskresser.com/the-definitive- ... mment-6883

From what I can tell, the improved bioavailability of rTG really isn't that much better than natural TG — and the improved bioavailability has only been studied under specific time frames and specific doses (and studied by people with stated conflicts of interest, fwiw). Who knows if they would differ over longer periods of times and/or different doses. So, there really aren't a lot of good comparisons between rTG and TG. Makes me wonder why that is. Perhaps it is because the brand qualities are so different to begin with. Anyway, sounds like rTG is the way to go if you don't like eating fish, but I still get the impression that eating natural fish is best, when possible. I, personally, still might be inclined to use natural TG to avoid any unforeseen problems with rTG, but that's just from my personal bias and my lack of understanding of rTG.

[MachineGhost]

From what I can tell, the improved bioavailability of rTG really isn't that much better than natural TG — and the improved bioavailability has only been studied under specific time frames and specific doses (and studied by people with stated conflicts of interest, fwiw). Who knows if they would differ over longer periods of times and/or different doses. So, there really aren't a lot of good comparisons between rTG and TG. Makes me wonder why that is. Perhaps it is because the brand qualities are so different to begin with. Anyway, sounds like rTG is the way to go if you don't like eating fish, but I still get the impression that eating natural fish is best, when possible. I, personally, still might be inclined to use natural TG to avoid any unforeseen problems with rTG, but that's just from my personal bias and my lack of understanding of rTG.

The main advantage of rTG is you can concentrate the EPA/DHA without devaluing bioavailability, which is definitely the rule for anything synthetic.  The brand I take is 60% and I believe natural TG is 20%-30% or worse.  This makes a huge difference in the number of gelcaps needed since they're pretty darn big to begin with (I didn't find the enteric-coated fish oil capsules from LEF to be any smaller). 

I do agree eating the fish directly is vastly superior.  It's a no brainer.  But not everyone likes the oily fishy taste.  I can't remember if I mentioned it before, but I was swilling down a tablespoon of raw, unprocessed wild Alaskan salmon oil every day for awhile and that was enough to make my toes curl.  It's gonna be a cold day in hell before I upgrade that experience to FCLO.

[Gumby]

1 Tablespoon! Hopefully that was just a short term therapeutic dose because a lot of people now believe that 1 Tablespoon of any fish oil isn't good for you over the long term. Way too much oxidation.

Just curious, but do you think salmon tastes bad?

Personally, I try to eat fish twice a week and I take 1/2 tsp/day of FCLO (down from 1 tsp/day). I'm used to the taste now.

[MachineGhost]

1 Tablespoon! Hopefully that was just a short term therapeutic dose because a lot of people now believe that 1 Tablespoon of any fish oil isn't good for you over the long term. Way too much oxidation.

1T was a lot better than 12 gelcaps!  You do have the ability with liquid fish oils to easily high-dose, although honestly, 1T (3.5g EPA/DHA) is not a high dose relative to studies showing effects on serious disease states like autism.  One has to be careful not to confuse the total volume of oil with the total EPA/DHA content.

Just curious, but do you think salmon tastes bad?

Yes, but I think cod (flesh) tastes even worse.  Vomit in my mouth either way!

Personally, I try to eat fish twice a week and I take 1/2 tsp/day of FCLO (down from 1 tsp/day). I'm used to the taste now.

I've heard that's supposed to happen (taste tolerance), but it never has to me.  Perhaps that will change as I fix my EPA/DHA deficit over time.  I am 100% happy with the rTG for now (3 gelcaps contains 1.7g EPA/DHA) unless the LEF version blows me away (doubtful, though I do like the extra ingredients).

[Gumby]

Just curious, but do you think salmon tastes bad?

Yes, but I think cod (flesh) tastes even worse.  Vomit in my mouth either way!

I wonder if you need to eat the skin in order to get the most benefit. Do you try to prepare it in different sauces? Cream, butter, etc. High fat meals tend to increase absorption (evidence suggests that's true of most nutrients). Jamie Oliver has a good recipe for salmon with pesto and green beans which is super easy.

[Kriegsspiel]

Hopefully that was just a short term therapeutic dose because a lot of people now believe that 1 Tablespoon of any fish oil isn't good for you over the long term. Way too much oxidation.

This bit caught my attention, what's the story here?

[Gumby]

Hopefully that was just a short term therapeutic dose because a lot of people now believe that 1 Tablespoon of any fish oil isn't good for you over the long term. Way too much oxidation.

This bit caught my attention, what's the story here?

See...

Chris Kresser: When it comes to fish oil, more is not better

Chris Masterjohn: Precious Yet Perilous

Basically, using lots of Fish Oil over many years is probably not a good idea...

This may come as a surprise to you, with all of the current media hoopla about the benefits of fish oil supplementation. Yet the vast majority of the studies done that have shown a benefit have been short-term, lasting less than one year. The only trial lasting more than four years, the DART 2 trial, showed that fish oil capsules actually increase the risk of heart disease and sudden death.

A 2004 Cochrane meta-analysis of trials lasting longer than six months suggests that the cardiovascular benefits of fish oil have been dramatically over-stated. They analyzed 79 trials overall, and pooled data from 48 trials that met their criteria. The only effect that could be distinguished from chance was a reduced risk of heart failure. Fish oil provided no reduction in total or cardiovascular mortality.

Too much fish oil can wreak havoc in your body

Omega-3 fatty acids are highly vulnerable to oxidative damage. When fat particles oxidize, they break down into smaller compounds, like malondialdehyde (MDA), that are dangerous because they damage proteins, DNA, and other important cellular structures.

A study by Mata et al demonstrated that oxidative damage increases as intake of omega-3 fat increases.


Source: Chris Kresser: When it comes to fish oil, more is not better

If you are trying to balance your Omega 3:6 ratio, the best way to do it is to reduce your Omega-6 intake and eat fish 2 or 3 times per week — rather than downing lots of Fish Oil. You can take therapeutic doses of Fish Oil (as MG is doing) to raise your Omega-3, but it's not a good long term solution, since it just increases the amount of oxidizable polyunsaturates in your body. A therapeutic dose of Fermented Cod Liver Oil could be up to 15mL to fight colds and other illnesses.

For maintenance doses, maybe limit Fish Oil to 1 gram and Fermented Cod Liver Oil to 5mL. That's just a rough estimate — everyone is different. (I'm not a doctor, so do your own research).

[MachineGhost]

I will be editing the regime list (on the first page) over time to provide links to "best of breed" book resources by the world's foremost experts.  I am open to suggestions.  Melatonin is the first.  I will prefer to vet (i.e. read) anything personally before listing it.

[BP]

I am posting without having read the previous posts, so please forgive me if my comments have been covered.  In my lay non-medical profession opinion, using most supplements creates expensive urine in most cases and does little for your overall health (and may in fact harm it).  And this assumes that supplements actually contain what is on the label and in the amount claimed on the label - a big if in most cases, e.g., lead in kids vitamins.  Supplements simply cannot recreate the various known and unknown nutrients in natural food and cannot make up for bad dietary (junk food) and lifestyle habits (sedentary, smoking, etc.).

I am a fan of Dr. Joel Fuhrman's work as in Eat to Live and like minded folks who advocate high nutrient food content as the vast majority of your diet. 

Another helpful resource is http://nutritionfacts.org with the many videos and blog.

Even the government has a good resource on supplements: http://ods.od.nih.gov/

Be well!

[Benko]

In my lay non-medical profession opinion, using most supplements creates expensive urine in most cases and does little for your overall health

You are quoting the former standart party line that even doctors have abandoned.  Patients at the hospital I work at routinely get blood tests to evaluate their vitamin D levels (since many/most are deficient).

A visit to the americal heart association web site will clue you in on the benefits on Fish oil (EPA/DHA).

In most cases it is preferable to get nuntrients from food (perhaps one of your points). 

[BP]

I have no party line because I have no party to defend.  My opinions are based on my evaluation of the literature (many years worth as this is an area of personal interest) that I have reviewed.  The resources that I have posted are a small sample of information resources that generally meet the criteria for opinions based on scientific studies.  I personally take a multiple vitamin as cheap insurance.

And while you are having your Vitamin D level checked you might also consider having your B-12 level checked as well, even if you eat meat, and especially if you are getting older.

Be well.

[Benko]

you might also consider having your B-12 level checked as well, even if you eat meat, and especially if you are getting older.

I am over 50 and take extra b12, thanks.  I can't see any need to get blood tested, since unlike vit d there is no harm in taking "extra".

"My opinions are based on my evaluation of the literature (many years worth as this is an area of personal interest) that I have reviewed. "

If you have reviewed the literature on vit D and are not taking extra/getting your blood levels checked (unless you get regular sun exposure) then your position is way out of the mainstream of a large number of people who have looked at this.  Which is your right. 

[MachineGhost]

Today, the Government Accounting Office's report on dietary supplement Adverse Event Reports was released.  This was requested by anti-dietary supplement, pro-Big Pharma cronyists Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) after several failed efforts to regulate supplements as drugs.  Unfortunately for them, the report overwhelmingly demonstrates that dietary supplements are safe.  Case closed.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653113.pdf

[Benko]

The first bill (S.3650 and A.4700) will establish a Dietary Supplement Safety Committee that would create a system for adverse event reports; assess data and make recommendations to ban whichever nutritional supplements it deemed harmful; and establish a public health education campaign on dietary supplements. Most dangerous of all, the health commissioner would have the ability to ban supplements as recommended by committee.

We are from the gov't and we know better than you
Ya Vol!

[MachineGhost]

400 IU of D3 a day increases 25-hydroxy levels by 2.6 ng/ml.

1000 IU of D3 a day increases 25-hydroxy levels by 7 ng/ml.

So, in the typical person who doesn't take supplements, they will have a 25-hydroxy level of approximately 20 ng/ml, insufficient to protect against cancer and other diseases.  To boost it to within the optimal 50-80 ng/ml range would require 5,000 IU of D3 each day, i.e. 20 + 35 = 55 ng/ml.  But because of fat tail outliers, more or less can be needed by any person and that can only be confirmed by a 25-hydroxy blood test.  But as a safe starting dose, 5,000 IU is it.

[MachineGhost]

Autophagy is turning out to be the strongest contender behind various life extension interventions.  Practical ways to promote it include:

    Fasting activates Autophagy -  caloric restriction affects 5 molecular pathways that activate autophagy
    Sunlight, Vitamin D and Klotho activate Autophagy - there are three ways through which UV light, Vitamin D, and the Klotho pathway activate autophagy via inhibiting the insulin/IGF-1 pathway
    Rapamycin activates Autophagy - there are two ways through which mTOR inhibitors activate autophagy –  TORC1 and TORC2 mechanisms
    Caffeine activates Autophagy - Caffeine can activate autophagy via an mTOR-dependent mechanism
    Green tea activates Autophagy - ECGC can activate autophagy via an mTOR-dependent mechanism
    Metformin activates Autophagy - metformin can activate autophagy via AMPK activation – mTOR-dependent and mTOR-independent mechanisms
    Lithium activates Autophagy -  lithium and other compounds can activate autophagy by inhibiting inositol monophosphate and lower IP3 levels – an mTOR-independent mechanism
    Resveratrol activates Autophagy – there are four 4 ways through which resveratrol can activate autophagy – via mTOR-dependent and mTOR-independent mechanisms
    Spermidine activates Autophagy - how spermidine activates autophagy via histone protein deacetylation – mTOR-indepdendent mechanism
    Hypoxia activates Autophagy -  intermittent hypoxia can increase autophagy via HIF-1a
    Phytosubstances which activate the Nrf2 pathway can activate Autophagy.  These are many and include soy products and hot chili peppers.

[Benko]

MG,

Thanks for the reminder.  Years ago I ran across some articles by someone (he was involved in a supplement company, and I think he may still occasionally post on Lyle's board)  that talked about the importance of autophagy and compounds that promoted it.

Perhaps more ammunition for intermittent fasting.

Rapamycin--are you really taking this?  This is an immunosuppressant drug used to prevent rejection in organ transplantation

"Hypoxia activates Autophagy -  intermittent hypoxia can increase autophagy via HIF-1a"
Uhhhh did you pull this list as is from somewhere?

[MachineGhost]

Rapamycin--are you really taking this?  This is an immunosuppressant drug used to prevent rejection in organ transplantation

Nah, curcumin is a rapamycin target analog so that does the job nicely.

"Hypoxia activates Autophagy -  intermittent hypoxia can increase autophagy via HIF-1a"
Uhhhh did you pull this list as is from somewhere?

We're not talking about auto-erotic asphyxiation but things like climbing mountains, low oxygen situations, etc..   Heck I'm sure just pulling the sheet over your head while falling asleep would work.

[leeroy]

Not to derail the topic, but if you are concerned about absorption when taking fish oil perhaps you should consider a fermented variety.

Heres an article about it: http://www.fishoilfacts.net/review-gree ... liver-oil/