Gyroscopic Investing

Reub wrote: Gumby, I wanted to thank you as well for recommending Crowdtilt to me.

You bet, Reub! And congrats on tilting. Hope your dad is doing better.

Gumby wrote:

Reub wrote: Gumby, I wanted to thank you as well for recommending Crowdtilt to me.

You bet, Reub! And congrats on tilting. Hope your dad is doing better.

Yeah, I hope things get better for you, Reub.  Crowdtilt is pretty interesting.

MG, I have two thoughts....

My initial thought is that you may be taking too much olive oil. I seem to remember that was one of the oils you tolerated. Your Linoleic Acid levels are quite high and olive oil tends to be a high source of Omega-6 — especially Linoleic Acid. The word "Linoleic" is actually derived from "oleic" (i.e. "olive").

Chris Masterjohn sums it up this way...

Chris Masterjohn wrote:"An excess of linoleate from vegetable oil will interfere with the production of DHA while an excess of EPA from fish oil will interfere with the production and utilization of AA"
Source: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/P ... eport.html

Take a look at the following sources of Linoleic acid...

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleic_a ... ry_sources

As you will notice in that Wikipedia link, Olive Oil is relatively high compared to coconut oil, which has much less LA in it.

So, Coconut oil is low in Omega-6, and has no Omega-3 (a good thing when using heat). From Dr. Mary Newport (the Alzheimer's coconut-research doc):

Dr. Mary Newport wrote:"Olive oil is about 10% omega-6 and has a 13:1 ratio,and by the way, olive oil is not all mono-unsaturated fat and has about 14% long chain saturated fats. My favorite, coconut oil, is about 4% omega-6 and has no omega-3."
Source: http://coconutketones.blogspot.com/2009 ... acids.html

My second thought is that the Flax Oil did you absolutely no good. Supposedly less than 5% of ALA gets converted to EPA, and less than 0.5% (one-half of one percent) of ALA is converted to DHA.

See: http://chriskresser.com/why-fish-stomps ... of-omega-3

So, my guess is that when you use olive oil and flax oil together, the olive oil competes with the flax oil for the same enzymes and the olive oil ends up being more efficient at converting to AA than the flax oil is at converting to EPA and DHA.

What do you think? Sound plausible?

I'd be willing to bet that the switch to Fish Oil is helping a lot. But, my sense is that you don't want to take too much fish oil for fear of it oxidizing. I believe Chris Masterjohn only recommends something like 1 gram per day at most for maintenance and low oxidation. His findings are in his PUFA report that is probably worth reading (for a fee):

See: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/P ... eport.html

Gumby wrote: Just curious, but which edible oils are you using in food preparation and how much of them would you say you use on a typical day?

Just EVOO, about 1-3T.  I use nothing else since it is too inflammatory or toxic.  Additional sources of LA would be the 1/4 cup of raw almonds, 2T of raw flaxseed meal and more recently, 1T of non-GMO lecithin.

I am not sure yet but I may be able to tolerate pasteurized grass-fed butter, unlike the grass-fed ghee.  I will have to do a food challenge test to be 100% sure.

I don't really see a realistic solution other than ingesting some seriously large amounts of fish oil for a very long time.  I wonder what the average Japanese daily intake of EPA/DHA is.

Gumby wrote: What do you think? Sound plausible?

Hmm it's plausible, but I'm not sure if its applicable.  For me, unrefined EVOO is inert, but there is a clear threshold where too much LA or AA from any source causes inflammation, whether that be refined or unrefined.  I don't take the flaxseed meal for the ALA, but for the lignans.

Here's the problem though.  The RDA for LA is 17 grams a day, so the almonds, the lecithin, the flaxseed meal, a krill oil capsule, and 3T of EVOO:

Lipids (51%)
===========================================
Saturated            |    8.4 g      42%
  Omega-3            |    4.0 g      252%
  Omega-6            |    10.4 g      61%
Cholesterol          |    0.0 mg      0%

...don't even get me to it.  Now add in 15 grams (3x a serving) of cod liver oil:

Lipids (57%)
===========================================
Saturated            |    11.5 g      57%
  Omega-3            |    6.9 g      434%
  Omega-6            |    10.5 g      62%
Cholesterol          |    30.2 mg      10%

...before solid food increases the Omega-6 even more.  1 gram of unconcentrated fish oil just isn't going to cut it (1.3 grams of that Omega-3 is ALA).  I only take 550mg EPA/DHA now since krill oil is worthless for raising serum levels and I'm skeptical spending a lot on fish oil that has no detectable benefit.

The almonds contain almost as much LA in just 1 ounce as in 3T of EVOO.  But again, we're not talking about high levels of intake here to begin with.

If there is some formula for determining the "potency" of Omega-3 vs Omega-6 on a weight basis, I'm all eyes.

What I can do eventually is replace the flaxseed meal with a lignan supplement (oh joy, another freakin' pill!) and see if I can replace the EVOO with refined coconut oil for cooking and grass-fed butter for veggies, etc..  For now I will double or triple up the concentrated, elephant-sized fish oil gelcap, but my gag reflex won't tolerate that for the long-term.  So, I'll be trying the expensive LEF version when I run out; they've apparantely reduced the size by using regular capsules instead of gelcaps, plus they're still the only brand including sesame seed extract to prevent oxidization.  Not sure its worth the money, but a smaller capsule size and no corresponding increase in the quantity to take would be a huge win.  Actually, I should try it out now using that $25 credit and member pricing!

Speaking of which, if anyone would like a free 1-month membership (discount pricing but is not as good as Amazon, etc.) and a $25 product credit at LEF, enter this contest:

https://mycart.lef.org/Sweeps/E/Entry.a ... gn=SWH203W

Ah, ok. So, eating lots of LA isn't supposed to raise AA, since the tissues levels of AA plateau at low levels of LA according to Masterjohn. (Again, purchase his report if you want to read more about this).

So, it seems clear that the Flax Oil is what screwed up your numbers. Humans — especially those who have compromised digestive systems — are pretty much unable to convert any ALA into DHA/EPA. So, you have to assume that the fish oil will help significantly. Check your numbers again in 6 months from when you started taking fish oil.

As I'm sure you are aware, the best way to improve the Omega 3:6 ratio is to eat less Omega 6...

How much omega-3 is enough? That depends on omega-6

And, then there is eating fish to consider — as well as its absorption...

The fish vs. fish oil smackdown

MachineGhost wrote:What I can do eventually is replace the flaxseed meal with a lignan supplement (oh joy, another freakin' pill!)

Isn't Lignan a phytoestrogen? ALA does you no good as far as I can see (beyond some unproven cancer reduction). Our bodies really can't convert any ALA to DHA/EPA. Studies have shown that ALA consumption doesn't raise serum levels of DHA/EPA. This is why many researchers now believe that the largest health benefits we get from omega-3 fats come from the longer chain derivatives, such as EPA/DHA.

MachineGhost wrote:I can replace the EVOO with refined coconut oil for cooking and grass-fed butter for veggies, etc.

If you want to try eating less LA, you should seriously think about Pharmaceutical Grade MCT oil (sold by Dr. Bernd Friedlander). It's the same MCT oil that Dave Asprey sells. The oil is just a high-quality filtered coconut oil where they filter coconut oil down to the capric & caprylic acids. You should definitely be able to tolerate that if you start with teaspoon doses and it's amazing brain food (as explained by Dr. Mary Newport). Many people swear by MCT oil, not only for its affect on the brain, but for the way it enhances the flavor of food. On its own, it has no taste. I just ordered my first bottle the other day (new shipments expected in the next two weeks). People say you can drizzle it on a salad and it makes the salad taste amazing. Brush it on top of sushi and you won't believe how good it tastes. And you can cook with it up to ~350º. You can also rub it onto scars and it will heal them quite quickly. Now Foods also makes a good MCT oil, but I don't know if it's pharmaceutical grade and I don't think it's as high in capric & caprylic acids as the pharmaceutical grade MCT oil.

MachineGhost wrote:For now I will double or triple up the concentrated, elephant-sized fish oil gelcap, but my gag reflex won't tolerate that for the long-term.

Your body won't tolerate that long term either (due to oxidation), so only use it to adjust your levels. Your best bet seems to be to reduce n-6 during this time as well and avoid ALA for its inefficiency.

Gumby wrote: How much omega-3 is enough? That depends on omega-6

Good article.  So essentially, 1T of fish oil is necessary to get a 60% tissue concentration of EPA/DHA equivalent to the Japanese, and even that is not as ideal as old-school Eskimos or Greenlanders which is really extreme (they do tend to die of hemmorhaging-type deaths).  1T also appears enough to offset the typical S.A.D. LA intake.  Considering I'm even higher than that, I feel more confident about such a dosage now.

Gumby wrote: The fish vs. fish oil smackdown

Leaving aside taste considerations, I think eating that much fish is neither fun nor affordable.  But he does bring up a good point of absorption.  I would never take an esthyl ester form of fish oil as it is unstable and not the natural state found in fish (triglycerides).  The latter is not as common in the marketplace nor necessarily inexpensive or concentrated, but it can be found.  I haven't updated it in a year or more, but I maintain a spreadsheet comparing many different forms and brands of fish oil as to the net absorption kinetics of EPA/DHA vs its cost.

Gumby wrote: Isn't Lignan a phytoestrogen? ALA does you no good as far as I can see (beyond some unproven

Yes, but its not a bad phytoestrogen.  It helps detoxify harmful estrogens to protect the prostate.  Since prostate BPH/cancer starts in men in their 30's, its not something to only worry about only when it becomes a serious problem 35+ years later (by which time its too late!).  Aside for helping to thicken my smoothies a bit, I don't think I'll miss it.  I'll keep the remaining on hand to continue to use as an egg replacer.

Gumby wrote: If you want to try eating less LA, you should seriously think about Pharmaceutical Grade MCT oil (sold by Dr. Bernd Friedlander). It's the same MCT oil that Dave Asprey sells. The oil is just a high-quality filtered coconut oil where they filter coconut oil down to the capric & caprylic acids. You should definitely be able to tolerate that if you start with teaspoon doses and it's
2

I'm familiar with MCT oil since it provides ketones for a glucose-intolerant brain -- very useful for ameliorating Alzheimer's Disease.  I am hypersensitive to tiny amounts of MCT though, get liver pain and/or naseua.  However for sake of the argument, why would I want to give up the medium-chain saturates that make coconut oil healthy and temperature stable for cooking?  And what about the missing lauric acid which is a large part of coconut oil's benefits?  AFAIK, caprylic acid is just useful against candida overgrowth in the vagina or intestine.

Gumby wrote: amazing brain food (as explained by Dr. Mary Newport). Many people swear by MCT oil, not only for its affect on the brain, but for the way it enhances the flavor of food. On its own, it has no taste. I just ordered my first bottle the other day (new shipments expected in the next two weeks). People say you can drizzle it on a salad and it makes the salad taste amazing. Brush it on top of sushi and you won't believe how good it tastes. And you can cook with it up to

Are you sure there's no MSG/umami involved with this?  Foodstuffs does not just normally "taste better" without that kind of neurotoxin involved.

Gumby wrote: Your body won't tolerate that long term either (due to oxidation), so only use it to adjust your levels. Your best bet seems to be to reduce n-6 during this time as well and avoid ALA for its inefficiency.

Yessir!  But, you do realize how very little LA I'm already eating to begin with?  Sheesh.

MachineGhost wrote:Considering I'm even higher than that, I feel more confident about such a dosage now.

Yes. Should be fine as you even things out over the short term.

Btw, in 2010, Masterjohn wrote a great piece on the dangers of too much fish oil...

Chris Masterjohn: Precious Yet Perilous

Kresser gets a lot of his EFA recommendations from Masterjohn, and Kresser passed the info along to his readers here a few weeks later...

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

Definitely read the piece from Masterjohn, but keep in mind that he's updated some of his findings in his PUFA report this year (which I haven't read).

MachineGhost wrote:Leaving aside taste considerations, I think eating that much fish is neither fun nor affordable.

In terms of affordability, wild fish is certainly more expensive. But, I've recently become a fan of Faroe Island farmed salmon. It's much more affordable, but it's nothing like other farmed salmon. Definitely worth researching as it is sustainable and about as good as farmed can be. Eat fish two or three times a week and you're in good shape.

In terms of taste, well you need to make it taste good. One really needs to find a way to incorporate more seafood in the diet in order to balance Omega 3:6 in today's high n-6 world without overdosing on fish oil. Personally, I've really enjoyed Rick Stein's Complete Seafood cookbook. Great photos, steps and relatively easy recipes.

MachineGhost wrote:But he does bring up a good point of absorption.  I would never take an esthyl ester form of fish oil as it is unstable and not the natural state found in fish (triglycerides).  The latter is not as common in the marketplace nor necessarily inexpensive or concentrated, but it can be found.  I haven't updated it in a year or more, but I maintain a spreadsheet comparing many different forms and brands of fish oil as to the net absorption kinetics of EPA/DHA vs its cost.

He has a great post on the top fish oils he recommends...

Chris Kresser: The definitive fish oil buyer’s guide

MachineGhost wrote:Yes, but its not a bad phytoestrogen.  It helps detoxify harmful estrogens to protect the prostate.  Since prostate BPH/cancer starts in men in their 30's, its not something to only worry about only when it becomes a serious problem 35+ years later (by which time its too late!).  Aside for helping to thicken my smoothies a bit, I don't think I'll miss it.  I'll keep the remaining on hand to continue to use as an egg replacer.

Got it. Good to know.

MachineGhost wrote:I'm familiar with MCT oil since it provides ketones for a glucose-intolerant brain -- very useful for ameliorating Alzheimer's Disease.  I am hypersensitive to tiny amounts of MCT though, get liver pain and/or naseua.

I've heard that some MCT oils are derived from canola oil. Not sure how they could do that (since canola oil doesn't really have MCTs in it, afaik). Anyway, a good MCT oil should be only derived from coconut oil. And whether you buy MCT oil or coconut oil, they need to be "Direct Micro Expelling" (DME) coconut oils. DME is a cold process and requires fresh coconuts that aren't dried and stored in moldy warehouses.

My sense is that you just needed to start with a smaller dose of coconut oil or MCT oil and work your way up to whatever amount you want to tolerate. Dr. Mary Newport explains in her FAQ on Alzheimers...

Dr. Mary Newport wrote:If you take too much oil too fast, you may experience indigestion, cramping or diarrhea.  To avoid these symptoms, take with food and start with 1 teaspoon coconut oil or MCT oil per meal, increasing slowly as tolerated over a week or longer. If diarrhea develops drop back to the previous level. For most people, the goal would be to increase gradually to 4-6 tablespoons a day, depending on the size of the person, spread over 2-4 meals.  Mixing MCT oil and coconut oil could provide higher levels and a steady level of ketones. One formula is to mix 16 ounces MCT oil plus 12 ounces coconut oil in a quart jar and increase slowly as tolerated, starting with 1 teaspoon.  This mixture will stay liquid at room temperature.

Source: http://www.coconutketones.com/

MachineGhost wrote:However for sake of the argument, why would I want to give up the medium-chain saturates that make coconut oil healthy and temperature stable for cooking?  And what about the missing lauric acid which is a large part of coconut oil's benefits?  AFAIK, caprylic acid is just useful against candida overgrowth in the vagina or intestine.

I only recommended MCT oil in the off chance that the pharmaceutical grade MCT oil is high enough quality to avoid a reaction to whatever was in the last batch of coconut oil you tried. People use one or the other for different effects. For instance, Dr. Newport recommends a combination of MCT oil and coconut oil for Alzheimer's.

MachineGhost wrote:Are you sure there's no MSG/umami involved with this?  Foodstuffs does not just normally "taste better" without that kind of neurotoxin involved.

Yeah. I'm 99% sure. It's an odd phenomenon with those medium chains. Nobody seems to know why it happens just yet. And some people have noticed flavor enhancing properties with coconut oil as well. The people who recommend MCTs are well aware of the dangers of MSG — particularly those with brain problems who rely on the benefits of MCTs.

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote: Your body won't tolerate that long term either (due to oxidation), so only use it to adjust your levels. Your best bet seems to be to reduce n-6 during this time as well and avoid ALA for its inefficiency.

Yessir!  But, you do realize how very little LA I'm already eating to begin with?  Sheesh.

Yeah, and I'm no longer worried about your LA after realizing that too much LA shouldn't raise AA levels. My mistake. I was thrown by the blood test saying your LA was high. I guess high LA doesn't really matter in terms of AA, but maybe it matters in terms of oxidation? No idea. I suppose, for all we know, the test could have been inaccurate.

Anyway, I really believe it was the inefficiency of Flax oil to EPA/DHA that screwed up your numbers. My guess is you'll be fine in a few months now that you're on the right track.

Gumby wrote: 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?

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote: 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

MachineGhost wrote:Here's the problem though.  The RDA for LA is 17 grams a day, so the almonds, the lecithin, the flaxseed meal, a krill oil capsule, and 3T of EVOO

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.

Gumby wrote:

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote: 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.

Gumby wrote: 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.

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote:

MachineGhost wrote: 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

MachineGhost wrote: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...

Christ Masterjohn wrote:

Beth@WeightMaven 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).

MachineGhost wrote: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.

Gumby wrote:
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!

Gumby wrote: 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.

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote: 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:

Chris Kresser wrote: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...

Chris Kresser wrote: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.

Gumby wrote: 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.

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.

Gumby wrote: 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).

MachineGhost wrote:

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.

Gumby wrote: 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?

Kriegsspiel wrote:

Gumby wrote: 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...

Chris Kresser wrote: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).

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.