Flaws Failures and Successes for Fish Oil

You may recognize some of this from a few months ago.  It turns out lends itself to a frequent updates.

Let’s look at the new list.

Did you ever wonder how so many different things could be happening in the world of omega 3 and fish oil?  How can it go from good to bad in one week?   How can it work in one situation for one thing and not in a seemingly related problem?

While science is all about data and sticking to the data, and common sense has no real place if data does not support it, at least in the mind of a true scientist, there is a point where something becomes “fishy” and doesn’t make sense.

If you look at populations with high omega 3 levels and low Omega 6 levels, whether they get them from fish oil or fish, there is almost no detectable heart disease, stroke, tumors, post partum depression, allergy, auto immunity, MS and so on. When say “almost no” I mean there is a reduction that is usually hitting a factor of 10 fold.  So if the average American population death rate from heart disease for instance is 250 per 10,000, its 25 per 10,000 in the Inuit Eskimos- who have high 3’s and low 6’s.

Notable in that very same population was a study that looked at Eskimos whose blood pressure averaged 150/90, whose cholesterol was 250 with a high bad cholesterol as part of that, and who were an average of 30 to 50 pounds overweight.  They still had 25/10,000 death rate from heart disease mirroring larger population based reductions.  They had fewer than half the strokes.

They also had 7X the omega 3 levels of the average Americans.

Now I look at all the “negative fish oil studies” and I have found a few  common themes/flaws.

They are:

  1.  Almost ridiculous under dosing of the test subjects with fish oil, often with poor quality “natural” triglyceride ( only able to reach 30% concentration and often having toxins).
  2. No attempt to measure blood/tissue levels
  3. No attempt to duplicate the omega 3 levels or the Omega 6/3 ratios of the populations that are relatively disease free.

The post partum depression study recently released was a classic example. It caught my attention because there have been several studies that show benefit to new moms and in populations where lots of fish/fish oil is consumed the rate of post partum depression drops dramatically. In the most recent study which has been spread and quote ad nausem on the internet, no attempt was made to check levels, the dose of supplementation was guaranteed not to work (most moms are already low in Omega 3’s to begin with and are even lower after pregnancy so 1 or 2 grams a day is a waste!) and finally no attempt was made to get these women to the levels seen in populations where there is little if any post partum depression.

What do you expect!  Next time you read a fish oil “no good” study see if you can answer those questions. See if you can answer even one of them.  There is a 99.99% chance the people studying the results didn’t bother with any of those measurements and were basically flying blind!

But once its on the internet its there forever, and with the exception of me, I have never seen anyone go back and say, “ I was wrong about this”!

I make ultra potent ultra pure Ultra 85 fish oil so you can take less and get the levels up to where they need to be with ease.  Its 35% more potent than my regular product while still maintaining our legendary purity.

A final comment: No Fish oil is not a telomerase activator.  It’s a great telomere preserver but it will not lengthen your telomeres!  Only TA-65 does that and has been proven with human studies.

Ultra 85 and TA-65 are a phenomenal anti-aging combo though!

 

Doc

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *