, , ,

Krill better than fish oil- more chicanery

A recent a study published in the journal Lipids in Health and Disease my favorite topic was examined. That topic you may have guessed is the ratio of Omega 6 inflammatory fats versus Omega 3 anti-inflammatory ratio. I have harped on and on about this for many years because it is the most important measure of how YOU are doing with your fish oil consumption. In my recent teleseminar I detailed the results of over 150 tests that I did. Like I have told you before I do my own research on stuff I think is important. I don’t just rely on internet nonsense or marketing hype which sadly is what most of it is.

Which brings me to the next point.

There is a battle going on for market share in Omega 3’s. This is not surprising considering their importance of Omega 3’s.
Here are the combatants.

Omega 3 fish oil manufacturers which include Ethyl ester “natural triglyceride” fish oil which is pretty much straight out of the fish, and finally the so called re-triglycerided “fish oil”  and a real anomaly since this molecule does not exist in nature at all.

Today I want to focus on krill and debunking some of the marketing nonsense and hype that goes on.

Please note this is only a short list of the most frequently used BS arguments on the internet. I am not against competition I am against deceptive tactics and as you will see there are plenty.

Here are they typical nonsense internet claims you will here and the truth

1) Krill is better than fish oil. The latest study shows an improved Omega 6/3 ratio with krill over fish oil. In the past Acker Biomarine the largest krill manufacturer on the planet funded a similar study. That study also showed an improved absorption on a mg per mg basis with no difference in clinical outcomes. Interestingly enough the folks at Acker were slick enough to pick a really crappy cod liver oil with only about 30% Omega 3 content. And they still could not say it was better. The most recent study Lipids Health Dis 12:178, 2013 was even more clever. Somewhere somehow they found a “fish oil” that was more omega 6 than omega 3. That was what they used for comparison, something that was guaranteed to show a positive result. Since this kind of fish oil had to be deliberately sought out and does not represent even typically available commercial fish oil I can only conclude this was deliberate chicanery meant to deceive people who do not know any better. How about this. I invite the authors to redo the study with my Ultra 85 I will donate as much as they need but they HAVE to publish the results. I will be waiting! I should also point out another thing. Last April there was a fatal explosion at the Neptune Krill plant in Canada. Hexane a volatile organic solvent that has been linked to cancer caused the explosion. Since Neptune makes only Krill I have to wonder what they use the Hexane for! I can only guess this is part of their extraction process. You decide whether this sounds like something you want to be exposed to!

2) The integration of krill into membranes is better than fish oil because it’s a phospholipid and mimics the membrane form more closely than any form of fish oil. This is actually true on a mg per mg basis. But they leave out the fact that commercial krill preparations only contain a total of around 300 mg of Omega 3 per capsule. They also leave out the fact that membrane bound Omega 3 still has to go to single chain EPA and DHA to be used for anything other than membrane activity. While membrane bound fatty acids are structurally important in ALL membranes including cell wall mitochondria and nuclear membranes. But anything else and believe me there is lots else (cytokines Resolvins Protectins all kinds of immune and hormonal modulators) all goes through single chain EPA and DHA forms. Ethyl esters are the closest format to that. Closer than 2 tailed phospholipids and much closer than the 3 tailed triglyceride forms.

3) Krill is pure because it’s small and comes from the pure Antarctic waters. What a load of BS that is. The krill I tested independently had lots of toxins and pollutants including 50X the amount of arsenic allowed in drinking water. Wanna guess which famous internet guru that everyone things so highly of is selling it? In addition the statement is true only if you look at single isolated organisms. Krill is tiny and it is at the bottom of the food chain. So its true it cannot accumulate much pollution. But when you concentrate hundreds of thousands or millions even to make one bottle then a little gets magnified and becomes a lot. Do you really think the people making these statements don’t know that?!

4) Fish is non sustainable therefore we should use krill. The Truth: Several krill fishing areas have been shut down because of eco system imbalances. Fish consumption is however stable now and for the foreseeable future due to appropriate fish and aquatic husbandry. In addition attempts to modify the food chain have led to such great things as Frankenfish the genetically modified salmon that grow huge and outcompete their wild type neighbors while providing more Omega 3 per pound. And my favorite GMO- plants modified to produce human form Omega 3’s, now looming on the horizon. Krill is certainly no more sustainable than fish and is more likely to affect more species because it is so low on the food chain.

5) Please show me one population based study on krill. I want that because the tiny little studies that are funded by Acker and Neptune completely lack the statistical power needed to draw any real conclusions and the conclusions they draw are “equivalence” not superiority in spite of the marketing hype. Truth: There is not one population of humans on the planet that lives on krill.

6) Ethyl ester fish oil is poorly absorbed. The truth is it is not “poorly” absorbed it is “slowly” absorbed so if you fiddle with your studies in the right way and check the absorption times at one hour you will see a difference. But the largest series of studies done with Ethyl Ester fish oil was called GISSI and have many times shown all the benefits these studies showed. They researchers there deliberately chose Ethyl Ester fish oil for it’s slower absorption curve for a reason. That reason is most people take their fish oil in the morning after they wake up. Most heart attacks statistically happen earlier in the morning. The slow steady 24 hour absorption curve of Ethyl ester fish oil covers the people better because it is still around at the time they need it most, 20 to 22 hours later! The results were unequivocal and included a 28% reduction in sudden death, 35% reduction in all cause mortality and similar reductions in cardiovascular and cerebrovascular deaths.

7) Here is what a recent review of fish oil formats concluded: “While the results with fish and fish oils have been not as clear cut, the data generated with the purified ethyl ester forms of these two fatty acids are consistent.” Read that last word CONSISTENT. There are no other Omega 3 formats that can show the same volume of data. Not krill not “natural triglyceride” not retriglycerided NONE!

8) Here is more from that same article EPA and DHA as ethyl esters inhibit platelet aggregability, and reduce serum triglycerides, while leaving other serum lipids essentially unaltered. Glucose metabolism has been studied extensively, and no adverse effects were seen. Pro-atherogenic cytokines are reduced, as are markers of endothelial activation. Endothelial function is improved, vascular occlusion is reduced, and the course of coronary atherosclerosis is mitigated. Heart rate is reduced, and heart rate variability is increased by EPA and DHA. An antiarrhythmic effect can be demonstrated on the supraventricular and the ventricular level. More importantly, two large studies showed reductions in clinical endpoints like sudden cardiac death or major adverse cardiac events.

9) Ethyl Esters are not found naturally in humans or in nature. Truth: Ethyl Esters are naturally occurring intermediates in the Omega 3 chain. This is often how other forms (phospholipid and triglyceride) become the single chain mediators they need to to create the Omega 3 effects against inflammation. In addition they are they main form of Omega 3 found in Calanus finmarchicus a kind of shrimp that inhabits the Northern Atlantic. So there goes that argument as well.

There is a reason you will not see well designed honest head to head studies comparing the effects of something like Ultra 85 to any of these other formats. All you will see and hear are people you never heard of claiming to be experts hawking their products. I do that too don’t I. But I design and chose my products based on science testing and what I would want for myself and my family.
If you knew what I know this is the only stuff you would consider ultra 85 and regular PG fish oil

Doc

PS If you want to learn more go to my telecom here.

References:
Ramprasath et al.

(Lipids Health Dis 12:178, 2013
Author: Peter D NicholsSoressa M KitessaMahinda Abeywardena
Credits/Source: Lipids in Health and Disease 2014, 13:2 “(Lipids Health Dis 12:178, 2013)”These conclusions are not justified and misleading. Considerable care is needed in ensuring that such comparative trials do not use inappropriate ingredients”

Metabolic Effects of Krill Oil are Essentially Similar to Those of Fish Oil but at Lower Dose of EPA and DHA, in Healthy Volunteers
Stine M. Ulven, Bente Kirkhus, […], and Jan I. Pedersen study funded by Acker Biomarine Please note the words “Essentially Similar” and this was using the lowest level fish oil they could find! This stud also noted an unexplained rise in inflammatory Omega 6 fatty acids with krill supplementation!
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2006;2(3):251-62.
A review of omega-3 ethyl esters for cardiovascular prevention and treatment of increased blood triglyceridelevels.
von Schacky C.

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 *