24 replies to this topic

[Kevnzworld]

There have been earlier studies that have shown that EPA/DHA lowers the rate of telomere shortening.
http://jama.jamanetw...rticleid=185234

This new soon to be published study is the first to my knowledge that demonstrated telomere lengthening.

"Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants’ omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres."
http://researchnews....omega3aging.htm

[Logic]

Very interesting Kevnzworld.

You may also be interested in this:
http://www.naturalne..._nutrition.html
It seems daft to try and lengthen telomeres without oing what you can to slow their shortening!?

[Kevnzworld]

Very interesting Kevnzworld.

You may also be interested in this:
http://www.naturalne..._nutrition.html
It seems daft to try and lengthen telomeres without oing what you can to slow their shortening!?

Agree. We need to wait to see the specifics of the study, but whether through inflammation suppression and/ or other mechanisms omega 3's support telomere length. It's worth noting that in this study the ratio of EPA to DHA was 7 to 1, higher in EPA than the average fish oil supplement.
The issue with PUFA consumption is the potential for lipid peroxidation. There are some fat soluble antioxidants ( not synthetic dl alpha E ), that have shown some efficacy in mitigating that potential such as astaxanthin.
Here's a study of combined astaxanthin and fish oil supplementation in the European journal of nutrition :
http://www.springerl...06474588827172/

[Roland Szigeti]

nice.

[centagen]

If you take fish oil be sure and spend the extra money on one that is high quality. The cheap ones are oxidized and contain a lot of toxins like PCB's, dioxin, fire retarndant chemicals, and thousands of other dangerous chemicals that have been dumped into the ocean. I spend about $40 - $50 for a bottle of 120 1000 mg capsules. It is not as expensive as it seems because the fish oil has much more EPA and DHA per gram than the cheap stuff so you take less capsules per day.

[hivemind]

There have been earlier studies that have shown that EPA/DHA lowers the rate of telomere shortening.
http://jama.jamanetw...rticleid=185234

This new soon to be published study is the first to my knowledge that demonstrated telomere lengthening.

"Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants' omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres."
http://researchnews....omega3aging.htm

That is not very strong evidence. The study subjects are sick people who have heart disease and it is a cohort study which cannot prove causal effects of fish oil consumption.

[Hebbeh]

If you take fish oil be sure and spend the extra money on one that is high quality. The cheap ones are oxidized and contain a lot of toxins like PCB's, dioxin, fire retarndant chemicals, and thousands of other dangerous chemicals that have been dumped into the ocean. I spend about $40 - $50 for a bottle of 120 1000 mg capsules. It is not as expensive as it seems because the fish oil has much more EPA and DHA per gram than the cheap stuff so you take less capsules per day.

Sources please. All testing of fish oil has never found any of the things you claim.

[Hebbeh]

There have been earlier studies that have shown that EPA/DHA lowers the rate of telomere shortening.
http://jama.jamanetw...rticleid=185234

This new soon to be published study is the first to my knowledge that demonstrated telomere lengthening.

"Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants' omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres."
http://researchnews....omega3aging.htm

That is not very strong evidence. The study subjects are sick people who have heart disease and it is a cohort study which cannot prove causal effects of fish oil consumption.

Perhaps you failed to review the second study?

[hivemind]

Perhaps you failed to review the second study?

Quote from the second study review:

Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance.

Edited by hivemind, 06 November 2012 - 03:57 AM.

[Hebbeh]

Perhaps you failed to review the second study?

Quote from the second study review:

Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance.

Nice cherry pick quote out of context...how about reading the rest the paragraph?

Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants’ omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres.

[hivemind]

Nice cherry pick quote out of context...how about reading the rest the paragraph?

Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants’ omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres.

That was just an association they found about the studied people. That was not the intervention they studied.

[Hebbeh]

Nice cherry pick quote out of context...how about reading the rest the paragraph?

Both groups of participants who took omega-3 supplements showed, on average, lengthening of telomeres compared to overall telomere effects in the placebo group, but the relationship could have been attributed to chance. However, when the researchers analyzed the participants’ omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in relationship to telomere lengthening, a lower ratio was clearly associated with lengthened telomeres.

That was just an association they found about the studied people. That was not the intervention they studied.

Nice try but you may want to review it a third time.

The study showed that most overweight but healthy middle-aged and older adults who took omega-3 supplements for four months altered a ratio of their fatty acid consumption in a way that helped preserve tiny segments of DNA in their white blood cells.

Omega-3 supplementation also reduced oxidative stress, caused by excessive free radicals in the blood, by about 15 percent compared to effects seen in the placebo group.

The researchers say this combination of effects suggests that omega-3 supplements could represent a rare single nutritional intervention that has potential to lower the risk for a host of diseases associated with aging, such as coronary heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, arthritis and Alzheimer’s disease.

Do I need to copy and paste more? Did you even read the whole study? Or did you just not understand it?

[hivemind]

Do I need to copy and paste more? Did you even read the whole study? Or did you just not understand it?

That review is stupid. How can they say:

The study showed that most overweight but healthy middle-aged and older adults who took omega-3 supplements for four months altered a ratio of their fatty acid consumption in a way that helped preserve tiny segments of DNA in their white blood cells.

...if the results from the fish oil intervention could have been attributed to chance? Makes no sense. They did not do omega6/omega3 intervention. They did a fish oil intervention which did not produce reliable results.

Edited by hivemind, 06 November 2012 - 04:24 AM.

[Hebbeh]

That review is stupid. How can they say:

The study showed that most overweight but healthy middle-aged and older adults who took omega-3 supplements for four months altered a ratio of their fatty acid consumption in a way that helped preserve tiny segments of DNA in their white blood cells.

...if the results from the fish oil intervention could have been attributed to chance. Makes no sense. They did not do omega6/omega3 intervention. They did a fish oil intervention which did not produce reliable results.

Are you sure it is the review? Or the comprehension of the reader? Honestly, you need to read and comprehend the whole study and analysis and not just read into what you want or wish for it to say and quit trying to twist the researchers words.

[hivemind]

It was an RCT study done with fish oil, if I understand correctly?

It did not produce statistically strong enough evidence about fish oil's effects on telomere lenght, so how can it produce evidence that fish oil changed the omega6/omega3 ratio and by this mechanism had an effect on the telomeres?


I don't know about telomeres, but fish oil does work in the secondary prevention of heart disease:

 RCTs.png   138.09KB   13 downloads

Edited by hivemind, 06 November 2012 - 04:40 AM.

[Hebbeh]

From the study:

In the case of fatty acids, omega-3 supplementation alone doesn't tell the whole story of how this dietary change can affect health, explained Martha Belury, professor of human nutrition at Ohio State and a co-author of the study. Also important is the ratio of omega-6 fatty acids to omega-3 fatty acids that are present in a person's blood.

"The idea we were looking at with the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids was an increase in the denominator to make the ratio smaller. In the United States, we need to focus on the omega-3 part because we don't get enough of those," Belury said.

"This finding strongly suggests that inflammation is what's driving the changes in the telomeres," Kiecolt-Glaser said.

Are you still confused about the nature of the study? Because I don't know how else to spell it out for you.

[hivemind]

^I am not. It was not an RCT study studying the effects of omega6/omega3 intervention.

Here is a meta analysis of such studies about heart disease:

http://journals.camb...ine&aid=7930322

The omega6/omega3 ratio seems not to be important at all if you try to prevent heart disease.

Walter Willett from Harvard agrees with me on this.

Edited by hivemind, 06 November 2012 - 05:47 AM.

[Hebbeh]

^I am not. It was not an RCT study studying the effects of omega6/omega3 intervention.

Here is a meta analysis of such studies about heart disease:

http://journals.camb...ine&aid=7930322

The omega6/omega3 ratio seems not to be important at all if you try to prevent heart disease.

Walter Willett from Harvard agrees with me on this.

It was. I already posted a quote in reference to the placebo group. You really need to read the whole study before commenting.

The researchers excluded people taking medications to control mood, cholesterol and blood pressure as well as vegetarians, patients with diabetes, smokers, those routinely taking fish oil, people who got more than two hours of vigorous exercise each week and those whose body mass index was either below 22.5 or above 40.

I don't believe we were discussing heart disease but if you want to drop names...research these:

Co-authors of the study include Elissa Epel, Jue Lin and Elizabeth Blackburn of the University of California, San Francisco; Rebecca Andridge and Beom Seuk Hwang of Ohio State's College of Public Health; and William Malarkey of the IBMR

[hivemind]

It was. I already posted a quote in reference to the placebo group. You really need to read the whole study before commenting.

Yes, but the fish oil intervention did not produce statistically strong results.

The omega3/omega6 ratio thing was just an epidemiological association. The intervention itself did not produce a strong result. The quantities of fish oil taken were small. Such quantities do not have strong effects on that ratio. That study was more about the effects of fish oil itself.

I don't believe we were discussing heart disease but if you want to drop names...research these:

There just are no RCT studies that would prove the omega ratio to be a useful thing.

The Ramsden meta analysis also has all cause mortality data not just heart disease data.

Edited by hivemind, 06 November 2012 - 06:54 PM.

[Kevnzworld]

Hivemind wrote:
"That is not very strong evidence. The study subjects are sick people who have heart disease and it is a cohort study which cannot prove causal effects of fish oil consumption. "
Referring to the first study
http://jama.jamanetw...ref-joc90146-44

Well, given that this study found that, quote:
After multivariate adjustment for clinical (HR 2.1; CI 1.3 to 3.3), inflammatory (HR 2.0; CI 1.2 to 3.2), and echocardiographic (HR 1.9; CI 1.0 to 3.5) risk factors, patients in the lowest quartile of telomere length remained at significantly increased risk of death compared to those in the highest quartile. ( people with stable coronary artery disease )
http://atvb.ahajourn...ntent/28/7/1379

I do not think that it insignificant that the JAMA study clearly showed an inverse relationship between omega 3 blood level content and telomere shortening. The fact that the subjects have stable heart disease ( a 5 year study ) should in no way detract from the results.
The OSU study showed that a higher ratio of omega 3 to 6 influenced telomere length. Given the study I quoted above that showed that patients with the lowest quartile of telomere length remained at significantly increased risk of death, this is important.
The evidence is mounting that at the very least Omega 3's support telomere length and possibly extend telomere length.

Edited by Kevnzworld, 06 November 2012 - 08:30 PM.

[smithx]

I don't know about telomeres, but fish oil does work in the secondary prevention of heart disease:

 RCTs.png   138.09KB   13 downloads

Could you please link to the study from which that graphic was taken? I couldn't read it and want to.

[hivemind]

I don't know about telomeres, but fish oil does work in the secondary prevention of heart disease:

 RCTs.png   138.09KB   13 downloads

Could you please link to the study from which that graphic was taken? I couldn't read it and want to.

Yes, I forgot the link and the picture is blurry because it has been scaled down.

It is from this study:

http://archinte.jama...rticleid=486503

The most effective intervention for preventing heart disease are statin drugs. Fish oil also works at least in secondary prevention.

Edited by hivemind, 07 November 2012 - 11:31 PM.

[smithx]

That was an interesting paper, but it doesn't seem to state the dosage of omega-3 fatty acids which was found to be beneficial.

[hivemind]

That was an interesting paper, but it doesn't seem to state the dosage of omega-3 fatty acids which was found to be beneficial.

The dosage varies in the individual trials, so that causes some heterogeneity/inconsistency in the results.

That study looked the trials as a whole and did not try to determine optimal dosages. Interesting thing is also that data about dietary intervention trials. Those dietary interventions are no match for statin drugs. If you want to have as good results as statin drugs have your diet has to be much more strict than in those trials. So strict that it is doubtful that that kind of dietary intervention can be done on a very large population scale. However, as an indivdual you can do that if you have the discipline.

Edited by hivemind, 09 November 2012 - 05:39 AM.

[smithx]

Yes, but what interventions? It seems they vary based on APOe type and probably other factors.

I'm trying to figure out what the correct diet for my APOe3/4 genotype is, and have not found great data (other than that I should restrict fats to 20% of my diet, probably. And avoid sugars, no doubt).