I've been using fish oil regularly for years, maybe 6+ At the end my dosage was 1320mg EPA and 880mg DHA per day. In that time my brain function went down continuously. A few weeks ago, I ran out of my supply, and stopped taking it together with MSM.
After a few days, my brain function has improved a lot. While I do not know if it's the o3 or the MSM, it made me suspect o3 so I started researching.
There was not much to find in mainstream ( I did not check studies on pubmed) until I found this:
http://www.brianpesk...cies-Report.pdf
In short what this guy is saying is, by citing studies:
- EPA and DHA are found in a very low ratio to o6 fatty acids in the human body, and screwing with that ratio will change the ratio of those fatty acids in human tissue too, leading to adverse effects
- it reduces immune function, and may even increase the chance of cancer (at least in mice)
- it does not reduce inflammation in humans
- it does increase oxidation stress
- It does not improve LDL
- It does not stop or reverse arteriosclerosis, but increase it
- it fails to have any positive influence on mental decline / dementia in humans
- Increasing the ratio of o3 to o6 will change distribution in the body too and cause adverse effects
- .... (I may not have listed all points because I was just scrolling through many parts of this pdf.
Ratio of o6 to o3 PEO in human tissue:
Brain, nervous system: 100 : 1
Skin: 1000 : 1
Organs and other tissue: 4 : 1
Fat tissue: 22 : 1
Muscles 6,5 : 1
Why should we even begin to supplement with o3's if we don't have a high ratio of them in our bodies? Unless the ratio is extremely skewed in our nutrition. And I am beginning to doubt that what we thought we knew about a extreme ratio is actually extreme. Looking at the human o3:o6 distribution, that is.
Now I would like to open discussion on the subject. Who want's to look at the studies he is referring to?
Is medical science again failing to notice evidence, or are his studies / arguments wrong?
Edited by BioFreak, 13 June 2014 - 10:12 AM.