One of the major changes in diet that I didn't mention in the last post was the rise of industrial liquid vegetable oils over the course of the 20th century. In the U.S. in 1900, the primary cooking fats were lard, beef tallow and butter. The following data only include cooking fats and spreads, because the USDA does not track the fats that naturally occur in milk and meat (source):
Animal fat is off the hook. This is the type of information that makes mainstream nutrition advice ring hollow. Let's see what happened to industrial vegetable oils in the early 1900s:
I do believe we're getting warmer. Now let's consider the composition of traditional American animal fats and industrial vegetable oils:
It's not hard to see that the two classes of fats (animal and industrial vegetable) are quite different. Animal fats are more saturated (blue). However, the biggest difference is that industrial vegetable oils contain a massive amount of omega-6 (yellow), far more than animal fats. If you accept that humans evolved eating primarily animal fats, which is well supported by the archaeological and anthropological literature, then you can begin to see the nature of the problem.Omega-6 and omega-3 fats are polyunsaturated fatty acids that are precursors to a very important class of signaling molecules called eicosanoids, which have a hand in virtually every bodily process. Omega-6 and omega-3 fats compete with one another for the enzymes (desaturases and elongases) that convert them into eicosanoid precursors. Omega-6-derived eicosanoids and omega-3-derived eicosanoids have different functions. Therefore, the balance of omega-6 to omega-3 fats in the diet influences the function of the body on virtually every level. Omega-6 eicosanoids tend to be more inflammatory, although the eicosanoid system is extraordinarily complex and poorly understood.
What's better understood is the fact that our current omega-6 consumption is well outside of our ecological niche. In other words, we evolved in an environment that did not provide large amounts of omega-6 all year round. Industrial vegetable oils are a product of food processing techniques that have been widespread for about 100 years, not enough time for even the slightest genetic adaptation. Our current level of omega-6 intake, and our current balance between omega-6 and omega-3, are therefore unnatural.
The ideal ratio is probably very roughly 2:1 omega-6:omega-3. Leaf lard is 6.8, beef tallow is 2.4, good quality butter is 1.4, corn oil is 45, cottonseed oil is 260. It's clear that a large qualitative change in our fat consumption occurred over the course of the 20th century. I believe this was a major factor in the rise of heart attacks from an obscure condition to the primary cause of death. I'll be reviewing the data that convinced me in the next few posts.
The Coronary Heart Disease Epidemic
The Coronary Heart Disease Epidemic: Possible Culprits Part I
The Omega Ratio
A Practical Approach to Omega Fats
Polyunsaturated Fat Intake: Effects on the Heart and Brain
Polyunsaturated Fat Intake: What About Humans?
Vegetable Oil and Homicide
75 comments:
I think you are right Stephan. There are other factors but excess Omega 6 is arguably a major trigger, and the most fundamental single factor.
The researchers in the field must know or suspect it. No researcher for a drugs company got promoted for preventative dietary recommendations that reduced the market for a wide range of drugs. Researchers have families to feed. It is the human dynamic in the commercial market, and an area where regulation by market forces is potentially catastrophically flawed.
The consequences of excess Omega are far wider than cardiovascular disease.
As one of your earlier posts points out Omega 6 influences brain function and behaviour, and is arguably making us more territorial and aggressive, which are not the most useful behavioural characteristics in a crowded resource limited world.
In combination with a lack of Omega 3 it excess Omega 6 is arguably a real threat to our long term survival.
We are arguably devolving.
But there is no obvious short term market bottom line profit, jobs for anybody, or money for the market, in a message eat less Omega 6, so the message gets shuffled under the carpet. There is now a hill of information in the middle of the room under the carpet. People must be struggling to avoid it.
But the market is making money out of Omega 6.
Some of the most widely used and profitable drugs, the inflammatory blocking NSAIDs, are simply cutting or blocking Omega 6 activity. It is easier not to eat the excess Omega 6 in the first place.
Large chunks of the food industry are based on high Omega 6 oils.
It is an embarrassingly simple answer, with enormous implications for society, jobs agriculture and the medical industry, so it may be a while before we get widespread acceptance. Smoking took 100 years, vitamin C more.
The Omega 6 message was first raised by Professor Lands 50 years ago, and he has been patiently banging the drum ever since in the face of being labelled a rebel. So how long before we get mainstream recognition Omega 6 is an issue, 50 years, and will the planet, and the global society remain stable that long.
Once you begin to understand the chemistry / biology, the conclusion excess Omega 6 is a huge dietary issue is headbanging screamingly obvious.
Author
Omega Six The Devils fat
www.Omegasixthedevilsfat
This could be the single factor behind the CHD epidemics and could also neatly explain the Lyon Study. Since the rise in MI in the UK after 1915 was much steeper than in the US at that time, the ultimate test of the polyunsaturated omega-6 oil hypothesis would be if the oil consumption has gone up there (in the UK) as well? Did it? Did vegetable oil replace butter in the UK during WWI, and did it remain in the diet afterwards?
Wow, Wow, Wow!! These graphs are truly eye opening! Clearly Omega 6 is a strong culprit. Thank you again for all of your hard work!
Out of curiosity, it might be interesting to also see a graph for extra virgin olive oil....
@ Jenny
Probably in the same range as corn: http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/fats-and-oils/7727/2
Or maybe not: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/09/pracical-approach-to-omega-fats.html
Could'nt erase the last post...
An added thought...
Not only are vegetable oils unsafe for their Omega 6 content, but NOW they are almost all genetically modified (corn, soybean, cotton, canola), and at what additional price?
It boggles the mind that us humans seem hell bent on destroying our own species!
Coconut oil would be another interesting one to graph.
Stephan,
Thanks for another great post. I recently read an article at Lyle McDonald's site regarding fats. I was surprised to see him state that in his opinion most of the concern with Omega 6 fats was way overblown. He cited a passage from Walter Willet that stated:
"Because n-6 fatty acids are the precursors of proinflammatory eicosanoids, higher intakes have been suggested to be detrimental, and the ratio of n-6 to n-3 fatty acids has been suggested by some to be particularly important. However, this hypothesis is based on minimal evidence, and in humans higher intakes of n-6 fatty acids have not been associated with elevated levels of inflammatory markers…In the United States, for example, intake of n-6 fatty acids doubled and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality fell by 50% over a period of several decades. In a series of relatively small, older randomized trials, in which intakes of polyunsaturated fat were increased (even up to 20% of calories), rates of CHD were generally reduced."
Lyle also cited a review by Kevin Fritsche entitled “Too much linoleic acid promotes inflammation, doesn’t it?” The abstract states:
"Controversy exists over how much linoleic acid (LA) should be consumed in a healthy diet. Some claim that high LA intake promotes inflammation through accumulation of tissue arachidonic acid (AA) and subsequent production of pro-inflammatory lipid mediators. Here the author reviews the current available evidence from human studies that address this issue. The data indicate that high LA in the diet or circulation is not associated with higher in vivo or ex vivo pro-inflammatory responses. Surprisingly, several studies showed that those individuals consuming the highest level of LA had the lowest inflammatory status. Recent findings suggest that LA and AA are involved in both pro- and anti-inflammatory signaling pathways. Thus, within the ranges of intake that are achievable for most human populations, the evidence do not support reducing LA intake below current consumption levels.".
The article can be found at http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0952327808001324.
Does anyone have any comments in response to the statements by McDonald, Fritsche and Willett?
My mind simply can not grasp how scientists could ignore the huge dietary shift from saturated fats to unsaturated fats and then claim that vegetable oil is "heart healthy" and that our modern ills are due to the traditional saturated fats the we now eat less of. Unbelievable!
Out of curiosity I looked up the FDA's stance on vegetable oils and found that in 2006 the agency authorized a qualified health claim characterizing a correlation between canola oil and a reduction in risk of coronary heart disease!
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qhccanol.html
http://www.uscanola.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7BE621F2EA-3B81-4A18-B7D3-10B042988CBC%7D
Have there been any studies done with high doses of omega 6, to see what happens when it always wins the battle with omega 3?
Tod Hargrove,
Thanks for those abstracts.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0952327808001324.
I tried the link and it did not work. Have you another.
Re the impact of Omega 6 on inflammation.
We need only about 1/2 % of calories. We eat 8% and more.
Once you reach 4% of calories as Omega 6 the cell membranes are already 80% saturated, and the increase thereafter is slow.
I am sure Stephan will cover this as I know he is very aware of it.
So many modern trials where dietary intake of Omega 6 is already well over 4% are not going to see big changes in the production of inflammatory percusors.
You also need to trigger production of inflammatory products by releasing the Omega 6 from the membrane, so you would need to look at the effect of Omega 6 in those at risk with inflammatory pressures rather than the healthy. . .
There are also a number of wider metabolic effects of Omega 6 including the impacts of omega 3 and 6 on cellular function through cell membrane composition.
For example omega 6 is less effective as a fuel and arguably as a relatively scarce seasonal fat nature never meant it to be one. Trials suggest long term use of Omega 6 as a fuel for energy leads to cardiac dysfunction.
Also Omega 6 rather than saturated fat is a primary constituent of fat build up in the walls of the blood vessels.
The other half of the issue is the lack of Omega 3s in western diets and the Omega 3:6 imbalance.
I would very much like to see the papers you cited if you have any more info.
Also modern medicine and earlier diagnosis have undoubtedly brought down cardiac death rates, if not the incidence of the disease.
Author Omega Six The Devils Fat
www.Omegasixthedevilsfat.com
Todd: "...intake of n-6 fatty acids doubled and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality fell by 50% over a period of several decades."
I'd wager that this is tracking the fact that omega 6 levels have continued to rise throughout the past century and the relevant 'drop in mortality' co-incides with recent improvements in treating people who've already developed CHD- mortality may have decreased but only because more people are surviving their heart attacks.
Robert
Agreed about the suspicious shortsighteness of the health establishment. Now normally I'm quick to attribute most evils to the drive to profit maximise... but here I suspect a lot of it isn't overt insincerity, but intense cognitive dissonance following from the fact that "less saturated, more healthy vegetable oils" has been official health advice for so long. Must be incredibly difficult for anyone to hold their hands up and say "Actually our advice was killing you all this time... do the exact reverse!"
Dan, sat fats with a lot of omega 6 (particularly the trans fat/trans-saturated forms) is the worst combo. Some argue the two year half-life (of Om6s) does all kinds of havoc itself.
But the combination of the fats shows the highest CVD. When you cut one you should see a drop.
Maybe it has been addressed or will be. What are the implications of 'modern' lard or tallow, which are higher in O-6 fats than traditional pastured or grass fed lard and tallow? If by trading one for the other (industrial oils for lard/tallow from feedlot animals) are you making the problem worse or incrementally better?
Working LinkToo much linoleic acid promotes inflammation—doesn’t it?I can't get the full text though.
Dave Moss
Thank you for your comments. I was not suggesting insincerity, more resigned pragmatism. I have enormous respect for the researchers who dedicate their lives to their subject of passion, and are often poorly rewarded.
The researchers are doing very useful and valuable work, in providing drugs that alleviate the symptoms, provide pain relief, and reduce the risk of certain conditions, albeit with a long list of side effects with varied significance.
Their excellent and dedicated work is also resulting in a better understanding of the pathways and their implications.
Whilst it was not clear, my comments were addressed at the wider inflammatory implications of Omega Six and not just the risks of cardiac disease. Most of those working on the downstream chemicals of Omega Six will I suspect clearly understand the implications of excessive Omega Six in the diet.
Lipids are a fairly specialised subject, and most outside the field, including most medical professions have no inkling of the massive implications of excess Omega six on human health and function, and will not understand why Omega Six is so inextricably linked with inflammation and pain.
Ideally researchers would be in a position to say to the companies we need to explain to people about the impact of excess Omega Six, and at the same time continue this valuable research.
In an ideal society that makes perfect sense. In a market driven world that primarily responds to corporate profitability, it makes every sense to continue to develop the drugs, and no sense to tell people to not eat as much Omega Six.
Reid,
There's actually a solid reason for that, as much as I hate to admit it. The Lyon diet-heart trial, one of the most successful of all time, used a canola oil-based margarine in the intervention group. BUT, I still don't think canola oil is great. The reason it worked is probably that it contains a balanced proportion of omega-6 and omega-3. You can do better by using traditional fats.
The Lyon participants reduced their n-6 intake to just over 4% of calories on average, which is not something the average canola oil user will do.
Brandon,
Modern lard and tallow still have much less omega-6 than industrial vegetable oils. I still support using pastured animal products when possible, but in terms of health, feedlot tallow is still far superior to industrial vegetable oil in my opinion.
Stephan
You presented the Omega 3:6 intake argument simply understandably and VERY effectively with the use of the pie charts.
You put the basics far more clearly than I did in my book. I have taken note (-:.
In the wild we eat the same things as animals, and we eat the animals, so in broad terms we are going to have similar Omega 3 and 6 fat profiles and intakes.
The exception would be fish eaters who would have higher Omega 3 and lower 6 intake like the Kitavans.
Love how easy it is to curb heart disease:
Lower sugar intake
Lower fructose intake
Lower polyunsaturated fat intake
(with balance of omega 3/6)
Don't smoke
Don't eat trans fats.
Maintain adequate vitamin D status
Lower grains that are not processed and high in phytic acid
I would add: make sure to eat good sources of minerals from time to time (sources of magnesium, calcium, iodine etc) I would hope people would eat food low in phytic acid also to make sure the minerals do not get bound up.
Most people will get adequate B-vitamins from nutrient dense whole foods.
Once you include exercising and keeping yourself at an optimal bodyweight, it almost doesn't matter what you eat as long as your follow the above rules.
Only thing i might question is that I doubt even a large amount of fructose in the form of fruit is going to harm us as long as we are active. I have seen studies before that the body processes fructose better when combined with glucose. Staying active will continually deplete liver glycogen and the fructose from fruit would help replace this. Just think of fruit eating primates and we do share some of their lineage. And for all low-carbers out there- complex carbs aren't going to kill you -- the body does not process them like fructose, just make sure you aren't eating grains high in phytic acid for those types of carbs!
One thing to note:
THE COMBINATION OF OMEGA 6 FAT AND FRUCTOSE TOGETHER COULD ALSO BE A MAJOR CAUSE OF HEART PROBLEMS!!
I would also bet that fructose with saturated fat wouldn't be as much as a problem because it wouldn't glycate as easily.
As a Dieitian, I have been saying this for YEARS. I had a dry spell after statins were developed, as the medications were able to decrease LDL so dramatically, I felt a bit useless in my nutritional argument. However, I have always believed this is the case. This is the dilemma regarding the butter vs. margarine discussion, that is so difficult for people to understand. In the early 90's there was a paper on what Americans were eating to ingest the various nutrients. I developed a Jeopardy game for the Family Practice Residents I was instructing on nutrition. This answer was posed, in the classical Jeopardy way, "what is the number one source of oleic acid in the diet." The answer back then was beef, and that is because animals were grass fed, not fed high omega 6 products (corn and soy). This always surprised the Residents. But your cells are the fats you eat. Thank you for illucidating my 30 year position. I will continue to read.
Brian,
Yes, the study is called modern America.
Brian
Can you expound a bit on why omega 6 and fructose eaten together are bad for us? I've been thinking this for a long time; actually that ANY polyunsaturated fats and fructose together are bad. Omega 3 included.
Reason being that humans were always mono-eaters, and everything we found and ate was conditioned upon availability and season. We probably weren't gathering berries at the same time you we were hunting for meat. Animal fat and fructose are two different fuel sources we have evolved to use, but have we ever used them at the same time?
Do you have any references you could point me to about this?
Sorry, I meant Aaron! Not Brian.
So, how come the beef producers aren't all over this? Looking at this post and the related posts it all points to the fact that well meaning Dr's advice of laying off the milk fat and red meat and switch to veggie oils and chicken is exactly wrong.
It looks to me that we should add increased chicken consumption to the list of things that have gone wrong in the last 100 years.
Gunther-gatherer:
this article goes some way to answering your question:
http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/search/label/AGE%20RAGE%20and%20ALE%20%289%29%3A%20VLDL%20degradation%20and%20Fish%20Oil
Here is some USDA info about meat consumption
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/April06/Findings/charts/Fingings-Chicken.jpg
Chicken has risen dramatically and they point out that 40% is purchased at restaurants 60% of that at fast food which means most of it is fried in veggie oil. So based on Stephan's data in the "practical guide to omega" post of get a double dose of n6 from fried chicken.
One thing I find interesting is that meat consumption is way up from 1910. So we must be getting a significant amount of our calories from animal sources.
The other interesting thing is that in all the graphs we show an increase in consumption of EVERY THING in the last 50 years. Perhaps the answer is just gluttony.
AGE, RAGE and ALE: The AGE of LDLNot sure if this is the actual post Jocelyn was linking to but Peter at Hyperlipid has done several blogs on fructose and omega 6 so searching his site for fructose will give the full picture.
Ted Hutchinson – thanks for the links.
Thoughts on lard.
I agree with Stephan's analysis that saturated fats are preferable to excess Omega Sixes. Saturated fats do increase oxidised cholesterol, but reduce wider inflammation and oxidative stress in the body. The negative is far outweighed by the positive.
But I have reservations about industrially processed lard;
It may be subject to hydrogenation, which is also likely to involve the removal of any Omega Three. As discussed in some of Stephan's previous blogs are a number of health concerns in respect of trans fats.
The creation of industrial lard strips it of almost all minerals and antioxidants.
The Omega 3:6 content of the lard will reflect the Omega 3:6 imbalance seen in grain fed livestock, in so far as it is made from such livestock.
High temperature treatment increases the risk of oxidised fats and cholesterol if and in so far as they are not removed by processing.
The links to the nutrition data for the lard and suet emphasises the impact of industrial processing on lard on its contents and composition.
Lard
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/fats-and-oils/483/2
Meat dripping
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/fats-and-oils/7185/2
Suet
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/beef-products/3478/2
Is all lard made this way? Probably not, but to know for sure we need better labelling.
Author; Omega Six The Devils Fat
www.Omegasixthedevilsfat.com.
( I am much nearer (-: completing an expanded and improved version which I hope to finish within the next 3 months)
Stephan, hats off to you! you're doing a great job with this blog. Virtually everything in it is useful and relevant, at least to me. Idk how you find time to be so thorough and precise.
Being hypothyroid (Hashimoto's autoimmune), I have noticed an improvement in function (reduction in supplemental thyroid), since halting vegetable oil use. The possibility of being the lack of veggie oils that is part of the improvement dawned on me on your post back to Ray Peat.
Lightly changing topics, what's your view of fish oil as essential, (I'm thinking Ray Peat)? I remember Peter's post on Krauss' paper, explaining how antioxidants (E vitamin) would eliminate the triglyceride reductions resulting from mega fish oil dosing. They do get peroxidized in the body... that's pretty much confirmed.
Could it be that the ratio is important in the presence of high omega-6 fats? but not so in their relative absence (traditional fats)? I read some of Dr. Peat's papers on this last night, and skipped my fish oil capsule this morning, until I have time to deconstruct the citations.
"In declaring EPA and DHA to be safe, the FDA neglected to evaluate their antithyroid, immunosuppressive, lipid peroxidative (Song et al., 2000), light sensitizing, and antimitochondrial effects, their depression of glucose oxidation (Delarue et al., 2003), and their contribution to metastatic cancer (Klieveri, et al., 2000), lipofuscinosis and liver damage, among other problems."
Also, I am curious as to what antioxidants and supplements you use. I ran out of mixed tocopherol E, and selenium (the latter is associated with an improvement in autoimmune hypothyroidism--all ties in nicely with the hypothesis).
Thanks again.
Keep up the good work!
Alex
Re: I do think this may be the largest factor in heart attack risk.
I totally agree that it is one of the factor behind metabolic syndrome, arteriosclerosis and other chronic diseases. However, I still don't believe that it is the single most important trigger specifically for MI as observed on your US and the UK graphs. To make the UK rate of heart attacks go sixfold over just ~5 years after 1915, requires something much more clear cut.
If it were just the veg oils, we would have seen the slope directly correlated with the quantity of veg oils. Until I see the veg oil consumption rising dramatically in 1915, I will remain skeptical. I will dig for the data later when I will have some more time.
Stan
"One thing I find interesting is that meat consumption is way up from 1910"
Keep in mind meat consumption rose quite a bit in the last part of the 19th century (facilitated by railroads?), then plummeted after the publication of book The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair, which exposed the horrendous conditions in the meatpacking industry and immigrant labor communities in Chicago. Great book to read, even today. It took a long time for the public to get over the images described so well in the book. In some ways, not much has changed - immigrant labor that are used and discarded when injured or ill from their work, unsafe working conditions, unhealthy animals, production lines that facilitate contamination and unsafe meat, etc. We really haven't come very far in 100 years. A better option is small local and regional processing facilities.
mtflight/Alex,
Have you checked your Vit D status? Some of my lingering/unresolved hypothyroid symptoms were greatly improved this winter (usually my worst part of the year, symptom-wise) when I finally got my Vit D level up to 68 ng/mL with 5000iU D3 daily (from low forties ng/mL when I began supplementing two years ago with 2000iU D3 or with more summer sun alone, and probably severely deficient before that before I supplemented and when I avoided sun exposure). I keep running across speculation that low Vit D is connected to hypothyroidism, gluten issues, fibromyalgia, etc.
Just came back from the gynecologist who noted the nice recent Vit D3 level in my chart. She said about 80 % of her patients are deficient and shocked when they find out ( this is in San Diego!).
Hi Anna,
In the last two years I got my 25(OH)D3 from 28 ng/ml to 87 as of Feb 09, by taking 8,000 IU/day.
Could correspond with the thyroid output improvement. It's good news because usually once the autoimmune attack is up, it leaves scar tissue behind. My old doctor said "what for?" when I told him I would be taking selenium because it reduced the autoantibodies in one study. He got fired for that and for wanting to statinate me.
My new one still recommends "treating" my elevated LDL.
PS you had some somewhat negative experiences with B vitamins, correct? I'm interested in that, because for the longest time since childhood my father has praised them.
I eat probably a quarter to a third of my calories daily from nuts. So how can I tell if all the omega-6 fats I consume are causing "inflammation"? I recently had blood tests and everything came back optimal:
crp: 0.23 mg/L (lowest decile)
ldl: 56 mg/dl
hdl: 76 mg/dl
triglycerides: 35 mg/dl
hba1c: 5.2
blood pressure: 110/70
homocysteine: 7.1
lp(a): 4
normal liver/kidney panels/blood counts
I also got NMR testing and had virtually no small LDL particles and virtually no large VLDL (i.e., the most atherogenic kind).
Based on these results, I felt like I should keep doing what I've been doing. So what biomarkers can I measure that would show up all this inflammation that the omega-6 fats are causing?
Also, what is Dr. Davis at the heartscanblog missing when he advocates nuts as one of the central dietary components of his plaque reversal strategy?
mtflight,
Good going on the latest 25 (OH)D results. 8000iu is also what my husband needed to supplement with to achieve a similar result. His first 25 (OH)D was 46 ng/mL in early January on 4000iU daily for about 4-6 months. Before supplementing, I'm sure he was very deficient.
My endo lowered my T4 dose by a tiny bit (less one 50 mcg tab per week) the visit before last because my TSH had dropped "a bit too low - around .3" (too low in his mind, not in mine - I felt fine and I know I feel and function much better with my TSH well below 1.0 - with no hyperthyroid symptoms). I think the TSH drop was due to the rise in my Vit D level from 40 ng/Ml to 68 (it actually went to 122 during Dec & Jan when I took a lot of extra D because of all the sick people I came in contact with, but then I stopped D3 for a month and resumed at 5000iU for the 68 result. When I told him my theory about the D being thre reaons for the TSH drop and my 5000 iU Vit D dose, he got all worried about my calcium level etc., and wanted the 25 (OH)D level checked on the next labs (I didn't tell him about the higher temp dose and the result via GRH though. He doesn't understand why I am not satisfied with a 25 (OH)D in the 40s, though, but he also isn't interested, either. My file probably is labeled WW (worried well)... ;-).
I'm not wild about taking B vitamins because they don't always sit well with me - either I "taste" them all day or they make me a bit queasy. Under the right conditions, sometimes I am fine taking B complex 50 - enough food in my stomach, the right B complex formula, not too high a dose, etc. So I am sporadic about taking them. I like the sublingual variety I take now. I can't think of any other problem I had with Bs.
Alex,
I don't think fish oil is essential by any means. If all you eat are fats from traditionally-raised animals, you need little or no fish oil or seafood to complement your diet. Fish oil is useful because it's a concentrated source of omega-3 that you can use to counterbalance higher omega-6, for example if you eat industrial animal fats, if you sometimes eat industrial vegetable oils, or if you eat nuts.
Ray Peat lumps all PUFAs into the same category, which is a mistake. I can't take his writing seriously anymore because he consistently misrepresents his references. He's right about some things, such as the fact that fish oil promotes lipid peroxidation, but I'm tired of having to second guess every sentence.
The only supplements I use regularly are small doses of high-vitamin cod liver oil and naturally sourced vitamin D3 in winter. I don't take antioxidants nor do I support taking them.
David,
I'm just presenting the data and my interpretation of them. You are free to be convinced or not. Your omega 6:3 balance will depend on what nuts you're eating and the other fats in your diet. I'm not too attached to lipid panels but your HbA1c looks good. It looks like you might be eating low-carb, which will mitigate the inflammatory effects of high omega-6 if recent diet trials are correct. Dr. Davis recommends high doses of fish oil, which would counterbalance the omega-6 in the nuts. Not an ideal solution in my opinion, but better than leaving out the fish oil.
Fish oil is a band aid?
I used to take it regularly, but now I have swapped it out for coconut oil and can see the positive effects. This has been a constant argument in many forums: should n-3 be taken to counterbalance n-6? I agree with Robert Andrew Brown that n-6 should just be avoided. We always talk about oxidation of vegetable oils. You can smell it in a bottle of rancid oil. I have been supplementing my normal food intake with two Tbsp of olive oil at each meal (3 times per day). I had to throw out my lovely organic EVOO from Italy because the oil had spoiled, and replaced it with a (non-organic) bottle from the same state (I live in CA) to minimize the travel time of the oil.
Ryan had a great quote from a natural and wild living guy:
"Matt replied that he ate fish maybe one or two times a week -- no more than that, though. Why? Because he noticed that while he subsisted mostly off of fish he felt fatigued and not as strong as when consuming mainly squirrels. Apparently, the Apaches also avoided eating too much fish, according to Matt."
This guy is a modern hunter and he craves some saturated fat. Squirrels v. fish? I'll take the fatter animal who does not need to concern itself with adipose tissue that does not solidify in the cold temperatures of river water.
David
Out of interest what nuts do you eat.What oils do you eat. Do you eat any fish or long chain Omega 3. What is your calorie intake. Do you use fruit juices, high sugar sources etc - I suspect you don't. Do you have a link for the diet.
Many thanks
PaleoRD
Are we talking fresh water or marine fish out of interest.
I suspect squirrels would have a better mineral profile than fresh water fish in some areas. Also most fish are pretty low in fat.
If this guy was living a truly wild diet low in plant based OMega 3s and 6s then Omega 3s v 6s would logically begin to impact on mood, aggression etc, through sex hormones and steroid production including norepinephrine, which could alter the perception of energy status.
Saturated fat produces more energy per gram than polyunsaturated fat.
Yes I agree fish oil is a sticking plaster in a sense, and fish comes with minerals fat soluble vitamins etc so is a better option, but it is a very good one.
Ray Peat.
He is not reading the same material as I read.
Peroxidation of Omega 3 DHA
Yes DHA has more double bonds and so is more susceptible to oxidation, but trials show it generally does not cause oxidative stress, in fact it often has antioxidant properties.
If Ray Peat was right dolphins would not exist, or at least suffer from huge oxidative stress.
When DHA is oxidised the products include protective antiinflammatory products like resolvins and protectins.
Ray peat Cancer and liver damage.
Most trial evidence shows Omega 3s are protective against cancer, and protect the liver.
Hi Stephan
Excellent article.
Most of the possible causes of the rapid rise in heart disease in the early part of the last century have been covered in the blog already.
I am sure that dramatic changes in food processing and the introduction of novel foods (margarines, etc) played the major part. Smoking doesn't convince me any more than 'high cholesterol' does.
But a few years ago, another occurred to me: if our increasingly unnatural diet were the cause of the heart disease epidemic throughout the industrialised world, why did heart disease mortality start to decline in the 1950s and 1960s? It also occurred to me that the answer to this trend could conceivably be more important, since "prevention is better than cure".
Possible answers I came up with are HERE
Stephan, did you discontinue supplementing K2 via butter oil?
I supplement with D3 after finding out it was 30. I also take a fairly high dose of Omega 3 and CLO, though the only Omega 6 I am aware of eating comes from almonds (maybe 1/2 cup per day).
I am curious to hear comments about this post on Scott's Blog --
'Is Adding Vitamin D To Our Foods Causing Autoimmune Diseases?'
http://sstrumello.blogspot.com/2009/05/is-adding-vitamin-d-to-our-foods.html
I look forward to your posts each day! There are very few people who could offer such insights, regardless of how much time they had to think about the issues you address.
PaleoRD,
I agree that fish oil is a band-aid that's useful if you're unable or unwilling to reduce your omega-6 intake to a low level. I do believe people crave saturated fat specifically. I was a vegan for about 6 months, and I felt much more satisfied after meals once I started eating coconut oil.
Barry,
Nice to see you on the blog! I agree that we should treat "new" foods like hydrogenated oils with a very high degree of suspicion. I think it's important to distinguish between heart attack mortality and heart attack incidence. Mortality has been decreasing since the 60s, but incidence hasn't changed nearly as much. I think that suggests mortality has been declining due to better medical interventions rather than a lifestyle factor. Here are a few references that look at heart attack incidence over time in the U.S.:
IHD Hospitalization Rates, 1970-1986Framingham data, 1950-1980Minnesota Heart Survey, 1985-1997Nick,
I did discontinue butter oil. I don't have anything against it, I just eat enough butter and organs that I don't think it's necessary. As for the blog post link, I'm extremely skeptical of anything that comes out of the Marshall protocol camp.
Barry,
Sorry for the poor formatting, those are three separate links in the comment I posted above.
The Model T "put america on wheels" early in the 1900s. Exercise hypothesis?
Is there anything that *didn't* change in the 1900s?
Homebray,
That could be a factor too.
Anna,
I agree, so many things changed we can never be sure what happened. But I think I have a good guess...
Robert Andrew Brown wrote:
"If this guy was living a truly wild diet low in plant based OMega 3s and 6s then Omega 3s v 6s would logically begin to impact on mood, aggression etc, through sex hormones and steroid production including norepinephrine, which could alter the perception of energy status."
The blog post that PaleoRD was referring to (in case you haven't seen it):
Talking Nutrition With a Wild ManMy thought was that someone on a nearly zero carbohydrate diet -- i.e. the primitive diet Matt was living on for over three months -- would be more affected by the fats consumed (poly/mono/sat) than in a high-carb diet. Carbs indirectly supply saturated fats through conversion in the body. The human body has a similar fatty acid to pork: mostly sats and monos with a little poly. Too many polys may disturb energy at the cellular level.
As for the omega 3:6 ratio, I would imagine Matt would have been more susceptible to the effects of an imbalance here as well.
The fish he was eating were freshwater, BTW.
"Saturated fat produces more energy per gram than polyunsaturated fat."
That's interesting. I didn't know that. I'll google it, but maybe you can point to your source for that info? Thanks.
Squirrel's adipose tissue is actually quite high in polys --around 28-32%. Monos are highest with around 50%. Sats make up the remainder.
But, if we consider the whole animal -- as this is how Matt ate the squirrels -- we must also include bone marrow, kidney fat, heart fat, brains, etc. This makes determining the fatty acid composition of the wild man's diet difficult.
Back to fish...
From Weston Price's research it seems that several cultures ate fish extensively over time, such as the Gaels, Inuit, and some African tribes who ate freshwater fish. The Gaels and Africans also ate significant amounts of properly prepared grains (carbs = sat fat) along with the fish; the Inuit also ate sea mammals. In other words, eating only fish for energy isn't a common theme in our human dietary history. But eating soley land mammals, with more optimal fatty acid profiles (mosty sat and mono, little poly), may have been a mainstay in the human diet for millions of years.
So it makes sense that Matt would prefer squirrels over fish, if we look at it from that angle.
Anyway, interesting stuff. Love discussing it!
Matt,
The Inuit avoided eating fish exclusively, saying it made them weak and didn't satisfy their appetite. They preferred seals and caribou when available. They would only subsist on pure fish when they couldn't get mammals. But it may also have to do with the fact that fish is too lean. When you eat zero carb, you have to get 70+ percent of your calories from fat. Seal oil is high in PUFA of the n-3 variety.
Ryan,
Sorry, that comment was directed at you.
Margarine was banned in New Zealand until 1972:
http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3548/features/11016/unravelling_the_food_myths_.html
As far as I'm aware, the NZ heart disease rate pretty much follows other western countries.
Kiwi,
Was all hydrogenated fat banned or just margarine? I assume industrial vegetable oil became widespread in NZ as well.
Hi Stephan,
Thanks for this great series of articles!
I noticed you said, "I don't take antioxidants nor do I support taking them." Have you ever discussed the reasoning for this and if so can you point me to the article(s)? Or is this something you might cover in a subsequent article? I've lately seen others (mostly from WAPF) mention that they don't subscribe to the hype surrounding antioxidants but they haven't elaborated as to why. I feel like I have missed something big!
I've noticed that in discussing fat-soluble vitamins you don't seem to mention Vitamin E. Is this because it is not found in high amounts in animal products, only in seeds, nuts and grains? Is this another antioxidant which you would not recommend? What about Vitamin C?
Stephen.
I honestly don't think oils were used much because NZ was/is basically a primary food producer (dairy).
I know vegetable oils were not readily available in supermarkets until 1970's.
Not sure if veg oil was used in bread, but cakes/cookies would have been made with butter.
Takeouts, fish-n-chips etc. were cooked using beef dripping until 1980's.
A true story:
Italian migrants was unable to buy olive oil for cooking except from a pharmacy (for medicinal uses in small bottles) :)
Ryan
"Saturated fat produces more energy per gram than polyunsaturated fat."
Source The Fats of Life Caroline M Pond.
Kiwi
Veg oils were not commonly used in the UK either in the 60s.
I would be amazed if hydrogenated lard was not used in bakery and food products, and how about solid vegetable based cooking fats?
Thanks for the insight, Stephan. That makes a lot of sense re: the Inuit and their fish consumption.
I still wonder about the importance of a balanced fatty acid intake on a high-fat, low-carb diet. It would seem that too many PUFAs would be detrimental and upset the balance of the body, which as I said earlier has adipose tissue with a high sat & mono content & low polys, like pork.
We can't make sat fats from polys, can we? So how would our bodies respond to a low-sat intake on a high-fat, zero-carb diet? Would our cells lose their structural integrity?
Senta,
I have nothing against vitamin E, I just haven't focused on it because I haven't seen any reason to worry about it if you eat real food.
"Antioxidants" work great in a test tube but they don't contribute meaningfully to the body's antioxidant capacity. Our primary blood antioxidants, for example, are uric acid, vitamin C and vitamin E. Nothing magical there. Polyphenols from green tea, chocolate, vegetables, fruit etc. make almost no contribution to blood antioxidant status.
The primary logical argument in favor of specific polyphenols is that they have drug-like effects on the body by altering enzyme activities and signaling pathways. I'm skeptical about the usefulness of these in the context of an otherwise good diet/lifestyle but I'm keeping my mind open.
Kiwi,
Thanks for the information. I'd like to see some hard stats on hydrogenated oil, industrial oil and animal fat consumption in NZ. If their n-6:3 balance didn't change and their heart disease rate increased similarly to the US, then that will be a challenge to my theory.
Ryan,
My suspicion is that a high-carb diet is a stressor, albeit one that the body can handle just fine if other things are in line. If you remove that stressor, the n-6:3 balance may become less important for inflammation. Their was a recent low-carb study from the Volek group I believe, showing that inflammation goes down on a super low-carb diet even as arachidonic acid (a n-6 eicosanoid precursor) increases.
As far as your second question, I don't know how the body would respond to a very high-fat, low-sat diet.
Stephan,
Thanks for your reply. I see, in your mention above of antioxidants you were referring specifically to polyphenols, not all antioxidants.
As far as Vitamin E, I was wondering if you were at some point going to examine its role in coronary heart disease, as you have done with the other fat-soluble vitamins.
Stephan,
I wanted to flesh out my question on Vitamin E a little further. Vitamin E has for years been heralded as one of the most important vitamins for heart health, with much discussion about the various forms, tocotreinols, etc.. I typically see amounts from 400-800 IUs daily recommended. It would be very difficult to get these amounts if one is eschewing omega 6 sources. It seems that the highest concentrations of Vitamin E are in vegetable oils.
So I'm wondering perhaps if the research on Vitamin E and cardiovascular health has been done within the confines of the mainstream low-fat *heart healthy"* diet where it shows some benefit, possibly because it mitigates damage from PUFAs? Perhaps little Vitamin E is required if Omega 6 sources are avoided or minimized?
Is there any important interaction of Vitamin E with the other fat-soluble vitamins? I've only read about Vitamin E, Vitamin C and alpha lipoic acid recycling each other.
Senta,
Yes, I was referring to non-essential antioxidants. I am not that knowledgeable about vitamin E but I do know a little bit. Vitamin E is one of the primary antioxidants in lipoprotein particles, along with coenzyme Q10. So it wouldn't surprise me if it were involved in coronary heart disease. Controlled trials using alpha-tocopherol have generally not supported its effectiveness in preventing CHD, although there was one trial that showed a positive effect. Some people will say the problem is because they only used one form of vitamin E (there are eight), or because they used synthetic (dl) alpha-tocopherol. Perhaps they're right. But no one really knows because it hasn't been tested under controlled conditions, at least not to my knowledge.
Vitamin E in lipoprotein particles serves to prevent the oxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids, both omega-6 and omega-3 and their derivatives. Keeping PUFA low will minimize the need for vitamin E. There are suggestions that the oxidation products of linoleic acid are more toxic than those of the n-3 lineage. Rats eating more LA have lower tissue levels of vitamin E in some studies. Not surprising, although dietary sources of LA typically come with a dose of vitamin E. Plants use it to prevent rancidity just like the human body does. Oils low in PUFA like coconut barely contain any vitamin E because they don't need it.
I really haven't looked into the interactions between vitamin E and the other fat-soluble vitamins. I don't know if I answered any of your questions but I did manage to ramble...
Sorry but I don't have any documentation or NZ historical data (good PhD thesis for someone though).
But at that time, butter was heavily subsidised by the government, so would have been much cheaper than any imported oil products.
The emphasis was on import substitution in all things. High tariffs and import quotas was the rule.
I agree hydrogenated lard may have been produced locally.
NZ didn't have a very extensive manufactured food industry.
Most baking was done at home by mother and was a ritual in most homes and a source of womanly pride to bake and have afternoon tea with friends.
Meat pies, fish-n-chips and sandwiches were the staple outside the home and few people ate out at restaurants because there really weren't many and it wasn't the custom.
For the vegetable oil theory to hold, would it not have to have been a significant switch from animal fats?
I don't think this happened with the NZ diet at that time. Although, the kind of fat used in bread does hold out a possibility.
Sugar looks to be the better bet, as New Zealanders have a very sweet tooth.
Dr Davis finds removing wheat products from the diet has a significant impact on the development of heart disease within his group of patients. He is getting the results, so I'm going along with it being carbohydrates (Taubes also).
To quote Weston Price "white-flour products, canned marmalades, canned vegetables, sweetened fruit juices, jams, confections".
kiwi
"For the vegetable oil theory to hold, would it not have to have been a significant switch from animal fats? "
The impact of Omega three and six is dependent on number of factors including the ratio between the plant-based Omega threes and sixes, and the access to long chain Omega threes.
As previously mentioned in this series of posts the impact of Omega 6 in so far as one is looking at the eicosanoids pathway, has reached 80%of its maximum effect at 4% of calories.
So change from say 2% of calories to 4% of calories, combined with a loss of Omega threes due to hydrogenation of fats and dietary changes could have a significant health impact.
Trials show that imbalance even at very low intake levels, between Omega three and six intake have health and cell structural impacts.
There is no question that calories play a part in this too, but I support Stephan's contention that Omega six is a major player, for a wide range of reasons, one of which is the impact of Omega three and six on the inflammatory pathways.
I would be fascinated to see more data on the New Zealand diet as I have seen suggestions in papers that New Zealand has a high level of neurological related conditions such as depression and from memory bipolar disorder which arguably also link to restricted intakes of long chain Omega three.
Author
Omega Six The Devils Fat
www.omegasixthedevislfat
Ok, this is interesting and I take your point about the ratios.
BUT:
"New Zealand has a high level of neurological related conditions such as depression and from memory bipolar disorder"
No, that's just a myth propagated by Australians!
Stephan,
Thanks for your response. I does seem plausible that Vitamin E should at least help ameliorate the damage from peroxidized PUFAs that contribute to cardiovascular damage.
And since, as you say, nature is kind enough to provide a good supply of Vitamin E with LA to prevent rancidity, I wondered if refining stripped out that Vitamin E from vegetable oils. This is what it says on Wikipedia:
"The processing of soy oil is typical of that used with most vegetable oils. Crude soy oil is first mixed with caustic soda. Saponification turns triglycerides into soap. The soap is removed with a centrifuge. Neutralized dry soap stock (NDSS) is typically used in animal feed, more to get rid of it than because it is particularly nourishing. The remaining oil is deodorized by heating under a near-perfect vacuum and sparged with water. The condensate is further processed to become vitamin E food supplement, while the oil can be sold to manufacturers and consumers at this point."
So Vitamin E is stripped out of refined oils and sold separately. No wonder people eating these oils need to supplement with Vitamin E.
I'd be very interested to see anything you find on the interaction of Vitamin E with other fat-soluble vitamins. Requirements for Vitamin E seem like they would be very low in a paleo diet, do you think that is true of the other traditional diets you have studied? If fish makes up a large portion of the diet, does nature provide enough Vitamin E to prevent Omega-3 oxidation or do the other fat-soluble vitamins A and D suit this purpose?
"I don't know how the body would respond to a very high-fat, low-sat diet." Stephan
Well, not humans, but felines were reported (since 1950s) to develop pansteatitis when fed canned tuna. Sure enough the condition was the "result from an excessive dietary intake of unstabilized polyunsaturated fatty acids."* If you think about this, tuna was probably canned in vegetable oil.
Apparently vitamin E would prevent this condition, and commercial feline food manufacturers add the vitamin E to "stabilize the fats."
Ref. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1789715
Kiwi,
I spent six months in NZ for my PhD research 10 years ago and was pretty amazed at how much fat most Kiwis were eating. Lots of cream, whole milk and lamb, to my recollection. Would be awesome to have statistics on veg oils, wheat, and sugar consumption over time.
"Sugar looks to be the better bet, as New Zealanders have a very sweet tooth"
Yeah. My best guess, too, is that all that pavlova is doing it. Mmmmmm.... pav....
Senta,
I've heard the theory that part of the problem is that PUFA oils are stripped of antioxidants during processing. It may be part of the problem, I don't know. Having antioxidants present wouldn't influence the effects on eicosanoid signaling though, at least not in any way I'm aware of.
The healthy cultures I've written about generally have a low omega-6 intake, but a variable omega-3 intake. Most of them are pretty low on both. Seal oil does contain a fair amount of vitamin E and probably coenzyme Q10. I think a portion of those omega-3s will be oxidized regardless, but I'm not convinced that's a problem in the context of a healthy diet.
Alex,
Interesting, thanks for the link.
Thanks Stephan, I agree! The more you look at it, the less important Vitamin E seems in the context of a healthy diet. That's probably why it doesn't seem to come up in the works of Weston A. Price. I've been wondering why that was for a while now.
He does discuss vitamin E a bit.
p. 368 NAPD
"Professor Drummond, a British bio-chemist, in discussing the question of the modern decline in fertility, before the Royal Society of Medicine suggested that the decline in the birth rate in European countries, during the last fifty years, was due, largely, to the change in national diets which resulted from the removal of vitamins B and E from grains when the embryo or germ was removed in the milling process. He called attention to the fact that the decline in the birth rate corresponded directly with the time when the change was made in the milling process so that refined flour was made available instead of the entire grain product."
Thanks Monica. That goes along with the Vitamin E being removed from vegetable oils by refining. So both grains and oils are made more harmful by processing.
That's right, now that I think about it Price was aware of vitamin E's effect on reproduction.
Very interesting blog. I am writing a paper on Nutrition Therapy to Prevent and Treat Disease. I will be taking time to read your blog thoroughly.
Thanks!
Ann S
The graphs don't support the hypothesis do they?
Heart disease was on the rise well before sat fat use declined and PUFA's took off.
Hi Perry,
Not sure which graph you're looking at, but they clearly show an extreme jump (2-fold) in refined seed oil consumption around 1915. That's also around the time hydrogenated fats were introduced (1911).
The Spoon Test
After reading your post about omega 3 and 6, I tried home made fries fried in lard - So good - in fact the best Ive ever had. My girlfriend wanted hers in Canola and made hers first. I had to clean the stainless sieve spoon to do mine and I needed a butter knife to scrape off the hardened starch oil residue that hardened onto the spoon. So when I made my fries I left the spoon out like she did for about 20 min. The spoon wiped clean. Its gotta tell you something - try it for yourself. Great work by the way Stephan!
Very interesting Jeb, thanks for posting. The PUFA in the canola oil probably oxidized during the deep fry, thus coating the spoon just like linseed oil becomes varnish as it oxidizes. I bet it tasted awful too.
Post a Comment