Omega 3 Vs Omega 6 (PUFA)

[Steve]

I've read multiple times that the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 in the body is an important factor. I don't remember all of the research behind it, but it sounded pretty convincing when I heard Paul Jaminet discussing it for example. Not everyone here agrees with Paul but he sure makes sense whenever I hear him speak or when someone debates him, and anyway this ratio is discussed by all kinds of people.

So since almost nobody (even on a Peat diet) is not ingesting Omega 6 oils to some extent doesn't it make sense to eat a little bit of Omega 3 to try to achieve the optimum balance? By not eating any Omega 3 aren't we shooting ourselves in the foot (except for maybe 1% of the people who eat almost no Omega 6 such as Ray)?

Also Ray talks about most fish oil going rancid before you even ingest it or shortly thereafter, but if that was the case then it wouldn't show up in your tissues as Omega 3 oil would it?

From Paul:
Arachidonic acid is made from linoleic acid, and so those two oils were considered as roughly equivalent in their ability to meet our nutritional needs, but a large part of current research is devoted to showing the details of how fish oils protect against arachidonic acid. The “balance” between the omega -3 and the omega -6 fatty acids is increasingly being presented as a defense against the toxic omega -6 fats. But the accumulation of unsaturated fats with aging makes any defense increasingly difficult, and the extreme instability of the highly unsaturated omega -3 fats creates additional problems.


From Ray (he mentions the ratio & doesn't really argue against it):
Arachidonic acid is made from linoleic acid, and so those two oils were considered as roughly equivalent in their ability to meet our nutritional needs, but a large part of current research is devoted to showing the details of how fish oils protect against arachidonic acid. The “balance” between the omega -3 and the omega -6 fatty acids is increasingly being presented as a defense against the toxic omega -6 fats. But the accumulation of unsaturated fats with aging makes any defense increasingly difficult, and the extreme instability of the highly unsaturated omega -3 fats creates additional problems.

 

[RobertJM]

I've always thought this myself. Just because of how n3 always provided such great perceivable benefits to me. So if I restricted my dietary n6 right down (as much as I could), and then added my old regimen of 1g of fish oil per day, would I see benefits again? According to peeps on this forum, n3 is more toxic than n6 but I struggle to understand this when n3 can have such powerfully acute results as an anti-inflammatory. Why would a poison have such effects? And if your PUFA intake is mostly all n6, you are leaving that n6 unopposed.

Of course just ingesting 0g of PUFA per day would mean the ratio doesn't matter, but that's obviously impossible.

And with how unstable n3 is..... well, vitamin e?

 

[Waynish]

Seems like this shouldn't be too hard to study in vivo or on matrix... Anyone find some studies?

 

[Mito]

I've read multiple times that the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 in the body is an important factor.

Omega 3 blocks some of the bad effects of Omega 6. Travis explains here: Omega-3 Fatty Acids Fight Inflammation Via Cannabinoids ?

 

[paymanz]

Yes omega six is inflammatory and omega 3 may cause oxidative stress.

In short term omega 3 has anti inflammatory affects but in long term its oxidative stress also can cause inflammation.

https://raypeatforum.com/community/...eatic-beta-cell-function-and-the-regul.15673/

 

[Steve]

Here's some more excerpts from Paul Jaminet............I just picked some lines out of some of his stuff, so it's not his entire paragraphs:

In response to a new study that came out regarding omega-3 & cancer:
There might be biological contexts in which omega-3 fats promote cancer.
This doesn’t mean we should refrain from eating omega-3 fats. Cardiovascular disease causes more deaths than cancer, and omega-3 fats are protective against CVD.
However, I think these studies support the PHD advice:
Eat enough oily marine fish to achieve omega-6 and omega-3 balance;
Minimize omega-6 intake so that omega-6 and omega-3 balance is achieved at the lowest possible intake of polyunsaturated fats.
All nutrients can be eaten in excess, and omega-3 fats surely fall into this category. The right amount of oily fish is probably about one to two meals per week.

Discussing rancidity:

Cooking can damage fats, that is why we recommend cooking fragile foods at low temperatures. We tend to bake salmon at 300 – 325 F.
Chemically fragile oils in capsules are likely to go rancid after months on a shelf, and are not likely to be as healthy as the oils in a freshly-killed fish.
If fish have gone rancid, you can tell. If the contents of a fish oil capsule are rancid, you can’t tell.

The trouble with this approach is that omega-3 fats are chemically fragile: their carbon double bonds are easily oxidized. EPA has 5 double bonds and DHA 6 double bonds, so they are the most vulnerable of all dietary fats. They easily become rancid.
Fish oil capsules often sit on a shelf for months before they are eaten. If someone offered you the opportunity to eat salmon that had been sitting on a shelf for six months, would you do it? No? Then why accept the same deal with salmon oil?
In fact, clinical trials have compared eating fish to eating fish oil capsules. Fish consumption has an excellent record in a number of clinical trials, but fish oil capsule supplements do not.
So, give up the fish oil capsules: they’re all too likely to poison you. Instead, buy some fresh fish. Poached or baked salmon is an excellent summer dinner.

 

[DuggaDugga]

Yes omega six is inflammatory and omega 3 may cause oxidative stress.

In short term omega 3 has anti inflammatory affects but in long term its oxidative stress also can cause inflammation.

Diabetogenic Impact Of Long-chain Omega-3 Fatty Acids On Pancreatic Beta-cell Function And The Regul

Indeed. Omega-3's "anti-inflammatory" properties are more accurately described as "immunosuppressive", in my opinion. Just depends on the agenda the person is pushing really.

 

[johnwester130]

omega 9 mead acid will be produced when deficient in both omega 3 and 6

 

[paymanz]

Indeed. Omega-3's "anti-inflammatory" properties are more accurately described as "immunosuppressive", in my opinion. Just depends on the agenda the person is pushing really.

As I said in long term the proxidation product of it causes more inflammation.

And some studies already shown that efad is more protective to inflammation than omega3 supplements.

 

[Steve]

I think the most important question is does the Omega-3 vs Omega-6 ratio matter?
From what I've read in this forum it seems like the balance between things is always important.
Since hardly anyone is going to be extremely low in Omega-6 (except for people who go to extremes) then I think we need to eat some Omega-3 to create a balance with Omega-6 (unless the ratio is not important).
I think I do a pretty good job of avoiding PUFA, but I still get about 6 grams per day (5g omega-6, 1g omega-3).

 

[Such_Saturation]

it sounded pretty convincing when I heard Paul Jaminet discussing it for example. Not everyone here agrees with Paul but he sure makes sense whenever I hear him speak or when someone debates him, and anyway this ratio is discussed by all kinds of people.

Fantastic arguments LMAO

 

[Steve]

Going thru my Cronometer it seems like I have greatly increased my Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio since Omega-6 is found in all kinds of food, but Omega-3 is harder to obtain.
So I hope somebody points out some good evidence that the ratio doesn't matter, otherwise I may go back to eating 1 lb of salmon per week as I used to pre-Peat.

 

[DuggaDugga]

As I said in long term the proxidation product of it causes more inflammation.

I agree.
Immunosuppressive effects of polyunsaturated fatty acids on antigen presentation by human leukocyte antigen class I molecules

 

[Steve]

Hi Dr Peat,
I’ve noticed that I’ve greatly increased my Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio since trying to avoid PUFA in my diet. So even though I’m eating less PUFA (about 6 grams per day) it is mostly Omega-6 since it is found in just about everything whereas Omega-3 is harder to obtain.
I’ve seen research that the Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio is important to keep optimal from 1:1 to 2.3:1. If that is the case I would need to add about 1lb of fatty fish per week to my diet.
Do you think the Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio is important, or are the studies just misleading?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dr Peat:
After 30 years of promoting linoleic acid as the “essential fatty acid,” the evidence of its toxicity (cancer and heart disease) started to become embarrassing to its advocates, so they changed the story to the ratio thing. It’s true that, for a time, especially in young animals, the -3 fats reduce the toxic effects of the -6 fats. I think their competency should be questioned when they fail to compare the effects of a fat free diet (creating an “essential fatty acid deficiency”) to the effects of adding -3 fats to -6 fats. The results I’ve seen show better results from complete PUFA exclusion.