Good Values for Omega-6 Fatty Acids

[SAFarmer]

the omega 6 info given to the public and by advertisers is dangerous. Americans are not omega 6 excess...its not even close actually. The problem with omega 6 is that when they are heated past 340 they become oxidized and then non bioavailable, and become a burden on the body to remove. America is suffering from an omega 6 deficiceny, because most of the omega 6 they take in is already oxidized and not bioavailable. They take in too many oxidized unusable omega 6, but too little actually fresh cellularly active omega6. The ideal ratio omega 3 to 6 is not 1 to 1, people never ate that ratio in history, not even apes eat that ratio. The true ratio the body optimizes to, what breask milk is, is about 1:6 3:6. Don't overheat or roast any food, steam or boil it, and the omega 6 is not a problem
Look at the post I made at the bottom of this page
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2992&start=10

and the post on the last page following for more info

basically DHA, EPA, AA are all dangerous to take in from diet. Fresh plant or milk based omega3/6 are not only a non issue, but might be slightly beneficial in the scheme of things...to the same extent oleic acid is

id say a safe good amount would be between 3-6 grams, even up to a little more, but quality matters...freshness
as an adult, the fat requirement is half or less than that of an infant or child, so we need very little. And as long as there is always sugar or saturated fat to burn, we don't burn ourselves out of any necessary fatty acids

I think you miss the point what Ray Peat is saying.

" The fresh oils, whether cold pressed or consumed as part of the living plant material, are intrinsically toxic, and it is not any special industrial treatment that makes them toxic. "

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/un ... oils.shtml

PUFA's are essential for the development of cancer. Rats could not develop cancer on a fat free diet. Above 3g/day of PUFA the risk of cancer goes up significantly.

 

[jyb]

PUFA's are essential for the development of cancer. Rats could not develop cancer on a fat free diet. Above 3g/day of PUFA the risk of cancer goes up significantly.

But that's only if you don't have dietary sat fat? From the RP quotes I've seen, what I remember is: less than 4g good, but what matters most is the ratio of sat to unsat fat.

 

[SAFarmer]

PUFA's are essential for the development of cancer. Rats could not develop cancer on a fat free diet. Above 3g/day of PUFA the risk of cancer goes up significantly.

But that's only if you don't have dietary sat fat? From the RP quotes I've seen, what I remember is: less than 4g good, but what matters most is the ratio of sat to unsat fat.

No, zero PUFA's is good, but virtually impossible with normal diet, except Lab produced food .
Therefore, Sat fat and Vit E good for balancing out the as limited PUFA you can manage.

 

[pboy]

I mean man...that's kind of a huge generalization. Im not defending pufas, but its like this...anytime you go into lactic acid fermentation mode, any cell does, its technically 'a cancer', then the person chills out, body repairs, 'cancer' gone. Theres other instances like immune system attacking other pathogens, or during growth that some cells mimic 'being cancerous' but aren't actually a problem. Most people develop and cure cancer every day. I think it might be a bit irresponsible to try to completely snuff out all PUFA, because there are times when inflammation is needed. I know this is controversial, but what happens if you get an infection? If you cant become inflamed, they just hang around and grow. Its like if a bunch of bums came to live in your house...its all cool for a while, better to be relaxed, not get inflamed...but eventually when they start building up and becoming too much a burden you gotta get fired up and throw some of them out. This is the one area of rays research that I think he goes too far in, it makes sense from a linear mindset, but not in a complex one

everyone here can disagree, we all keep omega 6 low but get some incidentally, and im saying don't sweat it at all. I follow Peats advice and research and philosophy in most ways, this one aspect just sticks out like a sore thumb

 

[SAFarmer]

everyone here can disagree, we all keep omega 6 low but get some incidentally, and im saying don't sweat it at all. I follow Peats advice and research and philosophy in most ways, this one aspect just sticks out like a sore thumb

I think, then, maybe your viewpoint should be moved to the "alternative to Peat" section ...

 

[SAFarmer]

I mean man...that's kind of a huge generalization.

This means you are acusing Peat of hugely generalization. I'd like to see your background and experience for such an accusation.

I think it might be a bit irresponsible to try to completely snuff out all PUFA, because there are times when inflammation is needed. I know this is controversial,

It's definitely controversial on a forum like this. Ray Peat is fundamentally against PUFA's, as much, or more like he is against estrogen and radiation. He does not say it is feasible to achieve zero PUFA in your normal diet, but I think he makes it quite clear that PUFA's are bad and definitely not "needed" as you are making it out ot be .

Why don't you start a forum on why PUFA's (Omega 6 and Omega 3 ) are good ?

 

[pboy]

im just wondering how much intimate testing on your own body with detailed knowledge of everything that goes on or in your body, being aware of the emotions of everyone around you...and for how long have you done this?

how can I convey my exact state into someone else...I cant, but I can try to be good with words. Its sad when people must throw the baby out with the bath water

keep in mind man, Peat stood on the shoulders of many giants, and many times im sure he had slight disagreements with the old writing, their every detail, and tried to grow them, expand on the full complexity of how something works

 

[pboy]

if you read the posts ive made on this...I state that he likely interpreted the data right. Old, processed, oxidized PUFAs are no good. AA, EPA, DHA from diet are no good. Fresh amounts of linoleic acid? Your body is actually using it for beneficial immune and skin barrier purposes. That's all im saying. I think nuts and seeds are not ideal food for other reasons. The linoleic acid in the milk and eggs you consume (if you don't manage to burn the egg too bad), is probably being used for beneficial purposes

 

[SAFarmer]

Fresh amounts of linoleic acid? Your body is actually using it for beneficial immune and skin barrier purposes. That's all im saying.

I am saying you are in direct disagreement with Peat on this. Whatever of ingested PUFA's that is not immediately peroxidized, gets accumulated and oxidized later. You are making beficial claims for PUFA for which you maybe have no reference or solid grounds ito experience or scientific process. All that nonsence about your "emotion" and" complexity" have no scientific value.

 

[pboy]

awesome man, maybe to you. To me they have a lot of value

Theres a lot of science out there and most of it regarding PUFAs is in congruent...its extremely complex, and there are many inter relations. Rat studies that use isolated substances in controlled enviroments don't tell very much, often times. I prefer info based on human experience, in real life.

Heres a random study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12848277
this one was random, but its just to illustrate how much ratios and types matter

and also...the body doesnt necessarily use everything you consume for its metabolism or growth, it can use substances to disrupt bacterial membranes

a no PUFA at all approach would work if you were retired, not growing, and were protected from ever having to do anything intense
Id suggest reading up on the thymus gland, especially in regards to immune system and how that works as a growing child, then research the entire endocannabinoid system...and youll see that some omega 6 are pretty vital, unless Mead acid can make up for everything

 

[HDD]

I think this information from the WAP site is quite telling. It seems the Nigerian mothers who do not consume omega-3 have the highest percentage of antimicrobial fatty acids.


http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topi ... uman-milk/
The elongated omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oils are also found in the milk of healthy, properly fed mothers, and especially mothers who consume fish and/or fish oils.

Some mothers can make these elongated omega-3 fatty acids from the shorter omega-3 fatty acids. When there is none of the shorter omega-3 (alpha-linolenic acid 18:3) in the mother’s diet, as has been recorded in some Nigerian mothers, the amounts of lauric acid and capric acid are very high, making up close to a third of the total fatty acids. This appears to be nature’s way of helping to protect the infant from infections and also helping to conserve the important elongated omega-3 fatty acids. There have been animal studies showing that there were adequate elongated omega-3 fatty acids in the tissues even when no omega-3 was present in the diet as long as the fat that was in the diet was coconut oil. Coconut oil is rich in lauric acid.

The average amount of antimicrobial fatty acids, particularly lauric acid and capric acid, found in the milk of lactating mothers around the world is not usually as high as that reported in Nigeria, but amounts as low as 2 percent and as high as 20 percent have been reported. French mothers average 6 percent with ranges of 2-12 percent. Japanese mothers are reported to produce up to 9 percent lauric and capric acids. Studies in the US showed that diabetic mothers have very low levels, around 2 percent, but mothers with cystic fibrosis have about 8 percent. Adding coconut oil to the diet of lactating mothers raised the levels of lauric and capric acid to about 20 percent.

 

[SAFarmer]

Id suggest reading up on the thymus gland, especially in regards to immune system and how that works as a growing child, then research the entire endocannabinoid system...and youll see that some omega 6 are pretty vital, unless Mead acid can make up for everything

I suggest you reread (couple of times in fact) all Ray Peat has written in his articles on PUFA's. He is pretty thorough. I think you clearly dont understand and comprehend his research.

I also suggest you take your pro PUFA ranting elsewhere in the section where it belong.

Charlie ?

 

[pboy]

I have read most of it...I understand his philosophy about it. I don't think Ray himself would quite appreciate someone as yourself who doesn't even talk about things openly and intelligently, comprehensively...you basically do what the authoritarians he warns against do. Everyone should remain open and able to talk about things, never abrupt, making accusations, attempting to character defame, and not even look at something

its not a pro pufa rant, im saying 99% of pufas are not good, except potentially a small amount linoleic acid, which all Peaters still get some of

 

[SAFarmer]

its not a pro pufa rant, im saying 99% of pufas are not good, except potentially a small amount linoleic acid, which all Peaters still get some of

Let me remind you and everyone what you have said:

id say a safe good amount would be between 3-6 grams, even up to a little more, but quality matters...freshness

I don't think I have ever read that Peat say PUFA's are "good" or "safe" or "needed" .

It's only you.

 

[pboy]

ok? cool. im completely ok with that

 

[jyb]

I don't think I have ever read that Peat say PUFA's are "good" or "safe" or "needed" .

Peat suggests some safety if small in comparison to sat fat. If you take into account factors like vit E, dietary sat fat, if you have a tendency to store fats or burn them etc, it's more nuanced than an absolute threshold of 4grams.

It isn't the quantity of these polyunsaturated oils which governs the harm they do, but the relationship between them and the saturated fats. Obesity, free radical production, the formation of age pigment, blood clotting, inflammation, immunity, and energy production are all responsive to the ratio of unsaturated fats to saturated fats, and the higher this ratio is, the greater the probability of harm there is.

 

[pboy]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997400/

this is just another random one, but it demonstrates the importance of ratio...less o6 increased cancer because the 3:6 ratio was almost even, but when they gave 3x amount the omega 6, it caused cancer cell apoptosis...this seems to be a common theme im coming across...which is why the public info about needing 1:1 ratio is terrible advice, even cancer promoting advice...and they all say never have omega 6's, they are all pro inflammatory...but its not true

i think Peats protocol is exactly right, because it is mostly heavy in saturated fat, which protects metabolically against any oxidation of the pufa. And theres no long chain EPA or DHA, which are terrible to eat in food, and he says to avoid any industrial seed oil or anything that uses it in their recipe. Im thinking whole milk, with its good fat ratio, the body might be able to utilize that linoleic for immune purposes. I guess theres no way to tell for sure

 

[SAFarmer]

I don't think I have ever read that Peat say PUFA's are "good" or "safe" or "needed" .

Peat suggests some safety if small in comparison to sat fat. If you take into account factors like vit E, dietary sat fat, if you have a tendency to store fats or burn them etc, it's more nuanced than an absolute threshold of 4grams.

It isn't the quantity of these polyunsaturated oils which governs the harm they do, but the relationship between them and the saturated fats. Obesity, free radical production, the formation of age pigment, blood clotting, inflammation, immunity, and energy production are all responsive to the ratio of unsaturated fats to saturated fats, and the higher this ratio is, the greater the probability of harm there is.

Peat does not suggest PUFA's are safe at all. He only thinks if you do eat it in little amounts, and it's very difficult not to eat any, that you should eat enough sat fat and vit E with it, to balance the negatives of the PUFA's. Some people here now interpret it to mean PUFA's are "safe" and "good" and "essential" !

 

[pboy]

this guys about to send me to the gallows as a blasphemer...take it or leave it man, im not promoting PUFA, im just getting into the details for the fun of it, and so I can prove to people in real life they shouldn't be taking flax or fish oil or anything, and if anything omega6 is the better one

 

[BingDing]

Peat suggests some safety if small in comparison to sat fat. If you take into account factors like vit E, dietary sat fat, if you have a tendency to store fats or burn them etc, it's more nuanced than an absolute threshold of 4grams.

It isn't the quantity of these polyunsaturated oils which governs the harm they do, but the relationship between them and the saturated fats. Obesity, free radical production, the formation of age pigment, blood clotting, inflammation, immunity, and energy production are all responsive to the ratio of unsaturated fats to saturated fats, and the higher this ratio is, the greater the probability of harm there is.

So using your quote from RP, if one eats the 6g/day of PUFA that pboy thinks is good, the ratio of PUFAs to UFAs increases and there is "a greater probability of harm". Sorry, but where is the nuance in that?

I think people have tried to discuss this with pboy in a decent manner. He is free to think whatever he wants about fresh PUFAs. But I think it is dishonest to pretend that his thinking is anything but contrary to what RP has written. And I also think it's a pretty strange thread on the RP forum, no matter how much fun pboy is having or how cool he is about being thought an idiot; people new to RP browse these threads every day and would almost certainly form a mistaken idea about RP from pboy's posts.