Pregnancy, Omega-3/DHA/Fish Oil, Child Development

Teestuff

New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2017
Messages
3
Hello,

Disclaimer: I discovered this forum a few years back, but was unable to comprehend it. However, I have been keeping my PUFA's intake minimal. Now my wife is pregnant and back again for advice!

I know I still have much reading to do in regards to RP, but because my wife is now pregnant, I want to know specifically if extra omega-3/DHA/fish oil should be supplemented (pre/during/while nursing). My wife generally eats 85% "mainstream healthy", definitely not RP-healthy (~low to moderate PUFA's intake), and hates it when I talk diet with her, but doesn't mind taking supps. I'm unsure about the PUFA's and the fetus's brain development requirement.

Also, while on this subject, when the baby is ~6mo old and eating solids, should we supplement him with the same thing as well, assuming his diet will be similar to that of his mom.

Any other general good RP advice for pregnancy and kids through all developmental stages would be highly appreciated. Links to RP articles, forum threads, etc.

FYI, I will choose a somewhat-broken baby over a mad wife due to over nagging about diet.

Thank you so much!
 

bk_

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
356
Here’s some good resources as a starting point:
Unsaturated Vegetable Oils: Toxic
The Nutri-Spec Letter - Volume 17, Number 5
The Great Fish Oil Experiment

Personally I tell my wife: avoid all PUFA including fish oils like the plague!!! Especially pregnant or breast feeding!

I don’t expect you or anyone else to listen or believe me or Ray Peat. Please do your own research. I have done a lot and I’m thoroughly convinced of the toxicity of adding more PUFA to the diet than we already get from consuming whole vegetables and meats (which can also be too high depending on the species and what it ate).

In a nutshell it boils down to basic chemistry: Fatty acid molecules with multiple double bonds are unstable and more reactive to oxidation (hence poly-unsaturated fat), whereas fatty acid molecules that are saturated have all the hydrogens atoms that the fatty acid can have bonded, thus the carbon to carbon bonds are single and much more stable (less reactive) to oxygen, both in a bottle and inside the cells or our bodies. Because PUFAs, especially fish oils, are unstable they break into toxic metabolites (especially during periods of stress) that damage cell function profoundly affecting metabolic health on numerous levels.

Sadly there is so much dogma in the realm of health that I’ve found there really is no way than to do your own research. Realize our institutions and authorities are amongst the last ones to admit to being wrong or making mistakes. Unfortunately it’s even harder for someone from a non scientific background to understand the research, the state of affairs in the scientific body, or how our institutions work and instead be swayed by junk science from the news or from an ill-informed medical practitioner.
 
Last edited:

somuch4food

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2018
Messages
1,281
I second the lower PUFA intake as being of foremost importance: http://davidgillespie.org/want-kids-with-allergies-and-asthma-feed-them-margarine/

I personally wouldn't ever supplement with fish oil or the likes. Vitamin E might be a better one to include to protect against her PUFA intake.

If you're worried about DHA, I would push for her to eat actual fish high in it a few times a month. There are actually evidence that those are useful to the brain while plant pufa aren't.
 

Rafe

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
737
@Teestuff Congrats!

I’d be alert to the pufas in baby formula when that comes up. After a quick search here is a pretty good introductory article that 1) acknowledges that AHA & DHA are not essential fatty acids, 2) has references, and 3) has a chart of the most available formulas & the types of fats & oils in them.

Best Baby Formula - Formula Fat - Baby Formula Expert

Notice what the author has to say about palmitic oleic acid and calcium uptake.
 

bk_

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
356
I second the opinion of convincing your wife to eat real fish or seafood (check that it’s low in mercury and contaminants) as an alternative to fish oil supplements if nothing else. Seafood at least has some protective vitamin E and is rich in minerals, warm water fish or seafood (as opposed to cold water salmon or cod) typically have lower PUFA content, and fish oil supplements are notoriously rancid in the bottle (already oxidized).
 

magnesiumania

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
607
Comments on this?

"
Blue light is a high color temperature light. High color temperature light changes the biochemistry of DHA. Today we understand that the light environment has a massive role on DHA biochemistry. Very few PhD’s realize how the physics of light changes the function of lipids. Ray Peat is an example. They are electromagnetic antenna of cell membranes.

We know there are many ideas from biochemists about DHA and most are dead wrong. Why? Think about a scientists like Feynman on this topic when made the best point every about theories and reality. In Nature we have the best result of experiment on DHA. DHA has been present for 600 million years in the eukaryotic tree and NEVER REPLACED EVEN ONCE. If this lipid is bad in anyway, as many PHD’s advocates, just by chance alone you'd expect something else to have been naturally selected for to replace it. Even though DHA has other competing PUFA's like DPA, that are easier to acquire and create on an energy basis, it remains unchallenged in eukaryotic cell membranes. This raises the question, why has nature specficially continued to use it exclusively even when experiments show it has an ugly side? Feynman's insight here bears repitition. When you realize that is nature's choice for this long, any theory that bastardizes DHA like Ray Peat's has on DHA, that “theory” has to explain this result in NATURE. Nothing Peat has proposed can explain it. No matter how many bad things he finds in lab experiment matters under the crucible of nature. The light in his lab is not equivalent to the sun and the light is never controlled for. Melanopsin biology requires this control. His ideas and theories are interesting to guys with myopia on how the physics of cells operates and many may find the experiments "good in theory", but fails under Feynman's test mentioned above. If nature uses it exclusively over 600 million years, we should not question its use, regardless if we have contrary proof from a lab experiment, that it might be a problem. This tells us that the experiments in some way are deeply flawed and we are missing the reason why. That is why I cannot in ANY way support Peat theories on DHA. Why do I echo Feynman's view point here? Life is lived in nature and not in a lab."
 

baccheion

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,113
DHA is needed from the last trimester until 2 years old to ensure proper brain, retina, etc development. Iodine as well. Avoiding PUFAs elsewhere makes it easier to meet such requirements with minimal issue. If there isn't a genetic mutation (FADS2), the body can make DHA from precursor PUFAs. On the other hand, directly supplementing could further reduce overall intake.

If the mother was 2 years away from pregnancy, I'd have mentioned following iodine protocol. It generally takes 2 years to properly prepare the body for pregnancy.

There are things like food sensitivity, nutrient, thyroid, hormone, genetic, etc panels that help provide perspective about the mother and lead dietary choices during preparation/gestation/nursing. The genetics of the child could even be hypothesized by combining results of the mother and father (and gender when available), which can further bias/direct choices. Weight loss to ensure body fat and inflammation aren't too high.

MSM lotion topically should minimize stretch marks and loose/sagging skin.

I'd also recommend a nutrient test (eg, NutrEval or manual selection from Quest/Geneva) to ensure there aren't any deficiencies. Vitamin D and magnesium are common and linked to many growing issues (eg, Autism).
 
Last edited:

lampofred

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
3,244
Comments on this?

"
Blue light is a high color temperature light. High color temperature light changes the biochemistry of DHA. Today we understand that the light environment has a massive role on DHA biochemistry. Very few PhD’s realize how the physics of light changes the function of lipids. Ray Peat is an example. They are electromagnetic antenna of cell membranes.

We know there are many ideas from biochemists about DHA and most are dead wrong. Why? Think about a scientists like Feynman on this topic when made the best point every about theories and reality. In Nature we have the best result of experiment on DHA. DHA has been present for 600 million years in the eukaryotic tree and NEVER REPLACED EVEN ONCE. If this lipid is bad in anyway, as many PHD’s advocates, just by chance alone you'd expect something else to have been naturally selected for to replace it. Even though DHA has other competing PUFA's like DPA, that are easier to acquire and create on an energy basis, it remains unchallenged in eukaryotic cell membranes. This raises the question, why has nature specficially continued to use it exclusively even when experiments show it has an ugly side? Feynman's insight here bears repitition. When you realize that is nature's choice for this long, any theory that bastardizes DHA like Ray Peat's has on DHA, that “theory” has to explain this result in NATURE. Nothing Peat has proposed can explain it. No matter how many bad things he finds in lab experiment matters under the crucible of nature. The light in his lab is not equivalent to the sun and the light is never controlled for. Melanopsin biology requires this control. His ideas and theories are interesting to guys with myopia on how the physics of cells operates and many may find the experiments "good in theory", but fails under Feynman's test mentioned above. If nature uses it exclusively over 600 million years, we should not question its use, regardless if we have contrary proof from a lab experiment, that it might be a problem. This tells us that the experiments in some way are deeply flawed and we are missing the reason why. That is why I cannot in ANY way support Peat theories on DHA. Why do I echo Feynman's view point here? Life is lived in nature and not in a lab."

"Since natural selection has not removed the presence of fish oil from the eukaryotic tree, it must be essential." I really don't think that is a scientific argument...
 

lampofred

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
3,244
DHA is needed at some point near the end of pregnancy for proper brain development. Iodine as well. Avoiding PUFAs elsewhere makes it easier to meet such requirements with minimal issue. If there isn't a genetic mutation, the body can make DHA from ALA. On the other hand, directly supplementing could further reduce overall intake of PUFAs.

RP has mentioned that people are falsely saying babies are "deficient" in O3 oil by comparing their brains to adult brains. But that brain tissue is only made up of whatever oils a person eats, and that the placenta actively tries to prevent unsaturated fat in the mother's bloodstream from getting incorporated into the child's brain. The latter fact proves that the body views O3 as a toxin and that O3 should not be supplemented for developing babies.
 

baccheion

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,113
RP has mentioned that people are falsely saying babies are "deficient" in O3 oil by comparing their brains to adult brains. But that brain tissue is only made up of whatever oils a person eats, and that the placenta actively tries to prevent unsaturated fat in the mother's bloodstream from getting incorporated into the child's brain. The latter fact proves that the body views O3 as a toxin and that O3 should not be supplemented for developing babies.
Brain levels of DHA are said to get close to adult levels within 2 years of birth.

DHA is said to be preferentially transferred from the mother to the child. The combination of DHA and iodine is said to be one of the main progressors of human advancement/evolution.

- A maternal erythrocyte DHA content of approximately 6 g% is the DHA status at which intrauterine DHA biomagnifications turns into bioattenuation and postnatal infant DHA equilibrium is reached

- Long chain fatty acids and dietary fats in fetal nutrition

- The Essentiality of Arachidonic Acid in Infant Development

- Maternal Docosahexaenoic Acid Intake Levels During Pregnancy and Infant Performance on a Novel Object Search Task at 22 Months

- Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation in pregnancy differentially modulates arachidonic acid and DHA status across FADS genotypes in pregnancy

- DHA Supplementation: Current Implications in Pregnancy and Childhood
 
Last edited:

lampofred

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
3,244
FYI, I will choose a somewhat-broken baby over a mad wife due to over nagging about diet.

Do you realize what you just said...? You're fine with poisoning your baby in order to avoid a few words from your wife...?
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1,790
Do you realize what you just said...? You're fine with poisoning your baby in order to avoid a few words from your wife...?
Lol. Might as well not even think about food or environment then. Give the mother soybean oil-fried french fries and iron-enriched wheat flour and make her sleep near the wifi router. Oh, and don't forget to eat plenty of chips and have some x-rays of the belly area every month of pregnancy to make sure the baby is fine.( sarcasm, obviously)

Any change in environment and habits is stressful, so even if your wife doesn't say anything, she'll be bothered by even small changes. Might as well make long-lasting changes so that you don't end up in that limbo where you're not doing things right enough, and at the same time, things are different enough to be uncomfortable.

If I were to have a child, I would do literally all I can to based on the knowledge that I have currently to make him/her as healthy as possible. I wouldn't want my child to live in a very urban area, for example, and I definitely wouldn't vaccinate or send them to school.
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2018
Messages
2,206
Yeah.if you think about it,Peat has so little evidence,he is almost out of his mind in that regard.
So much is known about (correctly low-dosed)PUFA-depletion from big ape-studies,so much Animal models,
He has only the Depleted but resilient-toxin-proofed 60ties-rat going for him.And i concede this Observation,these Fatty Acids
are highly problematic because they are so fragile.But you cant generalize from there on that your entire Human Shell gets bulletproofed via smart(?) PUFA avoidance.
 

Amazoniac

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
8,583
Location
Not Uganda
Kvothe said:
There are probably hundreds of publications talking about this supposed deficiency, and how mothers or infants need to be supplemented with DHA to prevent it. Most preterm infants are characterized as deficient since the small amount that is present in a newborn's brain is only incorporated into the brain during the end of the last trimester. It's a well known fact that, at birth, DHA concentration is very low, or deficient if you want, and then rapidly accrues during the first two years of life.

DHA Effects in Brain Development and Function
My question was: Please provide a source that babies are born “deficient in EPA / DHA”.

The source you gave says: “Its [DHA] accumulation in the fetal brain takes place mainly during the last trimester of pregnancy”.

Thus, babies are not born “deficient in DHA”.

And if you look at the plethora of data out there in both rodents and humans, having little to no omega 3 in the diet impairs fetal brain development, it never promotes it.
I think that he meant deficient, not devoid, and what's low or high will vary according to the standard in use. Based on the concentration in a gram of tissue, comparing a baby to an adult, there are indeed marked differences that could characterize the training object as deficient, and worse in case of premature birth for missing out the contamination phase, which was acknowledged by the guy.

The quoted part doesn't prove your point, it's just repeating what he mentioned: of the total amount that accumulates prior to birth, it occurs mostly during the last phase of pregnancy, could be dealing with trace or large quantities (rising by the end).

I had these links, they might interest you both:

- The relationship between age and the fatty acid composition of cerebral cortex and erythrocytes in human subjects
- Tissue levels acids during of polyunsaturated fatty early human development
- Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in the Developing Human Brain, Red Cells and Plasma: Influence of Nutrition and Peroxisomal Disease
- Role of omega-3 fatty acids in brain development and function: Potential implications for the pathogenesis andprevention of psychopathology
- The Essentiality of Arachidonic Acid in Infant Development
- An Assessment of Dietary Docosahexaenoic Acid Requirements for Brain Accretion and Turnover during Early Childhood
 

Amazoniac

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
8,583
Location
Not Uganda
It seems like a distration from the priority, which is to address the source of degradation. It's also common for it to shift the attention from lowering the consumption inflammatory oils to balancing them through others means.

upload_2020-7-25_19-46-7.png

Catch!
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom