omega 3 fish oil capsules

hello



anyone take these?

im starting 1000mg a day i think, am i right in saying that these capsules are 'good fats' to have? because on the pack it says for healthy bones and joints etc.

on a cut at the moment so taking 1 capsule a day be enough for my good fats?

sometimes have salmon to eat though

Here is a good read on EFAs:

http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/article-essential-fatty-acids.aspx

It's not necessary to supplement fats to be healthy, even on a cut it's very unlikely that you will be deficient in fats.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

Shame we don't have a supplements or diet forum for these.

I have anywhere from none to 10,000mg a day

www.fingerpistol.co.uk

yes i struggled into which category i should put this in. Would you say though that 1000mg a day of omega 3 is enough on a cut

i know that the body needs good fats, put i dont want too much by having a 1000mg of omega 3 capsule and 1 tbsp of p.butter

You can have a supp if you think you are likely to be deficient in these oils,
given the low amount of fish consumption for the average Brit, many people are borderline or deficient.

If you do supplement remember to get capsules that are from fish body oil not liver oil - to avoid any potential contaminants.

NOW OPEN:
Muscle Factory Lancaster
Lancaster's only Gym for serious trainers
Les Willis: Nutrition Consultant, Healthy Action.
31st March 2012 @ 2:30 Andy Bolton Seminar.

jimmy2404


yes i struggled into which category i should put this in. Would you say though that 1000mg a day of omega 3 is enough on a cut

i know that the body needs good fats, put i dont want too much by having a 1000mg of omega 3 capsule and 1 tbsp of p.butter

1000mg = 1g = 9 cals so don't stress over it!

I usually take between 5g-10g a day plus flax powder.

hamiltonsfitness
It's not necessary to supplement fats to be healthy, even on a cut it's very unlikely that you will be deficient in fats.

Are you going to be a fat-dodger all your life, Stu?

Please learn about small LDL. Ignorance is bliss. Until a potential one third of the population gets CHD. See http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/disastrous-results-of-low-fat-diet.html
We don't have NMR lipoprotein testing in the UK. There are hardly any EBCT CAC heart scanners in the UK either.

To jimmy, please see http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/fb.ashx?m=2698563

Cheers, Nige.

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

You can have a supp if you think you are likely to be deficient in these oils,
given the low amount of fish consumption for the average Brit, many people are borderline or deficient.

given the low amount of Persea for the average Brit , many people are borderline or deficent 

-

R3261

You can have a supp if you think you are likely to be deficient in these oils, given the low amount of fish consumption for the average Brit, many people are borderline or deficient.

given the low amount of Persea for the average Brit , many people are borderline or deficent 

What?

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

ever green tree

because somewhere else someone else is eating something else is not what a deficency is

-

Yes and no.

When you can look at a diet and say "they eat a lot more burgers and chips than they do fresh fish compared to 30 years ago" you can formulate which direction a group of people are heading.

Udos Choice | MWC Comp Journal

Are you going to be a fat-dodger all your life, Stu? Please learn about small LDL. Ignorance is bliss. Until a potential one third of the population gets CHD. See http://heartscanblog.bl...lts-of-low-fat-diet.html We don't have NMR lipoprotein testing in the UK. There are hardly any EBCT CAC heart scanners in the UK either.

I don't see the point of supplementing something that you are not deficient in. It is almost impossible to be deficient in fats however low you can get them.

This is also another example of bad science. If you find a population that is deficient in the ability to absorb a particular nutrient then find a symptom that they also have it does not prove a causal relationship.

Also, if you do find a causal relationship between deficiency and that symptom and prove that supplementation removes that symptom, it doesn't mean that supplementing that nutrient in a normal population will have any benificial effect.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

Yes and no.

When you can look at a diet and say "they eat a lot more burgers and chips than they do fresh fish compared to 30 years ago" you can formulate which direction a group of people are heading.

that is not what a deficiency is

-

A deficiency in medical terms is when you have so little of a nutrient in your diet that you have a specific negative medical effect. This IMO negates the massive spread of nutrient intakes that can have other positive effects, but are ignored. Vitamin deficiencies are a great example of this.

My point was in support of Les as he made a valid point - as a population our oily fish intake isn't exactly great. If your is worse then it's likely that you could do well to increase it.

Bearing in mind of course that if your seed oil intake is sorted, then fish oil intake is irrelevant

Stuart - the point is as per my first paragraph. Deficiency as a definition ignores levels where you thrive. If you go about life just staying away from being deficient in all your nutrients, you aren't going to have a great life. It leaves no margin for error, and no option for additional benefits.

Udos Choice | MWC Comp Journal

Deficiency as a definition ignores levels where you thrive. If you go about life just staying away from being deficient in all your nutrients, you aren't going to have a great life. It leaves no margin for error, and no option for additional benefits.

But if your experimental proof of efficacy is based on cases of deficiency being resolved with supplementation then that in itself is not proof that supplementing will be beneficial to a normal population, which is the point I was making.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

Are you going to be a fat-dodger all your life, Stu? Please learn about small LDL. Ignorance is bliss. Until a potential one third of the population gets CHD. See http://heartscanblog.bl...lts-of-low-fat-diet.html We don't have NMR lipoprotein testing in the UK. There are hardly any EBCT CAC heart scanners in the UK either.

I don't see the point of supplementing something that you are not deficient in. It is almost impossible to be deficient in fats however low you can get them.

This is also another example of bad science. If you find a population that is deficient in the ability to absorb a particular nutrient then find a symptom that they also have it does not prove a causal relationship.

Also, if you do find a causal relationship between deficiency and that symptom and prove that supplementation removes that symptom, it doesn't mean that supplementing that nutrient in a normal population will have any benificial effect.

Define "deficiency".
I strongly disagree (obviously!).

So Stu, do you know how much of your LDL is small LDL? Do you know what your CAC agatston score is? If your answer is "no" and "no", you have no idea whether you're one of the lucky 2 out of 3 or one of the unlucky 1 out of 3. Good luck with that. I have a pretty good idea (from blood tests) what group I'm in (the unlucky group that produces small LDL on high-carb, low-fat diets). Forearmed is forewarned.

If the only symptom of insufficient omega-3 intake was dropping dead from a heart attack, that alone would be reason enough to ensure a higher omega-3 intake. However, I've provided evidence before, showing that there are other benefits to higher omega-3 intakes. We've been down this road before and I'm not going down it again.

If GPs, cardiologists, nephrologists, pharmacists, biochemists, molecular biologists etc are banging on about the benefits of increased omega-3 intake (ditto for Vit D3), when are you going to take the hint?

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

Big Les

If you do supplement remember to get capsules that are from fish body oil not liver oil - to avoid any potential contaminants.

Does this refer to cod liver oil also?

I drink it straight from the bottle. An acquired taste I know, but I've found that some capsules  contain (absurdly in a supposed health product) hydrogenated fats.

So Stu, do you know how much of your LDL is small LDL? Do you know what your CAC agatston score is? If your answer is "no" and "no", you have no idea whether you're one of the lucky 2 out of 3 or one of the unlucky 1 out of 3. Good luck with that. I have a pretty good idea (from blood tests) what group I'm in (the unlucky group that produces small LDL on high-carb, low-fat diets). Forearmed is forewarned. If the only symptom of insufficient omega-3 intake was dropping dead from a heart attack, that alone would be reason enough to ensure a higher omega-3 intake. However, I've provided evidence before, showing that there are other benefits to higher omega-3 intakes. We've been down this road before and I'm not going down it again. If GPs, cardiologists, nephrologists, pharmacists, biochemists, molecular biologists etc are banging on about the benefits of increased omega-3 intake (ditto for Vit D3), when are you going to take the hint?

Yes, we have been here before and you have still not learned anything by the sound of it. Yes, you appear to have specific medical problems but don't be a evangelist and try to make everyone else take your cure. This is a bodybuilding forum, not a Nigel forum. Come back when you have some experience of bodybuilding.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

Stu, what part of "1 in 3 people are at a high risk of CHD on a high-carb, low-fat diet" did you not understand? This has nothing to do with bodybuilding, or me. It's genetics.

You say that I have not learned anything. Pot, kettle, black comes to mind. May I respectfully suggest that you come back when you have some more experience of how the human body works.

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

Stu, this book is a little old (1999) but worth a read as it has detailed info on the type of lipoproteins.

The Heart Disease Breakthrough by Thomas Yannios

James Collier
MT Co-Owner & Event Promoter
Like us on Facebook:

1 in 3 people are at a high risk of CHD on a high-carb, low-fat diet

My first reaction to your statement is bo**ocks.

This is just not true, however the fish oil merchants want to spin it.

The overwhelming evidence is that people who eat a low fat high starchy carb diet live longer than any other population group.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

There is a study by Darlene Dreon et al. See The disastrous results of a low-fat diet and read the comments section, where I posted a link to it requesting further information from Dr Davis.

EDIT: "The regression predicts that with a diet with 10% of energy as fat, approximately two-thirds of men would express phenotype B." Thats even worse than I previously thought.

Let's see your overwhelming evidence then. I hope it's not epidemiological data.

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

James


Stu, this book is a little old (1999) but worth a read as it has detailed info on the type of lipoproteins.

The Heart Disease Breakthrough by Thomas Yannios

And a very good book it is too :)

Stop trying to score points off each other here - neither of you is going to be swayed by the other - so what is the point of this tete-a-tete?

NOW OPEN:
Muscle Factory Lancaster
Lancaster's only Gym for serious trainers
Les Willis: Nutrition Consultant, Healthy Action.
31st March 2012 @ 2:30 Andy Bolton Seminar.

I'm trying to make the point that:

a) Omega-3 supplementation is beneficial to many people.
b) A high-carb, low-fat diet is not suitable for everyone.

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

Studies have been done to show the supplementing cod liver oil or flax into a diet can actually reduce body fat and improve strength, Arnie also used to reccomend this. Theres alot of research on it on the web.
 
I take 5 a day place 2 flax seed oil and have found this causes no ill effect what so ever.  Also, whilst you shouldnt be eating bad fats good fats are essential to  a healthy diet even on a cutting cycle.  (but should be kept low)

Yawn, i'm off to have a life.

stuart hamilton
Hamiltons Fitness
Colchester, UK
www.HamiltonsFitness.co.uk  Gym
www.HamiltonsTraining.co.uk  PT courses

Hi Stuart
 
On an unrelated subject, but one a guy of your experience has probably got a knowledge of, can you help me out please, got a post here.  On a cdk diet, had food poisoning and just not sure how to continue with the plan, your thoughts would be appreciated
 
http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/CDK-DIET-had-food-poisoning-what-do-i-do-m3682733.aspx
 
thanks
Dan

Oh, what a surprise! I ask Stu to provide some overwhelming evidence to support his opinion and I get....

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

Udos Choice | MWC Comp Journal

Hi Tony. It's good to be back to my old (sarky?) self!

Stu's argument from authority (I have big muscles and low bodyfat therefore I must know what I'm talking about) is becoming tedious. I don't think that I'm being unreasonable in asking for him to provide some decent (non-epidemiological) evidence to back up his opinion. I wonder if we'll ever get any?

1) DON'T PANIC! 2) Assumption is the mother of all cock-ups. 3) Where's the omega-3 fat?
Blog

Tony Barnes


A deficiency in medical terms is when you have so little of a nutrient in your diet that you have a specific negative medical effect.

and for Omega 3 the observed clinical symptoms are hemorhragic dermatitis, hemorrhagic folliculitis, scaly dermtitis and skin atrophy. of which you'll have a hard time finding evidence evidence for a deficiency in a fraction of any population let alone most Brits

My point was in support of Les as he made a valid point - as a population our oily fish intake isn't exactly great. If your is worse then it's likely that you could do well to increase it.

x popultation does more exercise. y population eats avacoda. z population drinks a glass of wine with their meals...

Stuart - the point is as per my first paragraph. Deficiency as a definition ignores levels where you thrive. If you go about life just staying away from being deficient in all your nutrients, you aren't going to have a great life. It leaves no margin for error, and no option for additional benefits.

but we have no idea what levels are optimal

life is one massive risk, of which w3s are not the greatest. it could be more DHA. or it could be not too much. or it could be more seed oils. it's not a bad idea to have your bases covered. but we just don't know yet, either way.

-

The overwhelming evidence is that people who eat a low fat high starchy carb diet live longer than any other population group.

really?

-

lol, yes, good to see you back Nige!

but we have no idea what levels are optimal 

From a couple of decades of trial and error, 15ml per 25kg bodyweight of Udos is an amount where most people get the best response, so this is a marker for an optimal intake.


I'm first to admit this needs money throwing at it for decent research, the issues are where to start; what benefit will come out of it (i.e. could we even use the results?); etc. There is some sports related stuff coming down the line which should hopefully answer some people's questions, but I can guarantee that no matter what the results, nor what the methods, there will always be a "but you didn't do x, and you never covered y" - etc. That level of detail comes from huge levels of research - which is typically reserved for things you can patent.


That does leave us with a bundle of observational stuff, which you can obviously take however you like.

Udos Choice | MWC Comp Journal