Re: New mega-3 review study shows no anticancer benefit :-(
- From: "MMu" <brilhasti@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:20:38 +0100
"montygram" <nazztrader@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1138251353.944984.207710@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> No results for omega 3 supplementation are valid unless the person or
> animal is already overloaded with omega 6s to begin with. Such studies
> do not control for the possibility that Mead acid, an omega 9 PUFA that
> human cells can make on their own, is optimal.
Because it has been shown, repeatedly, that at the time mead acid is built
in the body (which only happens in case of w3/w6 deficiency) a lot of very
bad things start to happen.
> Note that even the omega 9 PUFA,
> Mead acid, can be dangerous if it were eaten in large amounts in the
> diet without enough antioxidants.
Tell me a single food that contains large ammounts of mead acid please.
And if there is none: why is that so?
If mead acid is so much better than w3 / w6 fatty acids there should have
been a selection against animals that consume w3 / w6 fatty acids towards
animals that build only their own mead acid during evolution.
This does not seem to be the case.
>The point is to let your body make
> it's own PUFA and don't eat more than trace amounts in the diet. Fats
> like coconut oil and butter have all kinds of beneficial effects, with
> no problematic qualities. The studies that show that "saturated fat"
> is bad usually use lard, which is indeed not healthy, but it is because
> it is about 60% unsaturated, and with no antioxidants, and thus causes
> free radical damage and molecular dysfunction (inhibiting enzymes,
> turning on the genetic machinery - NF-bK, etc.).
(its NF-kB; and the "genetic machinery" is hopefully *always* turned on..
otherwise we would be dead very soon- protein synthesis, cell cycle,
metabolism.. they all depend on the "genetic machinery")
The bad properties of saturated fats have, in contrast to your theory, not
ever been asociated with any kind of free radical damage- but if you have
literature that indicates otherwise please be kind enough to post a
citation.
.
- References:
- New mega-3 review study shows no anticancer benefit :-(
- From: Knack
- Re: New mega-3 review study shows no anticancer benefit :-(
- From: montygram
- New mega-3 review study shows no anticancer benefit :-(
- Prev by Date: Re: tonic water
- Next by Date: Re: Low Stimuli Effect?
- Previous by thread: Re: New mega-3 review study shows no anticancer benefit :-(
- Next by thread: Re: Low Stimuli Effect?
- Index(es):