Letter: More objective look at Omega-3


To the editor of THE EAGLE:

Nicole Ostrow’s March 31 article "Do foods rich in Omega-3s really benefit your heart?" makes it sound like, why waste your time taking fish oil? This appears anyway to be her analysis of the study recently released from the Archives of Internal Medicine. So I looked at another review of this article by the New York Times and it says this:

* Research did not find that people who ate higher levels of saturated fat had more heart disease that those who ate less.

* They found that transfats do have a link to heart disease.

* Margaric acid, a saturated fat in milk and dairy products, was associated with lower cardiovascular risk.

* The polyunsaturated fats found in fish were also protective.

* Omega 6 fats commonly found in vegetable oils and processed foods, may pose risks.

* When asked why fish oil supplements didn’t produce cardiovascular benefits, lead author Dr. Chowdhury said "the supplement trials mostly involved people who had pre-existing heart disease or were at high risk of developing it. So it’s possible that the benefits of Omega-3s fatty acids lie in preventing heart disease rather than treating or reversing it."

You can’t eat a crummy diet and expect one or two capsules of Omega-3 pills from a department store chain is going to have any effect. Authors such as Barry Sears, Michael Pollan and David Perlmutter, M.D. all talk about balancing your Omega-6 /3 ratio as an indicator of how inflamed someone is. Inflammation is the cause of chronic degenerative disease.

Take a high quality liquid fish oil, reduce your consumption of Omega-6 oils and get your ratio checked once or twice a year and you are on your way to better health.




If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.

Powered by Creative Circle Media Solutions