are all omega-3 fish oil more or less the same?

[kenny1999]

Different brands, different packaging, different marketing terms, different prices, but are they more or less the same?

[exchemist]

19 minutes ago, kenny1999 said:

Different brands, different packaging, different marketing terms, different prices, but are they more or less the same?

As far as I know there are 3 omega3 fatty acids, ALA, EPA and DHA. The latter 2 are found in oily fish. (ALA is only found in plant products such as nuts.)

I suppose it is possible the ratio of EPA to DHA may differ in different supplements. But the evidence these supplements help seems a bit weak. What does work is eating oily fish. Why there might be a difference in efficacy I don’t know. Possibly to do with the uptake process during digestion - but I’m speculating.

[Peterkin]

You can always read the teeny-tiny print on the side of the jar.

The otc supplements are not strictly regulated as to sourcing and dosage; if you actually need it for an existing condition, get a doctor to prescribe the superior kind.

In general, the best sources are supposed to be a variety of wild-caught fish: mackerel, tuna, anchovy, herring and cod. Salmon is the best known, but it's also the most intensively farmed fish, and there are several issues with fish farming . You can also find vegetarian sources, like walnuts, algae and flax seed.

If you're taking vitamin A supplements, be careful of your dosage.

[kenny1999]

5 hours ago, Peterkin said:

You can always read the teeny-tiny print on the side of the jar.

The otc supplements are not strictly regulated as to sourcing and dosage; if you actually need it for an existing condition, get a doctor to prescribe the superior kind.

In general, the best sources are supposed to be a variety of wild-caught fish: mackerel, tuna, anchovy, herring and cod. Salmon is the best known, but it's also the most intensively farmed fish, and there are several issues with fish farming . You can also find vegetarian sources, like walnuts, algae and flax seed.

If you're taking vitamin A supplements, be careful of your dosage.

Wouldn't it be better to take fish oil tablets rather than wild-caught fish because many are advertised to have heavy metal removed or purified while wild-caught fish may contain some heavy metals.

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, kenny1999 said:

Wouldn't it be better to take fish oil tablets rather than wild-caught fish because many are advertised to have heavy metal removed or purified while wild-caught fish may contain some heavy metals.

Well, they're usually capsules, rather than tablets. But the contents are simply listed as 'salmon oil' or 'fish oil' and sometimes 'wild salmon oil'. I can think of only one reason why farmed fish wouldn't contain the same metals and other water contaminants as wild ones: the farm is in a no-outflow area. You have no way of knowing where the ones in you supplement were grown. A small advantage of the wild ones is that they have a fairly wide range and might have less exposure. 

The safest option is to devise a balanced, healthy diet and not depend on supplements. (Cheapest, too!) The second safest optiopnn is to buy the vegetable-based supplement. For the ecology --- who knows? 

[Moontanman]

I take krill oil, not sure if it's any better but it's a pretty shade of red. 

[guidoLamoto]

On 10/16/2023 at 11:44 AM, exchemist said:

As far as I know there are 3 omega3 fatty acids, ALA, EPA and DHA. The latter 2 are found in oily fish. (ALA is only found in plant products such as nuts.)

I suppose it is possible the ratio of EPA to DHA may differ in different supplements. But the evidence these supplements help seems a bit weak. What does work is eating oily fish. Why there might be a difference in efficacy I don’t know. Possibly to do with the uptake process during digestion - but I’m speculating.

ALA is found in meat, particularly beef. Beef also contains high amounts of cardiolipin-- another cardioprotective agent and the subject of several studies showing its beneficial effects in treating acute MI.

In regards fish oil and the cholesterol  problem in general-- a grossly over-stated problem exploited for the financial benefits of thpse emphasizing it. If you review the data & stats on the benfits of fish oil and the risks of  trans-fats, it's a pretty flimsy argument....The risk cholesterol poses on CAD is about as strong as the risks imposed by  serum Fe levels. How come nobody is recommending periodic phlebotomy to combat CAD?

If you want to signifcantly improve your cardiovascular status, don't smoke, exercise regularly and chose your parents wisely. Nothing else helps much.

[exchemist]

16 minutes ago, guidoLamoto said:

ALA is found in meat, particularly beef. Beef also contains high amounts of cardiolipin-- another cardioprotective agent and the subject of several studies showing its beneficial effects in treating acute MI.

In regards fish oil and the cholesterol  problem in general-- a grossly over-stated problem exploited for the financial benefits of thpse emphasizing it. If you review the data & stats on the benfits of fish oil and the risks of  trans-fats, it's a pretty flimsy argument....The risk cholesterol poses on CAD is about as strong as the risks imposed by  serum Fe levels. How come nobody is recommending periodic phlebotomy to combat CAD?

If you want to signifcantly improve your cardiovascular status, don't smoke, exercise regularly and chose your parents wisely. Nothing else helps much.

Yes it seems the fat of grass-fed animals contains some ALA. 

[guidoLamoto]

ALA, being an omaga-3 fatty acid, would be found in the fat portion. It's actually found in quite high concentration in the organ meats of beef in particular. The stats show that the ratio of omega3- to omega-6 FAs are more significantgly associated with cardiac status than the actual amounts, but, as with all these so called "risk factors" and various measures of lipid levels, statistical significance does not translate very strongly to clinical significance. Cf- Baseline risk of a cardiac event is 4/1000 per annum. Those with DM  have a risk increased to 16/100/yr, strong family hx of early MI ~15/1000/yr, and HTN also ~12/1000/yr (and treating it doesn't lower the risk). Chol >200mg% increases risk to 8/1000/yr-- twice the risk of "normal" chol (!!!)--but that means 992 /1000 DON'T have an Mi each year, compared to 996/1000-- big deal....Takng statins as primary prevention has not been convincingly proven to lower MI rates, while 45 pts with an acute MI need to take statins for five yrs to prevent just one repeat MI--big deal- an improvment of only 2% in absolute risk (35% in relative risk). (And no-- statistically speaking YOU are NEVER "the one" who is helped."-- a risk probabliity is a 2-D element-- an area under the curve; an individual is a 0-dimensional element.) Given the side effect profile of statins is in the 10% range, the risk/benefit ratio doesn't seem to be there, unless we include the legal risk/benefit ratio for the prescribing doctors.

In regards O-3- & O-6-FAs and beef: in the lab, grass finished beef (all beef is grass-fed unitl it gets to the feedlot) has a statistically significant increased amount of O-3-FAs compared to feedlot-finsihed beef-- but again, don't conduse statistical significance with clinical significance....As tudy ~10y/a showed that cattle on a feedlot given only hay  and not feed for the final two weeks before slaughter (or "harvest" for the more delicate reader) is found to have the same biochem analysis as purely grass-finshed beef. ...I give up-- I don't know what that means either in regards best practices recommendations.