Showing posts with label Omega 3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Omega 3. Show all posts

Monday, 8 January 2018

“the greatest dietary transformation in the history of Homo sapiens."

HEALTH

Food Science Is Caught Between the Head and the Heart

"Heart-healthy" foods could be bad for the brain, new research suggests. What's a careful eater to do?
3
Isn't it beautiful?
 
Photographer: Matt Cardy/Getty Images
A few weeks ago, a scientific claim linking canola oil to Alzheimer’s disease risk raised an intriguing question: When it comes to healthy eating, do we have to choose between the head and the heart? In other words, is it possible that foods promoted as good for cardiovascular health, such as canola oil, are bad for the brain?
There’s surprisingly little information out there on what to eat for brain health. The vast majority of nutrition research is aimed at the heart. Why wouldn’t scientists want to focus on maintaining the seat of consciousness, memory, creativity, love, learning and joy, as opposed to a glorified pump?
Sure, hearth disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. But disorders of the brain may cause more suffering, and the numbers are growing. According to a new report, more than 6 million Americans currently live with Alzheimer’s disease, and by 2060, that will rise to 15 million. Given the choice, I’d much rather live with a faltering heart and a mint-condition brain than the other way around.
Since many of us are starved for information on brain health, it’s not surprising that news outlets played up the scare factor on the canola oil study, even though the deleterious effect was found in mice and therefore may not apply to humans.
The researchers, from Temple University in Philadelphia, conducted two studies, the first using olive oil and the second, canola, which is found in many processed and pre-prepared foods. They used special mice with a genetic predisposition to develop Alzheimer’s disease, and gave one group a few drops of olive oil each day. The mice given olive oil did slightly better on memory tests, and, upon dissection, had fewer plaques in their brains than did those fed a standard mouse diet.
When they tried the same experiment with canola oil, they found the mice getting the extra oil did worse on memory tests and had built up more brain plaques. The results may not be sufficient to make anyone give up canola oil, but they do make an important point -- food affects the brain.
Some media critics, such as Mary Chris Jaklevic at Health News Review, chastised reporters for not putting this single study into context. But what context? Not that many scientists specialize in diet and the brain, and when I sought them out, people kept pointing me back toward someone I’d interviewed in 2011 -- Joseph Hibbeln, a biochemist and psychiatrist working at the National Institutes of Health.
His research has focused on a potential positive influence of one kind of fat -- omega-3 fatty acids, which are found in seafood and some plants. He’s led studies that suggested a connection between low intake of omega-3s and a host of ills, such as suicideviolenceand obesity. Drew Ramsey, a clinical psychiatrist specializing on nutrition, also notes that some controlled clinical trials have suggested omega-3 fatty acids improve symptoms of depression.
That’s the uncontroversial part, since omega-3 fatty acids are approved by the American Heart Association as part of the family known as polyunsaturated fats. Where it gets tricky is in the biochemistry, because, as Hibbeln explains, there’s a chemical competition between omega-3s and another kind of allegedly heart-healthy polyunsaturated fat: omega-6, which is found in cottonseed, sunflower, safflower and corn oils, as well as corn- and soy-fed factory-farmed poultry. (Canola and olive oil are in a different category called monounsaturated fats.)
The problem with omega-6 fatty acids, Hibbeln says, is that the more you eat, the lower the level of omega-3 fats in your bloodstream given the same omega-3 intake. This happens because both kinds of fat compete for an enzyme that converts them to a form the body can use. So if you care about eating to keep your brain healthy, evidence would suggest keeping your omega-3 levels high, and that would mean not foiling your effort by ingesting omega-6 fats.
The ratio of omega-6 fats to omega-3s has changed drastically over the last 75 years, as omega-6 fats went from about 1 percent to 10 percent of the human diet, and blood levels of omega-3 have plummeted. In the story I wrote in 2011 about Hibbeln’s work, he called it “the greatest dietary transformation in the history of Homo sapiens."
Whether omega-6 fats are heart-healthy depends on who you talk to. The American Heart Association’s recommendations continue to promote all polyunsaturated fats as healthy, and to demonize saturated fats -- the kind found in butter and other full-fat dairy products. There was one very large, controlled clinical trial comparing the effects of a typical diet to one in which most of the saturated fat was switched out for omega-6 rich corn oil. A re-analysis published last year concluded that people getting the corn oil had lower cholesterol numbers but were more likely to die.
Saturated fat is neutral in the tug of war between the omega-6 and omega-3 fats. There’s a body of studies suggesting that saturated fats are bad for the heart -- but much of this was done in rabbits. The human studies -- both observational and clinical -- have recently been called into question and continue to generate controversy.
What’s a health-conscious person to eat when the science is in such a state of disarray? The only fats that seem to be uncontroversial are omega-3 fats and olive oil. Canola oil is chemically similar to olive oil, but these new studies suggest they’re not interchangeable. As Hibbeln told me, the brain makes up 2 percent of the body by weight and uses up 25 percent of the energy we consume. Focusing more research on how to feed it seems like a no-brainer.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Tuesday, 5 December 2017

vegetable oils - skin cancer link

Pretty much everyone can agree sugar is bad. But, vegetable oils are really atrocious as well and don't get nearly the bad press they deserve!
Everyone says sugar feeds cancer. How about the highly inflammatory omega 6 fats?
Skin cancer? Don't fear the sun! Fear the nasty fats!
LikeShow more reactions
Comment
Comments
Amy Van Oostendehttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01635588709513930
(1987). Melanoma and dietary lipids. Nutrition and Cancer: Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 219-226.
TANDFONLINE.COM
LikeShow more reactions
Reply23 hrs
Remove
Amy Van Oostende Hurts your eyes, too!!

http://davidgillespie.org/stop-it-or-youll-go-blind/
Sharing is caring ...22400Macular degeneration is the primary cause of blindness in Australia today. And…
DAVIDGILLESPIE.ORG
LikeShow more reactions
Reply23 hrs
Remove
Amy Van Oostende http://yelling-stop.blogspot.com/.../linoleic-acid-and...
(A.S. Linoleic acid is an omega-6 fatty acid found in vegetable oils like soybean or corn. It is also found in animal fats, but in much sm...
YELLING-STOP.BLOGSPOT.COM

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

Cornell study finds some people may be genetically programmed to be vegetarians

Cornell study finds some people may be genetically programmed to be vegetarians.

Cornell University researchers have found a fascinating genetic variation that they said appears to have evolved in populations that favored vegetarian diets over hundreds of generations. The geography of the vegetarian allele is vast and includes people from India, Africa and parts of East Asia who are known to have green diets even today.

Researcher Kaixiong Ye said that the vegetarian adaptation allows people to “efficiently process omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids and convert them into compounds essential for early brain development.”

Omega-3 is found in fish, whole grains, olive oil, fruits and vegetables, while omega-6 is found in beef, pork products and many packaged snack foods such as cookies, candies, cakes and chips, as well as in nuts and vegetable oils.

Nutritionists believe that getting a good balance of these two types of fatty acids in the diet is essential to staying healthy. The body can’t produce these substances naturally, so it must get them from food.

Omega-3 is anti-inflammatory and helps regulate metabolism.

Omega-6 contributes to inflammation and plays an important role in skin and hair growth, bone health and reproductive health. Inflammatory responses are essential to our survival. They help fight off infections and protect us from injury. But if the response is excessive, it can lead to all kinds of problems and may contribute to a higher risk of heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's disease.

Studies have suggested that humans evolved on a diet with a ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 essential fatty acids of 1:1 but that the Western diet has a ratio that is closer to 15 or 16:1. The Mediterranean diet, in contrast, is closer to having an equal balance of the two and is recommended by many doctors.

But this new study, funded by the National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, shows that different people may need radically different ratios of the substances in their diet depending on their genes, and it supports the growing evidence against a one-size-fits-all approach to nutrition and for highly personalized advice.

The existence of the vegetarian allele implies that, for people with this variation, straying from that diet — by eating a lot of red meat, for example — may make them more susceptible to inflammation, because their bodies were optimized for a different mix of inputs.

The research, published Wednesday in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution, involved two parts. The scientists first analyzed the frequencies of the vegetarian allele in 234 primarily vegetarian Indians and 311 Americans living today. They found the vegetarian allele in 68 percent of the Indians and 18 percent of the Americans. Then they analyzed information from the 1,000 Genomes Project — a database of global DNA — to calculate an estimate of the frequency of the vegetarian allele in far-flung populations around the world. The differences were striking: 70 percent of South Asians, 53 percent of Africans, 29 percent of East Asians and 17 percent of Europeans had the gene variation.

Now here's where their work gets even more interesting. Ye and colleagues found a different version of that gene adapted to a marine diet, rich in seafood, among the Inuit people in Greenland. Technically speaking, it’s the “opposite” of the vegetarian allele. The vegetarian allele has an insertion of 22 “bases,” or a building block of DNA, and this insertion was deleted in the marine allele.

Ye, who is the lead co-author along with Kumar Kothapalli, a senior research associate in nutritional sciences, theorized that having the vegetarian allele “might have been detrimental” for the Inuit because of their seafood-rich diets.

The vegetarian and marine alleles appear to control the FADS1 and FADS2 enzymes in the body, which are critical to converting omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids into what the researchers called “downstream products” needed for brain development and controlling inflammation. People who eat meat and seafood need less of the FADS1 and FADS2 enzymes to get sufficient nutrition. “Their omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acid conversion process is simpler and requires fewer steps,” they noted.

Another groundbreaking study about genes and food was published in 2014 in Nature Communications. It found that a higher percentage of people in Europe — and particularly in Ireland — have variants for being lactose-tolerant, or able to break down the sugar in non-human milk.

The authors said this ability appears to have evolved from a long history of milk drinking.

Ye explained that people with this kind of gene “absorbed enough end products from milk for long-chain fatty acid metabolism so they don't have to increase capacity to synthesize those fatty acids from precursors.”

There has been considerable debate and research on when — and why — these types of variants cropped up.

In the case of lactose tolerance, early research had estimated that it arose 7,000 or more years ago, when people in the region began making cheese. But the Nature study wasn't able to find it until 3,000 years back, which may imply that the populations had to rely heavily on dairy before the adaptation occurred.

Ye said the evolution of the vegetarian allele is less clear. It doesn't exist in our ape relatives the chimpanzee or orangutan, but there is some evidence it may have been there in early hominids Neanderthal and Denisovan. It seems likely, the researchers wrote, that it has to do with migration patterns and the pressures that came with the availability or lack of availability of different kinds of foods in certain environments.

Today, in a world where many people have ready access to a wide variety of foods at their local groceries, the adaptations can act more as limitations to the kinds of foods you can eat to remain healthy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/03/30/cornell-study-finds-some-people-may-be-genetically-programmed-to-be-vegetarians/?utm_term=.3703a5b6fec0

***

This indicates that it was risky for vegetarian Indians to change their diets to a highly non-vegetarian diet.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Vijayawada/evolutionary-advantage-is-lost-with-diet-change-study/article8412156.ece

***

Original paper

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/33/7/1726/2578764/Positive-Selection-on-a-Regulatory-Insertion