Author Topic: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?  (Read 14116 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,996
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Michael

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2009, 06:30:46 am »
Peskin is talking nonsense For example japanese have been shown as having lower rates of CHD than in America:-

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7581-4C9R7K1-4Y&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1123579934&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=77f7741d3eeb33f7c0c4826a1403b811

Although, again, I haven't read Peskin's article it did strike me as peculiar that he should state (as quoted by PaleoPhil) that Japanese have higher rates of cancer and CHD than America?!  It sounds as though the article is up to the usual Nexus quality!!   ;)  I do vaguely recollect a discussion about the Japanese having higher rates of a particular form of cancer (was it stomach cancer?) possibly linked to their soya consumption (or similar) but that's not quite the same statement is it?!
1. When offered something that is too good to be true. It is.
2. Greed and fear are poor states of mind in which to make decisions; like shopping at the supermarket when you are hungry.
3. Exponential growth is mathematically unsustainable.

Offline Hannibal

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,261
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2009, 02:56:46 pm »
Although I consider Blue Ice as a healthy product, I think that consuming fresh wild raw fatty fish, such as mackarels, sardines, herrings or salmons is better.
Do you blame vultures for the carcass they eat?
Livin' off the raw grass fat of the land

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2009, 10:58:57 pm »
Although, again, I haven't read Peskin's article it did strike me as peculiar that he should state (as quoted by PaleoPhil) that Japanese have higher rates of cancer and CHD than America?!  It sounds as though the article is up to the usual Nexus quality!!   ;)  I do vaguely recollect a discussion about the Japanese having higher rates of a particular form of cancer (was it stomach cancer?) possibly linked to their soya consumption (or similar) but that's not quite the same statement is it?!
That was my vague basic recollection as well. When I saw that Mr. Peskin had a negative comment about whole fish but nonetheless recommended a whole fish product on his Website--not even fresh or raw but canned of all things!--I lost interest and can't be bothered to check his claims further.

Although I consider Blue Ice as a healthy product, I think that consuming fresh wild raw fatty fish, such as mackarels, sardines, herrings or salmons is better.
Sure, but the problem with that is that most wild fish that is sold in markets has the vitamin-D-rich liver and other organs removed, so that you would have to eat an enormous amount of fatty wild seafood to get the same level of vitamin D from CLO or sunlight.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline raw

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,062
  • country chickens and lambs and wild bugs
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2009, 11:49:51 pm »
That was my vague basic recollection as well. When I saw that Mr. Peskin had a negative comment about whole fish but nonetheless recommended a whole fish product on his Website--not even fresh or raw but canned of all things!--I lost interest and can't be bothered to check his claims further.
Sure, but the problem with that is that most wild fish that is sold in markets has the vitamin-D-rich liver and other organs removed, so that you would have to eat an enormous amount of fatty wild seafood to get the same level of vitamin D from CLO or sunlight.
i agree. but if you live in other country like GOODSAMARITAN, than you can find the fresh fish organ easily. same thing you can get to live in my country. those organs are very cheap. only poor buy them.
bugs or country chickens

Offline Hannibal

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,261
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2009, 03:50:00 pm »
Sure, but the problem with that is that most wild fish that is sold in markets has the vitamin-D-rich liver and other organs removed, so that you would have to eat an enormous amount of fatty wild seafood to get the same level of vitamin D from CLO or sunlight.
100 g of herring's flesh contains about 1600 IU of vitamin D, so it's quite good
It's not compulsory to eat vitamin-D-rich liver of the fish to get sufficient amount of vitamin D.
Besides I've got access to the whole fish, with every part inside it.
But it's better to eat small fish, as they're less contaminated
re sardines, for example -
"All sardines are very low in mercury, which is the biggest problem with much seafood. Generally speaking, the bigger the fish — the higher on the oceanic food chain — the more the mercury. Shark, tuna — and yes, salmon too — are all high in mercury. As befitting their name, sardines are small. About the lowest on the food chain, they are also among the fish lowest in mercury."
http://www.mendosa.com/blog/?p=344
Do you blame vultures for the carcass they eat?
Livin' off the raw grass fat of the land

Offline Michael

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2009, 01:43:31 am »
100 g of herring's flesh contains about 1600 IU of vitamin D, so it's quite good
It's not compulsory to eat vitamin-D-rich liver of the fish to get sufficient amount of vitamin D.

I didn't actually realise herring was quite so rich in Vitamin D.  I checked NutritionData and it confirmed 1628IU per 100g.  I wonder if their figures are for the whole fish though rather than just the flesh commonly eaten?  Irrespective, I don't think I could face eating 400g+ of herring everyday to satiate my Vitamin D needs.  I'd much rather take 5-10ml raw FCLO from Blue Ice with occasional herring.

I think the matter of mercury problems from eating fish is still in dispute in some quarters but I agree that the dangers are significantly decreased by eating fish lower on the food chain or with a shorter lifespan.

That was my vague basic recollection as well. When I saw that Mr. Peskin had a negative comment about whole fish but nonetheless recommended a whole fish product on his Website--not even fresh or raw but canned of all things!--I lost interest and can't be bothered to check his claims further.

Yes, that says it all doesn't it!   :)

1. When offered something that is too good to be true. It is.
2. Greed and fear are poor states of mind in which to make decisions; like shopping at the supermarket when you are hungry.
3. Exponential growth is mathematically unsustainable.

Offline majormark

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2009, 03:32:45 am »

Here is an answer from dr. Peskin on the whole fish issue:

" **tuna from this company and salmon from them is fine for animal-based PROTEIN. This is needed. I was referring to fish NOT being cancer protective – a very different issue.
** no one said it is cancer –causing – just NOT cancer-protecting."

So apparently it's like a neutral food, not really causing it and also not protecting either.

Note that he is not a believer in RAF, probably because he did not get to research it.


PS
And about the mercury issue: I remember Jerry Brunetti talking about how "as the fish get more mercury they start to consume more selenium" or something like that.
Are you familiar with this?
I will try to find the exact source when I have more time.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2009, 09:26:38 am »
Here is an answer from dr. Peskin on the whole fish issue:

" **tuna from this company and salmon from them is fine for animal-based PROTEIN. This is needed. I was referring to fish NOT being cancer protective – a very different issue.
** no one said it is cancer –causing – just NOT cancer-protecting."
That's fine, yet it would help if he explained the rest of the original quote (if he doesn't mind questions--I don't wish to irritate anyone): "Consuming whole fish instead of fish oil failed, too.13 That’s why the Japanese have greater cancer rates and greater heart disease rates than Americans."

What is the "why" that he's talking about that gives the Japanese "greater cancer rates and greater heart disease rates than Americans"? Is just fish oil? Does something in fish-oil-containing whole fish (such as herring), overcome the negative effects of fish oil to make whole fish healthy despite the cancer-causing fish oil? Or is fish oil only cancer-causing because its processed? That's somewhat plausible and would fit in with RPD. Does he think that fermented raw cod liver rich in vitamins A and D3, like what we use here is healthy--could the A and D3 in whole fish be what offsets the cancer-causing aspects of fish oil?

He may not be aware that most of us here do not appear to take straight fish oil. Majormark, do you think someone here is using straight fish oil that you are directing your warnings to? I haven't noticed anyone here saying they take straight, heated fish oil that doesn't contain A and D3--which is what his article seems to focus on--maybe I missed something? The only reports I've seen from people here are folks eating whole fish and/or taking fermented raw CLO. I think Lex might have taken straight fish oil in the past, but that was only because he was eating all or mostly grain-finished meats. We are probably very different from his usual audience, so that article may not apply to us.

Also, didn't Tyler or someone here point out in the past some problems with canned seafood (which is all cooked, as I understand it)?

As for protein, I eat seafood more for the fat, minerals and small amounts of A and D3 than the protein (about 80% of my calories are consumed as fat, after all). If fish oil (ie, fish fat) is not healthy or just neutral, I would probably stick to land mammal meats that are much cheaper for my protein, and would only eat fish occasionally for some variation, and would probably stick to lean choices like skin-free restaurant sashimi. Other than taste variety, why eat fish for protein instead of beef, bison, venison, chicken, pork, etc.?
« Last Edit: December 08, 2009, 09:43:28 am by PaleoPhil »
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline van

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,769
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2009, 09:40:09 am »
All canned and or bottle fish is heated.  Cordain put out a paper demonstrating the effects of prolonged and high temp canning processes pretty much decimates the omega threes in canned fish.     They all eventually shoot themselves in the foot eventually regarding cooking/heat/etc.    You can only point so long at 'one' cooked item and mention the ill effects.....

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2009, 09:52:27 am »
Prof. Peskin must not know much about us, given that he doesn't seem to be aware that we don't consider canned fish particularly healthy. Maybe it would help, Majormark, if you explained what we are doing and offered to answer any of his questions, if he has the time, rather than us continuing to ask questions and raise concerns to him (because I think the latter might eventually get irritating)?

He may decide that he doesn't want to waste time on raw food nuts (which would save him a lot of bother), or he may decide that he could help us on a few things, such as this fish oil question. I do tend to enjoy opinions that are contrary to the norm, BTW, so I am open to the idea that straight fish oil could be bad, though my first guess at the culprit would be the heating and other processing.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline majormark

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2009, 06:15:17 pm »
That's fine, yet it would help if he explained the rest of the original quote (if he doesn't mind questions--I don't wish to irritate anyone): "Consuming whole fish instead of fish oil failed, too.13 That’s why the Japanese have greater cancer rates and greater heart disease rates than Americans."

My understanding of this is that if some people exposed to disease causing conditions eat more "neutral" foods compared to another group that consumes more "protecting" foods, they will have higher incidence of that disease.

He does not provide all the reasons that lead him to this conclusion and you can email to info@brianpeskin.com and ask that question.

The important message for me, from the article, is that fat seems to be considered a food that helps with the cells oxygenation.

What is the "why" that he's talking about that gives the Japanese "greater cancer rates and greater heart disease rates than Americans"? Is just fish oil? Does something in fish-oil-containing whole fish (such as herring), overcome the negative effects of fish oil to make whole fish healthy despite the cancer-causing fish oil? Or is fish oil only cancer-causing because its processed? That's somewhat plausible and would fit in with RPD. Does he think that fermented raw cod liver rich in vitamins A and D3, like what we use here is healthy--could the A and D3 in whole fish be what offsets the cancer-causing aspects of fish oil?

I remember I asked about the raw fermented oil but I dont see any reply to that in my inbox. Maybe that email got lost or there is some other reason, but I will not resend it. You can try to ask him as well.

He may not be aware that most of us here do not appear to take straight fish oil. Majormark, do you think someone here is using straight fish oil that you are directing your warnings to? I haven't noticed anyone here saying they take straight, heated fish oil that doesn't contain A and D3--which is what his article seems to focus on--maybe I missed something? The only reports I've seen from people here are folks eating whole fish and/or taking fermented raw CLO. I think Lex might have taken straight fish oil in the past, but that was only because he was eating all or mostly grain-finished meats. We are probably very different from his usual audience, so that article may not apply to us.

Also, didn't Tyler or someone here point out in the past some problems with canned seafood (which is all cooked, as I understand it)?

As for protein, I eat seafood more for the fat, minerals and small amounts of A and D3 than the protein (about 80% of my calories are consumed as fat, after all). If fish oil (ie, fish fat) is not healthy or just neutral, I would probably stick to land mammal meats that are much cheaper for my protein, and would only eat fish occasionally for some variation, and would probably stick to lean choices like skin-free restaurant sashimi. Other than taste variety, why eat fish for protein instead of beef, bison, venison, chicken, pork, etc.?

I know some people here take fish oil and that is why I posted the topic. To share your experience.

Like I said, the issue could be with DHA and EPA quantity and of course damage could be added by heating the oil.

The more interesting question to me is how can we (people without access to lab equipment) test, in a relevant and measurable way, to see if taking high doses of these substances affect us negatively or not. I don't think any of the experiments were conducted with fermented oil. That is why if we could check some of the health parameters and find that these are indeed harmful than we can conclude that DHA and EPA in large quantity are not healthy regardless of the level of processing.

About protein, I think the canned fish was an example or just his preference.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #37 on: December 11, 2009, 08:16:38 am »
...The more interesting question to me is how can we (people without access to lab equipment) test, in a relevant and measurable way, to see if taking high doses of these substances affect us negatively or not. I don't think any of the experiments were conducted with fermented oil. That is why if we could check some of the health parameters and find that these are indeed harmful than we can conclude that DHA and EPA in large quantity are not healthy regardless of the level of processing. ...
I took processed regular fish oil in the past and experienced no negative effects other than nosebleeds when I took too much of it. Reducing the dosage greatly reduced the nose bleeds and going VLC eliminated them altogether.

I haven't noticed any negative effects at all from raw fermented CLO (1000 mg per day), though it's early yet.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline majormark

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2009, 05:18:34 am »

I got a response for that question on how can we check for negative effects.

Immediate observation can be (as some of you reported) bleeding:
 "**teeth will bleed AND bruises to skin  will not heal well!
  **I assure you there are more negatives. "

There are some blood tests that can be done, but he did not elaborate:
 "They have EFA tests but this is blood and all it is really good for is to see how the PEOs replace the fish oil.  I don’t use these tests anymore. "

On the positive effects of PEOs that can be observed:
 "**how the FEEL and if they have more energy – less tired. Softer skin, better finger nails (smooth, etc.) see book for all the things that PEOs do."

As for the heated or unheated issue he mentioned this:
 "** it is the wrong substance, period, so I have no interest analyzing such a thing."

Now, whether the heat is an issue or not, we have to imagine that a person having a diet book out, that also promotes cocked food, is not likely to jump on the raw bandwagon easily.

I did send him the Wikipedia link on raw foods in that email, just for information.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #39 on: December 15, 2009, 09:03:08 am »
I got a response for that question on how can we check for negative effects.

Immediate observation can be (as some of you reported) bleeding:
 "**teeth (he probably means gums) will bleed AND bruises to skin  will not heal well!
Luckily, I haven't had those side effects while taking fish oil or CLO--quite the opposite, actually. My gums bleed less and my easy bruising from SAD and vegetarian-oriented diets went away. While there are claims that fish oil and CLO help gums, teeth and skin, I suspect my gum, teeth and skin improvements had more to do with going Paleo, then VLC, then raw carnivore, because there were further improvements soon after beginning each of those stages. I can say that fish oil and CLO didn't reverse, stop or slow these improvements noticeably.

Quote
On the positive effects of PEOs that can be observed:
 "**how the FEEL and if they have more energy – less tired. Softer skin, better finger nails (smooth, etc.) see book for all the things that PEOs do."
I do have softer skin and smoother, stronger nails with brighter white on the distal edges, and my hang nails are slowly vanishing on raw carnivore. Again, I don't know if the CLO has anything to do with these improvements, but it doesn't seem to be slowing them down any.

What food sources of PEOs does he or you recommend and should they be raw, fermented, cooked, etc.?
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline majormark

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #40 on: December 15, 2009, 05:27:18 pm »

Looks like full-fat cheese, eggs, some nuts can be good sources of PEOs (maybe also other animal fats):
http://brianpeskin.com/peskinMDCTscan.pdf * Note that a check for plaque in the artery may also be a lab test worth considering.

"... eat lots of SATURATED fat enjoying lots of cheese and eggs with
virtually no fiber, add lots of salt, enjoy a big 16 oz. steak at least every other day, eat few fruits
or vegetables (just 1-serving a day (if even that) vs. the “expert’s” recommendation of 5)."

I also remember reading some studies that wallnuts (which contain both PEOs) can help reduce heart disease risk, which I understand it's strongly related to arterial plaque. Here is one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19458020?log$=activity


A clear definition of PEOs:
http://brianpeskin.com/PEOstheDifference.pdf

"This term “Parent Essential Oils” refers to the only two true essential fatty acids:
parent omega-6 (LA) and parent omega-3 (ALA). The term “parent” is used because
these are the whole, unadulterated form of the only two essential fats your body
demands, as they occur in nature. Once PEOs are consumed your body changes a
small percentage of them—about 5%—into other biochemicals called “derivatives,”
while leaving the remaining 95% in parent form."

"Why are the parent forms—PEOs—so important? Many of the EFAs sold in the stores
consist of manufactured EFA derivatives. Your body doesn’t need or want these
derivatives, because it makes its own derivatives out of the Parent Essential Oils (PEOs)
you consume as it needs them. Taking fish oil and other health-food-store “EFAs” often
overdoses you with derivatives, which can be very harmful. However, PEOs are
essential and must be supplied from outside the body every day, from foods and
certain oils. Your body can’t manufacture PEOs (commonly termed EFAs) on its
own—they MUST be consumed daily."

PaleoPhil: It is possible that being on a paleo diet you may not experience such adverse effects from the fish oil as those people in the experiments, because they most likely ate a standard diet.

Still, it's something worth considering.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #41 on: December 16, 2009, 07:31:37 am »
Looks like full-fat cheese, eggs, some nuts can be good sources of PEOs (maybe also other animal fats):
http://brianpeskin.com/peskinMDCTscan.pdf * Note that a check for plaque in the artery may also be a lab test worth considering.

"... eat lots of SATURATED fat enjoying lots of cheese and eggs with
virtually no fiber, add lots of salt, enjoy a big 16 oz. steak at least every other day, eat few fruits
or vegetables (just 1-serving a day (if even that) vs. the “expert’s” recommendation of 5)."

I also remember reading some studies that wallnuts (which contain both PEOs) can help reduce heart disease risk, which I understand it's strongly related to arterial plaque. Here is one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19458020?log$=activity

...
Thanks, but I eat eggs and steak and mostly avoid plant foods already and I find I do better on whole raw seafood than I do on cheese and lots of salt. Contrarian opinions are useful, though, to make sure one's on the right track for oneself and avoid falling into a dogmatic mindset.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,996
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Are Fish Oils (DHA & EPA) bad for us?
« Reply #42 on: December 16, 2009, 05:20:29 pm »
The guy people are talking about seems to recommend a lot of cooked, congealed saturated fats so this topic ought to be in the Hot Topics forum. I'll move it there now.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk