Discussion Board

Jeff,

Is this a true statement? It was made by William Harris of the Stanford School of Medicine at the University of South Dakota. It’s from an article in the November issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter. It’s from an article about fish oil and heart disease.

“We need to eliminate ALA as a surrogate omega-3, our bodies convert very little ALA to EPA and none to DHA. Why? The body can’t take the first step, which is to change ALA to an intermediate fat called stearidonic acid (SDA).”

I also read a similar statement in the current issue of the Economist on page 91. The article is called Food, glorious food-The way health claims about food are regulated is changing.

The Nutrition Policy Unit at London Metropolitan University says that claiming health benefits from products with the short chain omega 3s (ALA) is deceptive because proven health benefits only come from products with the long chain omega 3s (EPA and DHA). “Products that contain short-chain omega 3s, such as alpha-linolenic acid from plant oils like flax-seed oil, have not been linked with the strong health benefits shown by fish oils.”

There's an EPA/DHA supplement made from algae available from http://water4.net. It has 25 mg EPA and 175 mg DHA per capsule.
It's the only algae supplement I know of that has EPA as well as DHA.
Laura

I've been trying to figure this out too. There are no plant sources of DHA. Yet the brain needs mostly DHA and some EPA (maybe as a catalyst) which is found in fish. Infants can convert ALA (flax/leafy greens/walnuts) to DHA and EPA, but apparantly human adults cannot convert enough ALA to DHA and EPA.

So, what's a human adult vegan to do? Supplement with DHA and EPA?

On ALA, LA, EPA and DHA,


http://drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11105

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6735

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11112

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6293

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12720

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8461

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6183

In Health
Jeff

Thanks Jeff. Those links cleared up a lot of confusion for me on this topic.

Oceanfrontcabin wrote, "There are no plant sources of DHA." Not so. I've been ordering V-Pure from overseas for some time now. Says right on the container Vegetarian EPA-DHA. All from Algae. Google V-pure. It's pricey but available. Don't use the stuff myself, but my wife still does.

The "plant source" referred to is residue from animal sources(getting the visual picture?) left behind on the sea plants. So technically it's still animal but the most recent literature shows this conversion is really not a problem.
f1jim

I heard this discussed at one of the study weekends at Dr. McDougalls facility in Santa Rosa but I can't find a source so for now scratch my comment. It may just be poor blood flow to my brain. What still holds true is we have no problem making the conversion to DHA from sources such as flax seed. The most recent studies lay that controversy to rest.
f1jim

I think I figured out who Batman is!
f1jim

My understanding is that there are no actual health problems that have been found in vegans who do not eat fish, that the studies claiming benefits to eating fish are not conclusive when reviewed overall.

That is why I think it is so important to read "The China Study" to understand that, when you look at lifelong vegans, they are much healthier and do not have all the degenerative disease of affluence assoicated with the eating of animal products. It's not about isolated nutrients and the research on isolated nutrients is not always that relevant.

This article - http://www.udoerasmus.com/articles/udo/fish_oil.htm - says that there are ample studies saying that most people have no problem converting ALA and that 10% and up is converted. It's a good article.