Facebook Pixel

Comment Reply

EmpowHER Guest
Anonymous (reply to Vonnie Kennedy)

I don't know if my numbers are "fantastic", but they do truly flummox every expert I've talked to. So far 3 cardiologists responses have been "you're an enigma", "somebody, not me, should write you up" and "there is something else going on here." All are different ways of saying "we don't really understand what causes CVD", though few can bring themselves to admit this.
I don't buy that fish oil is of value. One look at the difference between wonderful Omega3 fatty acid and horrible saturated fat is one single hydrogen atom at the "omega" end of a very long fat molecule. One atom out of hundreds or thousands of atoms. Mammals (including you and me) only make saturated fats. Why wouldn't we make omega3's if they were beneficial? Fish need fats that don't go solid at fish temperatures, but mammals don't deal with near freezing temps.
The data to support benefits from omega3 are way to weak for me to buy into it. The original reason fish oil was identified was to explain the "paradox" of people on high fat diets and low CVD. The better explanation is that fat, saturated or not, is not the cause of CVD.

September 6, 2011 - 9:22am

Reply

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy