12 replies to this topic

[woly]

Hey all.

So Ive been trying to balance out my omega 6:omega3 ratio but am finding it quite difficult. Especially since 1) I am on a low carb diet and 2) want to get at least the RDI for vitamin E 3) I am quite active and therefore consume a lot of calories. I have managed to get it down to ~13-16g omega 6 with 1g of omega 3 (w/o supplements) but thats the best I can come up with.

My main strategies so far have been to include lots of nuts (mostly macadamia nuts) and olive oil as this gives me a fair amount of vitamin E without blowing out the 6:3 ratio. I suppose another strategy would be to then supplement with ~2g of fish oil (equaling ~1g total intake) but from what I have read, it seems to be better to reduce omega 6 rather than relying on high doses of fish oil. Does anyone have any tips for reducing my omega 6 intake further?

Woly

[niner]

The first place I'd look would be the industrial seed oils, but you've probably already got that covered. Getting rid of them entirely isn't easy. Chicken meat is sensitive to the bird's diet; if the bird is truly free range, it should be ok, but if it's grain fed like a lot of fake "free range" chickens, then omega six is a lot higher. As I understand it, ruminants are not as sensitive to their diet. Grass fed is better, but apparently not as much better as free range chicken. Nuts are pretty high in omega six.

[johnross47]

sardines and sea bass are good. 100gms sardines 1.7 of o3:0.6 of o6 and bass 0.9 of o3:0.0 of o6

[woly]

Nuts are pretty high in omega six.

Yes they do seem pretty rich but if I reduce my intake, I am finding it hard to get adequate vitamin E intake. Do you get your vitE from other sources? It seems to be a pretty tricky line to walk!

[johnross47]

This is an issue I've just started to look at. Over the last year or so I've been gradually adjusting my diet using cron-o-meter. It can be quite tricky, esecially if you live with people who don't participate. I tried to get the vitamins and minerals sorted out first.....the main aim was to get them all without using supplements. I know that some people think you need massively more of some vitamins than the reccomended amounts but I haven't dealt with that yet. I don't know the reasons for it and have no expertise in science. I recently started to look at the lipids and vit E. I have tried using supplements for this. I was using a high dose cap with a lot of tocotrienols, palm oil I think, and then watching the average drop on cron-o-meter until it got to 100%,then taking another, on the assumption that it would be stored and available. I might be completely wrong. This vit E/lipid balance issue does seem very tricky without using a very weird diet or supplements.

[johnross47]

An afterthought. For those of us who are not experts, nor adherents of a particular diet theory, (vegetarian, paleo, vegan or whatever), what is the basis for the theorised ideal ratio? I've read a lot of posts but they only increase the confusion.

[niner]

The basis for the ratio, as I understand it, is that omega six and omega 3 fatty acids are precursors to particular molecular parts of our immune system that may lead to inflammation if they are too far out of balance. I'm not sure what the exact best ratio is, but omega six is ubiquitous in the modern world while three is harder to get. Too much six with not enough three certainly leads to inflammation. I don't know what would happen if the ratio went in the other direction.

As a point of philosophy, I see no problem with using supplements to optimize the diet. A good diet only has to be "good enough" in order to be evolutionarily favorable. I can't think of any reason why a diet that was "good enough" couldn't be improved through supplement use.

[johnross47]

I do use some supplements, particularly D3 and fish oil, but for the rest I tend to use fractions of pills to top up, or a general supplement if I'm away from home and have little control over what I'm eating. I googled "omega 3 omega 6 ratio" yesterday and found a much bigger much more detailed article on Wikip. than I'd seen before just using vague search terms. It goes into the research in what looks like depth to me.
I do have an issue with the paleo assumptions though. I don't think there is very much good evidence on paleo diets. It has been said that modern hunter gatherers would be better described as gatherer hunters. .....they eat more veg and fruit than hunted meat. My suspicion is that there was no single diet......it varied with location and evolution has continued till the present so that the ideal diet for most modern Europeans is quite different from that of some stone age Africans or modern Inuit. It's probably more relevant to look at epidemiological evidence and as far as I can see the evidence there is varied. Different ratios favour different problems.

Edited by johnross47, 01 May 2012 - 07:21 PM.

[niner]

I do have an issue with the paleo assumptions though. I don't think there is very much good evidence on paleo diets. It has been said that modern hunter gatherers would be better described as gatherer hunters. .....they eat more veg and fruit than hunted meat. My suspicion is that there was no single diet......it varied with location and evolution has continued till the present so that the ideal diet for most modern Europeans is quite different from that of some stone age Africans or modern Inuit. It's probably more relevant to look at epidemiological evidence and as far as I can see the evidence there is varied. Different ratios favour different problems.

We may not know exactly what any given paleo population ate, and you're right that it must have varied according to what was available in any given location. However, we know exactly what paleo man didn't eat. Tons of sugar, tons of grain, industrial seed oils, feedlot-fattened animals, Ho Ho's, Ding Dong's, Mountain Dew... In order to avoid pointless argument, I think it's a lot better to describe paleo diets by what you don't eat rather than what you do eat.

[TheFountain]

Nuts are pretty high in omega six.

Yes they do seem pretty rich but if I reduce my intake, I am finding it hard to get adequate vitamin E intake. Do you get your vitE from other sources? It seems to be a pretty tricky line to walk!

No, it's a generalization to say nuts are all high in omega 6. The ratio of fatty acids in cashews for example is about the same as it is for olive oil. That is about 1.5 grams omega 6 per serving, a small amount of saturated fat and the rest being mono.

Peanuts will be higher in polyunsaturates. Almonds are good but also fairly high on poly. Cashews are good, macadamia nuts are good. A few other's are fairly even with poly and mono.

Edited by TheFountain, 02 May 2012 - 07:49 PM.

[TheFountain]

I do have an issue with the paleo assumptions though. I don't think there is very much good evidence on paleo diets. It has been said that modern hunter gatherers would be better described as gatherer hunters. .....they eat more veg and fruit than hunted meat. My suspicion is that there was no single diet......it varied with location and evolution has continued till the present so that the ideal diet for most modern Europeans is quite different from that of some stone age Africans or modern Inuit. It's probably more relevant to look at epidemiological evidence and as far as I can see the evidence there is varied. Different ratios favour different problems.

We may not know exactly what any given paleo population ate, and you're right that it must have varied according to what was available in any given location. However, we know exactly what paleo man didn't eat. Tons of sugar, tons of grain, industrial seed oils, feedlot-fattened animals, Ho Ho's, Ding Dong's, Mountain Dew... In order to avoid pointless argument, I think it's a lot better to describe paleo diets by what you don't eat rather than what you do eat.

That's probably a better approach. As Matt Lalonde pointed out in his seminar, it's important not to approach this from the mindset of what is included, and to be cautious with assuming what is EXcluded, save for heavily processed junk foods.

I think people who exclude the latter are already doing 90% of the job that needs to be done. I'm sure there were paleo cultures that survived on heavy fish consumption whilst staying away from other animals because they just weren't available to them. Likewise i'm sure many cultures survived on heavy fruit consumption. But there is this assumption in some circles that fruit was excluded from their diet. based on what? Like you said, caution need be exercised when entertaining notions of food items that were excluded.

[Snoopy]

This is a good thread. Something I've also been wrestling with since a wise old lady in a health shop in Stockholm told me the correct ratio is 1:1 !!!

I read somewhere that it increases 'the elasticity of the cell membrane'. I'd say that is pretty damn important if it affects every cell in the body. No wonder the benefits are vast...

A strategy I've used is buying fresh salmon daily which is the highest source of DHA.

You all make some good points about watching the omega 6 intake. Even what we would class as top health foods are probably loaded with them so it's swings and roundabouts...

[yoyo]

Get vitamin E from red palm oil.