Fish vs Flax - I know I've asked this before

Mindwraith

New Member
Both Fish oil and Flax oil contain a good amount of Omega 3's and 6's. Is there any reason for prefering one over the other? Are pills less effective than actually putting the oil into a shake?

Ok went and looked up some stuff and found this more technical explanation which seems to point to fish oil as being the better of the two:

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Fish oil versus flaxoil
BETHESDA, MARYLAND. There is considerable evidence that fish and fish oils are beneficial to heart health, reduce the risk of cancer, and benefit mental health. The "active" components of fish oils are eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), a polyunsaturated fatty acid with 20 carbon atoms in its backbone, and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), a polyunsaturated fatty acid with 22 carbon atoms. Both are members of the omega-3 group of essential fatty acids. EPA and DHA are found exclusively in marine animals; fatty fish such as herring, sardines, salmon and fresh tuna are the best sources.
Alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) is another omega-3 fatty acid found in flaxseed and flaxseed oil. ALA has 18 carbon atoms in its backbone and can be converted to EPA in the body (in the liver) by the addition of two carbon atoms. EPA, in turn, can be converted to DHA. Because the typical American diet is relatively low in fish intake ALA becomes a crucial source of the EPA and DHA required for optimum health.
Researchers at the National Institutes of Health have just completed a study designed to determine just how much ALA is actually converted to EPA in the body. Their study included eight healthy subjects who were fed a standard diet for three weeks and then given one gram of ALA labeled with an isotope tracer. The diet was beef-based in order to avoid extraneous sources of EPA and DHA. The researchers measured blood plasma concentrations of ALA, EPA and DHA 8, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 168 hours after ingestion of the labeled ALA.
The results show that only about 0.2 per cent of the ALA (2 mg) was actually converted to EPA. In contrast, about 23 per cent of the EPA was available for conversion to DHA. The researchers also noted that the half-life (the time it takes to reduce initial concentration by 50 per cent) of ALA in blood plasma was quite low at about one hour. In comparison, the half-life of EPA was 67 hours and that of DHA 20 hours.
The researchers conclude that ALA is not a viable source of EPA and DHA and cannot replace fish and fish oils in the diet. Editor's Note: According to this new data a tablespoon of flax oil would only result in the synthesis of about 30 mg of EPA - far less than the recommended daily intake of 220 mg.
Pawlosky, Robert J. Physiological compartmental analysis of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism in adult humans. Journal of Lipid Research, Vol. 42, August 2001, pp. 1257-65

So my only question regarding EFA's is should I buy the fish oil tabs or buy regular fish oil in a bottle? What kind of fish oil? Anybody recommend a brand or place?

Also, What are the cheepest yet best CLA's I can get out there? The CLA's I've found to be very expensive and they only provide about 15 days worth at that. Too much money IMO.
 
Yes there is. Fish oil gives you the EPA/DHA directly while with flax you're dependent on the conversion rate from ALA to EPA/DHA which is far from optimal. It's better than nothing though.
 
Ok then I just ordered the Fish oil called (alaska deep sea fish oil) that seemed to be pretty common out there. Ordered plenty to last a while luckily it's cheap. Says its got the recommended amount of EPA DHA per serving.

Now to find CLA, I saw EAS has some but HOLY CRAP thats expensive, anybody know what to do on that? Is CLA really that effective?
 
I asked this before too...
anyway there are problems with getting both flax and fish oil(say 1tbs each) as soon as they are taken into account when setting daily calories(say 1tbs each)?

Is it a waste of money or I can assume that "more is better"?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (boggy @ May 16 2003,10:06)]Is it a waste of money or I can assume that "more is better"?
It shouldnt hurt, as long as they are taken account for in caloires, but conversion from lna -> EPA will be nil becuase of the preformed stuff already taken in larger quantities.
EPA ->dha is usually nil anyway.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Kama45 @ May 18 2003,9:26)]Should mercury poisoning be a concern when supplementing with fish oil?
Not if it goes through the molecular destilation filtering process. Look around and find a good quality one, it's worth the money. If it lists cholesterol on the label then it hasn't gone through it as this process also gets rid of cholesterol.
 
Back
Top