• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Winter

Gifter said:
JTS has gone awful quiet to, so authoritative yesterday... I had high hopes we might be bickering buddies!
Click to expand...

You haven't really added anything to comment on. Those brief studies - more like clinical case studies than full scientific studies - don't make the point you want them to make. They show that diet can affect the blood levels of the lipids in the diet, which is hardly surprising, and that a few other factors are also changed. They don't show that there is any causal effect on the inflammatory or immune systems or to diabetes.

I'll have a look again at the week-end.

However, the idea that diet can affect disease one way or another is not in dispute. Bad diets have undesirable affects over the long-term. My point is that sensible balanced diets are generally enough for healthy individuals This is very different from what you are proposing with dietary changes as cures for pre-existing conditions.

P.S. You might like the following articles if you can get access:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9329762
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t514l06713q25285/
 
Last edited:
Winters are incredibly depressing. Waking up at 6.45AM and its pitch black, travelling to work on the train and its still pitch black by the time you arrive at the office. Leave at 4PM and get home around 5PM. Its still pitch black. Horrible.
----
On another note, going back to the eczema debate. I suffered from it for a few years on the insides of my elbows and a bit on my arms, neck & face.
I got rid of it very effectively by using epiderm. Its £11 a tub and is a substitute for soap. It is the best.
I used nigh on every cream before finding it and can only praise it.
 
For the second day in a row i had to let 2/3 of the air out of my tires today when traveling across fields.....wet wet wet....please bring on the cold frost's at least then i can drive across fields.
 
jts1882 said:
You haven't really added anything to comment on. Those brief studies - more like clinical case studies than full scientific studies - don't make the point you want them to make. They show that diet can affect the blood levels of the lipids in the diet, which is hardly surprising, and that a few other factors are also changed. They don't show that there is any causal effect on the inflammatory or immune systems or to diabetes.

I'll have a look again at the week-end.

However, the idea that diet can affect disease one way or another is not in dispute. Bad diets have undesirable affects over the long-term. My point is that sensible balanced diets are generally enough for healthy individuals This is very different from what you are proposing with dietary changes as cures for pre-existing conditions.

P.S. You might like the following articles if you can get access:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9329762
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t514l06713q25285/
Click to expand...

I hope you've been reading up. After all, 'essential fatty acids' are named such for a reason ;) they have to come from diet and are ummmm essential! which makes a mockery of your claims initially of me being way off by suggesting Omega 3 in the diet may be crucial. After all, you can use all the jargon you like, data from entire countries, and clinical studies, strongly suggests (as you won't accept proves, but I do) Omega3 rather than 6 centric diets suffer less with numerous immune diseases (causality, directly or not is arguing over semantics IMO & trying to obfuscate).

Plus, I've found that the understanding of the mechanisms are in fact still theoretical according to the scientific community (as the link you gave above uses as it's counter argument, thanks for that!). I think you going away and coming back with that poor of a counter shows how utterly weak your defense is IMO. If the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood, can you show me a different hypothesis which holds any sort of gravitas? surely you must have one to have been so dismissive of my suggestions, I'd like to hear about it to learn, or a backdown if not (and I will take a 'you haven't added anything' or put down response as you showing you are wrong but unable to admit it).

I'm going to be reading up alot more, tonight on phospholipids, tomorrow or the day after I'm going to go back and start with The inventor of omega-3

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Science/The-inventor-of-omega-3

Much more soon :)
 
Gifter said:
I hope you've been reading up. After all, 'essential fatty acids' are named such for a reason ;) they have to come from diet and are ummmm essential! which makes a mockery of your claims initially of me being way off by suggesting Omega 3 in the diet may be crucial.
Click to expand...

If that is what you think I said, your understanding of metabolism is poor. Essential fatty acids are just ones that we can't synthesize so we need them in the diet. However they are available in many foods. I didn't say you were way off that some omega-3 is needed in the diet, I said your theory about the way omega-3 in the diet regulates inflammatory and immune responses is way off.

By analogy there are essential amino-acids which we can't synthesize. It would be crazy to say the balance of dietary amino-acids determines which proteins are synthesized from them. We might as well exist in the primordial soup and skip several billion years of evolution.
 
jts1882 said:
If that is what you think I said, your understanding of metabolism is poor. Essential fatty acids are just ones that we can't synthesize so we need them in the diet. However they are available in many foods. I didn't say you were way off that some omega-3 is needed in the diet, I said your theory about the way omega-3 in the diet regulates inflammatory and immune responses is way off.

By analogy there are essential amino-acids which we can't synthesize. It would be crazy to say the balance of dietary amino-acids determines which proteins are synthesized from them. We might as well exist in the primordial soup and skip several billion years of evolution.
Click to expand...

You keep replying like it is a borderland concept or theory, yet everywhere I look research scientists are all saying much the same;


Omega-3 DHA and EPA for cognition, behavior, and mood: clinical findings and structural-functional synergies with cell membrane phospholipids.

Kidd PM.

Source
University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.

Abstract

The omega-3 fatty acids docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) are orthomolecular, conditionally essential nutrients that enhance quality of life and lower the risk of premature death. They function exclusively via cell membranes, in which they are anchored by phospholipid molecules. DHA is proven essential to pre- and postnatal brain development, whereas EPA seems more influential on behavior and mood. Both DHA and EPA generate neuroprotective metabolites. In double-blind, randomized, controlled trials, DHA and EPA combinations have been shown to benefit attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD), autism, dyspraxia, dyslexia, and aggression. For the affective disorders, meta-analyses confirm benefits in major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder, with promising results in schizophrenia and initial benefit for borderline personality disorder. Accelerated cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) correlate with lowered tissue levels of DHA/EPA, and supplementation has improved cognitive function. Huntington disease has responded to EPA. Omega-3 phospholipid supplements that combine DHA/EPA and phospholipids into the same molecule have shown marked promise in early clinical trials. Phosphatidylserine with DHA/EPA attached (Omega-3 PS) has been shown to alleviate AD/HD symptoms. Krill omega-3 phospholipids, containing mostly phosphatidylcholine (PC) with DHA/EPA attached, markedly outperformed conventional fish oil DHA/EPA triglycerides in double-blind trials for premenstrual syndrome/dysmenorrhea and for normalizing blood lipid profiles. Krill omega-3 phospholipids demonstrated anti-inflammatory activity, lowering C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in a double-blind trial. Utilizing DHA and EPA together with phospholipids and membrane antioxidants to achieve a triple cell membrane synergy may further diversify their currently wide range of clinical applications.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18072818

Cited by 94

Going off tangent with the subject matter, but we are arguing over the underlying mechanisms so it's fair game. So come on then, show a cogent counter theory that shows more promise rendering my stance worthy of the contempt you continuously show PLEASE!
 
Gifter said:
You keep replying like it is a borderland concept or theory, yet everywhere I look research scientists are all saying much the same;


...
Click to expand...

No they are not saying the same thing.

If you are going to quote abstracts from scientific/clinical studies you have to understand the current state of scientific knowledge and take the report's findings in context.

You can't recognise two or three words and claim support for pseudo-scientific theories.
 
jts1882 said:
No they are not saying the same thing.

If you are going to quote abstracts from scientific/clinical studies you have to understand the current state of scientific knowledge and take the report's findings in context.

You can't recognise two or three words and claim support for pseudo-scientific theories.
Click to expand...

Again, nonsense with no form of real reply. It wasn't supportive in two or three words taken out of context, the overall tone was supportive of my claim, the bolded words were for your holy grail 'omega-3 phospholipids demonstrated anti-inflammatory activity, lowering C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in a double-blind trial'. Maybe you need further comprehension training if you are claiming that piece doesn't back up my claim.

Here is the piece again, read back and tell me why that is not supportive of what I am claiming;

The omega-3 fatty acids docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) are orthomolecular, conditionally essential nutrients that enhance quality of life and lower the risk of premature death. They function exclusively via cell membranes, in which they are anchored by phospholipid molecules. DHA is proven essential to pre- and postnatal brain development, whereas EPA seems more influential on behavior and mood. Both DHA and EPA generate neuroprotective metabolites. In double-blind, randomized, controlled trials, DHA and EPA combinations have been shown to benefit attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD), autism, dyspraxia, dyslexia, and aggression. For the affective disorders, meta-analyses confirm benefits in major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder, with promising results in schizophrenia and initial benefit for borderline personality disorder. Accelerated cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) correlate with lowered tissue levels of DHA/EPA, and supplementation has improved cognitive function. Huntington disease has responded to EPA. Omega-3 phospholipid supplements that combine DHA/EPA and phospholipids into the same molecule have shown marked promise in early clinical trials.Phosphatidylserine with DHA/EPA attached (Omega-3 PS) has been shown to alleviate AD/HD symptoms. Krill omega-3 phospholipids, containing mostly phosphatidylcholine (PC) with DHA/EPA attached, markedly outperformed conventional fish oil DHA/EPA triglycerides in double-blind trials for premenstrual syndrome/dysmenorrhea and for normalizing blood lipid profiles. Krill omega-3 phospholipids demonstrated anti-inflammatory activity, lowering C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in a double-blind trial. Utilizing DHA and EPA together with phospholipids and membrane antioxidants to achieve a triple cell membrane synergy may further diversify their currently wide range of clinical applications.



But, to highlight, now it is not the subject that I don't understand (as you shift and backtrack whilst throwing insults still), but the prevailing thinking in the scientific field (f**king hell is that how far your defense has fallen!), yet this change of tact still gives you the pomp somehow?! Get real, show me the current state then, not some lame rubbish (as you have thus far). I suspect you can't as you jumped into this thinking you knew best and would easily cast aside my view, yet are now furiously backtracking from point of defense to ever weaker point of defense.

If it is a poor theory which flies in the face of the current zeitgeist then articulate why JTS, don't just say 'it's wrong because I know science and science says so naa naa naa-naaaa naa' it's childish really mate, you're inference of knowledge makes your lack of a counter argument bizarre, at best. Wouldn't (almost) everyone on here cheer if you posted some facts that nailed my premise?

Surely, if you have integrity, you already knew this prevailing thinking (as your posting suggests), so post it up, or look a fraud on this topic IMO. Friday you said you would go away and have a read, where is your findings from that even? Nada, Zilch, Nil.

Now back to my reading up...
 
Also to add I think omega3 is best naturally as part of a balanced diet (that virtually nobody has in the UK IMO), so in food form is best agreed no doubt. For me being vegi the best supplemental form I can use is some high quality flax with some live cultured buttermilk (as an emulsifying agent, but as that is not easy to prepare I just take 30ml swigs in the morning generally), but if I had the gusto (such as a flare up of Rosacea might cause) I would drop right back on 6 source food and make my diet so it places no strain on digestion (and/or having some fresh lemon juice or ACV on foods which are not easy to digest aiding HCL, taking some magnesium in the form of a few grains of epsom salts with foods which may cause digestive problems eg. after to much cheese and bread for me, when lacking carrot or such to aid it), take some high billion count probiotics (taken with milk, though if homogenized only fat free, better non-homogenized with fat though), whilst eating foods rich in omega3 and essential alkaline minerals via greens galore, especially seaweeds for good iodine (in season & organic preferable). I already don't have any food with added sugar but would add that if not. No protein 6 hours before bed, usually no food at all 4-6 hours if possible.

When done religiously it has mighty powerful effects for me. But each to their own.
 
Gifter, I don't know enough about what you and jts are discussing to enter that specific discussion, quick question though.

You seem to be looking for support for your views in peer reviewed articles based on double blind trials. Do you agree that that is the best way to assess what works and what doesn't? And that people should follow that evidence where it leads?

Or put differently, if jts shows that the peer reviewed literature actually disagrees with your opinion will you then change your opinion?
 
braineclipse said:
Gifter, I don't know enough about what you and jts are discussing to enter that specific discussion, quick question though.

You seem to be looking for support for your views in peer reviewed articles based on double blind trials. Do you agree that that is the best way to assess what works and what doesn't? And that people should follow that evidence where it leads?

Or put differently, if jts shows that the peer reviewed literature actually disagrees with your opinion will you then change your opinion?
Click to expand...

No, I'm arguing along their set of stipulations, which is that unless I show them 'double blind, peer reviewed' that they do not accept my hypothesis has any merit. My best reading on this subject, which formed my opinion, would be immediately shot down in flames as "unworthy due to source", but instead this time I'm sticking fast to beating them with their own stick, I have found great solace in this method :lol:

Whether it works best, in principle of course. In practicality nope, it is used as a ring fence to hold out truths (with no inherent profit capability) and hold lies protected within (those which protect massive profits), the framework around science is sick and needs clearing out IMO, most scientists are great, inquisitive, clever, well meaning people though, please let me make that distinction, it is the working dynamic of funding sources which make racketeering rife, through controlling research direction IMO, at our huge detriment.
 
Gifter said:
No, I'm arguing along their set of stipulations, which is that unless I show them 'double blind, peer reviewed' that they do not accept my hypothesis has any merit. My best reading on this subject, which formed my opinion, would be immediately shot down in flames as "unworthy due to source", but instead this time I'm sticking fast to beating them with their own stick, I have found great solace in this method :lol:

Whether it works best, in principle of course. In practicality nope, it is used as a ring fence to hold out truths (with no inherent profit capability) and hold lies protected within (those which protect massive profits), the framework around science is sick and needs clearing out IMO, most scientists are great, inquisitive, clever, well meaning people though, please let me make that distinction, it is the working dynamic of funding sources which make racketeering rife, through controlling research direction IMO, at our huge detriment.
Click to expand...

I think I've asked this before, but can't remember what you answered if you answered. If not peer reviewed studies based on double blind trials, what is the best way to separate out what works from what doesn't?

You talk about integrity, but yet you present evidence you yourself do not believe in. And you cherry pick peer reviewed evidence that supports your opinion to present as evidence while ignoring peer reviewed evidence that goes against your beliefs.

Sounds like special pleading to me, and unfortunately not uncommon among the alternative side.

------------------------

Sure there are problems with the way medical research is being done and funding is directed, although I don't fully agree with your description. What makes the alternative side any better? Are those companies not for profit? What controls the information and treatments they spread?

At least within mainstream medicine you have the FDA in the US and similar agencies in most countries having an oversight on what's going on. Who does that for the alternative side?
 
braineclipse said:
I think I've asked this before, but can't remember what you answered if you answered. If not peer reviewed studies based on double blind trials, what is the best way to separate out what works from what doesn't?

You talk about integrity, but yet you present evidence you yourself do not believe in. And you cherry pick peer reviewed evidence that supports your opinion to present as evidence while ignoring peer reviewed evidence that goes against your beliefs.

Sounds like special pleading to me, and unfortunately not uncommon among the alternative side.

------------------------

Sure there are problems with the way medical research is being done and funding is directed, although I don't fully agree with your description. What makes the alternative side any better? Are those companies not for profit? What controls the information and treatments they spread?

At least within mainstream medicine you have the FDA in the US and similar agencies in most countries having an oversight on what's going on. Who does that for the alternative side?
Click to expand...

The problem largely is the FDA & AMA are controlled by the executives from the pharma companies, they are not in the public interest. Funding for studies is controlled largely by the pharma interests.

I am not cherry picking something I don't believe in at all (as said in a fair world large scale studies would be done, and your framework would then work fairly and be the best way to find that which works best, this highlights the problem which makes me belittle 'science is best' as a defense), I read JTS's only defending article which said 'the treatments appear to have merit, but 'large scale studies have not been done' this is not a critique with merit, it lacks any real form of counter theory, which I am repeatedly asking for.

If the defense is 'not enough studies' have been done, yet medical authorities will not fund large studies in the face of overwhelming supportive data - It's a strawman.

I hope you can at least appreciate my position, if not agree with it.
 
I like both equally, summer can get too hot and when I'm on a train to London it can get a bit brick but mostly the summer is great when you get great weather. I also like the winter as you get to wrap up and wear your decent jackets and layers of clothes that you can't in the winter.

What I do hate is the dark mornings and nights which make it seem like you never see daylight when at work.

Overall I guess summer is best, fit birds in their short skirts and short revealing tops!
 
braineclipse said:
Or put differently, if jts shows that the peer reviewed literature actually disagrees with your opinion will you then change your opinion?
Click to expand...

Gifter said:
No, I'm arguing along their set of stipulations, which is that unless I show them 'double blind, peer reviewed' that they do not accept my hypothesis has any merit.
Click to expand...

So you won't change your opinion if shown peer-reviewed articles that disagree with your assertions. Faith based science doesn't work. The scholastics tried it many centuries ago, but we have moved on. I haven't mentioned peer-reviewed articles or double blind trials and have tried to explain the basic principles.

You have a theory but no clear testable hypothesis. You are looking for articles that support your theory, but you don't understand enough about the biology to understand the articles. You need to start with a textbook and then some general review articles before you can get anything from the primary literature. You are discussing things involving complex metabolic pathways with many feedback loops to regulate them and proposing that controlling the initial substrate in the pathway will control the pathway. This doesn't mean that you can't influence the pathways in a brute force way, but in doing so you are overriding the regulatory mechanisms that make them work. Until you understand this distinction you are wasting your and our time.
 
Gifter said:
Crohn's link, where the doctor has a 90% success rate (complete remission) in his research studies;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1076594/How-tackle-Crohns-Disease-help-drugs.html

Not related overtly to the omega 3 stuff, but rather nutrition as a treatment, and it highlights the problem of gaining funding for large studies etc. As said, the framework is sick.

Baffling really to me.
Click to expand...

great article/story. =D>

slightly related, recently i came across a herb called Boswellia which has huge anti-inflammatory properties which tackle auto immune diseases. Maybe youve heard of it, if not take a look.
.................................

(NaturalNews) Herbs that have an incredible array of health benefits that go well beyond just their nutrient value are considered 'super-herbs.' Boswellia is called Indian Frankincense and is known to have originated in the dry areas of India, Africa, & the Mediterranean. Boswellia is a true super-food shown to have remarkable healing and anti-inflammatory properties that are just now being discovered.

There are several different forms of the Boswellia tree. The Biblical incense frankincense was probably an extract from the resin of the tree Boswellia sacra. Boswellia serrata is the form that is best known for its healing properties. The beneficial compounds are found in the resin that is secreted naturally to protect the tree from parasites and other insects and pathogens. This resin is easily tapped and purified for use in both an oil and powder form. This resin consists of essential oils, gum and terpenoids.

Boswellia contains unique acids (boswellic acids) that have strong anti-inflammatory properties. Boswellic acids block the overproduction of cytokinetic activity in damaged tissues while enhancing blood flow to joints. This combination has been shown to increase joint mobility and ease stiff joints.

Boswellia Better than NSAID's

Many studies have shown that Boswellia is just as effective as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID's), which are the most commonly used treatment for issues of inflammation and chronic pain. NSAID's work by inhibiting the inflammatory promoting cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) enzymes. Unfortunately, these drugs also inhibit COX-1, which is essential for a healthy stomach lining. This is why these medications cause stomach bleeding. They also deplete the body of anti-oxidant trace minerals like selenium and zinc as well as key b vitamins needed to naturally reduce inflammation.

Boswellia works to reduce inflammation through a different mechanism. It acts to modulate the pro-inflammatory enzyme 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX). 5-LOX is the first enzyme released in the cytokine metabolic pathway. This pathway creates leukotrienes, which are strong inflammatory substances thought to influence many disease processes including cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, & asthma. The immune modulation reduces inflammatory chemicals and symptoms of inflammation.

These boswellic acids also reduce another inflammatory enzyme called human leukocyte elastase (HLE). HLE and 5-LOX are both classically elevated in inflammatory conditions and diseases. Boswellia is the only known substance to reduce both HLE and 5-LOX.

Boswellia also reduces the expression of the cytokine tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-a). In fact, it is thought that boswellia's success in relieving symptoms of arthritis is due to its ability to inhibit the breakdown of connective tissue caused by TNF-a induced expression of matrix metalloproteinase enzymes.

Boswellia has shown tremendous success at reducing inflammatory conditions in challenging cases such as Crohn's disease, Rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, allergies, osteoarthritis, & ulcerative colitis among others. Additionally, the powerful anti-inflammatory factors are being suggested for cancer and heart disease prevention.

Boswellia can be taken as a dried herb, a standardized extract and as a pain-relieving gel. All three work effectively. Experts recommend about 400mg taken 3x per day for relief from arthritic, asthmatic, or auto-immune symptoms. The dried herb can be put in smoothies and shakes and used throughout the day. Research has shown a greater absorption rate when taken with other forms of food.

Super De-Inflaming Shake:

1 cup of organic coconut milk
1/2 - 1 cup of frozen organic blueberries
1-2 scoops of non-denatured, grass-fed whey protein
1 Tbsp of ground flax/chia
1 Tbsp of turmeric
1 Tbsp of Boswellia
1 Tbsp of cinnamon
1 Tbsp of Ashwagandha
Pinch of Pink salt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back