by Dr.Harald Wiesendanger– Klartext
What the mainstream media is hiding
Health-conscious people know that their bodies need omega-3 fatty acids, but cannot produce them themselves. So many eagerly turn to supplements, and in doing so, may be doing more harm than they hope to prevent.
‘Always a good idea for your heart’, ‘Helps every cell in your body’, ‘The first choice for supporting cardiovascular health’, ‘Pure well-being’, ‘Plant power for your heart, brain and cell protection’, ‘The power of the sea for your body’ (1): Who can remain indifferent to such promises? If you want to eat right, there seems to be no way around it: omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids are ‘essential’ — the body cannot produce them itself, so we have to get them from food, similar to almost all vitamins and 9 of 20 amino acids. The same applies to omega-6. Both fulfil vital functions: they are building blocks of cell membranes, regulate inflammatory processes, influence blood pressure and blood clotting, and play an important role in the heart, brain, and immune system.
While omega-6 fatty acids – found in sunflower, corn, and soybean oil, for example – primarily promote pro-inflammatory signalling substances, omega-3 fatty acids – found in oily sea fish, algae, linseed and walnuts, for example – and in particular EPA and DPA, tend to have the opposite effect according to prevailing opinion: They inhibit inflammation and protect blood vessels.
The ratio is important: 1:3 to 1:5 (omega-3 to omega-6) is considered ideal. However, in the prevailing Western diet, the ratio is often 1:15 or worse. This promotes chronic inflammation, cardiovascular disease, and joint problems.
To counteract this, more and more health-conscious people are eagerly turning to dietary supplements. The market is huge and continues to grow rapidly: global annual sales of omega-3 supplements are expected to reach around 52 billion US dollars by the end of 2025; by 2033, they could grow to a staggering 102 billion. (https://straitsresearch.com/report/omega-3-product-market) Only vitamin supplements are in greater demand.
Too much of a good thing
What most consumers don’t realise is that they may be taking too much of a good thing. Although the usual doses – 250–800 mg EPA/DHA daily – do not cause any acute symptoms in most people and are therefore considered safe, (https://www.zentrum-der-gesundheit.de/ernaehrung/nahrungsergaenzung/omega-3-uebersicht/omega-3-richtig-dosieren) However, anyone who consumes more than 10 g of omega-3 fatty acids every day – in the form of high-dose supplements, in addition to a high-fat diet – risks serious consequences:
· Increased bleeding tendency: Omega-3 inhibits blood clotting. Very high doses can lead to nosebleeds and haematomas, and in extreme cases to internal bleeding – particularly risky if you are also taking blood thinners such as ASA, warfarin or DOAKs.
· Weakening of the immune system: Excessive anti-inflammatory effects can impair the body’s ability to fight infections.
· Unfavourable lipid changes: Some studies show that extremely high doses can raise LDL cholesterol.
· Oxidation risk: Excess omega-3 fatty acids are prone to oxidation. Without sufficient antioxidants such as vitamin E, this can cause more oxidative stress in the body.
· Atrial fibrillation: Cardiac arrhythmia.
However, it is said that unpleasant side effects (https://www.zentrum-der-gesundheit.de/ernaehrung/nahrungsergaenzung/omega-3-uebersicht/omega-3) can occur even with a daily dose of more than 2 to 3 grams – ranging from nausea to flatulence and fishy belching to heartburn – and that the risks increase in the long term.
Or could even smaller amounts be dangerous?
Omega-3 can promote inflammation instead of inhibiting it
In any case, a British-Australian research team urges caution in a study just published in the International Journal of Epidemiology. https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/54/4/dyaf065/8171742 It questions the idea that more omega-3 automatically equates to better health. Could fish oil and algae powder capsules be doing more harm than good?
The scientists analysed data from over 15,000 healthy people from the UK Biobank – which contains detailed information on the health and lifestyle of around 500,000 Britons aged between 40 and 69(2) – as well as from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, which has been continuously monitoring the children of around 14,000 pregnant women whose due dates were between April 1991 and December 1992 since the early 1990s. (2)
The scientists focused on three important markers in the blood that indicate inflammation:
– C-reactive protein (CRP): a protein produced in the liver whenever an inflammatory response occurs in the body. It is one of the so-called acute phase proteins, whose levels in the blood rise very quickly – within 6 to 12 hours – when the body reacts to infections, injuries, or other stimuli.
– Interleukin-6 (IL-6): a messenger substance (cytokine) of the immune system that plays a key role in inflammatory reactions. It is produced primarily by immune cells (macrophages, T cells), but also by cells of the vascular wall or fibroblasts, which are the builders and maintainers of connective tissue. IL-6 stimulates the liver to produce acute-phase proteins such as CRP. It promotes the formation of antibodies, activates T cells to strengthen the immune response, and attracts neutrophil granulocytes to the site of inflammation: specialised white blood cells (leukocytes), which form the most common subgroup of immune cells in the blood. They are the ‘frontline soldiers’ of the immune defence: extremely fast and highly aggressive towards intruders, they often die themselves after their work is done. IL-6 also acts on the brain to trigger fever – a classic sign of inflammation.
– Glycoprotein acetyl (GlycA): It determines the ‘sugar signature’ of several inflammatory proteins simultaneously – comparable to a fire brigade that is called out when something is wrong, for example in the case of an infection, injury or ‘silent’ inflammation in the tissue. The GlycA fire brigade consists of certain proteins in the blood that immediately multiply when a fire (inflammation) breaks out somewhere. These proteins carry small sugar appendages – comparable to colourful flags attached to emergency vehicles. When many such vehicles are on the road at the same time, you suddenly see these flags everywhere. And that is exactly what GlycA measures: like a traffic counter at the fire station, it records the sugar flags of the entire fleet of inflammatory proteins at once, so to speak, thus indicating how busy the fire brigade is overall. GlycA is considered a particularly sensitive marker for subliminal, persistent inflammation, such as that found in obesity, type 2 diabetes, arteriosclerosis, cardiovascular, and autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis or lupus. Even if there is no major fire raging – a manifest infection with noticeable symptoms – GlycA can reveal whether small smouldering fires are constantly smouldering somewhere in the body.
To the surprise of the scientists, both omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids were associated with higher GlycA levels. These included docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), an omega-3 fatty acid found in fish oil, and linoleic acid (LA), a polyunsaturated omega-6 fatty acid found in vegetable oils. Both also increased CRP levels. This is worrying because both markers are associated with long-term health problems such as heart disease and type 2 diabetes. The correlation was clear: the total amount of omega-3 fatty acids led to an increase in CRP of 0.09 points and in GlycA of 0.12 points – enough to raise the alarm.
The prevailing opinion is still that the main problem is an imbalance – too much omega-6, too little omega-3. However, the British-Australian study found that both fats, taken individually, caused an increase in GlycA. (However, the values of all three inflammation markers were higher the more omega-6 there was in relation to omega-3 – so their ratio remains important.)
The study also confirms what is already well known: omega-6 fatty acids promote inflammation. However, more omega-3 does not necessarily solve the problem, for one simple reason: both undergo the same biochemical pathways in our body – they are processed by the same enzymes. Since they rely on the same mechanism, they compete with each other. When our system is flooded with omega-6 fatty acids, this slows down the processing of omega-3, and vice versa. Some by-products of this process promote inflammation or increase blood clotting, depending on how much of each fat is present.
How we react to these fats depends primarily on our genetic makeup – on specific genes that control how our bodies metabolise them. Depending on the gene variant, some people have higher CRP levels after omega intake, while others have slightly lower CRP levels.
The shot can backfire
Neither omega-3 nor omega-6 had an anti-inflammatory effect. In fact, in the study, both types of fat either had no effect at all or increased inflammation. The conclusion is clear: blindly consuming fish oil or ‘heart-healthy’ vegetable oils may worsen the situation rather than improve it.
Does this mean that we should refrain from correcting an existing imbalance between omega-3 and omega-6? No – but we should do it in the right, sustainable way. If a ship is listing to port, we could take on water on the starboard side – this would compensate for the imbalance. But the real cause would remain: a leak below the waterline. As long as we don’t fix it, we have to be prepared for a bad end. The situation is similar with an imbalance between omega-3 and omega-6: it is not just an indication that something is wrong with two specific types of fatty acids in our bodies; rather, it points to something being seriously wrong with our metabolism as a whole. We did not bring this on ourselves by failing to shop wisely at the chemist’s – we have lived unwisely.
This is because fatty acids do not act independently of everything else we consume in our bodies. If we eat poorly – with an excess of processed, nutrient-poor foods, too little fibre, too much alcohol, too many calories, too many inferior vegetable oils that flood our cells with pro-inflammatory fats – simply adding omega-3 fatty acids cannot correct the underlying imbalance in the immune system. Instead, it could even backfire, as the British-Australian study shows: namely, further increasing inflammation if our body is already under metabolic stress.
Dietary supplements: the lazy person’s alibi
This is bad news for anyone who tries to conveniently compensate for the damage they do to their body with supplements – according to the motto: ‘Three doughnuts in the morning, three fish oil capsules in the evening: there you go, a balanced diet.’ A handful of tablets and the occasional green smoothie may neutralise a guilty conscience. However, a miserable diet cannot be compensated for with a few ‘healthy’ foods or supplements. What really counts is the overall quality and balance of everything we eat and drink. Only then can we address the most common cause of chronic inflammation – because it is diet-related.
Inflammation is never just about what you eat, but also about what you leave out. And no single nutrient is ever a panacea.
And this leads to good news: increasing sales in the dietary supplement industry is mostly unnecessary. How about simply eating a varied, wholesome, and balanced diet instead – preferably organic and without industrial convenience products? Then there will be no excess omega-6 to begin with. And inevitably, there will also be enough omega-3-rich foods on the menu: fatty cold-water fish such as herring, mackerel, sardines, and salmon; plant sources such as seeds and nuts, hemp, and rapeseed oil. Those who can afford it can opt for expensive krill oil, a high-quality, particularly bioavailable source of omega-3, extracted from tiny crustaceans in the Southern Ocean.
In addition, getting plenty of exercise, maintaining valuable social contacts, and having a meaningful purpose in life have never hurt anyone. Around the globe, there are thousands upon thousands of centenarians who have lived to be over 100 years old in good health without ever taking omega-3 capsules.
How can you find out if you are deficient in omega-3?
Supplements of individual nutrients are generally only useful, or even necessary, in specific life situations – during pregnancy and breastfeeding, in old age, for vegans, for certain illnesses, and for genetic deficiencies.
A whole range of complaints can indicate an omega-3 deficiency: from dry, flaky skin, blemishes and eczema, dry eyes and visual disturbances, to fatigue, exhaustion, muscle weakness, concentration problems, memory problems, mood swings and depression, to frequent infections, an increased tendency to inflammation, joint pai,n and water retention.
Unfortunately, all these symptoms are anything but clear-cut – they are consistent with many underlying conditions.
And even if more omega-3 were appropriate, how much more would be needed? The vast majority of supplement buyers take a guess, blindly trusting the manufacturer’s general consumption recommendations without knowing their personal requirements.
The status can be determined precisely by means of a blood test, the omega-3 index: it measures the proportion of EPA and DHA in the membranes of red blood cells. Values below 4% are considered critical, and 8–11% are considered optimal.
You don’t necessarily have to go to the doctor for this. With special test kits, the measurement can also be carried out conveniently at home. Kits offering good value for money cost between £54 and £90.
To be absolutely sure after changing your diet or taking supplements, you would need to have quarterly blood tests.
Wouldn’t the much cheaper, simpler, natural way to get enough fatty acids in the body, proven for hundreds of thousands of years, be the more sensible option: to live a truly healthy life?
Balance instead of extremes: that must be the goal. As in life in general, the middle ground is almost always the golden mean when it comes to nutritional issues.
P.S.: This article should not be used for self-diagnosis or self-treatment; it is not a substitute for visiting your doctor.
Notes
(1) https://www.newhope.com/industry-insights/the-omega-3-coalition-putting-rivalries-aside-for-the-greater-good; https://www.ispot.tv/products/Ya/omega-3, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_qguuhm-Ck, https://www.rossmann.de/de/gesundheit-optimum-performance-omega-3-vegan/p/0745202590057, https://www.amazon.de/Hochdosiert-Omega-Kapseln-Testsieger-Zitronengeschmack/dp/B0FCC7HF7H/ref=sr, https://www.amazon.de/Omega-Fisch%C3%B6l-Einf%C3%BChrungspreis-Triglycerid-Form-aufgereinigt/dp/B07L6K4HNC/ref=sr
(2) The data collection for the UK Biobank between 2006 and 2010 included: questionnaires on lifestyle, nutrition, social environment; physical measurements, e.g. blood pressure, BMI, eye examinations; blood, urine and saliva samples; genetic data (DNA analyses, whole genome sequencing); imaging techniques, in particular MRI of the brain, heart, joints, etc. These were linked to electronic health records and statistics on causes of death. The aim was to better understand the causes of diseases such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and depression; to identify genetic risk factors and gene-environment interactions; and to advance prevention and personalised medicine. The UK Biobank is considered the gold standard for large-scale cohort studies because it collects very comprehensive and standardised data, tracks participants over decades and offers open access to researchers worldwide.
(3) For decades, ALSPAC – also known as ‘Children of the 90s’ – has been collecting medical, biological, psychological, social, and environmental information. The study includes: questionnaires on health, lifestyle, nutrition, mental well-being, and social environment; physical examinations, e.g., of growth, blood pressure, and eyes; samples of blood, urine, umbilical cord blood, saliva, and DNA; genetic data; and imaging techniques such as MRI and DEXA bone density measurements. ALSPAC now also includes parents and the children of the original children (‘second generation’).