LCHF - Low Carb High Fat Diet Ver 2

[Spinsei]

Does anybody know where to buy omega3 enriched eggs??

 

Regards

 

They have in my Spar! Groenkloof PTA

[HippoPal]

Indeed htone, big pharma, aaargh, will rather follow krouxsa's gran's lifestyle!

[HippoPal]

They have in my Spar! Groenkloof PTA

 

Good. Wish they would sort out the parking there though!

[htone]

Re Omega-3 enriched eggs.... and I haven't tested this, so I am just expressing an opinion here - but if you follow a paleo-type diet which would be full of NATURAL foods, don't you think that an egg that is enriched or fortified with omega-3 is perhaps a little unnatural ? And if you look at how much of this you would actually need to consume, then fish-oil still seems to be a superior supplement of Omega 3 ?

 

Have a look at the article below (and yes I know it is dangerous to quote from a single source), but doesn't this make you think a little about this ?

 

 

Enriched eggs, milk may not be best source for omega-3s

 

Nutrition Lab

 

December 13, 2010|By Elena Conis, Special to the Los Angeles Times

 

Milk and eggs have earned their place in the American diet because they're good sources of calcium and protein, respectively. These days, some brands are also being touted as a good source of another nutrient: omega-3s.

Omega-3 fatty acids are in demand because of their proven beneficial effects on heart health. The Institute of Medicine, which advises the government on health issues, recommends 1,100 milligrams of omega-3s per day for women and 1,600 mg for men.

 

Two types of omega-3s — docosahexanoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid ( EPA) — have been shown in rigorous, large-scale studies to slow the buildup of plaque in the arteries, lower triglycerides in the blood, and reduce the risk of irregular heartbeat and of cardiac events in people who have already suffered a heart attack.

A third type of omega-3, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), may be beneficial for heart health too, though it hasn't been studied as extensively. Found in canola and soybean oils, ALA is already abundant in the American diet. In the body, about 5% of it gets converted into DHA and EPA.

In order to be useful, omega-3s must be consumed in fairly large doses that can be difficult — and expensive — to get through fortified foods such as eggs and milk, says Dr. Donald Hensrud, chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn.

Omega-3 eggs were developed in 1990 by a Canadian food scientist who was looking for a way to reverse declining consumption of eggs, which had gone out of favor due to their high cholesterol content. Producing an egg enriched with omega-3s turned out to be easy: All he had to do was feed hens flaxseed or another natural source of the fats and they ended up in the eggs.

Flaxseed contains ALA, so that ends up being the predominant omega-3 in fortified eggs. Few egg cartons reveal as much, however.

Land O Lakes Omega-3 All-Natural Eggs claim to contain 350 milligrams of omega-3s per egg, but the types and amounts of omega-3 aren't specified on the carton. Ditto for Organic Valley Omega-3 Extra Large Eggs, which boast 225 mg of the fats — types not specified — per egg.

Smart Balance, by contrast, reveals that its Omega-3 Grade A Natural Large Eggs each contain 160 mg of ALA and 32 mg of DHA.

That information is important, since ALA, DHA and EPA may differ greatly in their effects on cardiovascular health, says Dr. Freny Mody, director of cardiology for the Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

In eggs, levels of the two omega-3s known to be useful — DHA and EPA — are generally lower than levels of ALA, which is found in affordable chicken feeds like flax and canola. Feeding hens fishmeal and algae, two good sources of DHA and EPA, is a pricier proposition.

Working omega-3s into milk is considerably more difficult, but food scientists have figured out how to suspend DHA and EPA in milk by encapsulating the fats in a gel, says Joy Dubost, a Washington, D.C., nutritionist and member of the Institute of Food Technologists. (The suspension technology also keeps the milk from tasting like fish, the source of the omega-3s, according to Organic Valley's website.)

[Topwine]

Link To Prostate Cancer Brings More Bad News For Fish Oil Story

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2013/07/11/link-to-prostate-cancer-brings-more-bad-news-for-fish-oil-story/

 

Adding more confusion to an already fishy story, a new study has found a significant association between omega-3 fatty acids and the risk of prostate cancer. Although the linkage had been previously observed, the finding surprised the investigators, who wrote that ”these findings contradict the expectation that high consumption of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and low consumption of omega-6 fatty acids would reduce the risk of prostate cancer.”

In a report published in JNCI, investigators analyzed data from men who had participated in the SELECT (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) trial. They compared 834 men who developed prostate cancer with 1,393 matched controls. When compared with men who had the lowest levels of omega-3 fatty acids, men in the highest quartile of omega-3 fatty acids were at significantly increased risk for low-grade, high-grade, and total prostate cancer:

• low-grade: hazard ratio = 1.44, CI 1.08-1.93
  
• high-grade: HR = 1.71, CI 1.00- 2.94
  
• total: HR = 1.43, CI = 1.09 to 1.88
  

Further contributing to the counter-intuitive findings, men with higher levels of trans-fatty acids had a lower risk for high-grade prostate cancer.

The authors concluded that despite the absence of a “coherent mechanism” to explain the finding, the available data

“suggests that long-chain omega-3 PUFA do play a role in enhancing prostate tumorigenesis. As has been made evident from many other clinical trials of nutritional supplements and cancer risk, the associations of nutrients with chronic disease are complex and may affect diseases differently. Long-chain omega-3 PUFA have been widely promoted for prevention of heart disease and cancer. Both this study and a recent meta-analysis of clinical trials showing no effects of long-chain omega-3 PUFA supplementation on all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke suggest that general recommendations to increase long-chain omega-3 PUFA intake should consider its potential risks.”

The new study, although it did not specifically look at people taking fish oil supplements, is the latest in a series of studies that have cast doubt on the benefits of fish oils and the wisdom of taking fish oil supplements. Last year, a large meta-analysis and systematic review in JAMA found no cardiovascular benefits with fish oil supplements. In May, a study from Italy published in the New England Journal of Medicine also found no benefits for people taking fish oil supplements.

[P.A.K.]

Re Omega-3 enriched eggs.... and I haven't tested this, so I am just expressing an opinion here - but if you follow a paleo-type diet which would be full of NATURAL foods, don't you think that an egg that is enriched or fortified with omega-3 is perhaps a little unnatural ? And if you look at how much of this you would actually need to consume, then fish-oil still seems to be a superior supplement of Omega 3 ?

 

Have a look at the article below (and yes I know it is dangerous to quote from a single source), but doesn't this make you think a little about this ?

 

 

Enriched eggs, milk may not be best source for omega-3s

 

Nutrition Lab

 

December 13, 2010|By Elena Conis, Special to the Los Angeles Times

 

Milk and eggs have earned their place in the American diet because they're good sources of calcium and protein, respectively. These days, some brands are also being touted as a good source of another nutrient: omega-3s.

Omega-3 fatty acids are in demand because of their proven beneficial effects on heart health. The Institute of Medicine, which advises the government on health issues, recommends 1,100 milligrams of omega-3s per day for women and 1,600 mg for men.

 

Two types of omega-3s — docosahexanoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid ( EPA) — have been shown in rigorous, large-scale studies to slow the buildup of plaque in the arteries, lower triglycerides in the blood, and reduce the risk of irregular heartbeat and of cardiac events in people who have already suffered a heart attack.

A third type of omega-3, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), may be beneficial for heart health too, though it hasn't been studied as extensively. Found in canola and soybean oils, ALA is already abundant in the American diet. In the body, about 5% of it gets converted into DHA and EPA.

In order to be useful, omega-3s must be consumed in fairly large doses that can be difficult — and expensive — to get through fortified foods such as eggs and milk, says Dr. Donald Hensrud, chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn.

Omega-3 eggs were developed in 1990 by a Canadian food scientist who was looking for a way to reverse declining consumption of eggs, which had gone out of favor due to their high cholesterol content. Producing an egg enriched with omega-3s turned out to be easy: All he had to do was feed hens flaxseed or another natural source of the fats and they ended up in the eggs.

Flaxseed contains ALA, so that ends up being the predominant omega-3 in fortified eggs. Few egg cartons reveal as much, however.

Land O Lakes Omega-3 All-Natural Eggs claim to contain 350 milligrams of omega-3s per egg, but the types and amounts of omega-3 aren't specified on the carton. Ditto for Organic Valley Omega-3 Extra Large Eggs, which boast 225 mg of the fats — types not specified — per egg.

Smart Balance, by contrast, reveals that its Omega-3 Grade A Natural Large Eggs each contain 160 mg of ALA and 32 mg of DHA.

That information is important, since ALA, DHA and EPA may differ greatly in their effects on cardiovascular health, says Dr. Freny Mody, director of cardiology for the Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

In eggs, levels of the two omega-3s known to be useful — DHA and EPA — are generally lower than levels of ALA, which is found in affordable chicken feeds like flax and canola. Feeding hens fishmeal and algae, two good sources of DHA and EPA, is a pricier proposition.

Working omega-3s into milk is considerably more difficult, but food scientists have figured out how to suspend DHA and EPA in milk by encapsulating the fats in a gel, says Joy Dubost, a Washington, D.C., nutritionist and member of the Institute of Food Technologists. (The suspension technology also keeps the milk from tasting like fish, the source of the omega-3s, according to Organic Valley's website.)

Besides, eggs is one of the staples in my diet. I dont want it injected with nasties

[htone]

Besides, eggs is one of the staples in my diet. I dont want it injected with nasties

 

Not really injected, but them cheekens need to eat a lot of flax for it to show up in the eggs, hey. More concerning is that bit at the end about the enriched milk - I wonder who the test driver for that project was ?

[Topwine]

Further independent arguments against fish oil and other omega 3 oils like flaxseed oil .

Why do you think flaxseed oil needs to be kept in a refrigerator ? ...

 

http://www.brianpesk...l Fallacies.pdf

 

http://raypeat.com/a...s/fishoil.shtml

 

“In declaring EPA and DHA to be safe, the FDA neglected to evaluate their antithyroid, immunosuppressive, lipid peroxidative (Song et al., 2000), light sensitizing, and antimitochondrial effects, their depression of glucose oxidation (Delarue et al., 2003), and their contribution to metastatic cancer (Klieveri, et al., 2000), lipofuscinosis and liver damage, among other problems.”

 

And then people complain about glucose intolerance when they consume these oils 50 ml at a time !!

Edited October 31, 2013 by Topwine

[Helpmytrap]

Not really injected, but them cheekens need to eat a lot of flax for it to show up in the eggs, hey. More concerning is that bit at the end about the enriched milk - I wonder who the test driver for that project was ?

Also on the flip side, they'd probably be more Omega-6 enriched than anything else.

 

Besides, ALA is a very poor source of O-3 since the body needs to "attempt" to convert it to the relevant form through a very intricate and complex process which means that it is not a guaranteed O-3 source.

[Leon Besaans]

that is enriched or fortified with omega-3 is perhaps a little unnatural ?

 

 

Ja of course, but hell, what food is not misformed/ enriched?? Damn difficult eating a 100% strict paleo or whatever other diet.

 

My take is that if I have 0mega-3 eggs, and a decent helping of fatty fish a few times a week that side of the equation should be sorted out... Mostly anyway.

 

Thanks for input.

 

Regards

[DomJBo]

Link To Prostate Cancer Brings More Bad News For Fish Oil Story

 

http://www.forbes.co...fish-oil-story/

 

Adding more confusion to an already fishy story, a new study has found a significant association between omega-3 fatty acids and the risk of prostate cancer. Although the linkage had been previously observed, the finding surprised the investigators, who wrote that ”these findings contradict the expectation that high consumption of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and low consumption of omega-6 fatty acids would reduce the risk of prostate cancer.”

In a report published in JNCI, investigators analyzed data from men who had participated in the SELECT (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) trial. They compared 834 men who developed prostate cancer with 1,393 matched controls. When compared with men who had the lowest levels of omega-3 fatty acids, men in the highest quartile of omega-3 fatty acids were at significantly increased risk for low-grade, high-grade, and total prostate cancer:

• low-grade: hazard ratio = 1.44, CI 1.08-1.93
  
• high-grade: HR = 1.71, CI 1.00- 2.94
  
• total: HR = 1.43, CI = 1.09 to 1.88
  

Further contributing to the counter-intuitive findings, men with higher levels of trans-fatty acids had a lower risk for high-grade prostate cancer.

The authors concluded that despite the absence of a “coherent mechanism” to explain the finding, the available data

“suggests that long-chain omega-3 PUFA do play a role in enhancing prostate tumorigenesis. As has been made evident from many other clinical trials of nutritional supplements and cancer risk, the associations of nutrients with chronic disease are complex and may affect diseases differently. Long-chain omega-3 PUFA have been widely promoted for prevention of heart disease and cancer. Both this study and a recent meta-analysis of clinical trials showing no effects of long-chain omega-3 PUFA supplementation on all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke suggest that general recommendations to increase long-chain omega-3 PUFA intake should consider its potential risks.”

The new study, although it did not specifically look at people taking fish oil supplements, is the latest in a series of studies that have cast doubt on the benefits of fish oils and the wisdom of taking fish oil supplements. Last year, a large meta-analysis and systematic review in JAMA found no cardiovascular benefits with fish oil supplements. In May, a study from Italy published in theNew England Journal of Medicine also found no benefits for people taking fish oil supplements.

 

This is an alternative view, something that must be taken into consideration though, is that these men were diagnosed and then analyzed. Which means a lot of them could have specifically changed their diets post diagnosis which would skew the results. I'm not saying this is the case but just one of the circumstances to think about.

 

An important aspect I want to highlight is that they say there is no benefit in taking a fish oil supplement. Which I can easily agree with as if you are eating oily fish and a variety of different foods (yes I'm automatically excluding carbs) then you should be (over a sustained period of time) getting all the different vitamins and minerals that your body requires. Spinach would be source of iron for instance as opposed to supplementing with a supplement.

 

One of the things that Tim Noakes mentioned in his lecture yesterday that I found interesting and I think we sometimes forget. It is also one of his cornerstones for eating lchf is that he has gone back and studied the way many cultures used to eat prior to the agricultural revolution (this he claims is one of the reasons why there was a huge shift in the way people used to eat and the way people eat now) and mimic that in today's circumstances. Those people didn't take supplements or find eggs and milk that had been supercharged with oils from fish.

 

My stance would be to keep it simple (KISS Principle) and natural in this case.

 

edit: Grammar and spelling

Edited October 31, 2013 by DomJBo

[htone]

This is an alternative view, something that must be taken into consideration though, is that these men were diagnosed and then analyzed. Which means a lot of them could have specifically changed their diets post diagnosis which would skew the results. I'm not saying this is the case but just one of the circumstances to think about.

 

An important aspect I want to highlight is that they say there is no benefit in taking a fish oil supplement. Which I can easily agree with as if you are eating oily fish and a variety of different foods (yes I'm automatically excluding carbs) then you should be (over a sustained period of time) getting all the different vitamins and minerals that your body requires. Spinach would be source of iron for instance as opposed to supplementing with a supplement.

 

One of the things that Tim Noakes mentioned in his lecture yesterday that I found interesting and I think we sometimes forget. It is also one of his cornerstones for eating lchf is that he has gone back and studied the way many cultures used to eat prior to the agricultural revolution (this he claims is one of the reasons why there was a huge shift in the way people used to eat and the way people eat now) and mimic that in today's circumstances. Those people didn't take supplements or find eggs and milk that had been supercharged with oils from fish.

 

My stance would be to keep it simple (KISS Principle) and natural in this case.

 

edit: Grammar and spelling

 

Nicely put, DomJBo.

I like Noakes' simple explanation of what "real food" is, and I paraphrase: "If it hasn't lived until recently, it isn't food".

[Topwine]

This is an alternative view, something that must be taken into consideration though, is that these men were diagnosed and then analyzed. Which means a lot of them could have specifically changed their diets post diagnosis which would skew the results. I'm not saying this is the case but just one of the circumstances to think about.

 

 

This is not an alternative view. This is an objective view based on a RCT (randomised, double blind, controlled Study) the GOLD standard of studies. You cannot get better than this.

 

The men were not "diagnosed" beforehand and "then analyzed".

 

SELECT (the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) is the largest-ever prostate cancer prevention trial. http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/noteworthy-trials/select/Page1

 

Design, Setting, and Participants A total of 35 533 men from 427 study sites in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico were randomized between August 22, 2001, and June 24, 2004. Eligibility criteria included a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 4.0 ng/mL or less, a digital rectal examination not suspicious for prostate cancer, and age 50 years or older for black men and 55 years or older for all others.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104493

 

As part of the study their blood samples were collected every 6 months, starting at base line. Analysis of the people that developed prostate cancer after the next 5.5 years, showed these results.

 

Conclusions This study confirms previous reports of increased prostate cancer risk among men with high blood concentrations of LCω-3PUFA. The consistency of these findings suggests that these fatty acids are involved in prostate tumorigenesis. Recommendations to increase LCω-3PUFA intake should consider its potential risks.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/105/15/1132

[DomJBo]

 

This is not an alternative view. This is an objective view based on a RCT (randomised, double blind, controlled Study) the GOLD standard of studies. You cannot get better than this.

 

The men were not "diagnosed" beforehand and "then analyzed".

 

SELECT (the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) is the largest-ever prostate cancer prevention trial. http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/noteworthy-trials/select/Page1

 

Design, Setting, and Participants A total of 35 533 men from 427 study sites in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico were randomized between August 22, 2001, and June 24, 2004. Eligibility criteria included a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 4.0 ng/mL or less, a digital rectal examination not suspicious for prostate cancer, and age 50 years or older for black men and 55 years or older for all others.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104493

 

As part of the study their blood samples were collected every 6 months, starting at base line. Analysis of the people that developed prostate cancer after the next 5.5 years, showed these results.

 

Conclusions This study confirms previous reports of increased prostate cancer risk among men with high blood concentrations of LCω-3PUFA. The consistency of these findings suggests that these fatty acids are involved in prostate tumorigenesis. Recommendations to increase LCω-3PUFA intake should consider its potential risks.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/105/15/1132

 

I think you may have misunderstood me. I was making reference to my view being the alternative one not the study. The study I'm sure is as credible as it need to be to be of importance.

 

However in the article it mentions that all the men had DEVELOPED prostate cancer, which in my view is already a a significant occurrence in one's life to consider change. I'm years away from prostate cancer and would have no inclination to change my diet. But in 40 years time if the doc had to say to me that my prostate might become an issue in the following years then I would consider changing my diet, especially supplementing it with omega 3 which has anti inflammatory properties. Just what I would do.

 

Htone, correct me if I'm wrong, changed his diet due to his heart attack. You top wine have changed your sons diet because of your knowledge of his diabetes.

[DomJBo]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7gmde02jqhdvev0/Tim%20Noakes%20Public%20Lecture.wav

 

So here is the link for the lecture from Wednesday. If you have any questions just give me a shout I could probably help you to understand something as he did make reference and use of ppt slides. The last 20 or so minutes is questions and answers. The file is about 500mb for those with data restrictions.

[Topwine]

I think you may have misunderstood me. I was making reference to my view being the alternative one not the study. The study I'm sure is as credible as it need to be to be of importance.

 

Ok, thought you was talking about the study.

 

However in the article it mentions that all the men had DEVELOPED prostate cancer, which in my view is already a a significant occurrence in one's life to consider change. I'm years away from prostate cancer and would have no inclination to change my diet. But in 40 years time if the doc had to say to me that my prostate might become an issue in the following years then I would consider changing my diet, especially supplementing it with omega 3 which has anti inflammatory properties. Just what I would do.

 

Htone, correct me if I'm wrong, changed his diet due to his heart attack. You top wine have changed your sons diet because of your knowledge of his diabetes.

 

Everyone of course has to do what they believe is best. What baffles me is why you want to change your diet only AFTER you have developed prostrate cancer, and then to include more Omega 3 PUFA's which this study, and others, show a much higher risk of getting it in the first place !