@ZackVegas
I wasn't taking about a "nutrient," I was talking about the studies. They don't have much application to real world humans. If, for the sake of argument, we presume that Omega 3 and Omega 6 are "essential," it's obvious they wouldn't be needed in the diet in every case. Someone who has 20 pounds of stored Omega 6 and Omega 3 certainly wouldn't need them in the diet every day, or even need to consume them for very long periods of time. And even then, Omega 6 and 3 are basically unavoidable in anyone who eats food.
You aren't "determining anything". What would you recommend if an individual has the following symptoms of EFA deficiency? These symptoms are very much prevalent in common people with "normal feeding":
• Dermatological: Dry, scaly, or flaky skin (xerotic or eczematous dermatitis), periorificial dermatitis, and loss of skin elasticity.
• Hair and Nails: Hair loss (alopecia), brittle or dull hair, and weakened nails.
• Healing and Immunity: Poor wound healing and an increased risk of frequent infections due to a weakened immune system.
• Developmental (in Infants and Children): Growth delays, failure to thrive, and potential intellectual impairment.
• Other Signs: Thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count), anemia, and fatigue or brain fog.
The study in no way proves that. That's an interpretation, but not necessarily correct. They may have simply needed more fat in general, or simply more calories.
Feel free to dismiss every single EFA studies like this or "extreme cases".
Again, the fact that the study shows that 25% of patients on an extreme protocol of a purified diet for 6 months didn't develop "EFA deficiency" shows that this condition is nothing to be concerned with for any human or animal that actually eats food, and raises the question of if Omega 6 and 3 are "essential" in any context.
They didn't develop "EFA deficiency" from measurement of triene to tetraene ratio, you can check if they're getting the "higher metabolism" positive effects, without EFA deficiency symptoms.
Kinda like how you keep citing TPN studies over and over?
Even if I did it's better than you telling people to deprive themselves of nutrients they might need based on the study that is literal one human.
There are other studies done with very low fat diets. Walter Kempner used The Rice Diet with many people, and didn't seem to have any issues with so called "EFA Deficiency."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1200726/
Some patients stayed on the diet a year or more.
You cite a study of massively obese patients not needing fat in the diet for prolonged period, which probably to your logic isn't an "extreme case". There's also a medical study Angus Barbieri who didn't eat for a year, does that apply to everyone?
TPN is a purified diet, and will be missing a lot of vitamins, minerals, cofactors, and such. As I pointed out earlier, it might even be missing sufficient calories in some cases. The levels of included vitamins and minerals could be insufficient as well.
Where do you get the information on TPN? TPN is used to feed sick and even near-death people, there's almost no missing nutrients in TPN.
I'm sure researchers take calories into account in TPN studies.