Essential Fatty Acids (Omega-3 & Omega-6) are direct building blocks for the skin's lipid bilayers, reducing transepidermal water loss (TEWL).
-
@ZackVegas
Correlation isn't causation. Did you think that in one hundred years the only factor affecting public health is PUFA?This is from the link your provided:
"Decrease in the unsaturated fatty acids as a result of the low-fat regimen indicates the probability that even the normal adult human subject, like the rat, is unable to fabricate the highly unsaturated fatty acids, which should, therefore, be provided in the diet.
In the light of this latter observation, it cannot be assumed that the human subject could subsist indefinitely on a diet completely devoid of the unsaturated fatty acids."I've cited Omega-9 made from de nuovo lipogenesis doesn't build lipid bilayers effectively. Also, research on diets high in saturated fats is that they increase transepidermal water loss (TEWL).
Edit: Saturated fat reduces TEWL, but high consumption can worsen skin condition. There's also confounding factor that animal fats contain more Arachidonic Acid.
-
@ZackVegas
Correlation isn't causation. Did you think that in one hundred years the only factor affecting public health is PUFA?Of course the increase in PUFA isn't the only factor. There was also a massive spike in iron intake, which is also problematic, for example. There's lots of other things, from drugs to stress to quality of food that go into any long term trend. And high PUFA oils do lead to lower quality foods. Chips fried in beef tallow only have 3 ingredients.... Potatoes, Tallow, and Salt. Chips fried in high PUFA seed oils require a host of preservatives and antioxidants, due to the instability of PUFA, as compared to saturated fats.
Yes, correlation isn't causation, but PUFA is very obviously a key driving factor in the rise of obesity. We know that large amounts of PUFA slow down metabolism, and fatten animals. We know that it takes extra steps to process in Beta Oxidation than Saturated Fats, Monounsaturated Fats, or Trans Fats (that is just textbook biochemistry). We know that Omega 6 is inflammatory. And we have seen that removing PUFA in fat free diets increases metabolism, and can even cause weight loss in humans at what is thought to be a maintenence level of calories.
This is from the link your provided:
"Decrease in the unsaturated fatty acids as a result of the low-fat regimen indicates the probability that even the normal adult human subject, like the rat, is unable to fabricate the highly unsaturated fatty acids, which should, therefore, be provided in the diet.
In the light of this latter observation, it cannot be assumed that the human subject could subsist indefinitely on a diet completely devoid of the unsaturated fatty acids."Yes, it does. But so what? The study itself showed that a human could not just survive, but significantly improve his health on a 6 month diet devoid of unsaturated fats.
The whole idea that something labeled "essential" has to be something that the body can't produce is pretty silly. For example, if blood glucose drops too low, coma and death will be the result. Yet for some reason, glucose isn't considered "essential" because the body can generate it from protein so that coma and death don't result. Again, the only issue ever mentioned from so called "Essential Fatty Acid Deficiency" is skin problems, like scaly tail in rats, or rashes or xerosis in humans.
I've cited Omega-9 made from de nuovo lipogenesis doesn't build lipid bilayers effectively. Also, research on diets high in saturated fats is that they increase transepidermal water loss (TEWL).
Don't know what studies you are referring to here, but often times, those study diets that are 'high" in saturated fat are often higher in PUFA and unsaturated fats in general. If the study used a purified diet with HCO, that would be about the only diet that contains fat with next to no PUFA, and that regiment would have to go a long way to ensure the proper vitamins and minerals that you would get from something like milkfat or beef fat in normally eaten foods.
-
using the chart showing increasing pufa consumption correlated to obesity when the increased pufa consumption is in the form of deep frying with seed oils is disingenious
keep in mind zach is the same guy who said hitler abolished usury which is so wrong especially since pro hitler people also out of the other side of their mouth commend hitler for revitalizing the economy of germany which was accomplished with interest bearing notes to fund manufacturing expansion
alot of people yap just to yap and will just ignore stuff to suit their opinion. and when someone just posts stuff that is wrong and refuses to admit it , it also has me thinking they are again willingly being wrong just to prove they arent wrong somehow.
when i see people with really good skin and physiques and overall aura supporting whole food pufa consumption and i see weirdos with bad physiognomies with anime
girl avatars in the peat o sphere who dont even point out that the articles from rp have bad citations, well, u know, it is pretty easy to decide who is correct -
using the chart showing increasing pufa consumption correlated to obesity when the increased pufa consumption is in the form of deep frying with seed oils is disingenious
The increase in PUFA was driven by seed oils specifically. It's not "disingenuous," it's literarily what happened. While some of that was indeed from deep fried foods, a lot of it was in the form of things like salad dressing, mayo, and replacing things like butter and tallow with canola and soybean oil in regular cooking. And some of it was from a shift in fatty acid composition of livestock fat. Pig fat now has a higher proportion of PUFA than it did in the 1950s, so you are getting more PUFA simply by eating things like bacon or pork shoulder.
Besides, deep frying in and of itself is not unhealthy. French Fries used to made mostly with beef tallow. McDonalds used beef tallow for their fries from when they first started until 1990, when they switched to seed oils. And the PUFA content of those seed oils went up again in the early 2000s, when they stopped using partially hydrogenated oils. Deep frying really only becomes problematic when you start using oils that break down at high heats, and considering the high PUFA seed oils are unstable even at room temperature, this change took deep frying from fairly benign to very problematic..
when i see people with really good skin and physiques and overall aura supporting whole food pufa consumption and i see weirdos with bad physiognomies with anime
What do you mean by "whole food PUFA consumption?" This is a pretty silly statement, because you will be talking about people who eat about 30 grams less PUFA than the average person. As Ray Peat mentioned, PUFA is unavoidable, outside of a lab created diet. Even 8 ounces of Orange Juice has roughly 100mg of PUFA, and the more saturated fats like dairy fat, beef and coconut have about 2-3% of their fat as PUFA. Those who only consume PUFA in "whole foods" are going to be eating at levels closer to those in the early 1900s on the chart, unless they specifically eat nothing but salmon, flax seed, and nuts.
It's true that the vast majority of processed foods today are unhealthy, but that's only because they specifically use toxic ingredients, like high PUFA seed oils, and added iron (aka, ferrous sulfate). If these same foods where made with better ingredients, like beef tallow and coconut oil, they would be more benign, even healthy, and could easily be 20% or less of a healthy diet, that was based around meat, dairy, fruits and such.
By the way, how did you ensure these people only consumed PUFA from whole foods? Did you lock them down in a metabolic ward for a few months? Did you review their cronometer data for the past 5 years? Or, did you just hazard a guess about what they eat?
-
whole food pufa like nuts seeds and avocados (uncooked) are probably healthy in normal amounts in diet
deep frying even with saturated fats is suboptimal imo
-
whole food pufa like nuts seeds and avocados (uncooked) are probably healthy in normal amounts in diet
deep frying even with saturated fats is suboptimal imo
Avocados don't have that much PUFA. An Avocado is about 5 ounces, and that would have about 13 grams of total fat. Of that total fat, only 1.5 grams is PUFA. The majority of Avocado fat is monounsaturated.
Almonds are fairly high in PUFA. 2 ounces of almonds have 29 grams total fat, but only about 6 grams of PUFA. So, in normal amounts, those two examples might contribute 8 grams PUFA to a daily total. If other fats are eaten, they might be getting about 15 grams or so a day, which is close to the 1930 numbers.
I'd agree that deep frying in things like beef tallow is sub optimal, but then again, so are nuts and avocados. But let's be honest.... avocados taste good, and french fries taste gewd. You should get enjoyment out of eating, and if something tastes great, you shouldn't have to avoid it just because it's not optimal. Deep frying in things like Tallow or HCO is benign to slightly healthy, as opposed to deep frying in high PUFA oils, which is certainly unhealthy.
-
"Yes, there are plenty of studies out there that come to a conclusion that was reached long before the study was ever conducted. Maybe it's showing how Omega 6 and 3 can be "essential" in very extreme cases, or maybe it's confirmation bias. Either way, it doesn't have much application to real world humans that can eat normally."
Saying a nutrient "applies to sick people but not healthy people" or vice versa are the exact reasonings used by drug peddler big pharma or diet gurus.
This one is incredibly interesting. It shows that even in extreme cases of digestive disorders and malnutrition, it's still difficult to induce so called "Essential Fatty Acid Deficiency" in 25% of patients, even after 6 months of fat free feeding.
Maybe this isn't obvious to you: the other patients required EFA.
First off, I'm not "determining" anything. I am of the opinion that Omega 6 and Omega 3 aren't "essential," which is why I keep referring to them as "so called Essential Fatty Acids (or EFA)."
That's right, you're not determining anything: You're just citing the one study that is Burr experiment on one adult human over and over.
Don't know what studies you are referring to here, but often times, those study diets that are 'high" in saturated fat are often higher in PUFA and unsaturated fats in general. If the study used a purified diet with HCO, that would be about the only diet that contains fat with next to no PUFA, and that regiment would have to go a long way to ensure the proper vitamins and minerals that you would get from something like milkfat or beef fat in normally eaten foods.
That's why I provided studies with TPN (Total Parenteral Nutrition); however, you just dismiss them as "extreme cases".
-
@AlphaZance Reading your post... It feels weird as a concept since TEWL factor can be improved exogenously using just about any oil or butter. I know this because I was researching highest TEWL factor for hair and scalp, and white petrolatum is the unabashed winner with like a 99% chance of stopping water loss when used on skin or hair. Mineral oil is a runner up in the 90s as well. All other oils and butters are not as effective with carrying amounts of saturated fat and unsaturated fat.
So, just by what's mentioned alone, it feels like the study was too narrow in its approach...
-
Saying a nutrient "applies to sick people but not healthy people" or vice versa are the exact reasonings used by drug peddler big pharma or diet gurus.
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.
This is similar to hemochromatosis. Iron is a proven essential mineral, but those with hemochromatosis have toxic amounts. They can benefit from a low iron diet, and having blood removed via donation or phlebotomy.
Maybe this isn't obvious to you: the other patients required EFA.
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.
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.
That's right, you're not determining anything: You're just citing the one study that is Burr experiment on one adult human over and over.
Kinda like how you keep citing TPN studies over and over?
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.
That's why I provided studies with TPN (Total Parenteral Nutrition); however, you just dismiss them as "extreme cases".
Because they are extreme cases. The overwhelming majority of the people in this world EAT. Like, 99.999+%. As do 99.99999+% of animals. So, those cases simply wouldn't be applicable to the vast majority of humans and animals. And even people on TPN are only on it for a relatively short period of their life, from a few months to a few years.
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.
-
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. -
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.Well, if I were to recommend something in such cases, I would stick with beneficial strategies that have robust evidence behind them. Things like increased gelatin and collagen consumption, glycine supplementation, biotin supplementation, red light therapy. In skin conditions, maybe topical application of things like coconut oil, shea butter, and urea creams. I certainly wouldn't recommend Omega 6 and Omega 3 fatty acids, as I believe those substances to be toxic at the levels currently consumed, and likely causal in such problems.
In my own experience, when I trialed a very low fat diet, the rough skin on my elbows and heels became the smoothest it has ever been. I was pleasantly surprised at this. The diet lasted for 2+ months, did feature a large amount of glycine and gelatin, and was done to keep PUFA as low as possible. I aimed for 20 g of fat or less per day, hit as low as 7 some days, and tried to ensure that that fat was as saturated as possible. For me, this really backed up what Ray Peat had long been saying about PUFA.
Feel free to dismiss every single EFA studies like this or "extreme cases".
Will do, considering they are indeed extreme cases, and certainly don't prove that Omega 6 and Omega 3 are essential in any case.
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.
I'll say it again.... outside of a purified diet or outright starvation,, Omega 6 and Omega 3 are UNAVOIDABLE. The idea that Omega 6 and Omega 3 are somehow "essential" come out of the same lab and are based on a handful of mice studies.
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?
It would apply to the majority of the population. In 2021, 150 Million adults in the US were considered overweight or obese, similar to the patients in the Kempner study. Back in 1950, when Kempner was doing his studies, the total US population was about 120 million. Also, in 2012, the number of patients on TPN was just below 44,000. So, if you think TPN studies are somehow relevant, than the Kempner diet study would have to be about 3400 times as relevant. So yes, I do think this study is far more applicable than the TPN studies. Several thousand times more relevant.
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.First of all, I took info on TPN direct from the studies you posted. But also, from some basic common sense. Since TPN is an IV infusion, we would know that the manufacturers aren't simply grinding up steak and potatoes and injecting it into peoples veins.
Second, there is always going to be plenty of missing nutrients, since all the nutrients of food aren't known. Even then, the levels of known nutrients are going to be a guess. TPN is absolutely lifesaving in situations where someone can't eat, but it's far from ideal.
As for calories, I posted the problem with calories in an earlier comment that came direct from a study you posted. The amount was very low for the patient, and it seemed like the researchers didn't take into account that the patient had a history of eating disorders and was recovering from surgery, both things which should have increased his caloric intake.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login