Live data from Hacker News

Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

npr.org

141–150 of 248 posts

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#141
post #108

"Fine and Manson stressed that vitamin D and the omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil are important nutrients, but the best way to get them is as part of a well-balanced diet. That includes eating fatty fish like sardines, tuna and salmon, and vitamin-D fortified cereals, milk, and orange juice." Ah, okay. So instead of taking supplemental Vitamin D, you should get it from natural sources, such as..... foods that ha…

Most Omega-3 comes from fish already, though there is a point in preferring the fish to the supplements, it's not as if it was something completely synthetic (like other supplements) Also eating fish has other problems

All O3 comes from algae, fish merely accumulate. One could also get algae based supplement. It's animal friendly and possibly less contaminated (fish are much polluted nowadays).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_oil

I read there:

"""The fish used as sources do not actually produce omega-3 fatty acids, but instead accumulate them by consuming either microalgae or prey fish that have accumulated omega-3 fatty acids."""

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#142
Interesting. In the UK, the NHS suggests most people should routinely take vitaminD between November and March, but I wasn’t aware that heart attacks were the main issue with vitamin D deficiency.

Also, though the studies are dubbed ‘disappointing’ in the second paragraph

> African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart attack when compared to placebo,

Isn’t exactly chicken feed.

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#144
post #137
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are my concerns with their statement: First, I recall warnings about too much fish consumption due to mercury levels in the fish. So how much fish consumption is necessary to get the required omega 3 and does the benefits balance out over the harm caused by the mercury? And are there any particular kinds of fish to consume to limit mercury exposure while getting the benefits of omega 3? Second, as far as I know…

> mercury levels in the fish Better not to eat fish at all, as one small bit of tuna (for instance) per week already increases the mercury build up in the body. https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/fish/ Also, you can get high DHA omega 3 supplements made from algae. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/should-we-take-epa-and-dha-...

Tuna is nice and fancy (and expensive). Few eat it every day. Tilapia is cheap, sustainable, and has low mercury.

I’m no nutritionist, but what’s the big deal with eating tuna every now and again, but mostly sticking to smaller fish?

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#145
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Omega-3 comes from fish already, though there is a point in preferring the fish to the supplements, it's not as if it was something completely synthetic (like other supplements) Also eating fish has other problems

All O3 comes from algae, fish merely accumulate. One could also get algae based supplement. It's animal friendly and possibly less contaminated (fish are much polluted nowadays). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_oil I read there: """The fish used as sources do not actually produce omega-3 fatty acids, but instead accumulate them by consuming either microalgae or prey fish that have accumulated omega-3 fatty acids."…

Thanks for the info, it's interesting that Algae produce (fish) Omega-3, whereas land-based plants produce only ALA and not EPA/DHA

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#146
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came to say this. I’ve lived in London for 3.5 years and first winter got really depressed - originally from NZ and we have more light. Tried meditation and exercise and it kind of worked, but still not great. Next one and all since just took vit D everyday and the change in mood through winter has been remarkable.

What dosage did you take?

I take for example a 5000mg poll every two days. But in winter I take it every day.

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#147
post #139
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are my concerns with their statement: First, I recall warnings about too much fish consumption due to mercury levels in the fish. So how much fish consumption is necessary to get the required omega 3 and does the benefits balance out over the harm caused by the mercury? And are there any particular kinds of fish to consume to limit mercury exposure while getting the benefits of omega 3? Second, as far as I know…

> Consuming large amounts of juice might have been the trigger for diabetic conditions in a family member. I believe this is only possible when on a diet that's >10cal% fat. When your fat intake is very low (like the fruit binging chimps/utangs/bonobos), and your cells are (thus) properly sensitive to insulin, you will not suffer from lots of sugar in fruit juice. Fibers help making it digest slower, and will reduce…

Fructose does not raise blood sugar (!) but can lead to NAFLD. Bananas have a relatively low GI. Fat is not the enemy!

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#148

Study linked was not the biggest cardiovascular health news of today-- This was: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792 A single purified component of fish oil - EPA, did lead to a 25% relative risk reduction on top of statin treatment. This is a huge result with off the charts p values.

Yes, the fraud product from a one-product-wonder public company Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN). (see my comment below).

"fraud product" - Do you mean the product that has been FDA approved for 6 years? Is the FDA "in" on the fraud? Is the New England Journal of Medicine in too?

Does having one product (that sold $xxx mil last year) make a bad company? Or one that put all of it's chips into this long term outcomes study? (which has now paid off)

Why do you care so strongly about this?

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#149
post #135
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your joke but the concern he expresses is only relevant to the Omega-3. In the case of vitamin D, outside of sunlight exposure, supplements are basically your only practical option. Furthermore, the foods mentioned often have it added (milk nearly always does) and so one would want to be aware of that before adding it further from another supplement. At worst, the paragraph is just a poorly constructed catch al…

Here are my concerns with their statement: First, I recall warnings about too much fish consumption due to mercury levels in the fish. So how much fish consumption is necessary to get the required omega 3 and does the benefits balance out over the harm caused by the mercury? And are there any particular kinds of fish to consume to limit mercury exposure while getting the benefits of omega 3? Second, as far as I know…

You bring a lot of concerns with very little facts or data to back it up. You should do the research on all of these things because every single one is a case of nuances.

First, fish consumption mercury concerns are mainly relevant with large fish. So stick to smaller fish like salmon, or, if you want the biggest bang for your mercury buck, the healthiest fish to eat is actually anchovies. And frankly if you learn to prepare them right, they are delicious.

Regarding juice, you don't need to drink much juice to get a vitamin D boost. First of all, at least around here, the only juice you typically see with it is orange juice. A glass of OJ a day with an otherwise recommended diet isn't going to give you any problems unless you have an allergy or something. Actually a glass of OJ without supplements is not a bad idea as many popular "healthy" diets lack citrus which is important for numerous reasons. But the key here is quantity. It's true, lots of juice is associated with bad health outcomes. Just stick to a max of 1 cup (~230ml) a day, and be sure to get sufficient fiber. I'd always eat something with 5+ grams of fiber along with my OJ. That said, if you prefer you could always just drink milk or take a supplement. Or go outside. I get my Vit D by going outside. I drink OJ daily because there's very little citrus in my diet otherwise. Plus I like it. It balances my black coffee nicely.

Cereal, again, depends entirely on what you're eating as well as culturally what you even consider cereal to be. There is a near infinite range of foods called cereal with highly varying degrees of nutrition. I personally wouldn't rely on cereal for nutrition. The nutrient rich cereals on the shelf at the store are basically typical low nutrition grains with a ton of added vitamins. You may as well take a multivitamin. The importance of mentioning cereal is that they already have many added nutrients so you should be paying attention to what you are ALREADY getting before choosing to add a supplement.

Honestly, all of these things are VALID concerns, but, your whole post is an exercise in modern blanket nutritional and health guidance. In short, blanket health guidance is crap. For any blanket guidance you encounter, even scientifically support guidance, you are going to have a plethora of nuances that undermine it. Just take the "avoid carbs" advice so popular today. Turns out the healthiest people get about 50% of their daily caloric intake from carbs. But it's the KIND of carbs, and the combination of other factors that matter the most. https://www.medpagetoday.com/primarycare/dietnutrition/74608 In another recent study it was found the Japan's oldest and most healthy elderly people lived on 80% calories from sweet potatoes, ate hardly any rice, and small amounts of meat/fish. Sweet potatoes are extremely nutritious so I'm not surprised. The carbs are mostly complex as well. That's pretty important.

Point is, be sure to understand the details or you'll end up blanket statement-ing yourself out of every good thing this life has to offer.

Re: Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements

#150
post #84
post #43

So wait, what is disappointing about this: "Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which is a "statistically significant" finding, says Dr. JoAnn Manson, who is chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. She led the research." and "African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart attack when compared to placebo,…

"The study, which was also a randomized clinical trial, tracked participants for an average of five years. The volunteers took icosapent ethyl, which is sold under the brand name Vascepa and was developed by the Amarin Corporation, which funded Bhatt's research." Because if they spun the study as a success, the funders of this study, a pharmaceutical company, wouldn't be able to promote their drug.

Exactly. A private company selling a supplement paid for a study that shows said supplement is beneficial and should be consumed... This study cannot be taken seriously.
Post reply on HN