• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Should we avoid fish oil supplements?...

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
It seems like my pain is worse in the last few months that I backed off fish oil, but it does make my sensitivity to light considerably worse. I wonder if it's due to the DHA (even though my 2010 nutrEval test showed low DHA levels)?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666167/

Not sure if that study is applicable? @alex3619 ?

My quick take on this study, and I have yet to read the whole thing so may say more later, is that when mice are genetically modified to convert omega-6 to omega-3 they get more eye function issues, including physical degeneration. Omega-3s are very vulnerable to oxidative stress, and we have a bundle of that.

Too much omega-3 will distort tissue function, but its very hard to do. These mice were engineered to convert omega-6 to omega-3. What was their 6 to 3 ratio? What happens when most of the substrate for omega-6 based hormones are converted to omega-3? There might be massive hormone imbalance, which would be hard to detect. The name of these omega 3/6 hormones is eicosanoids, due to being made from 20 carbon fats.

Further, if oxidative stress mechanisms were not also enhanced, and they were not in this experiment, then the capacity to protect omega-3s from oxidative stress might not be sufficient. So damaged omega-3 might accumulate. This can lead to decreased omega-3 synthesis. So these poor mice might be making insufficient omega-6 eicosanoids, but still not enough omega-3 eicosanoids to compensate.

Omega-3s are best taken with natural vitamin E, and not alpha tocopherol. They are best taken in people with ME who are doing something about oxidative stress. I would actually recommend something be done about the antioxidant pentet, C, E, lipoic, glutathione and CoQ10. At the very least I would recommend more fruit (or vitamin C if you can't take fruit), E and CoQ10. Not in high doses though. Balance is more important than quantity in my view.

Methylation protocols are intended to boost glutathione, or NAC can be used.

The take-home message from this study is that balance is important, and so is oxidative stress.
 

Daffodil

Senior Member
Messages
5,875
oh no. i have been taking 1200 mg omega-3 three times a day, as recommended by my doctor.
 

peggy-sue

Senior Member
Messages
2,623
Location
Scotland
I tried Co-Q-10, the really expensive proper stuff, for 3 months. It made me worse.
I tried NAC and turned into a prickly beetroot.

@dannybex, It's 2003 since I read Puri's book, I have forgotten just about everything in it - and the theory he had about ME in it has been debunked. I don't have a copy any more, I lent it to somebody who hasn't given it back to me and I can't even remember who it was.

He compared DHA to the metal a car is made from and EPA to the engine oil, is all I can remember.

I decided to start taking it then, on the grounds that it was unlikely to do any harm and would probably help me to be as healthy as I could with the disease.
I wasn't getting any help; and I wasn't in a position to start researching properly. It was all I had heard of. That book was the first time I heard of ME as a construct even being used by an academic.

It's only because of the few times I have run out, and had to wait until I could afford more that I have discovered how much good it does for me.
I have my own evidence, from stopping for a good while, then starting again, on two occassions, noting the serious decline and then the massive improvement when I resume.
I suppose it really should be three for "scientific" purposes, but I'm not really willing to stop and experience the decline another time. I'm convinced.:p
 

peggy-sue

Senior Member
Messages
2,623
Location
Scotland
Just chucking a notion into things

Some of us seem to get infections all the time - and suffer from swollen lymph glands.
Others don't get infections as often as before we did with ME.

I don't know if swollen glands goes along with getting lots of infections.
I get infections far less often than I did before, I don't get swollen glands.

My immune system was always very robust. Perhaps it needs supressed!
 

peggy-sue

Senior Member
Messages
2,623
Location
Scotland
I am very concerned, personally, about this thread scaring folk off taking something that might really, really help.

I know we're all different, what we need to work out is what helps each of us, individually.

I don't like seeing a "scare" title such as this, not when it's for something that is known to help a lot of folk.

and I'm worried about Daffodil suddenly getting worried about taking it

I do not like promoting the product of one particular company. I really don't. But I don't think there is another available that is of the same quality.
 

dannybex

Senior Member
Messages
3,561
Location
Seattle
I am very concerned, personally, about this thread scaring folk off taking something that might really, really help.

I know we're all different, what we need to work out is what helps each of us, individually.

I don't like seeing a "scare" title such as this, not when it's for something that is known to help a lot of folk.

and I'm worried about Daffodil suddenly getting worried about taking it

I do not like promoting the product of one particular company. I really don't. But I don't think there is another available that is of the same quality.

I understand, but I don't look at it as a "scare" title…it's asking a question, not making a statement, and has started a good discussion about the pros and possible cons. Alex has made some good points about the flaws in the study, so hopefully Daffodil will see that, if she sees this thread at all.
 

peggy-sue

Senior Member
Messages
2,623
Location
Scotland
Daffodil has already commented, just a couple of post up, here -

"oh no. i have been taking 1200 mg omega-3 three times a day, as recommended by my doctor."

Which was what made me wonder a little about the title.:(
 

dannybex

Senior Member
Messages
3,561
Location
Seattle
Shoot…sorry, I missed that. I suppose the best thing to do (if possible) is to have one's NK cell function tested? It probably is more complicated (as Adreno mentions above) and as you've pointed out, you feel better on EPA.
 

rosie26

Senior Member
Messages
2,446
Location
NZ
I bought fish oil capsules last week- thought I was getting 1000mg but when I got home I realized I had bought 1500mg with Vit D in the mix as well - really disappointed as I didn't want Vit D in it as my ME doc wrote a prescription out for me recently for the couple of months over winter.

So have had to go out and get the right one - I find fish oil is helpful and possibly weighs in more beneficial than negative. I don't think I have noticed any problems with it. I take 2000mg a day.
 

Mij

Messages
2,353
My Omega 3 was depleted 12yrs ago as shown in my RBC fatty acids test. It was recommended to me to take fish oils and I've been taking them every since. My brain function has improved immensely, I benefit from it.

I agree with Alex, balance is the key.