omega 3 bad for hair?

I think that Danny Roddy suggests omega 3 are not good for those who fight hair loss?

I though having optimal levels of omega 3 were important for health and hair...

Also I think danny belives avocados is not a good food either for those who fight hair loss...

I read from many experts that avocados and sardines are reallly good foods for health and hormones etc...

what you guys think?

researchingeverything wrote:I think that Danny Roddy suggests omega 3 are not good for those who fight hair loss?

I though having optimal levels of omega 3 were important for health and hair...

Also I think danny belives avocados is not a good food either for those who fight hair loss...

I read from many experts that avocados and sardines are reallly good foods for health and hormones etc...

what you guys think?

hell this food stuff is confusing..every day you read contradicting claims..can't imagine omega 3 beeing bad for fighting hairloss.

BelieveInIt wrote:

researchingeverything wrote:I think that Danny Roddy suggests omega 3 are not good for those who fight hair loss?

I though having optimal levels of omega 3 were important for health and hair...

Also I think danny belives avocados is not a good food either for those who fight hair loss...

I read from many experts that avocados and sardines are reallly good foods for health and hormones etc...

what you guys think?

hell this food stuff is confusing..every day you read contradicting claims..can't imagine omega 3 beeing bad for fighting hairloss.

I'm totally feeling you, BelieveInIt - I recently became so confused with all this stuff that I just decided to pay attention to what my body is telling me. Granted, it's not always easy to do that, but it can be done if you're willing to listen to the signals your body gives.

Firstly, freaking EVERYONE'S an expert nowadays, and secondly the opinion seems to change on a month-to-month basis anyways - if you're doing lots of research you are going to get totally opposite opinions on things, and both sides of the argument sound convincing - who on earth do you believe?! It can really mess with your peace of mind if you give it too much attention.

Hairy Potter wrote:

BelieveInIt wrote:

researchingeverything wrote:I think that Danny Roddy suggests omega 3 are not good for those who fight hair loss?

I though having optimal levels of omega 3 were important for health and hair...

Also I think danny belives avocados is not a good food either for those who fight hair loss...

I read from many experts that avocados and sardines are reallly good foods for health and hormones etc...

what you guys think?

hell this food stuff is confusing..every day you read contradicting claims..can't imagine omega 3 beeing bad for fighting hairloss.

I'm totally feeling you, BelieveInIt - I recently became so confused with all this stuff that I just decided to pay attention to what my body is telling me. Granted, it's not always easy to do that, but it can be done if you're willing to listen to the signals your body gives.

Firstly, freaking EVERYONE'S an expert nowadays, and secondly the opinion seems to change on a month-to-month basis anyways - if you're doing lots of research you are going to get totally opposite opinions on things, and both sides of the argument sound convincing - who on earth do you believe?! It can really mess with your peace of mind if you give it too much attention.

exactly..i really think you can't go wrong with a natural diet, like paleo, some fruit, some veggies, meat, fish, chicken, nuts and lots of water...i won't believe anybody telling me any of those things cause hairloss.

look at animals, some of them have only 1 food source their entire life and seem to be perfectly healthy thats why i don't put too much attention to food cures in general. maybe (!!!) helps optimizing your health but who really knows, in the end it might not even be that good to eat so many different things.

BelieveInIt wrote:

Hairy Potter wrote:

BelieveInIt wrote:

researchingeverything wrote:I think that Danny Roddy suggests omega 3 are not good for those who fight hair loss?

I though having optimal levels of omega 3 were important for health and hair...

Also I think danny belives avocados is not a good food either for those who fight hair loss...

I read from many experts that avocados and sardines are reallly good foods for health and hormones etc...

what you guys think?

hell this food stuff is confusing..every day you read contradicting claims..can't imagine omega 3 beeing bad for fighting hairloss.

I'm totally feeling you, BelieveInIt - I recently became so confused with all this stuff that I just decided to pay attention to what my body is telling me. Granted, it's not always easy to do that, but it can be done if you're willing to listen to the signals your body gives.

Firstly, freaking EVERYONE'S an expert nowadays, and secondly the opinion seems to change on a month-to-month basis anyways - if you're doing lots of research you are going to get totally opposite opinions on things, and both sides of the argument sound convincing - who on earth do you believe?! It can really mess with your peace of mind if you give it too much attention.

exactly..i really think you can't go wrong with a natural diet, like paleo, some fruit, some veggies, meat, fish, chicken, nuts and lots of water...i won't believe anybody telling me any of those things cause hairloss.

look at animals, some of them have only 1 food source their entire life and seem to be perfectly healthy thats why i don't put too much attention to food cures in general. maybe (!!!) helps optimizing your health but who really knows, in the end it might not even be that good to eat so many different things.

The thing you mentioned about 1 food source is quite interesting, I think. Don't get me wrong, I think variety is great, it just makes life that much more interesting. But, for me, I feel like I have had almost too much choice and I based what I ate on the taste almost entirely, not on how the food made me feel afterwards.

So, for example, I'd eat a certain thing because it tasted good - all the while my body was telling me that I shouldn't really be eating that thing, but I'd do it anyway, either cos it just tasted so darn good, or just out of plain old habit.

My opinion now is that we put entirely too much into our bodies, more than it needs for sure, and often that stuff is not beneficial for our bodies' regeneration.

Are Omega-3's bad for hair?

Answer: a resolute "no."

http://hairevo.com/shop/content/12-how-prostaglandins-affect-hair-growth

http://hairevo.com/shop/content/9-krill-oil-for-hair-loss

Hairy Potter wrote:

The thing you mentioned about 1 food source is quite interesting, I think. Don't get me wrong, I think variety is great, it just makes life that much more interesting. But, for me, I feel like I have had almost too much choice and I based what I ate on the taste almost entirely, not on how the food made me feel afterwards.

So, for example, I'd eat a certain thing because it tasted good - all the while my body was telling me that I shouldn't really be eating that thing, but I'd do it anyway, either cos it just tasted so darn good, or just out of plain old habit.

My opinion now is that we put entirely too much into our bodies, more than it needs for sure, and often that stuff is not beneficial for our bodies' regeneration.

in animals their taste and smell senses lead them instinctively to what is good for them... the problem is that living in this society your taste is desensibilized by artificial foods and over-sweets over-sours over-salted etc so much, that we need those foods to taste ANYTHING...it's like some emo kid having to cut himself because it feels numb all the time...

but actually it's quite easy to reset the taste sensors, try eating ONLY 100% unprocessed unspiced natural products for a few weeks and you'll see your salt/ sweet/+ tolerance drop much lower. that's when you can ask yourself what you really would want to eat. it really helps to give it some time and compare foods in your mind.

what i found is i prefer mild tastes in fruits (strawberrys, blueberrys, bananas, apples not so much pineapple, grapefruit, oranges) and also in vegetables which are milder of taste to begin with (celery, carrots, not so much tomatos for example).

it was interesting that after researching i found that those foods seem indeed to be the most healthy antioxidating ones.

BelieveInIt wrote:

Hairy Potter wrote:

The thing you mentioned about 1 food source is quite interesting, I think. Don't get me wrong, I think variety is great, it just makes life that much more interesting. But, for me, I feel like I have had almost too much choice and I based what I ate on the taste almost entirely, not on how the food made me feel afterwards.

So, for example, I'd eat a certain thing because it tasted good - all the while my body was telling me that I shouldn't really be eating that thing, but I'd do it anyway, either cos it just tasted so darn good, or just out of plain old habit.

My opinion now is that we put entirely too much into our bodies, more than it needs for sure, and often that stuff is not beneficial for our bodies' regeneration.

in animals their taste and smell senses lead them instinctively to what is good for them... the problem is that living in this society your taste is desensibilized by artificial foods and over-sweets over-sours over-salted etc so much, that we need those foods to taste ANYTHING...it's like some emo kid having to cut himself because it feels numb all the time...

but actually it's quite easy to reset the taste sensors, try eating ONLY 100% unprocessed unspiced natural products for a few weeks and you'll see your salt/ sweet/+ tolerance drop much lower. that's when you can ask yourself what you really would want to eat. it really helps to give it some time and compare foods in your mind.

what i found is i prefer mild tastes in fruits (strawberrys, blueberrys, bananas, apples not so much pineapple, grapefruit, oranges) and also in vegetables which are milder of taste to begin with (celery, carrots, not so much tomatos for example).

it was interesting that after researching i found that those foods seem indeed to be the most healthy antioxidating ones.

Yup, I'm finding that to be the case myself - the more of the good stuff I eat, the less of the bad stuff I want. I find the intuitive aspect of food choice to be quite interesting. Of course, as you say, this can only really be of benefit once the taste has been resensitized to what is good and bad, and the only way that can happen is for a kind of reboot to take place.

I have found fasting to be really beneficial in this regard - after a few days, I find myself wondering why I would have wanted to put all that old crap in my body to begin with. It's so easy to go back to old habits though, especially with all the 'socially acceptable' food choices which we're faced with daily - not that it's impossible, it all boils down to personal choices at the end of the day.

Roddy, to my knowledge, treats the polyunsaturated fats in the same way Ray Peat does. I'm not sure how D Rod feels about omega-3 supplements specifically, but I know that Peat tends to lump all omega-3s into the same category. I don't agree with that, for several reasons. Omega-3 fats, assuming you are consuming DHA/EPA from a quality source, are not metabolized down the same pathways as other PUFA. Number one, consuming them means they aren't being manufactured by the body itself, which means you get around the oxidative process that cleaves the fatty acids that are turned into DHA.

Two, they are metabolized down an anti-inflammatory pathway. They lead to products that oppose the body's inflammatory processes. This is a wonderful thing.

The real way for PUFA to be a danger is when the diet has contained too much of it for too long (in proportion to the other fatty acids), which leads to your cell membrane creating a greater degree of PUFA. Because PUFA is so much more reactive than fully saturated fat, it "weakens" the cell membrane by making it more fluid and subject to oxidation. But we do need a certain degree of PUFA in the cell membrane, along with cholesterol it helps keep the membrane at a proper fluidity. Too much PUFA is a bad thing.

But here's the rub. The body does not make much DHA, and the amount you are taking if you are supplementing reasonably will never produce the effect mentioned above. And here's the real kicker about DHA, not only is DHA one the primary fatty acids found incorporated in the brain, when it gets oxidized there it actually becomes an anti-inflammatory product! It is shown to maintain visual acuity, is involved in learning, and prevents blood platelet aggregation.

DHA from a quality source is NOT the same as the PUFAs you are getting from cotton, soybean, corn oils, for example. Supplementing DHA/EPA is beneficial and anti-inflammatory. The REAL factor to consider with the other Omega 3's is really their ratio to the Omega 6's. Anyone eating an "average" diet today probably has a ratio of omega 6:omega 3 that is way higher that it should be. You want it at about 3:1 or 4:1. Many people are at like 20 or 30:1.

So my advice would be, don't worry about taking a cod liver/fish oil/krill supplement. Your biggest worry with these should be concerning their quality. With the other PUFA, eat it in a proper ratio to saturated fats. As a mammal, the larger your body is, the greater the degree of PUFA you'll have in your cell membrane. PUFA makes the cell membrane more permeable to ions though, and that weakness forces the cell to maintain a higher rate of metabolism to account for the cost. That's what makes you warm-blooded. So you do want a certain level of PUFA in the body. One other thing to consider about this fluidity subject is that a certain level of fluidity is necessary for your receptors to function. When membranes aren't fluid enough, you have trouble translocating the receptors for, say, insulin to the surface so they can help you utilize glucose. That's a bad thing.

One argument against this though is that the body can take saturated fats and reduce them into PUFA as it needs it. That is true, and is one reason why I think we don't need a ton in our diet and should track how much we're getting. But again, DHA is a different animal. The body doesn't make very much at all, so supplementing a gram a day isn't going to make much of a difference either way. Not to mention that sometimes I don't want to let my body decide how much anti-inflammatory products it needs, because it can do a poor job of that. So giving it a bit of a foot-hold can be beneficial.

Want to help ensure you are utilizing them properly? Cold exposure. The warmer the environment you are generally in, the less PUFA you need. When it comes to Ray Peat, you've got to consider something important, he tends to judge a biological molecule in one context: how it effects cellular respiration. Now the importance of cellular respiration, that's his paradigm so its understandable, but it does ignore the important role of PUFA/NEFA in places like the brain, the eyes, and your own sperm cells.

I've been studying lipid biochemistry since 1993.

While short, this article I wrote I think will explain why PUFA's when in the correct (unadulterated form)
are not bad. Of course, most PUFA's found on the shelves of a grocery store are adulterated.

http://longevitypost.com/the-omega-6-myth/

Also, there is no question that Omega-3 has brain benefits.

Further, Omega-3 activates enzymes that generate telomerase. Boosting Longevity (that's what they do).

The key here I believe is simply the state (raw, unadulterated, unprocessed) must be qualified.

Very interesting informative ariticle,thanx for sharnig  

Caustic, would you agree that PUFA should be avoided by individuals under high or moderate stress?

NDW wrote:Caustic, would you agree that PUFA should be avoided by individuals under high or moderate stress?

Most of them are in a processed form, which offer little or no benefit.  However, in the form of say raw pumpkin seeds, it provides relief from stress. Also marine oils help with resistance to stress.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22748167
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15450784