How Much Fish Oil to Take?

[Khan]

I'm lunching Friday at a seafood buffet, so I'll have an extra scoop on your behalf!

Funny, I never seem to get around to buying poke to eat at home. I'll have to see if it's in the commissary or Costco.


Spouse and I are among the world's laziest cooks. I know I'm surrounded by fresh fish but I just buy the frozen filets, thaw two of them, and heat them in the convection microwave for 14 min at 400 degrees. I'll have one for lunch that day and freeze the other to reheat another day. I rotate among mahimahi, ahi, salmon, and (when it's available) swordfish.

Of course if someone's cleaning out their fridge, or if they need help with their boat, or if they're trying to recoup the cost of gas from their last weekend fishing trip... I'm there for them.

I've tried sardines in tomato sauce but I've just never acquired the taste. Maybe again someday.

Sardines in olive oil added to a leafy salad with a bit of vinegar.

Smoked kippers on whole grain bread...

 

[GregLee]

I'll have to see if it's in the commissary or Costco.

Poke (English pronunciation: /poʊˈkeɪ/) is a raw fish salad served as an appetizer in Hawaiian cuisine.
Poke (Hawaii) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Costco in Hawaii Kai has a separate poke counter manned by a Japanese-appearing person who will give you samples of the dozen or so varieties he has to sell. He persuaded me a couple of weeks ago to try wasabi poke, which I really didn't care for, but I like most poke. Grocery stores here usually have poke, also.

(I think the correct English pronunciation is /ˈpoʊki/.)

Tako (octopus) poke with tomatoes, green onion, maui onion, soy sauce, sesame oil, sea salt, and chili pepper.

 

[RonBoyd]

Grocery stores here usually have poke, also.

Yeah, when I was there last (has it been five years already?), I found that Tamura's in Waianae (54-316 Kamehameha Highway) was the best. The Tamura Supermarket in the city was all right but (at the time) up the coast was "best in the islands" by far.

Ah, any of those pickups parked along the highway -- those with the "catch of the day" signs -- sold poke to die for. (Yikes! Don't get started on the Shrimp Vendors on the opposite coast -- my mouth is watering just writing that.)

 

[Rambler]

Two 1000mg capsules a day but have been thinking of going to three per day. I don't enjoy fish, so I rarely eat it. I want to keep the cholesterol in check so I don't have any issues acquiring private healthcare. So far so good.

R

 

[RonBoyd]

I want to keep the cholesterol in check so I don't have any issues acquiring private healthcare. So far so good.

There is a lot of conflicting data on exactly how much a person can (or should) control cholesterol. For instance, this off-the-top-of -my-head Google search:

cholesterol +atkins - Google Search

From USAToday in 2002:

For years, the Atkins formula of sparing carbohydrates and loading up on taboo fatty foods has been blasphemy to many in the health establishment, who view it as a formula for cardiovascular ruin.

But now, some of the same researchers who long scoffed at the diet are putting it to the test, and they say the results astonish them. Rather than making cholesterol soar, as they feared, the diet actually appears to improve it, and volunteers take off more weight.

But for in depth analysis the "bible" is still:

Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease

Here is an earlier thread on this subject:

http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f38/report-six-months-of-low-carbs-48983.html

TAl had a wonderful review of the above book that is located somewhere that I couldn't quickly find.

 

[kcowan]

One 1200 mg tablet a day for me on faith. No other pills of any kind. Got off statins 2 years ago due to muscle deterioration.

 

[sailor]

I don't think I could handle taking straight fish oil by spoon.

Try one with a slight lemon taste.
My kids love their "green grease" in the winter as they call it:
Amazon.com: Carlson Laboratories - Kid's Norwegian Cod Liver Oil Lemon, 8 fl oz liquid: Health & Personal Care

 

[GregLee]

But for in depth analysis the "bible" is still:

Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease

I don't trust amateur enthusiasts writing on scientific subjects. However, I see that I have mostly been following Taubes' recommendations, eating few foods with "bad calories" (I do have fresh pineapple and orange juice occasionally). It's been accidental, since I was just trying to reduce calories.

 

[Bestwifeever]

The twinkie diet guy saw his levels improve greatly. Maybe it's the cream filling?

 

[haha]

I don't trust amateur enthusiasts writing on scientific subjects.

That is hardly an accurate characterization of Gary Taubes.

Ha

 

[GregLee]

That is hardly an accurate characterization of Gary Taubes.

I don't know his background, other than the summary of the reference calling him a science writer. Someone paid to write about science is not being paid to do science -- so he is an amateur at science. I haven't read the book. In the review at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/books/review/Kolata-t.html Gina Kolata says

Taubes ignores what diabetes researchers say is a body of published papers documenting a complex system of metabolic controls that, in the end, assure that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. He also ignores definitive studies done in the 1950s and ’60s by Jules Hirsch of Rockefeller University and Rudolph Leibel of Columbia, which tested whether calories from different sources have different effects.

Suppressing research that doesn't support your thesis is an amateur's mistake in science.

 

[RonBoyd]

In the review at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/books/review/Kolata-t.html Gina Kolata says

Suppressing research that doesn't support your thesis is an amateur's mistake in science.

Now, let's be fair.

let me Google that for you:

"gina kolata" +"gary taubes" - Google Search

The Letters section of today’s New York Times Book Review carried Gary Taubes’ rebuttal to Gina Kolata’s self-serving review of Good Calories, Bad Calories. I was glad to see Gary strike back the way he did because it saved me some work.

In her review published earlier this month Kolata took Taubes to task for his conclusion that all calories don’t act the same in terms of how easily they make one gain weight. She accused him of ignoring specific studies done 50 years ago that she felt showed decisively that a calorie really is just a calorie irrespective of what it’s made of.

 

[haha]

I don't know his background, other than the summary of the reference calling him a science writer. Someone paid to write about science is not being paid to do science -- so he is an amateur at science. I haven't read the book. In the review at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/books/review/Kolata-t.html Gina Kolata says
Suppressing research that doesn't support your thesis is an amateur's mistake in science.

Actually, I don't care at all what you do or what you think, what you eat or don't eat. Your glib admission that you don't know anything about his background before calling him an amateur says all that needs to be said.
He never claimed to be doing science, and if truth is told 90% of the "scientists" doing nutritional work aren't really doing science either. They wouldn't know how.

Taubes claims to be be, and is, a science journalist. Your accusation of suppressing evidence is very peculiar. How could a journalist suppress evidence? He isn't a journal editor, or an NIH board, or a grant committee. These are in a position to suppress evidence, not free lance journalists, who are almost as close to powerless as retired folks.

I have no way of knowing what your personal stake in this may be, or if you just like to argue. In any case, if you or any of your loved ones have any sort of a weight problem, give his articles/books a look.

Ha

 

[GregLee]

Now, let's be fair.

I was interested to read Taubes' reply to Kolata. I don't have an opinion on the controversy between them -- I was remarking that contrary views and research should have been discussed by Taubes. There are some other references to Taubes and references to appraisals of his work on diet in the Wikipedia: Gary Taubes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .

 

[GregLee]

He never cleaimed to be doing science, ...

No, you're the one who implied he was a professional scientist when you criticized me for calling him an amateur. I wasn't replying to Taubes -- I was replying to you.

 

[RonBoyd]

There are some other references to Taubes and references to appraisals of his work on diet in the Wikipedia: Gary Taubes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .

Granted, I quickly ran through it but I didn't find anything to support your claim. Did I miss it?

 

[Martha]

FWIW, Taubes has a masters degree aerospace engineering and often wrote on physics topics in the past. Of course this does not make him a scientist in the topic of his book. I would be interested in what active researchers in the field have to say about the quality of his book.

Interestingly, I recently read a chapter in book on the state of consciousness research by a scientist that studies mediation. A few reviewers also accused him of ignoring research out there and his reply was that the omitted studies did not apply to the question at hand, or it was considered and rejected as not quality research. One problem is that anyone can criticize and it can be hard for us non-science types to figure out what is a legitimate criticism and what is not. You don't want to be thinking that just because this person is an expert in his field he knows what he is talking about. But with sufficient poking around it seems like most of the time you can get a good idea of what is quality and what is not. One thing that I have done is read a few books on evaluating research. There are some good books out there, like Amazon.com: How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine (HOW - How To) (9781444334364): Trisha Greenhalgh: Books: Reviews, Prices & more, and Amazon.com: Meaning, Medicine and the 'Placebo Effect' (Cambridge Studies in Medical Anthropology) (9780521000871): Daniel E. Moerman: Books: Reviews, Prices & more and for those nice wishy washy hard to pin down social science questions, Amazon.com: Evaluating Social Science Research: An Introduction (9780803988538): Dr Thomas R Black: Books

 

[GregLee]

Granted, I quickly ran through it but I didn't find anything to support your claim. Did I miss it?

My claim being that he is an enthusiastic amateur? Is anyone really saying he is or has ever been employed as a scientist? My claim that he omitted mention of some research not supporting his thesis? In addition to the Kolata review that I mentioned, the Wikipedia article references a review by Bray, who discusses a "number of errors of omission or commission that are important when relating diet to disease." (It also refers to Taubes' reply to Bray, which I haven't read.)

 

[HFWR]

Fish Oil Calculator | Whole9

 

[haha]

Fish Oil Calculator | Whole9

It won't allow me to enter data. ??

 

[HFWR]

It won't allow me to enter data. ??

Works for me, but only after I allow the page; i.e. no ad blockers or script blockers.

 

[RonBoyd]

It won't allow me to enter data. ??

It worked for me... although it took me a while to figure it out. Yeah, the red areas are input and the gray are calculated... but it took me forever to decide what it was asking for (and that was after it dawned on me that I didn't need to know what a "stone" was). Anyway, it told me to up my intake to 2800mg a day (from 2400). Hurumph

 

[Martha]

My claim being that he is an enthusiastic amateur? Is anyone really saying he is or has ever been employed as a scientist? My claim that he omitted mention of some research not supporting his thesis? In addition to the Kolata review that I mentioned, the Wikipedia article references a review by Bray, who discusses a "number of errors of omission or commission that are important when relating diet to disease." (It also refers to Taubes' reply to Bray, which I haven't read.)

His response to Bray is worth reading.

 

[Nords]

There are some good books out there, like Amazon.com: How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine (HOW - How To) (9781444334364): Trisha Greenhalgh: Books: Reviews, Prices & more, and Amazon.com: Meaning, Medicine and the 'Placebo Effect' (Cambridge Studies in Medical Anthropology) (9780521000871): Daniel E. Moerman: Books: Reviews, Prices & more and for those nice wishy washy hard to pin down social science questions, Amazon.com: Evaluating Social Science Research: An Introduction (9780803988538): Dr Thomas R Black: Books

Yeah, I studied those books, but they did not apply to the question at hand, or they were considered and rejected as not quality research.

The main impression I got from Taubes' calories book was that of beating a dead horse into the ground with a 90-pound jackhammer. God only knows why his critics feel that he ignored or overlooked credible research. Maybe they were too bogged down to finish reading it, too, or they starved to death before reaching the bibliography...

 

[GregLee]

His response to Bray is worth reading.

Well, I don't know about that. I find Taubes' views baffling, especially on exercise. The ordinary view on the relation between exercise and weight loss is that, when you exercise, you burn calories which would otherwise go to fat. Taubes seems to think that exercise causes an increase in stored fat, because it makes you hungry, and you consequently eat more, and so you gain weight. That makes sense only if you remove yourself as a causal agent from the process. Exercise may make me hungry, but I don't have to eat and therefore gain weight unless I put food into my mouth, chew, and swallow. It's the intake of calories that causes the weight gain, not the exercise, because I am not an automaton whose actions are governed by hunger or insulin peaks. I may be hungry and yet choose not to eat more.