Have you heard of Zero Acre Farms? They have engineered an ultra-low-LA cooking oil that they advocate for all purposes, including deep frying. I'm not sure what to think of it, but it definitely takes the "low ω-6" idea to its limit.
The crazy thing is that they engineered this oil from fermented sugar cane, which is about the most environmentally sustainable way to create it, since sugar cane is one of the highest-yielding plants per acre known to man.
I haven't tried it yet, but it looks really interesting.
I’m quite sad that many of my favorite foods are high in (non-seed-oil) ω-6: I eat peanut butter, almonds, and pistachios pretty much every single day. Now I’m not sure what to replace them with.
I'm coming back to this after making it 60% of the way through the book so far. It's excellent; one of those "life-changing" books for me. I'm also reading "The Queen of Fats" which the Omega Balance author highly recommended.
One thing that is becoming abundantly clear to me, especially after having just read "Ultra Processed People" is that the main reason ω-6's rule the day in Western diets is because they are exceptionally shelf-stable while ω-3's are not. (ω-6's may be as shelf-stable as SFA's but they are much cheaper to produce.) This means it will be really difficult for food manufacturers to pivot to a better omega balance even if consumers demand it. Basically, the fact that ω-3's go rancid so easily puts a forcing function on not eating very much processed food if one is trying to maximize ω-3 consumption.
To me, the key ideas from the book as it relates to the obesity epidemic are:
1. Cell membrane activity is important for metabolism, and cell membranes play a vital role in regulating nutrient uptake, insulin sensitivity, and signaling pathways that influence energy balance and body weight.
2. Membrane fatty acid composition is homeostatically regulated, with the brain and eyes being the most tightly regulated.
3. Arachidonic Acid (AA) is crucial for membrane function, but too much AA causes inflammation and other Bad Things. The enzyme involved in AA production has a preference for the ω-3 Alpha Linolenic Acid (ALA). When ALA is present in sufficient amounts, it can help keep AA levels in check, preventing Bad Things from happening. A diet omega balance of 95% (even if implausibly large) would be great because AA can be produced from ALA.
What I don't think came through in the book is that the omega balance is still a function of the weight of the food! So, yes, spinach has an omega balance of like 84% but in 3 cups of spinach there is <0.2 g of PUFA. Meanwhile, an 8 oz filet mignon has an omega balance of 7% but also contains very little PUFA: <1.2g per 8 oz. So if I eat steak and spinach for dinner, my omega balance becomes (84*0.2 + 7*1.2)/(0.2 + 1.2) = 18%. That's above the 15% threshold but well below the recommended 25%-50% range. It's also easy to see how omega balance can be more about eliminating excess ω-6 compared to adding in ω-3.
I spent today looking through the "What We Eat in America" tables produced by USDA (which are taken from food diary data from NHANES), and the average omega balance (= ω-3/(ω-3+ω-6)) has held steady at about 10% for both adult men and women from 2001-2019.
I thought it would be getting worse over time (since soybean oil consumption seems to be continuing to increase). But if Hulbert is right, a steady 10% seems to be low enough to do a lot of damage over time.
Another explanation could be that people are systematically under-reporting the high-ω-6 foods in their diaries (and these have been getting worse over time).
This goes back a few years but interesting in the context “Zooming back to present day, Allport has walked her talk. By switching from omega-3 fats to omega-6 for just 30 days, she demonstrated a slowing of her own metabolism and a change in body composition from lean mass to fat.” https://www.cbass.com/Omega6.htm
I'm glad you adressed the Peat question -- also known as the omega-3 question. On the one hand, Peat's infamous article has many kind convincing studies (which however I haven't checked thoroughly for statistical errors and biases). On the other end, there are Hubert's claims.
The thing is I don't see how the n-6/n-3 ratio discourse is helpful. The problem is that there is no world where it's applicable. The only valid oil is linseed oil, which is disgusting. If rancidity is a concern then it's all the more of a concern with n-3s, which are even more prone to oxydation. It leads people to take fish oil capsules and weird vegetable oil combination because it's marketed as healthy. Canola oil as a supposedly "excellent" ratio too (aside from the fact that it's also disgusting), at least that's what everyone think. The appropriate ratio is probably like 1:1 if not less.
As you said on this question the better heuristic is the Knobbe argument: just eat like your ancestors, that's the evolutionary consistent thing to do, eating the lowest amounts of PUFA possible, grass-fed animals and maybe some wild fish/mammal brain.
The fact that they are everywhere also renders moot the question of whether they are essential or not. Surely it's good to get some minimal amount of long-chain n-3 (and not from capsules) but should alpha-linolenic really be seen as essential? Very unclear. The Japanese, famous for their diet rich in fish (but still low-fat), already had notable rates of strokes before the introduction of modern diets, so even n-3 can be questionned I guess.
And to be clear, the weight loss is not what interests me (never needed it) but the believable mental health argument that Hubert makes has me very intrigued.
I'm in France and it's rare to find 100% grass-fed cattle, but we do have a variety of label imposing strict rules on animal welfare -- should be outside most of the time and grass-fed as much as possible, though they resort to canola "cakes" often, still not as bad as soybean. So I've come to the same conclusion has you: some seafood, grass-fed meat, maybe some brains and some wild canned salmon from time to time, and ditch all the vegetable oils.
Sry this comment does not have anything to do with this article but I could not login on the site on my browser.
Could you update the foodulator ?
If that isn't too much work.
I was thinking about a way to select any nutrient and than list all foods from max-to-min in the same way like before. Maybe list the contents in the same table.
That would make it easier to find foods high in certain things or low in others.
This is a quibble, but the following phrase has a mistake: “Hulbert would like to see us average just about as high as possible across our diet, probably aiming for at least 25% and trying to get closer to 50%. This would be equivalent to an ω-6:ω-3 ratio of 2:1 or even 1:1.”
3:1 would be 25%, 2:1 would be 33% and 1:1 would be 50%.
Have you heard of Zero Acre Farms? They have engineered an ultra-low-LA cooking oil that they advocate for all purposes, including deep frying. I'm not sure what to think of it, but it definitely takes the "low ω-6" idea to its limit.
The crazy thing is that they engineered this oil from fermented sugar cane, which is about the most environmentally sustainable way to create it, since sugar cane is one of the highest-yielding plants per acre known to man.
I haven't tried it yet, but it looks really interesting.
(see here: https://www.zeroacre.com/blog/vegetable-oil-substitutes;
key image here: https://images.ctfassets.net/stnv4edzz8v3/1qCgYakNmwGf4DfNMTkcZW/f39bd4d6e869d2a16fdd91e347da507d/Linoleic_Acid_Content_of_Cooking_Oils.png)
Some cute models for you
Stearic Acid (straight as an arrow)
https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?model=CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC%28%3DO%29O
Oleic Acid (same but with a cis-bond, bent)
https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?model=CCCCCCCC%5CC%3DC%2FCCCCCCCC%28O%29%3DO
Elaidic Acid(same but with a trans-bond, slightly bent)
https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?model=O%3DC%28O%29CCCCCCC%2FC%3DC%2FCCCCCCCC
And here's your favourite Docosahexaenoic Acid (an acid of twists and turns)
https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?model=O%3DC%28O%29CC%5CC%3DC%2FC%2FC%3DC%5CC%5CC%3DC%2FC%5CC%3DC%2FC%5CC%3DC%2FC%5CC%3DC%2FCC
I’m quite sad that many of my favorite foods are high in (non-seed-oil) ω-6: I eat peanut butter, almonds, and pistachios pretty much every single day. Now I’m not sure what to replace them with.
I'm coming back to this after making it 60% of the way through the book so far. It's excellent; one of those "life-changing" books for me. I'm also reading "The Queen of Fats" which the Omega Balance author highly recommended.
One thing that is becoming abundantly clear to me, especially after having just read "Ultra Processed People" is that the main reason ω-6's rule the day in Western diets is because they are exceptionally shelf-stable while ω-3's are not. (ω-6's may be as shelf-stable as SFA's but they are much cheaper to produce.) This means it will be really difficult for food manufacturers to pivot to a better omega balance even if consumers demand it. Basically, the fact that ω-3's go rancid so easily puts a forcing function on not eating very much processed food if one is trying to maximize ω-3 consumption.
To me, the key ideas from the book as it relates to the obesity epidemic are:
1. Cell membrane activity is important for metabolism, and cell membranes play a vital role in regulating nutrient uptake, insulin sensitivity, and signaling pathways that influence energy balance and body weight.
2. Membrane fatty acid composition is homeostatically regulated, with the brain and eyes being the most tightly regulated.
3. Arachidonic Acid (AA) is crucial for membrane function, but too much AA causes inflammation and other Bad Things. The enzyme involved in AA production has a preference for the ω-3 Alpha Linolenic Acid (ALA). When ALA is present in sufficient amounts, it can help keep AA levels in check, preventing Bad Things from happening. A diet omega balance of 95% (even if implausibly large) would be great because AA can be produced from ALA.
What I don't think came through in the book is that the omega balance is still a function of the weight of the food! So, yes, spinach has an omega balance of like 84% but in 3 cups of spinach there is <0.2 g of PUFA. Meanwhile, an 8 oz filet mignon has an omega balance of 7% but also contains very little PUFA: <1.2g per 8 oz. So if I eat steak and spinach for dinner, my omega balance becomes (84*0.2 + 7*1.2)/(0.2 + 1.2) = 18%. That's above the 15% threshold but well below the recommended 25%-50% range. It's also easy to see how omega balance can be more about eliminating excess ω-6 compared to adding in ω-3.
Nice review!
I spent today looking through the "What We Eat in America" tables produced by USDA (which are taken from food diary data from NHANES), and the average omega balance (= ω-3/(ω-3+ω-6)) has held steady at about 10% for both adult men and women from 2001-2019.
I thought it would be getting worse over time (since soybean oil consumption seems to be continuing to increase). But if Hulbert is right, a steady 10% seems to be low enough to do a lot of damage over time.
Another explanation could be that people are systematically under-reporting the high-ω-6 foods in their diaries (and these have been getting worse over time).
Source:
https://www.ars.usda.gov/northeast-area/beltsville-md-bhnrc/beltsville-human-nutrition-research-center/food-surveys-research-group/docs/wweia-data-tables/
Steps:
• Grab Table 1 from each year
• Define omega6 = "PFA 18:2" + "PFA 20:4" (Linoleic + Arachidonic; but basically this is all Linoleic)
• Define omega3 = "PFA 18:3" + "PFA 18:4" + "PFA 20:5" + "PFA 22:5" + "PFA 22:6" (ALA + SDA + EPA + DPA + DHA)
• Compute omega balance = omega3/(omega3+omega6)
This goes back a few years but interesting in the context “Zooming back to present day, Allport has walked her talk. By switching from omega-3 fats to omega-6 for just 30 days, she demonstrated a slowing of her own metabolism and a change in body composition from lean mass to fat.” https://www.cbass.com/Omega6.htm
Great review! I'm definitely purchasing this.
I'm glad you adressed the Peat question -- also known as the omega-3 question. On the one hand, Peat's infamous article has many kind convincing studies (which however I haven't checked thoroughly for statistical errors and biases). On the other end, there are Hubert's claims.
The thing is I don't see how the n-6/n-3 ratio discourse is helpful. The problem is that there is no world where it's applicable. The only valid oil is linseed oil, which is disgusting. If rancidity is a concern then it's all the more of a concern with n-3s, which are even more prone to oxydation. It leads people to take fish oil capsules and weird vegetable oil combination because it's marketed as healthy. Canola oil as a supposedly "excellent" ratio too (aside from the fact that it's also disgusting), at least that's what everyone think. The appropriate ratio is probably like 1:1 if not less.
As you said on this question the better heuristic is the Knobbe argument: just eat like your ancestors, that's the evolutionary consistent thing to do, eating the lowest amounts of PUFA possible, grass-fed animals and maybe some wild fish/mammal brain.
The fact that they are everywhere also renders moot the question of whether they are essential or not. Surely it's good to get some minimal amount of long-chain n-3 (and not from capsules) but should alpha-linolenic really be seen as essential? Very unclear. The Japanese, famous for their diet rich in fish (but still low-fat), already had notable rates of strokes before the introduction of modern diets, so even n-3 can be questionned I guess.
And to be clear, the weight loss is not what interests me (never needed it) but the believable mental health argument that Hubert makes has me very intrigued.
I'm in France and it's rare to find 100% grass-fed cattle, but we do have a variety of label imposing strict rules on animal welfare -- should be outside most of the time and grass-fed as much as possible, though they resort to canola "cakes" often, still not as bad as soybean. So I've come to the same conclusion has you: some seafood, grass-fed meat, maybe some brains and some wild canned salmon from time to time, and ditch all the vegetable oils.
Hello,
Sry this comment does not have anything to do with this article but I could not login on the site on my browser.
Could you update the foodulator ?
If that isn't too much work.
I was thinking about a way to select any nutrient and than list all foods from max-to-min in the same way like before. Maybe list the contents in the same table.
That would make it easier to find foods high in certain things or low in others.
This is a quibble, but the following phrase has a mistake: “Hulbert would like to see us average just about as high as possible across our diet, probably aiming for at least 25% and trying to get closer to 50%. This would be equivalent to an ω-6:ω-3 ratio of 2:1 or even 1:1.”
3:1 would be 25%, 2:1 would be 33% and 1:1 would be 50%.