T Nation

Fat Blocks Protein?

I usually take cod liver oil with my protein shake. I drink the liquid cod liver oil because I realized it contained way more omega 3 than the pills. However, it tastes disgusting so I need to ‘wash it down’ with something else (like protein shakes) to drown out the rancid flavor.

But, has my habit of combining cod liver oil with protein shakes meant I’m not absorbing the protein from the protein shake fully? Because I heard that fat blocks protein absorption… And omega 3 is a fat?

Should I take them separately?

In nature fat and protein are normally found together. What biological sense would it make that the human body can’t digest one if the other is present?

Can you site where you got this information?

[quote]JLone wrote:
In nature fat and protein are normally found together. What biological sense would it make that the human body can’t digest one if the other is present?

Can you site where you got this information?

[/quote]

Haha, what biological sense is it that fat is stored over muscle? Well, it made sense centuries ago when we didn’t have enough to eat, but now it is redundant…

Sometimes we have to fight against what our bodies want to do?

I’ll second that that makes no sense. I have atleast some protein fat and carbs in every meal and I’d say I’m larger than the average dude.

Fat may slow protein absorption, but it certainly does not, in any way, block the absorption of protein. This would only be important post-workout, but I have also seen evidence that it does not make a difference in that case.

@ alternate:

You should look into the retinol levels in the oil. It may be pushing the top end of the recommended range.

In case you do not know, retinol is the active form of vitamin A. Retinoid compounds are very powerful and not something to be messed with. Checkout the wikipedia pages for vitamin A and beta-carotene for more info.

With fish oil, it only takes 3-6 of the cheapo 30% EPA/DHA 1g/1000mg pills to get the dose of 1-2 teaspoons of cod liver oil. A typical supplemental dose is 6-10 pills/day, and up to 20 for special cases. There are concentrated versions of 60-75% available on the market which would make the dosing 3-5 pills for 1g (or 1000mg) pills, or 6-10 500mg pills.

Biotest has a version (Flameout - see store link above) that will give you 3g in 4 pills.

If you want vitamin D, it is cheaply available in 5000 IU pills and gelcaps (the gelcaps thought to be better). One pill/cap per day should suffice.

[quote]alternate wrote:

[quote]JLone wrote:
In nature fat and protein are normally found together. What biological sense would it make that the human body can’t digest one if the other is present?

Can you site where you got this information?

[/quote]

Haha, what biological sense is it that fat is stored over muscle? Well, it made sense centuries ago when we didn’t have enough to eat, but now it is redundant…

Sometimes we have to fight against what our bodies want to do?[/quote]

Storing energy and digesting is hardly the same. Surely you will digest meat if you cook it in olive oil. And if you dont have enough to eat you will surely use all the energy to fill the glycogen storages and not fat, unless you mean you would have a slowed metabolism, then it would be enough to eat…

[quote]xxxx wrote:
@ alternate:

You should look into the retinol levels in the oil. It may be pushing the top end of the recommended range.

In case you do not know, retinol is the active form of vitamin A. Retinoid compounds are very powerful and not something to be messed with. Checkout the wikipedia pages for vitamin A and beta-carotene for more info.

With fish oil, it only takes 3-6 of the cheapo 30% EPA/DHA 1g/1000mg pills to get the dose of 1-2 teaspoons of cod liver oil. A typical supplemental dose is 6-10 pills/day, and up to 20 for special cases. There are concentrated versions of 60-75% available on the market which would make the dosing 3-5 pills for 1g (or 1000mg) pills, or 6-10 500mg pills.

Biotest has a version (Flameout - see store link above) that will give you 3g in 4 pills.

If you want vitamin D, it is cheaply available in 5000 IU pills and gelcaps (the gelcaps thought to be better). One pill/cap per day should suffice.[/quote]

Typical supplement 10omega pills a day, sometimes 20? Are you on drugs?

[quote]NikH wrote:
Typical supplement 10omega pills a day, sometimes 20? Are you on drugs?[/quote]

Sadly, no.

The standard fish oil supplement is 180mg EPA/120mg DHA, thus 300mg omega 3 (actually closer to 350-380mg due to DPA content). As these pills are 1g (or 1000mg), 6-10 of them are about 1-2 teaspoons in volume and yield a dose of 1.8-3g of EPA/DHA. That is inline with FDA max intake guidelines of 3g per day (2g of which is supplemental), though oily fish is a preferred source.

To be clearer, I should point out that by typical, I mean adult males who train (T-Nation readers and commentards). The label of the cheap fish oil from the grocery store suggests 3 times 2 caps per day, so this is not exactly out of the ballpark. The high end of the dose range is for large, heavily training, high calorie intake individuals.

I never made any comments on what one should do (other than inform themselves of vitamin A toxicity). I do suggest that you work on your reading comprehension, and if you want to argue facts perhaps you should state your own point of view or why you think mine are out of line. I must have missed that part of your posts.

Exactly 10 pills is over the MAX guideline for supplemental intake. 20 pills is three times over the max intake. In comparison D-vitamin upper intake is 4000UI and you are recommending 12 000 UI.

omega 3 overdose:
Increased incidence of bleeding
Hemorrhagic stroke
Oxidation of omega-3 fatty acids, forming biologically active oxidation products
Increased levels of low-density lipoproteins (LDL) cholesterol or apoproteins associated with LDL cholesterol among diabetics and hyperlipidemics
Reduced glycemic control among diabetics
source wikipedia.

What do you think you benefit of taking three times as much as the supplementary UPPER intake level?

[quote]NikH wrote:

What do you think you benefit of taking three times as much as the supplementary UPPER intake level?[/quote]

I haven’t read any of this conversation other than this last part of this post.

If you are taking an excessive amount of EFA that is no good.

EFAs in themselves arn’t just some really awesome thing that improve your health. They all need to be in balance with each other. For instance if you eat a lot of wild caught fish and or tons of vegetables you don’t need to supplement omega 3 because you are most likely already omega 3 dominant.

But if you eat tons of chicken and beef that is not grassfed and your diet is lacking in vegetables and fiber you are going to be out of balance with way more omega 6 than omega 3 and this is where a supplement would help you.

[quote]alternate wrote:

[quote]JLone wrote:
In nature fat and protein are normally found together. What biological sense would it make that the human body can’t digest one if the other is present?

Can you site where you got this information?
[/quote]
Haha, what biological sense is it that fat is stored over muscle? Well, it made sense centuries ago when we didn’t have enough to eat, but now it is redundant…

Sometimes we have to fight against what our bodies want to do?[/quote]
Are saying the human body’s fat storage system developed over millions of years doesn’t make sense because in the past 100 years 6-pack abs have become desirable in some cultures?

If so, this is probably the dumbest thing I have read on the internet to date.

@ all others:

My apologies, some people never learn.

@ NikH:

You are not talking to a newb, in fact I’m kinda, sorta an expert in this field (by others’ definition, not my own). I have been a member of T-Nation under one handle or another since the last millenium. My employer requires me not to publicly post under my name or other identifiable means - which I have done in the past. I have thousands of well researched and written posts regarding nutrition studies and implications of such. I also have two hard drives full of PDFs, so please feel free to cite any study and the relevance/context that it may be important in.

You seem to have some mental problem where if someone makes a statement that doesn’t 100% jive with your truth it must be fighting words. You started the insults and perceive my statements as set in stone recommendations, not to mention outright making shit up.

I said 5000 IU vitamin D. Perhaps you are mistaking fish oil which is molecularly distilled and contains at best trace amounts of D3 with fish liver oil which the OP asked about (and I pointed out the possible vitamin A toxicity issues which are very real). As for the max amount, this is for adults in general, you know the average couch potato. It has been shown that even 10000 IU a day for long periods has no ill effect. A few years ago the max was 2000 IU. Make of that what you will.

Regarding fish oil, issues with bleeding are related to populations on blood thinning medications and people with cardiovascular disease. The oxidation issues are found when taken alone in a fasted state. Eaten as part of a meal, this has not been shown to be true. Using diabetic and hyperlipidemics populations to extrapolate effects on otherwise healthy individuals is well, for lack of a better word stupid. Once again, serious comprehension fail.

Do you understand the wording “special cases” (yep, I just quoted myself), for example, a 250 pound powerlifter who eats 5000 Kcal (which we actually have a few on this site) would be one such candidate as this is twice the standard 2000-2500 Kcal intake the FDA recommendations are based on.

@ paulie:

In short your entire post is the typical crap you normally spew with the exception of the last statement which is partially true.

For a person who does not eat any oily fish, there is no other source in the diet of long-chain polyunsaturated omega 3 fats (LUFA). Eating 200-300g of salmon which I do quite often gives me 4-6g of EPA/DHA in one meal. There is no such LUFA fats in chicken or grass-fed beef (other than trace) and even the 18-carbon omega3 fat in grass-fed beef is trace at best. This is one of the biggest marketing scams out there - I love grass-fed beef, but for the taste.

A higher o3/o6 ratio means nothing when the absolute amount is nearly nothing, most of the fat in beef is saturated or monounsaturated. And for the record, there is actually more 18-C o3 fat in normal beef on an absolute basis than grass-fed, though the o3/o6 ratio is worse.

Here is a little website that may help with understanding of lipid chemistry and how much more complicated it is than irresponsibly quoting wikipedia out of context (NikH) or brosciencing about omega3 (paulie):

http://lipidlibrary.aocs.org/

The ONLY possible way to eat too much omega3 is to intake 30+g of ground flax AND 300+g of salmon, herring, or mackerel EVERY damned day. More than 90% of the population eats too much omega6 every day including most people watching their diets (your not-so-humble author included at least half the days of the week).

[quote]xxxx wrote:

@ paulie:

In short your entire post is the typical crap you normally spew with the exception of the last statement which is partially true.

[/quote]

Take a chill pill my dude. haha

Sigh I was unaware that I had such an unpopular rep on this board.

Anyways cruciferous vegetables among other plant based foods do contain EFAs

[quote]paulieserafini wrote:

[quote]xxxx wrote:

@ paulie:

In short your entire post is the typical crap you normally spew with the exception of the last statement which is partially true.

[/quote]

Take a chill pill my dude. haha

Sigh I was unaware that I had such an unpopular rep on this board.

Anyways cruciferous vegetables among other plant based foods do contain EFAs[/quote]

Ok, it was a bit out of line. You do generally have a light-hearted attitude, so I can let you slide (not actually pissed at you, perhaps your lack of reading then commenting). The other guy is full of it.

Though, technically there are trace amounts of omega 3 (18 carbon length) in cruciferous veggies, data does not bear out your claims - see attached image of screenshot. 0.7g for 800g of veggies (most people will not eat 200g a day) is not a significant source as compared to 2 heaping tablespoons of ground flax (ground since whole does not digest).

[quote]xxxx wrote:
You seem to have some mental problem
You started the insults and perceive my statements as set in stone recommendations, not to mention outright making shit up.
stupid. Once again, serious comprehension fail.
The other guy is full of it.
irresponsibly quoting wikipedia out of context (NikH)
some people never learn.
[/quote]

You have more issues than X.

Maybe I wasn’t clear before: show me the scientific evidence that supports your theory on health benefits of taking 20 omega pills with said 350-380mg omega 3 content per pill per day for long periods for this 5000kcal eater, I am sure you have some since you got 2 harddisks full of PDF’s?
Upper limit doesnt mean the upper limit is “ideal” for couch potatos either, going over the upper limit, based on current research, can be toxic for the couch potatos.

[quote]xxxx wrote:

[quote]paulieserafini wrote:

[quote]xxxx wrote:

@ paulie:

In short your entire post is the typical crap you normally spew with the exception of the last statement which is partially true.

[/quote]

Take a chill pill my dude. haha

Sigh I was unaware that I had such an unpopular rep on this board.

Anyways cruciferous vegetables among other plant based foods do contain EFAs[/quote]

Ok, it was a bit out of line. You do generally have a light-hearted attitude, so I can let you slide (not actually pissed at you, perhaps your lack of reading then commenting). The other guy is full of it.

Though, technically there are trace amounts of omega 3 (18 carbon length) in cruciferous veggies, data does not bear out your claims - see attached image of screenshot. 0.7g for 800g of veggies (most people will not eat 200g a day) is not a significant source as compared to 2 heaping tablespoons of ground flax (ground since whole does not digest).
[/quote]

I only claimed that if you were eating a ton of vegetables and plant based foods with fish that you would probably be omega 3 dominant…this could also include flax (plant based)

and that if you didn’t eat like this then you would probably be omega 6 dominant and probably require a supplement to get in balance.

Because to my knowledge having a balance of omega 3:6:9 is more important than just eating a shit ton of omega 3.

I don’t exactly see what is so wrong with what I said.

[quote]JLone wrote:
In nature fat and protein are normally found together. What biological sense would it make that the human body can’t digest one if the other is present?
[/quote]

^^ OP might’ve been trolling so it’s funny how this first response absolutely destroyed his silly claim.

xxxx - good stuff, pls post more often

@ chillain:

Thanks, we have agreed in the past and have even argued in a respectful manner (likely due to lack of context). As for claims of trolling, based on the questions and responses, I think it is typical of people who have been looking into nutrition and are trying to separate some experts’ claims from reality. The media and their frequent misreporting (without malice) certainly do not help.

@ paulie:

You are correct in the last post. The reason I nit-picked was that others with less background or ability to make a decision for their own context will read this and be confused. I apologize for my negative comments towards you. You have certainly shown yourself to be a gentleman and a scholar (scholars argue to assert, others argue to win). Thank you for taking part in this discussion.

There is a difference between adequate intake (the amount needed not to get death or disease sick) and he amount required for influencing leukotiene, prostaglandin, and thromboxane pathways. This is why 18-carbon o3 like from flax is recommended since it counters the the high dietary intake of o6 in pathways which they compete for enzymes for. Likewise, the LUFA o3s from fish oil counter high arachidonic acid from meat based diets.

One last nit-pick, lets summarize a reasonable course of action:

  1. One needs some omega3 in diet, 15-20g flax and a few servings of oily fish a week will suffice.
  2. If 1 is not met, omega3 eggs and 6 fish oil pills (standard 30% strength) could fill the gap.
  3. Any combination of 1 and 2 will suffice.
  4. Supplementation of fish liver oil must be carefully monitored due to vitamin A toxicity (very real issue).

None of the above will lead to omega 3 dominance, but rather a reasonable 1/(3-4) o3/o6 ratio. Although, this too may not be important for all individuals. Some are more sensitive than others to such intake levels/ratios.

As for omega 3-6-9 ratios, it is more complicated. omega 9 is a proxy for monounsaturated fats, not all are omega 9, that is a misnomer, see that link I posted above for way too much info on fatty acids chains. omega 3 and 6 are polyunsaturated fats and should roughly be balance with monounsaturated and saturated fats. With monounsaturated being the one that can be higher without negative effects (to the best of current knowledge).

If anything o3+o6 should roughly be equal to SAT and MONO should be this amount or a little more. Achieving the o3/o6 balance with flax and oily fish has benefits beyond the fat content as flaxseed contains liqnans which help remove the more negative estrogen compounds while leaving the beneficial ones behind (note this is putative, not gospel). Fish protein too seems to have benefits beyond the protein or fat content, though it is less clear why.

/paulie-specificResponse (you just got your own tag bro!)

Ah, fucknuts.

First off, I was unaware that I had more offspring than X or that we were royalty. My assumption is we both have zero - knock on wood.

You certainly were not clear, further, you were an outright asshole, took qualified statements out of context, invented claims out of thin air, and apparently have no clue what toxicity is. Sounds like someone here is projecting their own X-like tendencies onto others.

Interesting how I asked for a study from you for reference to discuss, and you respond by asking me to post a study. I certainly thought my baiting would work. Yes, I am trolling you. You brought it on yourself.

The so-called upper limit for o3 is based on test-tube studies, which are notorious for varying from in vivo. Please present me with an in vivo one. Don’t worry, I know you can’t because none such exist with negative effects. Beyond that researchers have a an extremely difficult time determining intake of any nutrient due to data collection inconsistencies because of self reporting, let alone the fact that the ranges of measures for omega 3 content vary more than measures of food containing said omega 3 fats (the numbers you see reported for a given food are averaged amounts).

The LUFA (EPA/DHA) amount of 2-3g (2g supplemental) is based on studies related to cardiovascular health, namely the reduction of triglycerides which is more important than LDL/HDL since the simple ratio tells nothing. There are no in vivo studies suggesting toxicity at the ratios I have suggested (2-3g intake, we will deal with 6g later).

It is the size of the LDL or HDL particles which is most important and this is linked to the triglyceride levels. Low triglycerides are correlated with large LDL and small HDL. LDL is the delivery vector for fatty acids, thus large particles indicated that the liver is sending out fat and it is not being deposited instantly. The small HDL particles mean that the ability to pick up triglycerides in the blood is high and this accounts for the low blood triglyceride levels. Such a mileau indicates that the body’s main energy system is working effectively and that there is plenty of available fat energy if needed.

So what is the official take on intake of fish oil?
http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Omega3FattyAcidsandHealth-HealthProfessional/

[quote]Impact on cardiovascular disease: According to both primary and secondary prevention studies, consumption of omega-3 fatty acids, fish, and fish oil reduces all-cause mortality and various CVD outcomes such as sudden death, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction. The evidence is strongest for fish and fish oil supplements.

Impact on heart function: Animal and isolated organ/cell culture studies demonstrate that omega-3 fatty acids affect cellular functions involved in ensuring a normal heart rate and coronary blood flow.

Impact on CVD risk factors: Fish oils can lower blood triglyceride levels in a dose-dependent manner. Fish oils have a very small beneficial effect on blood pressure and possible beneficial effects on coronary artery restenosis after angioplasty and exercise capacity in patients with coronary atherosclerosis.[/quote]

See the part about dose-dependent? Other than this perhaps some impact on joint health. The rest is inconclusive.

As for negative effects:

Nothing new here. Trying to use diabetics and hyperlipidemics in place of generally healthy sedentary people is disingenuous at best in your discussion of toxicity (as opposed to very real vitamin A toxicity which is why I posted in the first place).

As for 6g for a 5000 Kcal diet, as a percentage this is the same as 3g for a 2500 Kcal diet. If you want to believe one will drop dead or get sick, feel free, but there is a study referenced on the wikipedia page of Greenland Eskimos who were found to take in 5.7g EPA with no ill effects (there likely was was a 3.5g or so DHA component to this based on ratios found in marine animals they hunt).

BTW I’m really getting a kick out of your feeble attempts, please continue I have plenty of rope left.

Great story. Now, why would I eat 20 omega pills per day? What’s the health benefit compared to 3?