Health & Wellness

Your brain on omega 3

Emily Deans, MD
Primal Docs
Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:10 UTC

One of the major differences between our post-industrial diets and the evolutionary and traditional foods of our past is in the kinds of fat we eat. One huge change has to do with the polyunsaturated fatty acids (or PUFAs), which come in several varieties, but most commonly omega 6 and omega 3. PUFAs are "essential fats," meaning we can't make them from other types of food, and we must eat them. However, never in the history of humankind have we eaten novel omega 6 fatty acids in such massive quantities.

Corn oil, safflower oil, sunflower oil, cottonseed oil, peanut oil and/or soybean oil are ingredients in pretty much all processed food. Just check the list on the back of breakfast cereals, bread and other baked goods, fried items, salad dressings, margarine, mayonnaise, and sauces. Vegetable oils are used (along with canola oil) in the fryers at most restaurants. They are cheap and relatively tasteless, which make them perfect for certain industrial and restaurant food applications. They are also universally high in omega 6 fatty acids, and therefore we eat a ton of them in the Western diet, especially since throwing out butter, lard, and beef tallow 30-40 years ago.

Why does it matter if we eat lots of vegetable oil? Omega 6 PUFAs are used by the body to make certain hormones and signaling molecules. Roughly speaking, the omega 6s are the precursors for many of the molecules that make up our body's inflammatory response. As an example - the omega 6 linoleic acid (corn oil is mostly linoleic acid) is a precursor for many molecules, but among them the prostaglandins that the enzymes COX-1 and COX-2 work on. If you have ever taken ibuprofen or another NSAID painkiller, you have blocked the effects of COX-1 and COX-2, decreasing inflammation and therefore the easing experience of swelling and pain in the body. If you want the nitty gritty details, Wikipedia has a very good and understandable review of these inflammatory signaling molecules.

Here's the real problem - too much inflammation mediated by a high dietary percentage of the omega 6 fatty acid linoleic acid can be reasonably associated with coronary vascular disease, insulin resistance, cancer, hypothyroidism and other autoimmune diseases, thrombotic stroke, headaches, asthma, arthritis, depression, and psychosis. So you can see that such a massive change in our diets in the short term of the past 50-70 years could potentially have equally massive effects on our health.

But the omega 6s are only half the picture. It turns out the omega 3s (wild coldwater fish oil is the best source, but it is also available in grass-fed animal fat and other kinds of seafood) compete in the body with the omega 6s. Omega 3s are the precursors for anti-inflammatory signaling molecules (which, obviously, counteract the inflammatory signaling molecules). We can only store so much of either in readily available sites, so if we eat omega 3, we displace some of the omega 6. Supplementing with omega 3 fatty acids has been shown to be beneficial in a number of major diseases.

If we max out on the omega 6 without any omega 3, we end up with a highly inflammatory soup of chemicals stored and floating around in our bodies, theoretically predisposing us to that list again - cancer, diabetes, obesity, depression, heart disease, and autoimmune diseases. If we balance the omega 6s and 3s, we end up with a good mix of anti-inflammatory and inflammatory molecules. In the Western diet today, the omega 6:3 ratio is somewhere between 17 and 30 to 1. Hunter-gatherers, coastal fishing populations, and traditional eating patterns have a ratio of between 4:1 and 1:2.

So that is the big picture for the whole body - but I'm a psychiatrist. What do the omega 3s do in the brain?

The brain has a huge number of cell membranes, and cell membranes are made out of fat. The fat content of the brain is a little different than the rest of the body - the only PUFAs allowed into the healthy brain in any appreciable amount are the omega 3 DHA (a long-chain omega 3 present in fish oil and grass-fed meats) and the omega 6 derived (or obtained directly from animal foods) arachidonic acid (AA). In addition, while AA is found in equal amounts all over the brain, DHA is found predominately in the gray matter. That's where our thinking takes place.

Let me explain a bit about the actual structure of these molecules. (It will be helpful for you to consume some wild-caught salmon before reading this as the DHA helps your brain's memory center, the hippocampus, make new memories.)

Saturated fats and cholesterol make rather boring cell membranes all on their own. Their structure is pretty straight, and they line up rather like this:

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

PUFAs have unsaturated chemical bonds, which make them rather kinky. Add some PUFAs to a cell membrane and you suddenly get this:

iiiiiiLiiiiiiiiiLiiiiiiiiLiiiiiLiiiiiiiiiiiiLiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiL

As you can see, the unsaturated bonds break up the structure a bit, and molecular biologists call this "increasing membrane fluidity." Important cell membrane proteins, such as ion channels, depend on the presence of PUFAs to be incorporated correctly into the membrane. If all is well, the PUFAs serve as part of "lipid rafts" that are required for transport of protein and signals through the membranes, the formation of synapses, and maintaining the integrity of the neuronal membranes. All of these functions are dependent upon DHA and are obviously vital for the tip-top functioning of our complex brains.

Dr. Paul Jaminet had a nice observation about PUFAs in neuronal cell membranes when he first saw my simple "L" and "i" drawing of the cell membrane:

"[Omega 3 fats] - especially DHA - [are] unique mainly in that they don't have any real shape. They have so many double bonds that can twist and bend so easily, they change conformation very rapidly and under the slightest pressure fold up into tiny balls or slither out of the way. This is what makes salmon oil so slippery, especially at body temperature.

So a DHA-filled membrane is barely a membrane at all. Rather a unique structure. A biological extreme. The membrane equivalent of a soap bubble. They don't even have a letter in the alphabet for it; even M has only three bends.

And this is what human consciousness depends on? No wonder we're in trouble."

We can make a bit of DHA from ALA (an omega 3 found in plants, such as flax), but the process is horribly inefficient. Otherwise, DHA is made by photosynthetic algae eaten by krill or fish or oysters, etc. - which we eventually consume. We cannot make DHA ourselves in useful amounts. As we now know, the amount and ratios of PUFAs in our brain are dependent upon what we consume in our diet.

The omega 6 derived AA is also important in the brain - it initiates and maintains the inflammatory cascade, which is a critical function. But AA is a different kinky shape than DHA and the overall membrane functioning is quite different if we have a ton of AA compared to DHA. This paper notes that "it is intriguing that the dramatic increase in the prevalence of [Alzheimer's disease] in the last century not only parallels the increase in average lifespan, but also an increase from 2 to more than 20 of the ratio of omega 6 to omega 3 PUFAs in the average Western diet."

What do I conclude from a common-sense analysis of the massive change in our diets coupled with a knowledge of how omega 3s are important for our neurons? Our brains seem to be designed to run on fish oil. We really shouldn't be operating the all-important noggin too far outside the design specs, or nasty things could happen. All of the clinical research I've seen in this area has focused on merely supplementing with extra omega 3 fatty acids, and I will certainly review much of this information in later posts. However, once again common sense will tell us that the best result would likely result from decreasing the overall omega 6 burden while making sure we get adequate omega 3s of the right kind for our brain.

In simple terms, that means significantly decreasing the amount of processed food we eat, and making sure we get some oily fish a few times a week. Switching to grass-fed beef and eating lamb or bison (which are usually grass fed) will also help. Olive oil is relatively low in omega 6 (it is primarily a monounsaturated fat and therefore a neutral player in the inflammatory vs. anti-inflammatory war), so olive oil and vinegar or lemon juice can be deliciously substituted for commercial salad dressings. For baking and cooking, use butter, lard (a commenter reminds me it should be naturally sourced and used in moderation, of course), or coconut oil! It won't kill you. Really.

Reader Comments

yantra · 2013-02-28T14:54:35Z

what about hemp seed oil?

this website maintains a heavy bias towards eating meat rather than vegetarianism (or god forbid, veganism!). on one hand, it might be better to live and eat like those who lived in our distant past. on the other hand, the availability of variety in food now (thanks to capitalism and the industrial revolution) far outweighs that which was available 10,000 years ago (though as a caveat there was probably more varied wild game back then).

i appreciate this site and read it often, but tire of the intentional anti-vegetarian bias, whether truthful or not. this page has some opposite information, suggesting that though hemp seed and other types of medium chain omega 3/6 oils are not long chain fatty acids, they are absorbed more readily.. [Link]
also, please take into account the toxicity (and increasing acidity) of overfishing in the oceans. these elisions make your site read more like neo-paleo-propaganda than 'the world for people who think'.

Ruth · 2013-02-28T19:41:25Z

Perhaps it's your diet that's making you "tired" and the brain foggy? Maybe you should try some omega 3? Or change your diet?

Callisto · 2013-02-28T21:51:03Z

I concur. Hemp seed oil appears to offer Omega 3s without the risk of ingesting radiation now found in so much of ocean life and likely to grow exponentially as Fukishima dumps thousands of tons of toxic waste water directly into the Pacific.

As to over-fishing; another good reason to consider a plant-derived Omega 3 supplement. The most recent reports of bogus claims regarding fish sold as one thing and actually being another has been attributed not only to duplicitous wholesalers but to the fact of over-fishing.

sass · 2013-03-01T08:14:57Z

I find it so confusing.. I was vegetarian for 10 years, then I read the Vegetarian Myth (as promoted by the Cass site, from where this site is an affiliate; the two actually go together). But since then, I have also read a very neat debunk to the Veg Myth (available online as a pdf, think I saw it on scribed). Problem with the Cass site and the people there, there is no effective addressing of opposing views, imo, tending to instead just keep on pushing their own view. They choose to do it that way because I think the attitude is "you're either getting what we're on about or you don't, and we not gon explain it to you" - you're with us or not. A shame because I like to hear and explore opposing arguments too; sometimes it helps to understand something by understanding what it is not, all being relative.

Back to the meat though, I dislike eating meat. I dislike participating in the hierarchy, and would like to think, as a conscious empowered and evolved human being I could make the choice not to eat animals. I really have an issue with it, feeling like I am consuming their souls, and I love animals so dearly.

Also, that we were apparently vegetarian before "the fall", according the Cs, maybe there is a natural inclination toward vegetarianism because of a soul memory from this time.

Summary: it's a dilemma and I for one am still not at a point of understanding the whole diet picture, finding it very complicated.

Mike · 2013-03-01T11:11:09Z

Here is the quote from 23 Oct 1994, not that it is any way the end all be all:

Q: (L) Is a vegetarian style of eating good for one?

A: Not usually.

Q: (L) What did human beings eat before the Fall?

A: Vegetarian.

Q: (L) So, until we go through the transition we are not really designed to be vegetarian?

A: Correct.

From what I have seen on the forum is that people come in with a belief that they want to push without reading any of the books or volumes of material in threads that has already been posted and then expect their view point to be re-considered, etc. In many cases the individual acts badly and really has a block to questioning their point of view. I've read a good portion of the forum diet things as they were published and have seen what is considered the optimal diet change as new and deeper research is conducted. That is what I see as leading to the general understanding that is currently accepted.

sass · 2013-03-01T18:03:23Z

@ Mike

Hi Mike, I get what you're saying and I agree.

I would though like to see some discussion as to WHY some piece of information is incorrect, eg, this debunk that I mention above (but also other stuff too. Although, I say, pophistorian does a terrific job and I wish to see a lot more of that).

For dummies like me, and very busy and stressed people, it can help to understand information by understanding it's antonym. Unfortunately though (imo and experience), if any questioning is presented responses are regularly a bombardment asking if the questioner has read the wave (etc), the initial point derailed off topic very quickly. When this happens, the forum members come across as defensive and seem to confuse objective information analysis with subjective agenda themselves.

Sorry, this is not much to do with the article above.

naturalden · 2013-03-02T00:10:52Z

Sass

It seems SOTT has become somewhat dogmatic (characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts) in their dietary views. This article is a good example. I followed a link from the above article and found the following: "Several clinical trials investigating the effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in AD have been completed and all failed to demonstrate its efficacy in the treatment of AD [Alzheimer's disease]. It puzzles me why SOTT would highlight in red: "Our brains seem to be designed to run on fish oil." Based on what?

I'm a long time SOTT reader and have learned many things through the years including to always ask: What does the science show? I'm not seeing much science in this article.

If you are interested in the effect of fish oils on the human body I would suggest reading this following. [Link]

Mike · 2013-03-02T13:54:24Z

@ sass, can you post a link to the debunking of Veg Myth.

Mike · 2013-03-02T14:07:42Z

@naturalden
As you probably know, since you are a long time SOTT reader, the people that post, highlight and comment on these article are all volunteers. From what I have seen since starting to read SOTT in 2005 and considering what the site has posted over the years since is that SOTT has been ahead of the curve on many topics and does a good job on nearly all topics that I've seen them publish about. I haven't seen SOTT as dogmatic on the diet stuff, just that they are doing their best to get the information out to the public based on the latest research. Also, no one is perfect, but I do think they strive to be objective as possible.

Mike · 2013-02-28T19:08:23Z

Research...

and experience has lead the site to publish what it does from what I have seen. A couple of books to check out 'Primal Boday, Primal Mind' and 'The Vegetarian Myth'.

naturalden · 2013-02-28T19:32:31Z

Essential Fats?

A strong case can be made that ALL PUFA's are toxic to the human body.

"To understand the present issues regarding fats in nutrition and medicine it's helpful to look at the historical development of biochemical and physiological fat research in a variety of contexts, including agriculture and economics, as well as considering the effects of the changing ideas about cell structure, vitamins, hormones, immunology, brain development, evolution, and the growing understanding of the way physiology interacts with ecology. We need to recognize the complexity of the physiology of fats, to appreciate the complexity of the living organism.

Financial considerations have driven fat research in very obvious ways. In 1883, Mark Twain described how commercial fraud was making use of new technology to substitute cheap fats and oils for butter and olive oil.. Hard fats such as tallow, which had been used for making soap and candles, began to be widely used as a substitute for butter in the 19th century. Around 1912, chemists found economical ways to solidify (for use as a butter substitute) the very cheap liquid oils, such as cottonseed oil, linseed oil, whale oil, and fish oils, which been used mostly as fuels or varnish. The seed oils were so cheap that meat packers quickly became major producers of hydrogenated cottonseed and soy oils, to extend their limited supply of lard or tallow for sale as shortening or margarine.

Between 1912 and 1927 there were several studies that reported that animals could live on a fat-free diet, and that in fact they lived longer, and without the normal mortality from cancer. In the 1940s and 1950s, most textbooks that mentioned the idea that certain fats were essential nutrients described it as a controversial idea. But the oil industries used public relations effectively to sell the medical (heart protective) benefits of a diet containing increased amounts of linoleic and linolenic acids, which they called the essential fatty acids. They began citing a 1929 publication (by G. Burr and M. Burr) that claimed to demonstrate the essentiality of those fatty acids, while ignoring the publications that pointed in different directions.

The cheapness of the seed oils led to their use in animal feeds, to promote growth. By the 1940s, the polyunsaturated oils, including fish oils, were known to cause deterioration of the brain, muscles, and gonads in a variety of animals, and this was found to be caused mainly by their destruction of vitamin E. A little later, the disease called steatitis or yellow fat disease was found to be produced in various animals that were fed too much fish or fish oil.

The reason linseed oil and fish oil were used for making varnishes and paints was that they are "drying oils," reacting with oxygen to polymerize and harden. The physical and chemical propertiess of the oils are fairly well understood, and among the polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) the omega -3 fatty acids react most easily with oxygen. Heat, light, and moisture increase their spontaneous interactions with oxygen, and besides polymerizing, these oils produce a variety of reactive particles, including acrolein, which combine with other substances, such as cellular proteins and DNA, with highly toxic effects. At low temperatures and low oxygen concentrations these oils are not highly reactive. Fats that harden at low temperatures (as saturated fats do) wouldn't be convenient for organisms that live in a cool environment, and so organisms regulate the type of fat they synthesize according to the temperature of their tissues. The fact that certain types of polyunsaturated fatty acids function nicely in fish, worms, and insects, doesn't mean that they are ideal fats for mammals."

[Link][Link]

Callisto · 2013-03-01T13:47:49Z

drugged up meat....

it's what's for dinner! The excerpt below is from an article regarding the new drug administered to beef cattle: Zilmax, a Merck pharmaceutical initially approved for treatment of asthma ....human asthma. Read:

As a journalist for Chronicle of Higher Education, Melody Peterson described her visit to the meat locker at West Texas A&M University. Escorted by Ty E. Lawrence, associate professor of animal science, Peterson reported,

"Bloody sides of beef, still covered with a slick layer of ivory-colored fat, hung from steel hooks. Dressed in a white lab coat, a hard hat on his head, Lawrence pointed to the carcass of a Holstein that had been fed a new drug called Zilmax. He noted its larger size compared with the nearby body of a steer never given the drug."

"'This is thicker, and it's plumper,' said Lawrence, pointing at the beast's rib-eye. 'This animal right here,' waving his hand at the pharmaceutically enhanced meat, 'doesn't look like a Holstein anymore.'"

Not a Holstein anymore: is that really something to be proud about? If a Holstein doesn't look like a Holstein anymore, what are we eating and what are we becoming?

Learn more: [Link]