LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 132

Thread: fish oil

  1. #51
    The real hangover cure is two bags of saline IV, an oxygen tank, and a good meal. You put that trio in your body even sober and it will be the clearest high you've ever had. Most of the world spends their whole lives dehydrated. Our bodies are by far a majority of water. Do the math.

    Are vitamins and any other supplement a substitute for good nutrition? Heck no. They're supplements, not substitutes. Unless you overdose on the fat-soluble (A,D,E,K) vites, and you can at a certain level since the body can't flush them out like water-soluble, they're not gonna hurt and can only help. The FDA doesn't regulate supplements so when you hear anecdotal reports that "such and such is a waste of money" it's only one person's ignorant mouth spewing rubbish and they may have also got a way underdosed supp. Some companies out there are feeding off the "magic pill" craze whenever a skewed study hits the papers and says a certain supp is better than sliced bread. As for people who talk about vitamins as if they're a fuel source, slap them like they was an armless dummy because there are only 3 energy substrates (protein, fat, carb) and thinking another substance like a vitamin can serve as a fuel source is similar to expecting your car to go a single mile off pure engine carbon cleaner. Square peg in a round hole.

    There are a handful of vitamins, minerals, and other supps I take from time to time or almost all the time. If I run out or forget, no big deal. My focus is impeccable diet 6.5 days a week, and you always need that cheat meal to kickstart the metabolism if your intake was too low from eating clean the rest of the week. Study the crap out of diet for a year or two, get to the point where you can look at a plate and come within 50cals and 5g pro/fat/carb of correct estimate and you're stoked because you can basically plan out all meals and still enjoy what you're eating.

    I eat a lot, but there's not a lot of things I eat, if you can understand that. Red meat is next to never for me these days. Salt is never added because it's too abundant as it is, and it's always watched. I do fish 1-2x a day 3-4 days a week. If I'm happily on and off the toilet quickly then I know I'm eating right because when you treat your body well habitually it lets you know the instant you do not. Hence, why I drink next to no alcohol.

    Braddahs, please stay away from soy. It's in everything. Soy is a phytoestrogen (Plant estrogen) yet binds to estrogen receptors in the male body. We get all the E we need when it converts from T in our bodies via the aromatase enzyme and the older we get, the more feminized the male body becomes. Soy is pumped up like it's the effin fountain of youth simply because it's better and less carcinogenic on the female body than estradiol (natural E). But for us males, anything that acts as E in the body is no bueno. Our hormonal thermostat (negative feedback loop) is guided by E, not T, so the greater E our body senses the less of all hormones it will produce. In review, soy = less hard ons, more emo, more man tits.

    PB&J, sage brah, I'm not saying I won't drink a half bottle of scotch ever again, but I've had enough hangovers where you literally think you're gonna die to know I've rocked out more than the average jetty bear. Not you sage brah, you're the bestest, raddest, baddest jetty bear there ever was in Deal.

  2. #52
    A few more deets...

    Good vites/mins for the male to take (especially 28+ years old):
    Zinc (precursor to T) and magnesium
    Glucosamine, MSM and biotin (better joints, better hair)
    L-arginine (she will be happy with this one, trust me)
    Aspirin (1/day for circulation/heart if you're not allergic)
    Milk thistle (your liver has >500 functions)
    Daily multi with B-complex (gummy if possible, will satisfy candy craving)

    Dietary considerations:
    Get to know the glycemic index - moderate is best
    Grains should be whole, not white
    There's enough salt in food already
    If it's processed at all, pass
    High-fructose corn syrup is the devil
    Fats are very necessary, limit saturated ones
    Protein at every meal
    Fish 2-3x a week
    Cottage cheese is all-around healthy as hell
    Greek yogurt can be mixed with many things for a healthy "dessert"
    Fruits and veggies (cruciferous: broccoli, etc.) every day
    Eat more often in lesser amounts
    Drink water til you piss clear every 30-45 minutes

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,796
    Quote Originally Posted by EmassSpicoli View Post
    The FDA doesn't regulate supplements so when you hear anecdotal reports that "such and such is a waste of money" it's only one person's ignorant mouth spewing rubbish and they may have also got a way underdosed supp.
    Not really. In the case of fish oil, which is the topic of this thread, the Omega-3 isn't absorbed into your body. This is proven in real controlled studies, not by the FDA. Just because the FDA doesn't regulate it, doesn't mean it hasn't been scientifically studied and tested.
    Fish oil supplements a waste a money, if you are looking for the benefits of the Omega-3.

  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Not really. In the case of fish oil, which is the topic of this thread, the Omega-3 isn't absorbed into your body. This is proven in real controlled studies, not by the FDA. Just because the FDA doesn't regulate it, doesn't mean it hasn't been scientifically studied and tested.
    Fish oil supplements a waste a money, if you are looking for the benefits of the Omega-3.
    Brah, it was a general statement across all supps that is quite true. The thread veered to lots of supps/diet, so let's remember how welcoming a thread titled "hello" can be on SI

    There's no governing body to regulate non-scheduled substances and non-foods, therefore any company can go undeterred in putting out a bunk supp that may not have much supp at all. The pseudo-quote I used represented average Joe Blow expecting a supp to rock his world and then bad-mouthing it when it did not. I'm all for primary research being done on supps. Link the citations to the studies you mention and I'll enjoy reading them, since so little primary data exists in this realm.

    I'll ask though, who funded those studies and was the methodology in any way geared to a certain result? Those familiar with the political economy of medicine and food/nutrition know well that any "study" can be skewed to a certain "conclusion" and have it stamped by a couple MD's and PhD's that walk away full-pocketed. Now, when its in AJM or NEJM, I'll take it more religiously. Not shotting down any support of your anti-fish oil claim, and actually stoked to see journal citations if you pull any up.

  5. #55
    Here's one:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19465191/

    Reputable journal there and PubMed/LexisNexis searches will give you those. Always got to read the full text and not go by an abstract. Lets you double check the authors' accuracy and sometimes you see their true motives.

    I'm right there with you on the whole food fish consumption over throwing back handfuls of oily gel caps. I'm at 4-5lbs of fish a week. Right OTB. Love it.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,796
    Quote Originally Posted by EmassSpicoli View Post
    Brah, it was a general statement across all supps that is quite true. The thread veered to lots of supps/diet, so let's remember how welcoming a thread titled "hello" can be on SI

    There's no governing body to regulate non-scheduled substances and non-foods, therefore any company can go undeterred in putting out a bunk supp that may not have much supp at all. The pseudo-quote I used represented average Joe Blow expecting a supp to rock his world and then bad-mouthing it when it did not. I'm all for primary research being done on supps. Link the citations to the studies you mention and I'll enjoy reading them, since so little primary data exists in this realm.

    I'll ask though, who funded those studies and was the methodology in any way geared to a certain result? Those familiar with the political economy of medicine and food/nutrition know well that any "study" can be skewed to a certain "conclusion" and have it stamped by a couple MD's and PhD's that walk away full-pocketed. Now, when its in AJM or NEJM, I'll take it more religiously. Not shotting down any support of your anti-fish oil claim, and actually stoked to see journal citations if you pull any up.
    In the case of fish oil, there are several studies out there. Here is an article about a study done in Italy on limitations of fish oil in general: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...tacks/2145431/

    Here is the one I posted earlier:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22968891
    The second one is not directly looking at supplements, but there were tested. It shows low absorption compared to consuming fish.
    Last edited by brewengineer; Oct 24, 2013 at 11:49 AM.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    In the case of fish oil, there are several studies out there. Here is an article about a study done in Italy on limitations of fish oil in general:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...tacks/2145431/
    The study was certainly not general, since most of the subjects were high risk cases who were already taking medication.

    ""They're very high-risk people, and so the level of other treatments was very high," Arnett said. "When you're being aggressively treated for all of your other risk factors, adding fish oil yielded no additional benefits."

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Stuart View Post
    The study was certainly not general, since most of the subjects were high risk cases who were already taking medication.

    ""They're very high-risk people, and so the level of other treatments was very high," Arnett said. "When you're being aggressively treated for all of your other risk factors, adding fish oil yielded no additional benefits."
    It is relevant if you rely on fish oil as a way to save your heart. Besides, I posted the second study for a better overview of omega-3 and health benefits (or in the case of pills, the lack of benefits). I already said there are benefits in eating fish a couple times a week.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    It is relevant if you rely on fish oil as a way to save your heart.
    Absolutely not, since the study concentrated on those who were using heart medication, how can these people be said to be relying on fish oil to save their hearts?

    If they were doing so they wouldn't be taking heart medication.



    Besides, I posted the second study for a better overview of omega-3 and health benefits (or in the case of pills, the lack of benefits).
    Is there such a thing as omega 3 in pill form?

    I thought that it usually came in capsules or in a bottle.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Stuart View Post
    Absolutely not, since the study concentrated on those who were using heart medication, how can these people be said to be relying on fish oil to save their hearts?

    If they were doing so they wouldn't be taking heart medication.




    Is there such a thing as omega 3 in pill form?

    I thought that it usually came in capsules or in a bottle.
    Gel tabs=fish oil supplements=pills. Dats how we do in Merca.