Fish Oil: DHA vs EPA

[OTay]

Do men really need more DHA? Got this from another thread that had no answers.

@mertdawg

This is what the biotest description of Flameout says:

"Fatty acid supplements typically contain more EPA than DHA. Why? Because fish naturally contain more EPA than DHA. That’s fine for females because the biosynthesis of DHA is a lot higher in women than it is in men.*

The problem is that men have a much higher risk of heart disease. Men also have lower amounts of DHA – despite eating the same amount of fatty acids as women – but they have a higher incidence of heart attack. As such, men need more DHA than women.*

DHA, in addition to having a anti-arrhythmic effect, reduces blood pressure and according to at least one study, even increases HDL (the good cholesterol) by 29% while EPA reduces it by 6.7%.*

Flameout contains a much higher amount of DHA than EPA:*

DHA: 2,200 mg
EPA: 880 mg"

This article explains the main differences between EPA and DHA

What Are the Real Differences Between EPA and DHA? | Psychology Today

Aside from this, many studies are showing the opposite of the conjectures of the Biotest description. Men do tend to turn EPA into DHA in larger amounts, while women have higher levels of EPA, but that does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that men should supplement with more DHA. It seems that men get a greater reduction in cellular inflammation and platelet aggregation from EPA precisely because their liver turns more EPA into DHA and so they have lower levels of EPA and a little bit can have a bigger effect. And since the body can turn EPA into DHA. Basically, one of the main reasons that men have more heart attacks than women is because men turn more EPA into DHA and have lower EPA levels. EPA supplementation lowers men’s blood clotting rate much more than women’s. So I currently don’t see a justification for men to take in high DHA doses and lower EPA doses. Very high DHA doses can also block the production of GLA which is a precursor of ant-inflammatory factors in the body and there is evidence that high DHA intake may require some GLA intake to prevent low levels of those other anti-inflammatory agents.

Summary-just because men make more DHA doesn’t mean they need more DHA in their omega-3 supplementation, and it might mean the opposite. It is important in my opinion that Omega-3 supplementation should stay in the sweet spot of about 2-4 grams a day since high levels of any polyunsaturated fatty acid can raise oxidative damage to cell linings. Combine this with low omega-6 levels. If the supplementation is in the 2-4 gram range then if anything it probably makes more sense for women to get DHA since they tend to make less, but at least in the 2-4 gram range your probably not getting too much DHA even with a high DHA omega-3 source that GLA is getting deficient. Personally, I think I might now get a purified, high EPA source and combine it with Flameout though on days that I eat fatty fish (higher EPA and also ALA that gets turned into EPA first). SO I think combining “fish” days or meals with higher DHA days would also keep a pretty good balance. Unfortunately, most discussions that reference Biotest supplements get sent to the Biotest forum toilet where they get little in the way of productive contributions and discussions. It would be nice to be able to talk about supplements by name without sending them “out of sight.” It’s pretty certain that if I started up a thread about DHA versus EPA in Flameout it wouldn’t go anywhere. It’s unfortunate.

@mertdawg

Let me just say that the main advantage of EPA seems to be in blocking the inflammatory effects of omega-6s so if you keep your omega-6s low, then I think Flameout is fine, sticking to 4 a day, and eating fatty fish maybe 2x a week instead.

DHEA has independent benefits, and there is no evidence of harms from any omega-3s in the 2-4 gram range (4 caplets provide 3.0 grams), but some paleo advocates recommend 10-15 grams of omega-3 a day and there is mounting evidence that that can be harmful, as well as a mechanism explaining why it could be harmful (oxidation damage).

[alex_uk]

@mertdawg

but some paleo advocates recommend 10-15 grams of omega-3 a day and there is mounting evidence that that can be harmful, as well as a mechanism explaining why it could be harmful (oxidation damage).

Would love more info on this, I tend to take 6g of omega 3 a day to get just under 1.5g of DHA, not seen @mertdawg reply for a while, @QuadQueen might have some good info here as well?

More isn’t always better, need to remember that myself!

[QuadQueen]

The recommendations on fish oil have changed in terms of the amount and the overall need to supplement. Having worked heavily in the Paleo community, there was a time when megadosing was the recommendation, but that’s not the case anymore. The research doesn’t support it and as stated above, it can be harmful in super high amounts. I haven’t really delved into the conversion amount differences between males and females, and I’ve never recommended super high doses. My typical recs are 2000-3000 mg/day at maximum with at least 500 mg of that being DHA. If the individual is eating a fatty fish 2-3 times/week, I don’t recommend supplementing at all.

As with all things, too much of a good thing isn’t a good thing. And in the case of supplements - often times less is more.