Omega 3 - fish or pills?

Email
Print

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 7:16p.m.

Salmon - good for you

Salmon - good for you

Many of us now take fish oil tablets. We take them because they contain that fatty acid that has all sorts of health benefits, omega 3.

Scientists at Massey University have been trying to find out what is the best way to get omega 3 into our systems. Is it by taking the pills, or is it by eating the fish?

King salmon farmed in the Marlborough Sounds is fast becoming the fish everyone recommends you eat, from visiting chefs from Australia to nutritionists.

"Salmon is an absolutely incredible food," says Healthy Food Guide's Claire Turnbull. "Not high in protein, but full of omega 3, which we hear about all the time in terms of your health."

It's that omega 3 that's made salmon so valued as a food. It is well documented the fatty acid is good for the heart, confirmed by a new study published earlier this year in the American Medical Journal.

But probably what's not so well know is how good it is for our general well-being.

Scientists here have been looking at the merits of eating salmon as against taking fish omega 3 tablets.

Associate professor Welma Stonehouse of Massey University has studied the health benefits of omega 3 for 20 years. Her research shows you have to take an awful lot of pills to match the benefits of eating the salmon.

King salmon has a reputation for being expensive, and it's true - it's exported to top restaurants around the world. But it only takes 150g of the fish to get your weekly intake of omega 3, about $3 worth.

And it doesn't just contain omega 3, but also a trace element we need in our diet - selenium.

Rising chefs from around Australia have come together to compare notes and discuss the benefits of cooking with it. A former Kiwi who now cooks in Sydney is enjoying educating Australians about how good it is.

King salmon is better for you than any other salmon - it has twice the level of omega 3 as other varieties.

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

11 Apr 2011 09:50p.m.

Myles Penlington wrote:

What I want to know is the levels of omega 6 - specifically AA - arachidonate acid (in the King Salmon). Given that farmed salmon in the US has incredibly high levels that are supposedly not good for you at all.

14 Mar 2010 03:32p.m.

Les Simpson wrote:

What is clear from the various comments is that there is little understanding of what the components of fish oil do. Eicosapentaenoic acid improves the fluidity of the lipid bilayer of the red cell membrane which increases red cell deformability and lowers blood viscosity. Docosohexanoic acid has a structural role in the brain.
The effects are dose-related. In 1991 we published a report of the effects of 4 grams of fish oil daily on the flow properties of blood in elderly subjects. Although there were beneficial effects in the first six weeks of the study, they were not sustained through the second six weeks. Subsequently it has been found that 6 grams daily are effective. So for those people who are taking less than 6 grams daily, they are likely to be wasting their money.
The major problem about fish oil is that the medical fraternity ignore what has been published on the topic. For example, a search for "blood viscosity and fish oil" produced 22,900 titles - so the available information is quite extensive. In 1985, Kromhout et al reported that after a 20 year follow-up, 34 grams daily of oily fish reduced the incidence of heart disease by 50%. So it is relevant that a search for "Cardiovascular disorders and fish oil" produced 693,000 titles. It is difficult to understand how this amount of published information can be ignored by medical investigators.
It is no comfort that an article on fish oil in the latest Time shows no recognition of the published information about fish oil.
Note that plant-derived omega-3 is reliant on the normal function of an enzyme, delta-6-desaturase. In several chronic disorders the enzyme has been shown to be dysfunctional, which means that plant-derived omega-3 cannot be utilised.
Don't take my word for this. Check through the search engine, "PubMed".

12 Mar 2010 10:36p.m.

Peter wrote:

I don't like salmon, so I take 3 capsules per day. It's not a big deal.

12 Mar 2010 06:39p.m.

Carol wrote:

ORACLE, while you chew on your sashimi and slam the natural health industry, this excerpt from an article I found may be of interest to you ... "Sashimi (Raw Seafood).
The important thing to remember about sashimi is that the fish should be saltwater fish, not freshwater fish. (Freshwater fish may contain parasites that are killed by cooking. Saltwater fish do not contain these parasites.)

12 Mar 2010 06:31p.m.

Welma Stonehouse wrote:

Amendment to comment posted by Welma Stonehouse 12 Mar 2010 4:39p.m:
Most other capsules available contain 180mg EPA and 120mg DHA per capsule NOT 180g EPA and 120g DHA.

12 Mar 2010 04:39p.m.

Welma Stonehouse wrote:

The aim of the research done at Massey University was to investigate which method of consumption, fish or fish oil capsules, are most effective to increase long-chain omega-3 status. The volunteers in the study consumed either two 120g portions of salmon twice per week or daily dosages of capsules. Both methods were equally effective at increasing the levels of long-chain omega-3’s in the blood, but consuming salmon had the added benefit of increasing the levels of selenium in the blood which was not seen with capsules (capsules contain no selenium). In addition, the amount of long-chain omega-3’s that was obtained from the 2x 120g portions of salmon per week was equal to 48 capsules per week (this was specific for the capsules that we used in our study). However, most other capsules available contain higher amounts of long chain omega-3’s (180g EPA and 120g DHA/capsule) and one will have to consume 19 capsules of these to obtain the amount supplied by 2x 120g portions of salmon. It is recommended by various international bodies (e.g. the International Society for the Study of Fatty acids and Lipids) that we consume 500mg of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids for protection from heart disease. People who already have heart disease need larger dosages (1g long-chain omega-3 per day). Higher dosages might be needed for brain health and other conditions, but more research is needed before definite recommendations can be made for these. One 150g portion of New Zealand Kingsalmon per day will supply the 500mg of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids we need per day. There is often confusion about the omega-3 fatty acids from plant sources (such as flaxseed and walnuts) and marine sources. They are not the same. The omega-3 fatty acids contained in plant sources is called alpha-linolenic acid. The biological effects of this fatty acid are different from that of the long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA). Most of the health benefits have been shown for the long-chain omega-3 and not for alpha-linolenic acid from plant sources. Alpha-linolenic acid is converted in the body to EPA and DHA, but this process is very inefficient in humans and it is therefore much better to directly obtain the long-chain omega-3’s from the food sources that contain them. This research was initiated and funded by Massey and Massey researchers have not conflict of interest.

12 Mar 2010 11:19a.m.

Dmitry wrote:

I doubt Massey has initiated that research by themselves: the complete disregard for other non-animal sources of Omega-3, like linseed oil, indicates that it likely has been paid for by the fish farmers. "The complete absence of antibiotics, chemicals and vaccines in the production of our salmon products". So how is tightly packed fish in tanks deprived of its natural behaviour kept from getting deceases, and is the fish waste discharged straight into pristine Marlborough sound?

11 Mar 2010 08:56p.m.

Lyndsay Searle wrote:

My father has been studying omega 3 and brain development for more than 20 years in London. He is talking about eating fish 3-4 times a week if possible ( salmon for dinner tuna on sandwidges at lunch etc) to get good quantities of omega 3 for the body to use. 150g once a week seems far too light to me so I think there has been a mistake made here. Salmon now a days is comparitivly cheap and we are lucky that we can buy it at our supermarket and it is often on special.

11 Mar 2010 06:12p.m.

Neil wrote:

How did we survive before all this was discovered? How about getting omega 3 from linseed and walnuts, and selenium from Brazil nuts? I used to eat NZ farmed salmon thinking it was environmentally benign compared to the overfishing and side effects of most fisheries. Then I discovered most salmon is fed other fish, and some of those fisheries are appalling. I sent Regal an email and asked what they use for feed but didn't even get a reply. One can only assume they are afraid to admit what goes into their salmon, so I am back to nuts and seeds.

11 Mar 2010 05:44p.m.

Lyndsay Searle wrote:

My father has been studying omega 3 and brain development for more than 20 years in London. He is talking about eating fish 3-4 times a week if possible ( salmon for dinner tuna on sandwidges at lunch etc) to get good quantities of omega 3 for the body to use. 150g once a week seems far too light to me so I think there has been a mistake made here. Salmon now a days is comparitivly cheap and we are lucky that we can buy it at our supermarket and it is often on special.