Flax or fish oil? and Glutamine???

[xavier2484]

quick question? what is better fish oil or flaxseed oil .. i know each one has different omega's in it. but what one have u found worked better?

also what kinda Glutamine is best with peptides or L glut? and how nessasary is it?

 

[Conciliator]

Fish Oil is the only direct source of the essential fatty acids EPA and DHA. Flax oil requires conversion and the body isn't very good at it. Get the fish oil.

Glutamine can help keep your gut happy and strengthen your immune system. That's about it though. If you're looking to get something out of it in terms of recovery or growth, however, you're wasting your money: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/..._uids=11822473&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum I wouldn't spend my money on it if I were you.

 

[xavier2484]

so fish oil is the same as say cod liver liquids? etc

 

[hackskii]

so fish oil is the same as say cod liver liquids? etc

Cod liver is high in Vitamin A and too much can be toxic, besides fish oils are cheaper and I take 12 a day myself.
I dont think it would be a good idea taking 12 cod liver caps a day.
Fish oils are awesome, probably the only supplement I would take if I had to choose just one.

 

[Joe West]

flax has too much omega 6s, which have been linked to prostate cancer.

 

[Conciliator]

flax has too much omega 6s, which have been linked to prostate cancer.

That's not a reason not to take flax. The amount of omega-6's would be minimal compared the typical American diet.

The reason you don't want the flax is because the omega-3's in it have to be converted to the EFA's that you want, and conversion is poor.

 

[Joe West]

That's not a reason not to take flax. The amount of omega-6's would be minimal compared the typical American diet.

The reason you don't want the flax is because the omega-3's in it have to be converted to the EFA's that you want, and conversion is poor.

according to a study i read, the conclusion would disagree with your supposition.

using flax raised prostate cancer risk by itself.

as long as no one uses it, i dont think this is an issue.

 

[Conciliator]

according to a study i read, the conclusion would disagree with your supposition.

using flax raised prostate cancer risk by itself.

as long as no one uses it, i dont think this is an issue.

Please post a pubmed link to an abstract of the study. I'd be interested to see how much flax they were supplementing with and how it was that they were able to attribute the cause of the prostate cancer to the omega-6 fats in the flax. Flax is very low in omega-6's and very high in omega-3's, so your reasoning is counterintuitive. Studies have also shown that flaxseed can help mitigate cancer, so I'm calling BS here. If you can link to a study, however, and show otherwise, please do. Note that Brouwer's meta-analysis was NOT looking at flaxseed supplementation per se, but general (n-3) fatty acid intake. I have a feeling you might be misunderstanding this study.

Here's some evidence to the contrary:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/..._uids=15496224&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12429338

 

[Joe West]

i dont have enough time to do it right now, however as i recall i read it on eurekalert. EA, of course, names the study cited so you can additionally look it up verbatim yourself.

if i cant get around to it today, i will tomorrow. your call.

 

[Conciliator]

i dont have enough time to do it right now, however as i recall i read it on eurekalert. EA, of course, names the study cited so you can additionally look it up verbatim yourself.

if i cant get around to it today, i will tomorrow. your call.

I took a cursory look at EA, but couldn't find anything. Please post it tomorrow.