Dolphins study suggests saturated fat helps with insulin resistance

[Chad]

This is interesting considering the long term societal health recommendations. Just another nail in the fat is bad coffin.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-me ... t-diabetes

[jennypenny]

"According to Venn-Watson, high ferritin, or hyperferritinemia, is thought to be a possible underlying cause of metabolic syndrome because of the damage ferritin can cause to cells and tissues. “Thus, we believe that [heptadecanoic acid] may work in decreasing high ferritin, resulting in less cell damage and reduced indicators of metabolic syndrome,” she tells IFLScience."

Low ferritin is also dangerous, though. It's a marker for iron-deficiency anemia. I wonder which is correct? Don't get me wrong--I'm a big believer in eating natural fats. Just a curious discrepancy.

I'm sure they'll prove fish/fish oil is a required component of a healthy diet now that we've decimated fish populations.

[Chad]

They have already proven fish oil is vital part of our diet. Some theorize omega 3's are one of the big reasons we developed our big brains. Though, you don't have to eat fish to get the heptadecanoic acid recommended by the article, it's also found in whole fat dairy:

They found that butter, whole milk and yoghurt contained the highest amounts, whereas it was undetectable in nonfat dairy products.

I would wager our society is way more hyperferritinemia than low ferritin considering the high carb low fat recommendations for the last 30-40 years. We ate glucose spiking foods in carbs, but then never ate the fat that counteracts it. I'm leaning much more towards the nutritional approach of Dr. Peter Attia than the older carbs are good and fat is bad, especially saturated fat, theory.

[black_son_of_gray]

Not sure I understand the logic here.

1. Dolphins have evolved to survive on a diet that is fish and maybe squid.
2. The study compares two groups of dolphins, 1) a group in San Diego that lives in netted enclosures and is fed frozen whole fish (primarily just one fish, capelin, which has no heptadecanoic acid…); 2) a group of free-ranging dolphins in Sarasota Bay, FL which are known through a related study to eat at least 15 different species of fish (these were stomach contents)
3. Not unsurprisingly, the mostly-single-fish-fed captive dolphins have metabolic syndrome
4. The researchers added variety to some of the captive dolphins (the test diet varied in a number of different fatty acids, not just the one), and this resulted in changes in the serum fatty acid profile - though not a complete rescue to the levels seen in the wild reference dolphins
5. ….and to top it off sample sizes were ~4-6 dolphins, not large by any stretch

Of course, with science journalism- hyperbolic as it is- it is almost always better to just go to the source and make up your own mind.

Therefore "saturated fat could help prevent diabetes" in humans? That jump is bigger than the Grand Canyon.

1. Humans don't eat diets exclusively of fish and don't have the same metabolic adaptations.
2. Humans with metabolic syndrome aren't eating predominately just one thing. I also highly doubt that most people with metabolic syndrome aren't getting enough fatty dairy or fish. More likely, they are getting too much and should eat more plants (which are low in saturated fats)
3. There was not 'causation' data in the dolphin study, just 'association'

By all means, feed captive dolphins better diets! But this means almost nothing to a human being.

[Chad]

I didn't say it was gospel (it suggests there definitely should be more studies done). I said it was interesting, which it is. Especially, when it's tied to all the other nutrition research over the last 10 years. Lots of this research suggests that saturated fat is actually good for you.

It's also interesting considering how blood glucose, along with inflammation, is being identified as negative aspects, even for non-diabetics, as they age.

This ties into a lot of Dr. Peter Attia's work. He suggests diabetes isn't caused by obesity, but is just another symptom of what really causes diabetes.

[Ego]

They have already proven fish oil is vital part of our diet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/scien ... story.html

A study published on Thursday in the journal Science reported that the ancestors of the Inuit evolved unique genetic adaptations for metabolizing omega-3s and other fatty acids. Those gene variants had drastic effects on Inuit’s bodies, reducing their heights and weights.

Rasmus Nielsen, a geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley, and co-author of the new study, said that the discovery raises questions about whether omega-3 fats really are protective for everyone, despite decades of health advice. “The same diet may have different effects on different people,” he said.

Food is a powerful force in evolution. The more nutrients an animal can get, the more likely it is to survive and reproduce. Humans are no exception to this rule. When we encounter a new kind of food, natural selection may well favor those of us with genetic mutations that help us thrive on it.

Some people, for example, are able to digest milk throughout their lives. This genetic adaptation arose in societies that domesticated cattle thousands of years ago, in such places as Northern Europe and East Africa. People who trace their ancestry to other regions, by contrast, tend to more often be lactose-intolerant.

Dr. Nielsen wondered if the Inuit underwent a similar evolutionary change when they shifted to a diet made up mainly of meat.

and

This discovery was particularly tantalizing, because the scientists knew that these enzymes help regulate the different fats in our bodies, including omega-3 fatty acids.

Even more intriguing was the fact that one of these gene variants was present in almost every Inuit in the study. It is much less common in other populations: About a quarter of Chinese people have it, compared with just 2 percent of Europeans.

[Chad]

@Ego
Interesting, though, I don't think the journalist is taking the right path with the info. It's not surprising at all that the Inuit have a special gene to regulate fat consumption considering their diet was mostly fat. I'm not sure it suggests omega 3's aren't helpful to the rest of us. We aren't exactly eating whales and seals on a daily basis. A salmon filet or two a week with some minor supplementation every day hardly requires a special gene for control.

This isn't like not having the gene to digest lactose. Other cultures still ate fat, including omega 3, and their bodies used it appropriately. They just didn't eat fat anywhere near the levels the Inuits were forced too.

The other study the writer sites looks at the effects of fish oil on high risk populations:

... most of which looked at whether fish oil could prevent cardiovascular events in high-risk populations.

This study was trying to show that someone who does curls and only curls after they have been out of shape for decades can get in shape with just curls. Of course, they can't. And, of course, people who have already basically destroyed their cardiovascular system aren't going to be saved by fish oil. Food and exercise are long-term healthy variables, not short-term fixes (Not a rant at you, because I'm sure you know already).

Here is a report with tons of studies (164 references):

http://www.foundmyfitness.com/reports/omega3-report.pdf done showing the benefits of omega 3

You probably have to sign up to view the PDF, but you won't get inundated with email if you do. One a week at most, and it will be all health info linked to actual scientific studies.

[Ego]

This isn't like not having the gene to digest lactose. Other cultures still ate fat, including omega 3, and their bodies used it appropriately. They just didn't eat fat anywhere near the levels the Inuits were forced too.

Good point. Good research link too. I bookmarked it.