Posted by Larry Hoover on January 24, 2007, at 11:09:23
In reply to Maybe just a *little* DHA? » Larry Hoover, posted by saturn on January 23, 2007, at 20:58:08
> Thanks for the interesting links Lar (btw, do you mind if I call you Lar?).
Of course you may.
> You've convinced me that DHA is, well, essential. What I am not sure about is the optimum amount of DHA relative to EPA. It has been suggested that too low of an EPA/DHA ratio may be ineffective or even counterproductive for cognitive purposes.
Okay, so there's your hypothesis.
> Do you have an opinion on this?
Yes.
> For example a company Minami Nutrition boasts a capsule containing 581 mg EPA and 70 mg DHA. That's a ratio of about 7. Nordic Naturals makes one with 850 mg EPA and 200 EPA (ratio of 4.25).
>
>
> Thanks...Peace...Saturn.I'm leary of reductionist science. The idea that the only beneficial substance in fish is EPA seems unreasonable, to me. The idea that we can isolate one active ingredient.....
I don't think there's an answer for you available solely through intellectual analysis. At some point, you must do the experiment(s).
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:723138
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/alter/20070114/msgs/725924.html