The benefits of marine omega-3s for preventing arrhythmias

Good read, below the conclusion of the study. Attached the full paper

Conclusions
The intake of marine omega-3s has consistently been found to have antiarrhythmic effects. When marine omega-3s are consumed, there is an increase in cellular membrane fluidity, inhibition of L-type calcium channels and a reduction in the chance of arrhythmic events during susceptible times. Prospective data suggest that maintaining an omega-3 index of about 8%, which requires consuming seafood rich in omega-3 up to five times per week or consuming over 3 g of EPA and DHA per day, may provide the greatest protection against arrhythmic events.

Thanks for posting, Marco. I love fish, but the missus don't. She'll eat it about once a week...IF...I cook it. It's the smell, and to a certain extent the taste that puts her off. So, supplements it is.

Quote
Marco
Attached the full paper

You forgot something.

Quote
Carey

Attached the full paper

You forgot something.

I'm sorry it took long to reply. Here the full study. I recommend reading all of it, there is also some negative outcome as well shown in the paper,

Quote
gloaming
Thanks for posting, Marco. I love fish, but the missus don't. She'll eat it about once a week...IF...I cook it. It's the smell, and to a certain extent the taste that puts her off. So, supplements it is.

you are welcome

Another view - [www.afibbers.org]

Quote
PavanPharter
Another view - [www.afibbers.org]

Pavan, an administrative thought. Why start a new thread? I say this as when you do, it pushes an older topic off the first page and out of view. Just post it as a reply in this thread would be my suggestion.

What to believe?

[pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

In RCTs examining cardiovascular outcomes, marine ɷ-3 supplementation was associated with an increased risk of AF. The risk appeared to be greater in trials testing >1 g/d.

[pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

We found a U-shaped association between consumption of marine n-3 PUFA and risk of incident AF, with the lowest risk close to the median intake of total marine n-3 PUFA (0.63 g/day).

Quote
GeorgeN
Why start a new thread? I say this as when you do, it pushes an older topic off the first page and out of view.

Yep, I agree. Behold the magic of the Merge Topic tool.

I posted this a few weeks ago on the omega 3 topic.

I was a vegan when I had my first episode in 2004 (no longer vegan as of 2008 or 09). In 2015, I was tested for the first time for omega 3 index it was very low, around 3.something. Because of AlzD genetic risk, my doc wanted my omega 3 index between 10 & 12. Subsequently, I've run it generally north of 12 and as high as 19 without an impact on my afib burden.

I was questioned about the above and this was my response:

I eat fish & shellfish daily. Many times for multiple meals. I also consume a plasmalogen precursor supplement, which likely should be included. As my genetics are prone to cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), which is a condition leading to brain bleeds, I vacillate (as high omega 3 makes blood "thinner"), because there are no good answers. I can also consume a DHA supplement and cod liver oil. Because of the CAA risk, I also avoid OAC meds, trying to keep my afib burden extremely low and my CHA2DS2-VASc score at 1 (because of my age). To mitigate my AlzD genetic risk, my brain needs a lot of DHA. I balance many different risks.

For the omega 3 index, I use the Omega Quant test.
Here is a podcast with the Dr. Bill Harris, who developed the test.

Quote
PavanPharter
What to believe?

[pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

In RCTs examining cardiovascular outcomes, marine ɷ-3 supplementation was associated with an increased risk of AF. The risk appeared to be greater in trials testing >1 g/d.

[pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

We found a U-shaped association between consumption of marine n-3 PUFA and risk of incident AF, with the lowest risk close to the median intake of total marine n-3 PUFA (0.63 g/day).

I just wanted to make a comment on study n2, the last at the bottom. Quintile n.5, the group who took the more marine omega 3 and had more Afib episodes, also took more alcohol and it was the group who also had the higher blood pressure, unless I'm not reading the study properly.

I also want to point out that, I believe nobody knows, what would be the mechanism of which fish oil could cause afib. After all, real food is also safer than food supplements. However, fatty fish such as salmon, are full of mercury.


My own anecdotal experience is the 3 times I had Afib, were the 3 times I was not taking Fish oil. My first time the Omega 3 index was at 5.6, I do not know the 2 and 3rd afib time where my omega3 index was. I'm open to the possibility that this is just a coincidence though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/20/2023 09:24PM by Marco.

Quote
Marco
I just wanted to make a comment on study n2, the last at the bottom. Quintile n.5, the group who took the more marine omega 3 and had more Afib episodes, also took more alcohol and it was the group who also had the higher blood pressure, unless I'm not reading the study properly.
.

In the study, they said they adjusted for BP & alcohol.

Here are my issues:

1. The basis of the study was a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). The accuracy of these are always suspect, IMO. Also using the output of an FFQ to project over long periods of time is very questionable, again IMO.

2. Most of the fish oil came from fish, not supplements per the data.

3. If the confidence interval of a relative risk crosses 1.0, then it did not reach statistical significance. Only Q3 did this (note it's P of 0.02 is the only P < 0.05).

4. The relative risks (RR) weren't very different. Note that Q5 (group with the highest fish oil consumption) had a RR of 1.06 or 1.05 depending on the model. Meaning a 5 or 6% increase from the base group (though 18 or 19% more compared to Q3).

Here are the relative risks prepared by the models:


So I wouldn't put much stock in the study.

Quote
GeorgeN

I just wanted to make a comment on study n2, the last at the bottom. Quintile n.5, the group who took the more marine omega 3 and had more Afib episodes, also took more alcohol and it was the group who also had the higher blood pressure, unless I'm not reading the study properly.
.

In the study, they said they adjusted for BP & alcohol.

Here are my issues:

1. The basis of the study was a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). The accuracy of these are always suspect, IMO. Also using the output of an FFQ to project over long periods of time is very questionable, again IMO.

2. Most of the fish oil came from fish, not supplements per the data.

3. If the confidence interval of a relative risk crosses 1.0, then it did not reach statistical significance. Only Q3 did this (note it's P of 0.02 is the only P < 0.05).

4. The relative risks (RR) weren't very different. Note that Q5 (group with the highest fish oil consumption) had a RR of 1.06 or 1.05 depending on the model. Meaning a 5 or 6% increase from the base group (though 18 or 19% more compared to Q3).

Here are the relative risks prepared by the models:
[i.ibb.co]

So I wouldn't put much stock in the study.

thanks for pointing that out. I read the study very quickly.

I do believe there is more data needed for the Aifib and EPA/DHA situation. Till then, I still believe obtaining a decent Omega 3 index and omega 6 to Omega 3 ratio is one piece of the puzzle towards better health

Quote
GeorgeN

Another view - [www.afibbers.org]

Pavan, an administrative thought. Why start a new thread? I say this as when you do, it pushes an older topic off the first page and out of view. Just post it as a reply in this thread would be my suggestion.

The reason to start a new thread is this one has a biased subject line and many people don't read past the headlines.

There is an equal and well established set of research showing that marine O3 adds to afib burden. If this forum is to be fair and balanced and present all sides equally, I don't believe it's right to move conflicting information to being a footnote.

Quote
Marco
I also want to point out that, I believe nobody knows, what would be the mechanism of which fish oil could cause afib. After all, real food is also safer than food supplements. However, fatty fish such as salmon, are full of mercury.
.

Nope.

Fresh wild caught salmon is one of the LOWEST of commercial fish, You'd have to eat 53lbs a week to be at risk.

Tuna has 31X the mercury of salmon.

[www.fda.gov]

Quote
PavanPharter
I also want to point out that, I believe nobody knows, what would be the mechanism of which fish oil could cause afib. After all, real food is also safer than food supplements. However, fatty fish such as salmon, are full of mercury.
.

Nope.

Fresh wild caught salmon is one of the LOWEST of commercial fish, You'd have to eat 53lbs a week to be at risk.

Tuna has 31X the mercury of salmon.

[www.fda.gov]

ah!, I would have thought all big fishes contained too much mercury. Good to know

In case it needs to be said, a balanced diet includes foods of all kinds. One should eat nuts, vegetables, fruit, legumes, green leaves, eggs (complete, not just the whites), dairy, etc. Just do it in limited quantities spread out over the weeks and months.

If there were on egentle caution to almost everyone reading, particularly to those who are circling the drain around metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance, limit carbs from all possible sources....berries, root vegetables, grains, baked goods, 'treats' (crisps, chips, bars, 'energy' bars, gummies, anything with sugars of any kind in it except maybe stevia. If you can limit yourself to less than about 70 gms/day, you'll probably be in much better health ere long, and maybe out of danger metabolically.

Pretty sure spinach and oxalates were direct contributing factors to my AFIB.

Oxalate toxicity is under-recognised and under-diagnosed. It can be caused by genetic factors, a yeast fungus infection, diet, or a combination. Symptoms can include fatigue, poor sleep, joint and muscle aches and pains, brain fog, eye pain, burning sensation, vulvar pain and kidney stones. You are more at risk of it if you have a leaky gut, and it may interfere with body systems causing anaemia, heart arrhythmia, underactive thyroid, interstitial cystitis, osteoporosis, fibromyalgia or carpal tunnel syndrome. One problem is that it is counter-intuitive, often being caused by a diet rich in leafy greens! The toxicity can be reversed by gradually reducing your oxalate intake, moving a bit towards a healing carnivorous diet, though you may experience greater pain at first as the oxalate is eliminated from your system.

[thevitalityclinic.co.uk]

Plants are trying to kill you. [youtu.be]

Brussel sprouts have 136 identified human carcinogens in them. Not one vegetable you will find in a grocery store has less than 60 known carcinogens.

Quote
PavanPharter
Not one vegetable you will find in a grocery store has less than 60 known carcinogens.

We live in a world full of carcinogens, and that was true throughout human evolution from the first wiggly things in primordial mud until today.

Which tells me that I should ignore such data until it's far more compelling.

"The dose makes the poison"

Quote
Carey
"The dose makes the poison"

Saliva causes stomach cancer.

But only when swallowed in small amounts over long periods of time.

It might be informative to read up on the 'hormesis effect.' [ hore MEE sis]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2023 11:55AM by gloaming.

Here are two links that lists cancer risks

[amp.theguardian.com]
[amp.cancer.org]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2023 03:38AM by susan.d.