There's a lot that needs to be clarified. For example, did they study only animals that live much shorter lives than humans? Also, they are talking about PUFAs in cells, and I am not arguing against this, but rather to replace the AA or an omega 3 with Mead acid, then see what happens. Now let's consider humans. We can see from statistics when people often die of "heart disease" and certain cancers, for instance. Both of these seem to be directly related to PUFAs in the typical diet (in the majority of cases), and so if a large number of people die of these "diseases" well before the age of let's say 90, it's clear that this is significant for human life expectancy, and this particular study is not especially useful, though it would be nice to see a study that is "on point," that is, it compares animals with Mead acid in their cells to those with AA and/or omega 3 PUFAs.
In fact, I remember writing a post for another newsgroup about an animal that was injured, taken into captivity, then died for reasons the "experts" could not explain. I suggested that these "experts" may have thought the animal required "essential fatty acids," and killed it by giving it too much dietary omega 6 and/or 3 PUFAs. |
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Prev Message
