Vital Choice Salmon Oil (top left) vs. two standard fish oils

Our young, low-weight Pacific Albacore Tuna—fresh or canned—is simply superior!   

Smaller means safer:  Vital Choice troll-caught tuna weigh just 12 lbs. or less, so they contain less mercury, and more omega-3s, than the larger troll-caught tuna touted by other “minimal mercury” vendors.

No loitering allowed:  Our tuna are hauled in fast, bled, and flash-frozen within about two hours.  (Standard long-line-caught albacore spend 12 hours in the water.)

Better, fresher flavor, even in the can:  Unlike standard canned albacore—which is cooked twice at great cost to flavor and omega-3 content—Vital Choice tuna is cooked only once (in the can) to preserve its healthful oils and fresh flavor.

Danish researchers report that young children fed with infant formula containing fish oil enjoyed speedier maturation of their developing immune systems, compared with infants fed cow's milk or regular infant formula.

The study affirms the positive outcome of a 2005 study, in which the same Danish team tested the immunity-development effects of giving nursing mothers fish oil during the first few months of breast-feeding.

Here are the details of both studies, whose results bolster the wisdom of ensuring ample maternal omega-3 intake and of fortifying infant formula with omega-3s.
 

Kids fed fish oil display sign of faster immune-system maturation

Researchers from Copenhagen University and the Technical University of Denmark conducted a study in 64 healthy infants.

For three months, starting at nine months of age, the children received one of three diets:

• Cow's milk
• Infant formula
• Infant formula fortified with fish oil

The Danes tested the infants’ blood before and after the study period, and found one major difference between the three test groups.

Infants fed the formula fortified with fish oil had much higher levels of INF-gamma: a key marker for maturation of young immune systems.

As the researchers said, “… this study suggests a faster immune maturation with [fish oil] supplementation with no apparent reduction in immune activation. The implications for later health need further investigation.” (Damsgaard CT et al 2007)

We hope someone takes them up on their suggestion and tests whether getting omega-3s early in life strengthens immunity through childhood into adolescence and adulthood.

In fact, there’s already some evidence that the risk of developing hypertension in adulthood drops when one’s diet is high in omega-3s during infancy (Das UN 2006).

Nursing infants’ immune growth also sped by moms’ fish oil intake

In an earlier study, the Danes recruited 122 nursing mothers whose fish intake fell below the population average.

(Since most people in Denmark eats lots of fish, these women’s fish intake probably approximated the American average, which is low in comparison Denmark and other Nordic countries.)

The researchers randomized the mothers into two groups: one was given capsules containing either fish oil (1.5 grams of omega-3s) while the other group took capsules containing olive oil (Lauritzen L et al 2005).

All of the mothers took the capsules throughout the first four months of nursing.

Blood was taken from all of the nursing infants at four months and 2.45 years of age, for testing.

At 2.45 years of age, blood levels of the immunity marker IFN-gamma were four times higher in the children of mothers who took fish oil, compared with the offspring of mothers given olive oil capsules.

These encouraging results suggest that we may continue to discover reasons why it was a very good idea when, in 2001, the FDA finally approved optional fortification of infant formulas with omega-3 DHA and omega-6 arachidonic acid. Both nutrients are essential to optimal brain development and occur in breast milk, but are absent from standard formulas.

The findings also provide added evidence that omega-3 fortification of infant formula should be made mandatory, which would also bring the price of fortified formula down sharply.

Sources

• Damsgaard CT, Lauritzen L, Kjaer TM, Holm PM, Fruekilde MB, Michaelsen KF, Frokiaer H. Fish oil supplementation modulates immune function in healthy infants. J Nutr. 2007 Apr;137(4):1031-6.
• Lauritzen L, Kjaer TM, Fruekilde MB, Michaelsen KF, Frokiaer H. Fish oil supplementation of lactating mothers affects cytokine production in 2 1/2-year-old children. Lipids. 2005 Jul;40(7):669-76.
• Dunstan JA, Roper J, Mitoulas L, Hartmann PE, Simmer K, Prescott SL. The effect of supplementation with fish oil during pregnancy on breast milk immunoglobulin A, soluble CD14, cytokine levels and fatty acid composition. Clin Exp Allergy. 2004 Aug;34(8):1237-42.
• Sacks FM, Campos H. Polyunsaturated fatty acids, inflammation, and cardiovascular disease: time to widen our view of the mechanisms. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Feb;91(2):398-400. 
• Das UN. Hypertension as a low-grade systemic inflammatory condition that has its origins in the perinatal period. J Assoc Physicians India. 2006 Feb;54:133-42. Review.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) just hit a new low in its obeisance to giant food companies.

FDA issued the decision late last month, in response to a petition from Associated British Foods: the $8-billion-per-year food giant that makes Mazola® corn oil, Karo® corn syrup and Argo® corn starch.

The ruling permits the following health claim on the labels of corn oil products, which includes the bizarre “… little scientific evidence …” qualifier underlined below, which echoed in the language of the agency’s decision:

• “Very limited and preliminary scientific evidence suggests that eating about 1 tablespoon (16 grams) of corn oil daily may reduce the risk of heart disease due to the unsaturated fat content in corn oil.
• “FDA concludes that there is little scientific evidence supporting this claim. To achieve this possible benefit, corn oil is to replace a similar amount of saturated fat and not increase the total number of calories you eat in a day. One serving of this product contains [x] grams of corn oil.”

As the agency says in its ruling, “…  due to the small number of subjects in the two intervention studies that showed a beneficial relationship and the fact that not all of the studies reported a benefit, FDA believes that the scientific evidence represents a very low level of comfort among qualified scientists that the claimed relationship is scientifically valid.”

Compared with saturated fats, omega-6 fatty acids are clearly beneficial for heart health.

However, the FDA’s decision to allow the new corn-oil claim seems irresponsible in light of four things:

1. Mainstream medicine considers chronic, silent inflammation a key risk factor for heart disease.
2. Corn oil is very high in omega-6 fatty acid, which, compared with omega-3s, are relatively pro-inflammatory.
3. Americans consume five to 10 times more omega-6s than experts believe is optimal.
4. Countries with higher ratios of omega-3s to omega-6s enjoy lower rates of depression and cardiovascular disease.

New qualified-claims category facilitates industry influence

Before 2002, the FDA only allowed “unqualified health claims” for foods, which require so-called “significant scientific agreement”: i.e., a general consensus among experts that the claim is valid and supported by all publicly available evidence.

The best known example of an unqualified claim is the one permitted on low-sodium foods: “Diets low in sodium may reduce the risk of high blood pressure, a disease associated with many factors.”

This new label claim for corn oil is similar to the qualified claims that were previously allowed for olive oil and canola oil, for which the evidence was described as “limited and not conclusive,” instead of the weaker “very limited and preliminary” standard that the agency decided corn oil meets.

Because a qualified claim does not require “significant scientific agreement”, it invariably includes a disclaimer that describes the strength of the supporting evidence.

The FDA now issues permits for three levels of qualified health claims, which meet the varying levels of evidence:

• Strongest Qualified Claim -- “Although there is scientific evidence supporting the claim, the evidence is not conclusive.”
• Medium-Level Qualified Claim -- “Some scientific evidence suggests …However, FDA has determined that this evidence is limited and not conclusive.”
• Weakest Qualified Claim -- “Very limited and preliminary scientific research suggests…. FDA concludes that there is little scientific evidence supporting this claim.”

The FDA determined that the evidence backing the new corn oil claim met only the weakest claim standard: one so low as to invite bad decisions in response to political pressures from “big food”.

Last year, we heard Marion Nestle -- professor of nutrition at NYU and a widely respected advocate for public health -- speak about the nutritional sins of the food industry and its ability to bend public policy to its will.

Her comment to the Los Angeles Times regarding the new corn oil claim reflects the disdain with which anyone knowledgeable about nutrition and health should hold the agency’s decision: “It’s hilarious. They get funnier and funnier. This one is at the far end of hilarity.” (Ravn K 2007)

Dr. Nestle also voiced a cautionary note in her LA Times interview: “There's a tendency to put the good parts in big print and the bad parts in small print,” because FDA sets no limits on how health claims must appear on labels or in ads.

Further, in a 2005 report the FDA acknowledged that few consumers read or understand the disclaimers attached to qualified health-benefit statements like the new corn oil claim. Consequently, the disclaimer attached to new corn oil claim won’t impede its misleading implications.

Compared with corn oil, olive oil enjoys much more evidence in favor of its ability to enhance heart health, but the FDA has only allowed olive oil labels to bear this slightly stronger label claim:

“Limited and not conclusive scientific evidence suggests that eating about 2 tablespoons (23 grams) of olive oil daily may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease due to the monounsaturated fat in olive oil.  To achieve this possible benefit, olive oil is to replace a similar amount of saturated fat and not increase the total number of calories you eat in a day. One serving of this product contains [x] grams of olive oil."”

And the olive oil claim approved by the FDA ignores the fact that extra virgin grade olive oil likely adds substantial additional benefits, thanks to its potent antioxidants.

Sadly, the FDA’s risible corn-oil-claim ruling supports the increasingly credible suspicion that corporate money and the political influence it buys plays a powerful role in the FDA’s decisions.

Sources

• U.S. FDA. Qualified Health Claims: Letter of Enforcement Discretion - Corn Oil and Corn Oil-Containing Products and a Reduced Risk of Heart Disease (Docket No. 2006P-0243). Accessed online April 13, 2007 at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qhccorno.html
• Ravn K. Corn oil's ‘qualified health claim’ raises eyebrows. Accessed online April 13, 2007 at http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-cornoil16apr16,1,4611891.story?coll=la-headlines-health
• U.S. FDA. Letter Responding to Health Claim Petition dated August 28, 2003: Monounsaturated Fatty Acids from Olive Oil and Coronary Heart Disease
• (Docket No 2003Q-0559). Accessed online April 13, 2007 at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qhcolive.html

We received the following email in response to the article in our last issue titled “Mental Decline Slowed by Omega-3s”.

Elan's Question
Quick question: You stated "...men who consumed an average of about 400 mg of omega-3s per *day* enjoyed significantly less cognitive decline..." and then "...400 mg is the amount in two servings of average fish, which is the minimum number of servings the American Heart Association recommends eating every *week*..."

Is it the case that the men in the study had to consume 7 times the amount recommended by the AHA to enjoy the lack of cognitive decline?

Thanks for the wonderful newsletters!

- Elan

Our answer
Rather than seven times the amount of omega-3s recommended by the American Heart Association to prevent heart disease, the men who enjoyed less mental decline only ate about three times as much: an amount easy to get from fatty fish like wild tuna, salmon or sablefish.

The AHA's recommendation of two servings per week is based on eating white fish like halibut, cod, tilapia, catfish, and pollock, which are relatively low in omega-3s, compared with fatty fish.

We mistakenly said that there were only 400 mg of omega-3s in two servings of average white fish when there are actually about 1,000 mg in two servings.

A trip through Tuscany should include a stop at the captivating hilltop city of Volterra, for breathtaking views, fairy tale castles, the deservedly famous Renaissance-era square called Piazza dei Priori … and great food, including fish delivered fresh from the nearby Mediterranean Sea. 

Surrounded by magnificent rolling hills, peppered with stands of statuesque poplar and cypress trees, the town typifies Tuscany’s ancient, enviable way of life, which dates back well before the Etruscan civilization, for which Volterra was a major cultural center.

The narrow cobblestone streets are filled with an abundance of fresh food markets, from tiny farm stands to superior butcher shops: a tempting sensory panoply sure to spark culinary ideas at every turn.

Volterra’s coast-oriented culinary tradition serves as the inspiration for this simple and delightful regional recipe, which features a decidedly non-Mediterranean fish that’s perfectly compatible with its otherwise authentically indigenous ingredients.

Alaska Halibut Volterra 

Serves 4

Organic extra virgin olive or macadamia nut oil

4 Alaska Halibut fillets (6 oz. each), thawed

1 can (13.75 oz.) quartered artichoke hearts, drained

1 can (2.25 oz) sliced black olives, drained

1 medium red or yellow pepper, cored and cut in chunks OR 1 cup fresh sliced porcini mushrooms

1 cup thick spaghetti sauce

1 cup shredded Parmesan Reggiano, divided

• Preheat oven to 400ºF.
• Brush a 9x12-inch pan with oil.
• Rinse Alaska Halibut under cold water; pat dry with paper towel. Place halibut in pan, spacing evenly.
• Combine artichoke hearts, olives, peppers, spaghetti sauce, and 1/2 cup Parmesan cheese; blend thoroughly.
• Top each halibut fillet with 1/4 of vegetable mixture.
• Sprinkle remaining cheese over vegetables.
• Bake halibut for 10 to 15 minutes, until fish is just opaque throughout.

Nutrients per serving: 391 calories, 14g total fat, 5g saturated fat, 32% calories from fat, 61mg cholesterol, 43g protein, 24g carbohydrate, 5g fiber, 1421mg sodium, 354mg calcium and .7g omega-3 fatty acids.