Fish Oil

[Eddie0206]

I'm not sure if this is the right thread, but here ya go
I have some Fish Oil Concentrate gell tablets, I was wondering if these were a wise thing to take, if so, how often should I take a dose?

[ChinPieceDave667]

I took up to 10 a day once, spaced out and it didn't bother me too much

[ChinPieceDave667]

some reading. I love this site. I always try and look up different supplements. to see what they do
http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/n...fis_0106.shtml

[EricT]

You do need to be careful what fish oil products you use. There is always some contaminated product floating around out there.

It needs to be molecularly distilled to be free of heavy metals and dioxins. Also needs to be fresh. I'd actually recommend puncturing one or more of the capsules and smelling the oil. If it smells really fishy, it's probably rancid. That would mean that the manufacturer was not careful enough, didn't process the oil quick enough, etc. Fresh oil should not have any strong fishy smell any more than fresh fish would.

Capsules should be kep't in the fridge after opening to be on the safe side and keep them their freshest.

Keep these guidelines in mind with all your oils, including the cooking oils. Oils high in polyunsaturated, expecially, should be kept refrigerated. If they are higher in monounsaturated, like olive oil, they can be kept room temperature, to a point.

With that said, fish oil is a great thing to be taking.

[verbatimreturned]

i just reliezed i didnt put my input in my post. but ive heard fish oil is good for weightlose i would be taking it but i havent bought any yet definatly in the near future though

[verbatimreturned]

I just purchased some fish oil from the Vitamin World a couple of days ago, it was on sale two for one. anyway on the side of the Bottle it says "good manufacturing processes" GMP, does that mean that what I have meets the standard as far as what Eric had mentioned?

[verbatimreturned]

well this kind of answers my own question but this is what I found out about the GMP at http://www.gmp1st.com/gmp.htm

GMP refers to the Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations promulgated by the US Food and Drug Administration under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (See Chapter IV for food, and Chapter V, Subchapters A, B, C, D, and Efor drugs and devices.) These regulations, which have the force of law, require that manufacturers, processors, and packagers of drugs, medical devices, some food, and blood take proactive steps to ensure that their products are safe, pure, and effective. GMP regulations require a quality approach to manufacturing, enabling companies to minimize or eliminate instances of contamination, mixups, and errors. This in turn, protects the consumer from purchasing a product which is not effective or even dangerous. Failure of firms to comply with GMP regulations can result in very serious consequences including recall, seizure, fines, and jail time.

GMP regulations address issues including recordkeeping, personnel qualifications, sanitation, cleanliness, equipment verification, process validation, and complaint handling. Most GMP requirements are very general and open-ended, allowing each manufacturer to decide individually how to best implement the necessary controls. This provides much flexibility, but also requires that the manufacturer interpret the requirements in a manner which makes sense for each individual business.

GMP is also sometimes referred to as "cGMP". The "c" stands for "current," reminding manufacturers that they must employ technologies and systems which are up-to-date in order to comply with the regulation. Systems and equipment used to prevent contamination, mixups, and errors, which may have been "top-of-the-line" 20 years ago, may be less than adequate by today's standards.

That really doesn't answer my question though about whether or not I could tell if the product was molecularly distilled and all of that other good stuff

[EricT]

Honestly, I'm pretty sure that fish oil doesn't even fall under any of those categories and if it does I'm don't know if it would protect you from contamination by heavy metal pollutants, dioxins, etc.

The only way to know is to ask the manufacturer if their product is molleculary distilled. I don't know if you bought caps or liquid. I prefer liguid (even better if it is the kind they keep in a fridge). It is more likely to be good.

All that being said and given that I believe in trying to get the best you can, let me also say that IMO the benefits of of fish and fish oil products probably outweigh the risk of the heavy metals for otherwise healthy people. But there have been some mighty heavy contaminations found in a great many fish oil products, more so than fresh fish.

If it's Vitamin World brand, I would simply drop them an email and ask.

[EricT]

Environmental Defense's survey

Environmental Defense contacted 75 companies whose fish oil products are commonly found in supermarkets, pharmacies and health food stores, and asked them (1) whether they purify their fish oil to reduce or remove environmental contaminants; (2) what methods they use to purify their fish oil; and (3) what standards they comply with regarding acceptable levels of contaminants.

Environmental Defense solicited information on mercury, PCBs and dioxins, since these three pollutants comprise the majority of consumption advisories for fish caught in the United States and could also be present in fish used for fish oil supplements. (Generally, fish oil comes from fish that are caught to feed animals, not humans.)
What standards does Environmental Defense consider sufficiently stringent?
There are a variety of standards for allowable limits of contaminants in food (including dietary supplements). For this study, Environmental Defense evaluated standards from the following government agencies: the State of California (Proposition 65), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, and the European Union.
Surprisingly, allowable levels of contaminants vary greatly between agencies, with the FDA's standards being the least stringent. PCB standards vary the most. The FDA's tolerance level for PCBs is 2,000 parts per billion (ppb), while the State of California's limit under Proposition 65 (the most stringent standard) is only 90 ppb, assuming daily consumption of one 1,000 mg fish oil capsule. Similar disparities exist for mercury and dioxins. Since EPA's and California's Proposition 65 limits were the most protective of human health, we used these standards as the baseline for our survey.
In addition, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (listed at right) -- a trade association comprising many of the companies surveyed (see chartfor full results) -- established voluntary standards equal to or more stringent than those set by EPA and California's Proposition 65.

Survey results
Many of the companies contacted provided high-caliber responses, indicating that they take potential health risks from contaminated fish oil supplements seriously. Most companies said they used molecular distillation and steam deodorization technologies to remove environmental pollutants from their fish oil supplements. These highly effective purification processes use a combination of pressure and high temperature to separate pollutants from omega-3 fatty acids.
Overall, more than 80% (61) of the 75 companies contacted verified that they have met the strictest U.S. standards for contaminants. Twenty-one companies' responses were incomplete, and seven companies did not respond (note that 14 companies provided complete information for some products while incomplete for others). One company, Omega Protein, said it complied with the least stringent standards (FDA's) but did not respond to our follow-up inquiries about whether it also adhered to other stricter standards. (See chartfor full results.)

In short, most fish oil supplements appear to be adequately purified and safe. Consumers who take fish oil supplements should consider purchasing them from companies that verified they have met the strictest U.S. standards for contaminants.

Taken from here

[EricT]

Some of this is a repeat of the previous post.

Fish Oil Supplements: Is the Brand You're Taking Safe?

Environmental Defense Releases Supplement Survey Contact: Kathleen Goldstein, Environmental Defense, 202-841-0295

(March 30, 2005 - New York, NY) Environmental Defense today released the results of its fish oil supplement survey, which determined the best and worst choices based on company responses concerning removal of environmental contaminants. More than two-thirds of the companies contacted comply with the strictest standards, which is encouraging since consumers are increasingly taking fish oil supplements for their beneficial omega-3 fatty acids, and want to know that the products are safe.

"Fish oil supplements are a great way to reduce your risk of heart disease, but all supplements are not created equal," said Environmental Defense scientist Dr. Rebecca Goldburg. "Consumers should be aware of potential risks from environmental contaminants such as PCBs and dioxins."

Sales of such omega-3 supplements have more than tripled since 1998, reaching $190 million in 2003. However, unpurified fish oil supplements can contain unsafe levels of environmental contaminants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The presence of pollutants is a widespread problem, not just in oils but also in popular fish such as tuna, swordfish and farmed salmon as well.

"Environmental contaminants like PCBs and dioxins are potent developmental and neurological toxins," said Environmental Defense health program director Dr. John Balbus, MD, MPH. "People take supplements to be healthy, but if they don't choose the right ones they could be sabotaging themselves."

Environmental Defense surveyed 54 major producers and suppliers of fish oil supplements in the United States to see if and how they are addressing health risks from environmental contaminants. They evaluated standards from a number of U.S. and foreign government agencies. Since the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State of California (Proposition 65) limits were the most protective of human health, they used these standards as the survey's baseline. In addition, the Council for Responsible Nutrition - a trade association comprising many of the companies surveyed - has established voluntary standards equal to or more stringent than those set by EPA and California's Proposition 65.

"We are encouraged by the number of companies that voluntarily cooperated with Environmental Defense's efforts to make this information public," said Council for Responsible Nutrition President Annette Dickinson, Ph.D. "We are pleased, too, that so many companies are taking care to manufacture fish oil supplements that rate high in purity and quality."

More than two-thirds (37) of the 54 companies contacted verified that they met the strictest U.S. standards for contaminants. These companies use highly effective purification processes - molecular distillation and steam deodorization - to separate pollutants from the beneficial omega-3 fatty acids. Nine companies' responses were incomplete, and eight companies did not respond.

Overall, fish oil supplements are an ecologically acceptable as well as healthful choice for consumers. But, in the future consumers will ideally be able to choose fish oil supplements that are not only properly purified, but also derived only from well-managed, ecologically sound fisheries.

To learn more or view the survey chart, visit www.oceansalive.org/eat.cfm.