Fish Oil vs. cognitive ability

[~Sophia~]

20% of the brain’s structure is made of omega 3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (and they have been included for years in prenatal supplements).

This study showed a significant cognitive improvement in school children. It involved 117 children, 5-12 years of age with developmental co-ordination disorder. In a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial, children were given either active treatment (omega 3 and omega 6 supplementation) or a placebo for 3 months. After 3 months the active treatment group showed significant improvements in reading, spelling and behaviour compared with those taking a placebo. For example, the reading age of the treatment group rose by an average of 9.5 months whereas the control group rose by only 3.3 months. For the next 3 months the placebo group were also given active treatment and similar levels of improvement were found; the performance of those in the original active treatment group (still taking the supplementation) continued to improve over this 3 month period.

PEDIATRICS Vol. 115 No. 5 May 2005, pp. 1360-1366

A relative lack of essential fatty acids has also been lined to other neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders such as dyslexia and ADHD but I bet many healthy children could benefit from taking fish oil as well.

(For those interested in dosage - the active treatment was a supplement containing 80% fish oil and 20% evening primrose oil. The daily dose of 6 capsules provided 558 mg of eicosapentaenoic acid, 174 mg of docosahexaenoic acid, 60mg of linoleic acid, ands 9.6 mg of vitamin E)

[DavidOdden]

I bet many healthy children could benefit from taking fish oil as well.

I don't have a strong objection to gambling, but do you know of a reason to bet "positive effect" as opposed to "no effect". Would you make the same bet for adults 20-40, or those 40-70? For example, what if the underlying problem was a deficiency of omega 3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, remedied by the supplements, but not reflecting an open-ended benefit for all? Just curious.

[~Sophia~]

I don't have a strong objection to gambling, but do you know of a reason to bet "positive effect" as opposed to "no effect". Would you make the same bet for adults 20-40, or those 40-70? For example, what if the underlying problem was a deficiency of omega 3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, remedied by the supplements, but not reflecting an open-ended benefit for all? Just curious.

My bet is based on the fact that essential fatty acids are often missing, to the desired level, in a modern diet of many children and adults. So if a child is already eating enough essential fatty acids there probably be no effect observed (because nutritional benefit is already maximized) but I think that for many children that simply is not the case. Personally, don't know many children who eat cold water fish, walnuts, and flaxseeds on a regular bases. I think that the effect is probably the strongest in younger children who's brain is still developing.

Long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (if not digested) can be manufactured in the liver from alpha linolenic acid (ALA) but this conversion is very limited (only about 5-15% is ultimately converted). Further, high amounts of omega 6 interfere with this conversion so the ideal dietary ration of omega 6 to omega 3 fats is approximately 2:1. However, the ratio of omega 6 to omega 3 in the average American diet is about 20:1.

Edited December 29, 2007 by ~Sophia~