>In a message dated 10/24/01 4:18:50 PM, Hilary McClure
<[log in to unmask]
>writes:

>Enig/Fallon criticized their first book because of its ..negative coverage
>of arachidonic
>acid, but all three of those topics seem to have been revised in the
>later book

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 20:53:54 EDT, Madeline Mason <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>And yes, those topics as
>well as their stance on flax seed oil have changed completely.

Would you say, that AA shouldn't be covered "negative"
and what is to be corrected about flax oil?

At http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/560S
Artemis P Simopoulos writes some interesing facts about EFA studies.
Particularly long chain w-3 EFAs (EPA) have a lot of beneficial effects.
Such effects can be achieved by supplementation with basic w-3 EFAs (ALA,
flax oil) as well.
Provided that there's noch much competition from w-6 oils.
And we know that MUFAs (OA) and SFAs interfere too, but in a smaller degree.
(See topic "Effects of dietary ALA compared with long-chain n-3 fatty acid
derivatives..")

regards, Amadeus S.