Todd Moody wrote:
> > I am unaware of any reason unless you are talking transfatty acids; that
> > being vegetable oils which have been hydrogenated.  However, this
> > stretches me a bit.
>
> I am skeptical myself.  If SFAs inhibit D6D and ALA inhibits D6D
> and LA inhibits D6D and TFAs inhibit D6D then I think there are
> some confounding variables floating around...

>From what I know of biochemistry, and believe me I wish I knew more,
more chemical reactions in the body occur or rely on chemical cascades.
Cascades work by allowing a small amount of substrate to turn on a
"production engine" for the manufacture of a large number of chemicals.
I think that relying on supplementation to directly modulate chemical
reactions is not an acceptable answer, for a number of reasons.

A better dietary design would rely on the cascade effect, where foods
would trigger an endocrine response which would drive many body
functions.  In the case of our interests, in times of limited meat,  a
shift in diet to the consumption in carbs would yield a cascade in the
biochemical production of those fatty substrates needed for survival.
It's like multilevel marketing.  My one insulin might be responsible for
for producing a thousand AA by triggering a hundred D5Ds.  Note that
this is JUST an EXAMPLE.

It seems that supplementation with food concentrates, e.g., EPO, BCO,
GLA or what have you is not the way the body is designed biochemically.
Sure these foods (nutriceuticals) may provide substrates for energy and
building blocks, but they have a stronger economic benefit for those who
sell them.  Among my many activities I teach small nutritional outfits
how to support their products with the available research.  This is
about "pushing product" and not what the body needs.  Make no mistake.

Andrew  =8-)
--
Andrew S. Bonci, BA, DC, DAAPM
Assistant Professor, Department of Diagnosis
Cleveland Chiropractic College
6401 Rockhill Road
Kansas City, Missouri   64131
(816) 333-7436 ex39