Analysis of the metabolomic state informs on metabolite profiles associated with disease risk

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01980-3/figures/5

The MOST interesting finding is how linoleic acid (omega 6) is surprisingly protective against BOTH dementia and diabetes. Linoleic acid seems to have an opposite sign to broader omega-6 though?

[also MUFA has the wrong “sign” and mgiht be “slightly bad”?]

Cholesterol is dissected into SO many subtypes - only a tiny fraction of the types really contribute to disease. OVERALL cholesterol ON SUM seems very mildly “good” which is consistent with DNAm age data (and everything else) I’ve seen (eg mortality in late life people).

The most surprising finding is that ketone bodies/BHB are “slightly associated with bad outcomes” (i can see how they’re generated in diabetic ketosis)

“Large HDL is better than small HDL” (slightly)

XL-HDL-FC seems strangely bad

1 Like

related - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5492028/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5360226/

M-VLDL-C Cholesterol in medium VLDL
M-VLDL-CE Cholesteryl esters in medium VLDL
M-VLDL-FC Free cholesterol in medium VLDL
M-VLDL-L Total lipids in medium VLDL
M-VLDL-P Concentration of medium VLDL particles
M-VLDL-PL Phospholipids in medium VLDL
M-VLDL-TG Triglycerides in medium VLDL
S-VLDL-C Cholesterol in small VLDL
S-VLDL-CE Cholesteryl esters in small VLDL
S-VLDL-FC Free cholesterol in small VLDL
S-VLDL-L Total lipids in small VLDL
S-VLDL-P Concentration of small VLDL particles
S-VLDL-PL Phospholipids in small VLDL
S-VLDL-TG Triglycerides in small VLDL
XS-VLDL-C Cholesterol in very small VLDL
XS-VLDL-CE Cholesteryl esters in very small VLDL
XS-VLDL-FC Free cholesterol in very small VLDL
XS-VLDL-L Total lipids in very small VLDL
XS-VLDL-P Concentration of very small VLDL particles
XS-VLDL-PL Phospholipids in very small VLDL
XS-VLDL-TG Triglycerides in very small VLDL
1 Like

Thanks, that helps some but this is still a bit of a puzzle to me. I’m working on it.

Linoleic acid might correlate negatively with AA because higher levels MIGHT mean less is being converted into AA.

Wkipedia says AA has its benefits and is not clearly bad either.

FWIW, mainstream science (eg Harvard nutrition) is more on the side of PUFAs being "good’ than “bad”, but the ““really bad”” tail risk of PUFA is way worse than MUFA which is why I would still choose MUFAs [also we know highly MUFA diets are fine, we don’t have the same ancestral data for PUFAs]

related

Do Seed Oils Make You Sick?

Critics say they raise your risk for weight gain, heart issues, and more. But the science doesn’t support those claims.

https://www.consumerreports.org/health/healthy-eating/do-seed-oils-make-you-sick-a1363483895/

2 Likes

Thanks
I have often thought that this seed oil thing is overblown. Typically I would be spraying less than 1 gram into the bottom of a frying pan just to keep the food from sticking. Say it was 1 gram, how much of that would be transferred to my steak or whatever?
Why don’t people just use olive oil? Because olive oil is not a neutral-tasting oil and other seed oils such as canola are. I use olive oil when it is appropriate to the recipe.

1 Like