Offer
Provide additional details about the offer you're running.
FLASHSALE
1. Introduction
The idea that the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is critical for long-term health has been widely debated. Over the past three decades, total fat and saturated fat intake in Western diets has steadily decreased, while omega-6 fatty acid intake has surged and omega-3 intake has declined. Some argue this shift has pushed the typical omega-6/omega-3 ratio from a natural 1:1 balance during evolution to 20:1 or even higher today.
This dramatic change has led researchers to question whether a higher intake of omega-6 fats compared to omega-3 fats could contribute to chronic health conditions such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. However, despite concerns, human studies have not consistently supported the claim that omega-6 fats promote inflammation or negative health effects. Carefully controlled feeding studies suggest that omega-6 fatty acids may not be as harmful as commonly believed.
In this blog, we’ll explore the two competing perspectives, examine what the science actually says, and discuss how to achieve an adequate intake of both omega-3 and omega-6 through diet.
2. The Ratio Confusion
Understanding how the omega-6 to omega-3 debate evolved requires examining key historical discoveries that shaped modern nutrition beliefs. The timeline below provides critical context for what is now considered received wisdom in dietary science.
· 1929—George and Mildred Burr discover that certain fats are essential for the growth and survival of rats, causing scientists to rethink the idea that fats are necessary only as a source of calories and fat-soluble vitamins.
· 1931 The Burrs identity linoleic acid as the essential factor in fats missing from the rats’ diet.
· 1934 Archer Daniels Midland Company opens the first solvent seed-oil extraction plant in the US, using hexane as the solvent.
· 1950 The scientist Ralph Holman discovers linoleic acid is the precursor of arachidonic acid and alpha linoleic acid of EPA & DHA.
· 1957 Sune Bergstrom isolates the first prostaglandins.
· 1973 William Lands discovers prostaglandins made from n-3 fatty acids are much less inflammatory then from n-6 fatty acids.
· 1972 Bang & Dyerberg show Eskimos decreased heart disease even though diet high in seal fat and blubber.
· 1978 Bang, Dyerberg & Vane show EPA an omega-3 plays a role in prevention of thrombosis & atherosclerosis.
· 1989—The DART (Diet and Reinfarction Trial) and GISSI (Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto miocardico) trials reveal the benefits of omega-3 fatty acids in preventing death from heart attacks.
At the onset of the industrial revolution (~140 years ago), the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids in the human diet began to shift dramatically. With the rise of the modern vegetable oil industry, omega-6 intake surged while omega-3 consumption declined (Leaf & Weber, 1988). This shift reflected the widespread adoption of commercial seed oils, which became a dietary staple in processed foods.
As the food industry adapted, cooking oils rich in omega-6 became commonplace, some researchers proposed that Western diets—particularly in the U.S.—contained excessive levels of omega-6 (Blasbalg et al., 2011) leading to concerns about a possible link between omega-6 dominance and chronic disease. The idea emerged that an imbalanced omega-6 to omega-3 ratio could be a driving factor in inflammation and poor health—though human studies remain inconclusive.
Recognizing the market potential, supplement companies capitalized on this narrative, marketing fish oil as a solution to offset excessive omega-6 intake. Over time, the pursuit of an ideal ratio became mainstream, even though many experts argue that total essential fatty acid intake—rather than a strict ratio—should be the true priority.
3. Dueling Perspectives: The Two Camps
As research into fats and fatty acids progressed, the scientific community split into two camps—each with differing views on the importance of omega-6 to omega-3 ratios.
Camp 1: The Omega Believers—This group insists on a strict ratio for optimal health, believing that excessive omega-6 intake contributes to inflammation and chronic disease. Their tipping point came at the 1985 Omega-3 Fatty Acids Conference in Washington, D.C., where leading scientists presented research on EPA and DHA, two omega-3 fatty acids found abundantly in fish. Their findings suggested that these nutrients could deliver profound health benefits, particularly for heart health.
During this conference, the idea gained momentum that Western diets contained excessive amounts of omega-6. Researchers argued that human tissue in industrialized nations was awash with omega-6 fatty acids, which compete with omega-3s for metabolic pathways. To some scientists, this imbalance was more than just a nutritional issue—it was a public health crisis in the making. They warned that an unchecked omega-6 overload could act as a biological time bomb, increasing the risk of heart attacks and inflammatory diseases.
Camp 2: The Omega Moderates – This group argues that total omega-6 and omega-3 intake matters more than achieving a precise ratio. They contend that recommendations to reduce linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid, are based on minimal direct evidence, and they take a more balanced view of how omegas affect health.
In May 2017, a symposium titled “N-6 PUFA: They Are Not as Bad as You Think” (Belury & Harris, 2018) was held to challenge long-standing dietary fat dogmas, particularly regarding omega-6 fatty acids. Five speakers presented evidence examining whether linoleic acid (LA) and arachidonic acid (AA) were truly pro-inflammatory and harmful at current intake levels. The consensus among participants was that not only is LA not harmful, but it may actuallycontribute to a reduced risk of coronary heart disease and type 2 diabetes—conditions collectively known as cardiometabolic disease. Additionally, findings suggested that omega-6 fatty acids may play a role in reducing chronic inflammation, contradicting earlier concerns.
4.How Much Research Backs the Ratio Argument?
The discovery in the 1970s of the potential health benefits of marine omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA) by Bang and Dyerberg in Greenland Inuits sparked an avalanche of research into these essential nutrients. Scientists soon realized that EPA (omega-3) and arachidonic acid (AA, omega-6) compete for the same enzymes, which are critical for maintaining homeostasis and controlling inflammation. This led to the hypothesis that an ideal omega-6 to omega-3 ratio might be fundamental for overall health.
Further complicating the narrative, research revealed that aspirin inhibits the conversion of AA (omega-6) into a variety of pro-inflammatory compounds, fuelling the belief that AA itself was inherently inflammatory. This quickly escalated into a broad oversimplification—omega-6 was “bad,” omega-3 was “good”—and the idea of an optimal ratio emerged as a simplified way to assess potential inflammatory responses in the body (Lands, 2003).
Fast forward to recent years, and research into eicosanoids (local hormones produced by omega-6 and omega-3) has revealed a more nuanced picture. Omega-6 fatty acids are not exclusively pro-inflammatory; in fact, they exhibit both pro- and anti-inflammatory effects, depending on context. Studies have repeatedly shown the benefits—not detriments—of linoleic acid (LA), the primary dietary omega-6 fatty acid (Harris et al., 2009) (Farvid et al., 2014).
In 2016, researchers examined the long-term impact of different types of dietary fat on mortality (Wang & al, 2016). This large-scale cohort study, which followed 126,233 participants for up to 32 years, found that omega-6 fatty acids were more strongly linked to lower death rates than omega-3 fats.
These findings suggest that rather than cutting omega-6 intake, increasing omega-3 consumption while maintaining omega-6 levels may be the more beneficial approach—challenging the widespread assumption that omega-6 fats must be minimized to achieve optimal health.
Key Takeaways:
1. We need to increase our omega-3 intake—but not at the expense of omega-6.
2. Not all fats are equal, the quality of fats matters far more than obsessing over the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio.
Conclusion: What Should You Focus On?
Where possible, focus on consuming a quality source of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), containing good levels of both omega-6 and omega-3. With naturally high levels of both omega-6 and omega-3, hemp seed oil is a simple, all-in-one solution for getting essential fatty acids daily—no need to juggle multiple sources like flaxseed, walnuts, sunflower seeds, pine nuts or canola oil. Gone is the need to Google search for foods high in omega 3.
Additionally, our hemp seed oil stands apart from other hemp oil producers. Through high heat testing at Melbourne University, we confirmed that our oil retains all of its essential fat benefits even when used in baking. This expands its versatility, making it an even more valuable addition to a health-conscious diet.
References
Belury, M., & Harris, B. (2018). Omega-6 Fatty Acids, Inßammation and Cardiometabolic Health - Overview of Supplementary Issue. Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids.
Blasbalg et al. (2011). Changes in consumption of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids in the united states during the 20th century. Am J Clin Nutr, 950-962.
Farvid et al. (2014). Dietary linoleaic acid and risk of coronary heart disease: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Circulaion, 1568-1578.
Harris et al. (2009). Omega 6 fatty acids and the risk for cardiovascular disease: A science advisory from the american aeart association nutrition committee. Circulation, 902-907.
Lands, W. (2003). Diets could prevent many diseases. Lipids, 317-321.
Leaf, A., & Weber, P. C. (1988). Cardiovascular effects of n-3 fatty acids. . New England Journal of Medicine, 549-57.
Wang, D., & al, e. (2016). Association of Specific Dietary Fats With Total and Cause-Specific Mortality. JAMA Internal Medicine, 1134-45.
Learn More: