The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And ingestion of EPAs, because it limits these inflammatory cytokines, things like IL-6, C-reactive protein, et cetera, can cause more of the tryptophan that one ingests or has in their body to be diverted towards the serotoninergic pathway.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
hitting a certain threshold level of EPA intake, whether by supplementation with fish oil or krill oil or through some plant source if you're not into ingesting fish or krill, or trying to get up above that 1000 milligram threshold for EPA by ingesting particular food sources, you certainly can do it through food, you don't have to supplement, but it's easier to do with supplements, that doing that will limit the inflammation that diverts tryptophan into this neurotoxic pathway.
An ingestion of EPAs, because it limits these inflammatory cytokines, things like IL-6, C-reactive protein, et cetera, can cause more of the tryptophan that one ingests or has in their body to be diverted towards the serotonergic pathway.