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.
there are two substances generally found as supplements, although there are other sources of them as well, including within nutritional sources that have been shown, at least in some studies, to be pretty effective in adjusting the symptoms of bipolar disorder, and those two things are inositol and omega-3 fatty acids.
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.
So what that says is that omega-3 supplementation, while not the only intervention that one should consider is something to consider and talk about with your doctor and it's operating in powerful ways. ... I don't think I can overemphasize enough that especially for bipolar disorder and the great risk of suicide and suffering and inappropriate spending, or I should say maladaptive spending and impulsivity that's associated with bipolar disorder, that it's hard to imagine a scenario in which just talk therapy and fish oil and lifestyle interventions are going to completely suppress or treat bipolar disorder. People with bipolar disorder really need to consider the full picture of treatments, the drug treatments, the talk therapy treatments, and lifestyle treatments, and nutraceutical, or we can say supplement-based treatments such as omega-3 supplementation as a full and necessary picture for dealing with their illness.