Part V: Do Plant-Based Diets Need Supplementing?

Chris, my number 28 was for the Vitamin D test. I hear what you are saying about DHA being unstable and oxidizing quickly yet several WFPB docs suggest supplementing is a good thing particularly for older folks. Why would Greger and Klaper for instance suggest this if they felt the supplement wouldn't do any good because of the issues you raise? I respect these men greatly for their work and advocacy for WFPB nutrition and they don't seem to have any financial bias in recommending these algae supplements. Some might suggest Fuhrman could be biased since he sells his own brand, but not the other two.

Ken, I hear you that fear is not a way to live; all we do is lose precious moments when we focus on our fears and not the moment in front of us. Nevertheless in a similar vein as what I suggested to Chris, at some point, most or all of us hopefully rely on some evidence based data to make our personal decisions. All the WFPB docs point to such data in making recommendations on what is healthy to eat and what might need to be supplemented such as B12, or D, or DPA/EHA. What makes life harder for those of us trying to do the best health practices we can is how cautionary we feel we need to be. As I said, several docs suggest supplementing DPA/EHA might be valuable; some haven't gotten on that bandwagon. So we have to decide what to do when there is not consensus and the fact the insurance companies refuse to cover some valuable blood tests makes it even harder to decide what to do.

I assume from your comments that both Ken and Chris have not done the blood tests checking DHA/EPA levels and you have decided not to supplement for this. I am not sure even if we supplement, whether we could really know whether it is having a beneficial effect. If our basic labs show we are healthy, and that is how we feel, we may not know, in terms of how we feel cognitively, how much our brain is shrinking as we age. All I know is I want to preserve what I have for the longest time possible. Best to both of you and for contributing to the discussion.

Sorry this is so long, but, this is a great discussion! I believe discussions like these are a major benefit to our health!
Indeed, I do not know what my DPA/EHA number are. I admit that is due to ignorance instead of dismissal. So, I thank everyone for this discussion.
Regarding DPA/EHA, however, I would not be inclined to supplement because I have found that consuming any ingredient containing greater than 10% fat, regardless of type or "goodness", elevates insulin resistance - which makes Type 1 diabetes difficult to manage. As I understand, the prospect of low DPA/EHA is a decline in mental capacity, however, Type-1 Diabetes complications are catastrophic. Fortunately, I have yet to experience any mental (or otherwise) decline - or at least any evidence thereof.
Reviewing my previous comment, I see that it looks like I advocate a "happy-go-lucky" or "ignorance is bliss" mindset. But, that is really the opposite of what I really mean to say. Indeed, most of my health efforts has been in the face of ignorance - but never by intent. My response is experimentation. Obviously, I can't experiment every aspect of biology, but experimentation is my innate mindset. Experimentation is how I learned to manage my Type-1 diabetes to achieve non-diabetic results. As it turns out, my experimentation derived method is in conflict with industry established standards and even in conflict with many WFPB doctors, but I feel successful enough to believe in the results. This doesn't mean I'm smarter than the authorities, but it means I'm not inclined to automatically follow established paths. I am results oriented. If I try something that results in a better outcome, I tend to believe that over the authority. If I have no experience in a subject, then I will follow the authority, but never with absolute conviction, until I see the physical results. For example; there is an established standard for calcium and vitamin D intake in defense of osteoporosis. However, everyone that I know with osteoporosis who diligently takes the prescribed doses of calcium and vitamin D, never get any better. This reduces my faith in the established treatment and specifications of osteoporosis.
Throughout these past 30 years, I have received many warnings that I am too "low" on this or that. My first question is always, "what is the detriment?" I then get a list of symptoms. My second question is, "How long does it take before the symptoms take effect?" Since the length of time since I have been too "low" on this or that is generally in excess of 10 to 20 times the specified time to symptom plus the fact that I have instead moved further away from the listed symptoms since being too "low", brings the said "low" figure into question.
I suppose that much of this falls into a belief category. In my career as an electronics design engineer, I find the same belief mechanisms throughout that industry. Especially as simulation software and reference designs are becoming increasingly popular while physical prototype test-and-measure becomes less popular. I admit I am old school in that respect; I am inclined to believe the physics and direct experience of the subject over industry established opinion. I cannot count the number of times that highly esteemed and respected engineers have told me that one of my designs can't work. They know, because they have never seen such a circuit arrangement and it doesn't work in their high-end simulation software. The problem is; they are telling me this while watching the said physical design, in action and working perfectly.
I do not say this in dismissal of industry established data. I use it routinely in my life and career, but I am shy about considering it an end-all absolute - regardless how much I trust the source. When available, however, direct empirical experience is my overriding belief. I can't help it; I'm a Doubting Thomas.

Deborah, Yes that could be an issue from what I've learned too. These friends are pretty careful WFPB eaters from what I know so I imagine they stick with the 1-2 ounces of nuts that many of the docs prescribe. Since nuts are protective for many good things, I would not want to give up a reasonable amount. The problem I think is overeating nuts not using them sparingly. And of course I am talking about healthy nuts, raw, not sweetened or roasted. I am assuming Deborah that you have not taken the blood test either since you haven't mentioned it.

Ken, I understand your point. For each of us, we have to find what we believe works. Hopefully you take in the evidence based data, try it out, and then make changes when warranted for your personal needs.

After participating in this discussion, I am more inclined now to spend the money and take the blood test and see what it finds. I really don't like the idea of supplementing if I have no personal need, but if I'm at a low level of something that could be critically important as protecting my cognitive ability, I would want to know that. So maybe I will take the test and see what it show for this WFPB eater. If I do, I will report back.