Talk:Omega-3 acid ethyl esters

note

This is the first time I've looked for Lovaza here, though I know this is not the normal way for Wikipedia to list medication or suppliments, it is what's here. I'll take a picture and work on adding some basic information here. It might be better as Omega-3-acid ethyl esters (LOVAZA) as it's noted in the GlaxoSmithKline information on it and is more normal for Wikipedia. --Bcw142 (talk) 23:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Contents

Note: 38% + 47% + 17% = 102% (>100% due to rounding)

Question: Is rest all fish oil?

"Each 1-gram capsule of LOVAZA contains at least 900 mg of the ethyl esters of omega-3 fatty acids sourced from fish oils. These are predominantly a combination of ethyl esters of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA - approximately 465 mg) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA - approximately 375 mg)." Source: http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_lovaza.pdf (Section 11 Description)

Hence: ~37.5% DHA ethyl esters, ~46.5% EPA ethyl esters, >=~6% other Omega-3 (which equals >=90%) Hence: ~10% other fish oils (an assumption?)

Can someone explain the signicance of ethyl esters versus "natural forms"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.3.227 (talk) 07:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Possible contextual discussion needed: The third sentence of this article (as of 22 OCT 2010) describes the process by which GlaxoSmithKline "transformed" a dietary supplement into a "pharmaceutical." Was there any controversy about this? That is to say, it seems to me that what GlaxoSmithKline appears to have achieved is to convince the FDA to approve an excluse right to market (purified) fish oil as a pharmaceutical (with all attendant potential financial gain) while others must market it as a dietary supplement. Does this fit within standard practice of the FDA? Could another company, for example, apply to the FDA to market St. John's Wort capsules as a "pharmaceutical" with exclusive rights? Eenwikilekter (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

"Natural" fish oil contains fatty acids incorporated into triglycerides and as free fatty acids. Making an ethyl ester involves converting everything to free fatty acids, getting rid of saturated fatty acids, which has the effect of concentrating EPA and DHA, and then sticking an ethanol molecule on one end. Hence ethyl for the ethanol and ester for the fatty acid. Any product with ethyl esters should not be described as 'natural.' David notMD (talk) 10:28, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Abbott Laboratories

Please accept the edits to this page (February 14, 2013). My name is Scott Stoffel, and I work at Abbott in Corporate Public Affairs, and the edits I am providing are all factual, based upon review of the page with Abbott Laboratories scientists who have expertise in this area. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to access my contact information, found here: http://abbott.com/news-media/contacts.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottStoffelAbbott (talk • contribs) 18:08, 14 February 2013 (UTC) ScottStoffelAbbott (talk) 20:41, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Lovaza ethyl esterification is not unique

Because many popular fish oil supplements use ethyl esterification to avoid contaminates as well[1], I changed:
in these respects it is considered a pharmaceutical: unlike unregulated extracts, there is no risk of contamination by methyl mercury, arsenic, or other pollutants that are often seen in the world's oceans.
to:
Due to the esterification process during manufacturing there is no risk of contamination by methyl mercury, arsenic, or other pollutants that are often seen in the world's oceans.
--Dejitarob (talk) 02:21, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Confirming that in that link, Vitamin World Ester-Omega is an ethyl ester dietary supplement ingredient. Almost all of the other products in that link are not ethyl esters. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Note on related articles

See discussions at Talk:Omega-3 fatty acid about making all these fish oil/omega-3 articles make sense across Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 00:52, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Clarifying triglyceride-lowering and recent Reduce-It

Doc James (talk · contribs), thanks for doing some work on this. I think this article is a bit confusing for peopoe right now - it says this drug is "used to treat high blood triglycerides" but then says "Evidence does not support a benefit in decreasing the risk of heart disease". For the average reader, that's confusing - what clinical outcome is expected by treating high triglycerides? Is this used to prevent diseases from really high triglycerides such as pancreatitis and xanthomas? Separately, I'm sure you've heard a bit about all the buzz happening around the REDUCE-IT trial ("Amarin’s Vascepa nabs ADA backing to cut heart risks, even ahead of FDA review"), altho there's controversy around its "light liquid paraffin oil" placebo. Technically that's about ethyl eicosapentaenoic acid, but EPA is one of the ingredients discussed here, so the caveat about dosage and this particular ingredient may need to be noted. II | (t - c) 17:44, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Note, in reading Icosapent ethyl: Where will it fit into guideline-based medical therapy for high risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease? I noticed that it says "icosapent ethyl is approved only to treat patients with triglycerides ≥500 mg/dL to prevent acute pancreatitis"; however, the FDA approval / label required a statement that a reduction in pancreatitis was not established. Nevertheless, the real clinical target here seems to be pancreatitis, and yet this article does not mention the pancreas. II | (t - c) 18:33, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

There are a fair number of medications used to treat stuff which have little or no evidence of benefit.

Arthroscopic knee surgery for OA is another example.

User:ImperfectlyInformed what do you suggest? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:37, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I made edit. Still a bit confusing that EFSA says one thing while FDA / Cardiology clinical guidelines say another - not sure we should be picking a side conclusively there. As far as the REDUCE-IT trial, apparently Vascepa is not approved in the EU so REDUCE-IT was not in their review (per Analyst Defends Amarin (AMRN) Stock as EU Regulators Say Omega 3 is Ineffective). We'll see how it shakes out, not too urgent. II | (t - c) 05:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Pregnancy

This "While use in pregnancy has not been well studied, some omega-3 fatty acids appear beneficial."

Provides a lot more information than "There are no controlled data in human pregnancy."

So restored the first.

How it is taken has nothing to do with its side effects so putting them together in one sentence does not make sense. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Omtryg in 2014 to Osmotica Pharmaceuticals

Ref says "Trygg Pharma"? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:28, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Please help re-title the graphic in intro

Hello, I cannot find where to correct the naming convention that appears exactly below the chemical structure image. Because the FDA recognizes spelling with TWO hyphens (one between “3” and “acid”), a hyphen must be added so that the chemical structure is entitled: “omega-3-acid ethyl esters”

Thnx! Gobucks821 (talk) 16:25, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Please disregard: I fixed this by filling in an EMPTY field in the template. The correct name now appears as the title and description. :-) Gobucks821 (talk) 16:43, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

• • • PLEASE HELP RE-TITLE THE PAGE NAME to include appropriate, officially recognized spelling of chemical/drug name. It should include a 2nd hyphen: “Omega-3-acid ethyl esters” and thus have a link of …/Omega-3-acid_ethyl_esters/

Thank you!!! Gobucks821 (talk) 16:48, 24 December 2021 (UTC)