Fishy Fish Oil Studies

[Guest guest]

Fishy Fish Oil Studies

JoAnn Guest

Apr 08, 2006 09:11 PDT

 

 

 

 

Something is fishy about the recent headlines claiming omega-3 fish

oil is ineffective in reducing mortality from cardiovascular

disease.

 

Regardless of the actual content of the medical journal reports, the

public reads and hears the headlines only, and they are negative.

The news reports emanated from a pooled analysis of 89 studies

involving fish oil and heart disease.

 

Here are some of the headlines:

 

* Fish oil may not be so healthy after all- Daily Mail UK

 

* Doubts cast on oily fish benefits- BBC News

 

* Wonder ingredient not the good oil once touted- Weekend Australian

 

The news reports went on to say:

" Scientists have found little evidence that oily fish is good for

your health. " " Scientists who reviewed 89 studies of Omega 3 fats

found no clear evidence that they are of any use at all. "

 

Up until 2003 studies showed a clear preventive effect for omega-3

fish oil in mortality reduction from cardiovascular disease. Then in

2003 the

DART-2 trial was published which skewed all the pooled statistics in

another direction. These statistics should have never been combined

with other studies because the DART-2 trial dealt only with men with

stable angina. The advertised cardiac mortality difference between

males with

angina who consumed fish oil and those who did not was a relative

+26%, but in hard numbers it was only +2.5%. [European Journal

Clinical Nutrition 57: 193-200, 2003]

 

Angina (chest pain) can originate from coronary artery injury and is

significantly reduced by administration of high-dose oral vitamin C,

which has been demonstrated in both animal and human studies.

[Coronary Artery Disease 15: 21-30, 2004; American Journal

Cardiology 87:1154-9, 2001] Low vitamin C levels are associated with

angina. [Journal Cardiovascular Risk 3: 373-77, 1996]

 

The males in the DART-2 trial were strongly non-compliant in

regards to advice to consume more fruit, which would be rich in

vitamin C. Therefore, fish oil may have been

inappropriately selected to reduce mortality among angina patients.

The fact males with angina ignore advice to eat foods rich in

vitamin C is sufficient evidence that vitamin C deficiency is a

behavioral/nutritional disorder.

 

Furthermore, among the 89 pooled studies, 44 involved supplemental

omega-3 oils. Others involved dietary intake.

 

Only 8 of these studies

were large (greater than 500 subjects). So the results of one large

study, like DART-2 (3000+), skewed the pooled results. Some studies

involved daily intake of omega-3 oils as low as 400 milligrams, and

one study 7000 milligrams.

 

But when the all the participants in these

studies were divided into four groups of varying intake of omega-3

oils,

the lowest intake group only consumed ~100 milligrams per day and

the highest group ~600 milligrams per day. Essentially, all four

groups, on

average, consumed very low amounts of omega-3 oils! [british Medical

Journal, Online First March 24, 2006] The small difference between

these groups would hardly be expected to show much difference in

mortality.

 

By the way, where were the news reporters when researchers in

Germany reported in the April issue of Critical Care Medicine that

omega-3 fish oils, given in hefty doses (7000+ milligrams for a 160-

pound/70kilo adult) to hospitalized critical care patients for about

9 days, lowered

mortality rates from 18.9% to 12.0% ( 37% reduction)!

 

Fish oil also reduced length of hospital stay and need for

antibiotics. [Critical Care Medicine 34: 972-79, 2006] Fish oil

saves lives!

 

http://www.knowledgeofhealth.com/report.asp?story=Fishy%20Fish%20Oil%

20Studies & catagory=Omega%203,%20Health%20Agencies

 

 

JoAnn Guest

mrsjo-

www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Diets