Nonsense. I’m inclined to at least be skeptical of this new finding, but certainly not with the tendentious crap you just linked to!!
>> Not so fast
That was fast! Great debunking job.
Although I’m kinda sad to see the source “Insidecostarica” brought low... I mean, that’s where I go for *all* of my in-depth science information.
As a side anecdote... been eating fish for YEARS. I heart fish! Especially sushi. And especially high-omega3-fatty-fish like mackeral and salmon. My LDL cholesterol is low, my HDL is high, and yet my prostate remains the size of a grapefruit, just like it was when I was 20. :-)
From your link...
“The study in question proves nothing. It is looking at a data set of men that were in a vitamin E and selenium study. It is relying on measurements of fatty acids between those with prostate cancer and those without that it is essentially meaningless. For example, the study uses plasma amounts of fatty acids, which fluctuate readily with the last meal consumed. A good study would use the red blood cell level of fatty acids that are an accurate indicator of actual omega 3 consumption in the past 4-6 weeks. There is no knowledge of the dietary intake or the supplement intake of omega 3 for any participant (yet the researchers try to blame supplements).
The difference in the plasma fatty acid levels in the prostate cancer group versus the non-prostate cancer group was .2 percent, virtually nothing. Extrapolating data from such a meaningless starting point is irrelevant. As is ignoring an overwhelming body of science on the health benefits of essential fatty acids.
The actual headline of this study should be that “smoking reduces the risk for prostate cancer.” The clearest association found in their data was that the more a man smoked the less risk for prostate cancer he had. Wow. Does anyone believe that?”
As many men are on fish oil supplements(for the past 20 years) it would only seem logical that there would of been and explosion of prostrate cancer seen. I see no evidence of that.
Thanks for the counter article. I have been looking for a good one about the OP study.
You post a link from a company that sells Omega-3 supplements - why? Did you think this is a scholarly, scientific rebuttal? Did you notice that the only citations offered are for the supplement trade association and another supplement manufacturer?