5 ms·

So wait, what is disappointing about this: "Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which is a "statistically significant" findin

So wait, what is disappointing about this: "Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which is a "statistically significant" finding, says Dr. JoAnn Manson, who is chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. She led the research." and "African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart attack when compared to placebo, which is a "dramatic reduction,"

dmix 8y ago
The fact fish oil and vitamin d have been touted for couple decades as helping prevent cancer? I remember both my parents taking both regularly growing up in the 90s and they both separately mentioned cancer prevention as the big reasons.
- clumsysmurf 8y ago
  Even until recently I still see studies consistent with this idea (o-3 & cancer) https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-01-omega-3s-fish-flax-cancer.html https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-01-omega-3s-fish-flax-ca...
- raws 8y ago
  Isn't a risk reduction the same as helping prevent?
- marktangotango 8y ago
  I’m a big believer in fish oil. In my late 30s I experienced a consistent feeling of unwell ness and what I describe as “brain fog” so badly and consistently I went to the dr about it. Turned I had high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Dr wanted me to modify my diet and if it didn’t improve he wanted to put me on statins(!) Fish has never been part of my diet. Started using fish oil, eating Cheerios, vitamins and some excercise. Started makeung a point to include seafood 2 times a week. Long story short, 6 months later all my numbers were in line. The most striking thing I recalled from this was the fish oil, brain fog went away, I felt a great deal more mental acuity. Fast forward to today; that was all 8 years ago, in the interim I stopped all that and the brain fog and unwell ness are back. I started fish oil again, and the effect was immediate. I even remarked to my wife how much better I felt. That’s all anecdotal, and probably placebo effect anyway, ymmv.
  - phkahler 8y ago
    As for the statins... Doc said we had to treat my high cholesterol and triglycerides. I was very reluctant to take statins so she said "OK try red yeast rice for 3 months but if it doesn't improve you're gonna have to take statins". OK. My cholesterol 320->220. My triglycerides 300+ -> 115. It turns out that lovastatin was identified as one of the key molecules in the ancient Chinese remedy. So that's my one data point, and the only one relevant to me regarding statins.
    - codewiz 8y ago
      It's not at all surprising that red yeast rice would be as effective as a prescription drug in lowering triglycerides. In fact, "Some red yeast rice products contain large amounts of monacolin K, which is chemically identical to the active ingredient in the cholesterol-lowering drug lovastatin." (from https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice) It seems statins have serious side effects such as nerve damage, so perhaps you should go with the exact dosage prescribed by a doctor instead of taking an unknown quantity of the same drug from natural sources.
      - phkahler 8y ago
        I got the muscle aches that can come from statins. Lowered my dose and they went away. Thing is, the doc never saw anyone achieve the results I did with the prescription stuff. No need to support a broken patent system and get a doctor and pharma company involved.
  - damontal 8y ago
    What part do you think Cheerios played in this?
    - marktangotango 8y ago
      Cheerios are advertise to reduce cholestol, there are studies to support the claim, whatever that’s worth.
  - 8y ago
- WaltPurvis 8y ago
  I have honestly never heard fish oil mentioned as a way to reduce cancer. I guess a lot of people have been taking/hyping it for that, but I've always only heard of it as a means of lowering your risk of heart problems. (And it sounds like the results of this study are that it dramatically lowers the risk of heart attack, as much or more as any prescription medication, so I agree with other commenters who say it's weird to describe this study as showing "disappointing" results for fish oil and heart disease.)
- copperx 8y ago
  Wasn't fish oil recently linked to advanced prostate cancer? (people with prostate cancer had elevated DHA in a big study -- whether that's caused by fish oil consumption is unknown, but still something to consider.)
- koboll 8y ago
  "Touted" based on what? There isn't much good evidence linking fish oil to cancer. https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/ https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/ But there's very good evidence that shows fish oil has benefits for triglycerides and cholesterol, which is consistent with the results of this study re: heart attacks.
shanev 8y ago
"The study, which was also a randomized clinical trial, tracked participants for an average of five years. The volunteers took icosapent ethyl, which is sold under the brand name Vascepa and was developed by the Amarin Corporation, which funded Bhatt's research." Because if they spun the study as a success, the funders of this study, a pharmaceutical company, wouldn't be able to promote their drug.
- adetrest 8y ago
  Exactly. A private company selling a supplement paid for a study that shows said supplement is beneficial and should be consumed... This study cannot be taken seriously.
nitins 8y ago
Yes, I don't understand why this is disappointing. The article also says there are no side effects. Even if there is 10% decrease, isn't it good?
- copperx 8y ago
  If you read the editorial, the reason is that those were secondary endpoints (not what the trial set out to measure). The literature is filled with exciting secondary endpoint "discoveries" that turn out to be nonsignificant when they become primary endpoints in a study. Also, the data suggest that these secondary endpoints aren't to be trusted because findings don't match other studies.
phkahler 8y ago
Was going to post that first quote along with: "Overall, they showed that neither fish oil nor vitamin D actually lowered the incidence of heart disease or cancer," Fine says. So apparently heart disease and heart attacks are two different things. If so, why should we care about heart disease at all?

dmix 8y ago

The fact fish oil and vitamin d have been touted for couple decades as helping prevent cancer? I remember both my parents taking both regularly growing up in the 90s and they both separately mentioned cancer prevention as the big reasons.

clumsysmurf 8y ago
Even until recently I still see studies consistent with this idea (o-3 & cancer) https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-01-omega-3s-fish-flax-cancer.html https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-01-omega-3s-fish-flax-ca...
raws 8y ago
Isn't a risk reduction the same as helping prevent?
marktangotango 8y ago
I’m a big believer in fish oil. In my late 30s I experienced a consistent feeling of unwell ness and what I describe as “brain fog” so badly and consistently I went to the dr about it. Turned I had high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Dr wanted me to modify my diet and if it didn’t improve he wanted to put me on statins(!) Fish has never been part of my diet. Started using fish oil, eating Cheerios, vitamins and some excercise. Started makeung a point to include seafood 2 times a week. Long story short, 6 months later all my numbers were in line. The most striking thing I recalled from this was the fish oil, brain fog went away, I felt a great deal more mental acuity. Fast forward to today; that was all 8 years ago, in the interim I stopped all that and the brain fog and unwell ness are back. I started fish oil again, and the effect was immediate. I even remarked to my wife how much better I felt. That’s all anecdotal, and probably placebo effect anyway, ymmv.
- phkahler 8y ago
  As for the statins... Doc said we had to treat my high cholesterol and triglycerides. I was very reluctant to take statins so she said "OK try red yeast rice for 3 months but if it doesn't improve you're gonna have to take statins". OK. My cholesterol 320->220. My triglycerides 300+ -> 115. It turns out that lovastatin was identified as one of the key molecules in the ancient Chinese remedy. So that's my one data point, and the only one relevant to me regarding statins.
  - codewiz 8y ago
    It's not at all surprising that red yeast rice would be as effective as a prescription drug in lowering triglycerides. In fact, "Some red yeast rice products contain large amounts of monacolin K, which is chemically identical to the active ingredient in the cholesterol-lowering drug lovastatin." (from https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice) It seems statins have serious side effects such as nerve damage, so perhaps you should go with the exact dosage prescribed by a doctor instead of taking an unknown quantity of the same drug from natural sources.
    - phkahler 8y ago
      I got the muscle aches that can come from statins. Lowered my dose and they went away. Thing is, the doc never saw anyone achieve the results I did with the prescription stuff. No need to support a broken patent system and get a doctor and pharma company involved.
- damontal 8y ago
  What part do you think Cheerios played in this?
  - marktangotango 8y ago
    Cheerios are advertise to reduce cholestol, there are studies to support the claim, whatever that’s worth.
- 8y ago
WaltPurvis 8y ago
I have honestly never heard fish oil mentioned as a way to reduce cancer. I guess a lot of people have been taking/hyping it for that, but I've always only heard of it as a means of lowering your risk of heart problems. (And it sounds like the results of this study are that it dramatically lowers the risk of heart attack, as much or more as any prescription medication, so I agree with other commenters who say it's weird to describe this study as showing "disappointing" results for fish oil and heart disease.)
copperx 8y ago
Wasn't fish oil recently linked to advanced prostate cancer? (people with prostate cancer had elevated DHA in a big study -- whether that's caused by fish oil consumption is unknown, but still something to consider.)
koboll 8y ago
"Touted" based on what? There isn't much good evidence linking fish oil to cancer. https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/ https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/ But there's very good evidence that shows fish oil has benefits for triglycerides and cholesterol, which is consistent with the results of this study re: heart attacks.

shanev 8y ago

"The study, which was also a randomized clinical trial, tracked participants for an average of five years. The volunteers took icosapent ethyl, which is sold under the brand name Vascepa and was developed by the Amarin Corporation, which funded Bhatt's research." Because if they spun the study as a success, the funders of this study, a pharmaceutical company, wouldn't be able to promote their drug.

adetrest 8y ago
Exactly. A private company selling a supplement paid for a study that shows said supplement is beneficial and should be consumed... This study cannot be taken seriously.

nitins 8y ago

Yes, I don't understand why this is disappointing. The article also says there are no side effects. Even if there is 10% decrease, isn't it good?

copperx 8y ago
If you read the editorial, the reason is that those were secondary endpoints (not what the trial set out to measure). The literature is filled with exciting secondary endpoint "discoveries" that turn out to be nonsignificant when they become primary endpoints in a study. Also, the data suggest that these secondary endpoints aren't to be trusted because findings don't match other studies.

phkahler 8y ago

Was going to post that first quote along with: "Overall, they showed that neither fish oil nor vitamin D actually lowered the incidence of heart disease or cancer," Fine says. So apparently heart disease and heart attacks are two different things. If so, why should we care about heart disease at all?