7 ms·

Study linked was not the biggest cardiovascular health news of today-- This was: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792 https://www.nejm.org/doi/f

Study linked was not the biggest cardiovascular health news of today-- This was: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792 A single purified component of fish oil - EPA, did lead to a 25% relative risk reduction on top of statin treatment. This is a huge result with off the charts p values.

dmix 8y ago
Importantly the results were only positive for those: > Among patients with elevated triglyceride levels Much like low dose aspirin its possible this is a bad idea for the average person unless you are already showing signs of heart disease.
- koboll 8y ago
  https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/#hem-triglycerides https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/#hem-triglycerides The effect is stronger in individuals with elevated triglyceride levels, but it seems to lower triglycerides in those with more normal levels as well.
- agsdfgsd 8y ago
  How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person? It is an anti-inflammatory, and inflammation is a leading theory of potential disease causation for a number of diseases. Daily low dose aspirin is associated with a significantly lower all-cause mortality in average people.
  - loeg 8y ago
    > How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person? There's a small dollar cost, and there's this whole section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects
    - agsdfgsd 8y ago
      Nothing there suggests it is bad for the average person. The average person will lower their chances of dying by taking daily low dose aspirin. The average person does not have a sensitivity to aspirin, and the side effects of high dose aspirin don't apply.
  - majkinetor 8y ago
    Aspirin has detrimental effects on stomach, thats how. Ibuprofen was created because of that. Think 1 teaspoon of blood per day that you bleed from stomach. Vitamin C can prevent some of that but it still exists.
    - agsdfgsd 8y ago
      It has such effects only in a small portion of people, and only in high doses. That is not a reason for average people to avoid a daily low dose, which has a direct reduction in all cause mortality.
raspasov 8y ago
Yes, the fraud product from a one-product-wonder public company Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN). (see my comment below).
- devonEnlis 8y ago
  "fraud product" - Do you mean the product that has been FDA approved for 6 years? Is the FDA "in" on the fraud? Is the New England Journal of Medicine in too? Does having one product (that sold $xxx mil last year) make a bad company? Or one that put all of it's chips into this long term outcomes study? (which has now paid off) Why do you care so strongly about this?
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >"fraud product" - Do you mean the product that has been FDA approved for 6 years? Is the FDA "in" on the fraud? No, but something can be both FDA approved and fraud, e.g. snake oil. It just can't be particularly dangerous. >Why do you care so strongly about this? Wasn't you who devoted 4-5 arguments to a single comment the parent made? Why add this pop-psychology facile dismissal? What does "care so strongly" even means as an argument?
    - devonEnlis 8y ago
      Trying to understand the commenter's motivations. This product has reduced cardiovascular death - if his fraud conspiracy theory convinces appropriate patients not to take it, it could literally kill people.
      - coldtea 8y ago
        First time hearing about the product, but looking at the facts, the parent seems to be right. It's more snakeoil than product. Your argument was that FDA approved it, but here's the actual story: "On 10/16/2013 after FDA's ADCOM panel had voted 9-2 against recommending to expand Vascepa's label for treatment of cardiovascular disease, shares dropped over 60%" "In March 2016, after losing a court case, the FDA agreed to allow some off-label marketing" So, it's not like FDA approved it as a drug for cardiovascular disease. They overwhelmingly rejected it as so, and then were forced to allow it to market it self off-label as such (for "free speech" purposes, as opposed for medical reality).
agsdfgsd 8y ago
But since statins increase deaths from cardiovascular disease, it is very possible that EPA is only protective against the damage of statins, rather than being beneficial in general.

dmix 8y ago

Importantly the results were only positive for those: > Among patients with elevated triglyceride levels Much like low dose aspirin its possible this is a bad idea for the average person unless you are already showing signs of heart disease.

koboll 8y ago
https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/#hem-triglycerides https://examine.com/supplements/fish-oil/#hem-triglycerides The effect is stronger in individuals with elevated triglyceride levels, but it seems to lower triglycerides in those with more normal levels as well.
agsdfgsd 8y ago
How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person? It is an anti-inflammatory, and inflammation is a leading theory of potential disease causation for a number of diseases. Daily low dose aspirin is associated with a significantly lower all-cause mortality in average people.
- loeg 8y ago
  > How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person? There's a small dollar cost, and there's this whole section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects
  - agsdfgsd 8y ago
    Nothing there suggests it is bad for the average person. The average person will lower their chances of dying by taking daily low dose aspirin. The average person does not have a sensitivity to aspirin, and the side effects of high dose aspirin don't apply.
- majkinetor 8y ago
  Aspirin has detrimental effects on stomach, thats how. Ibuprofen was created because of that. Think 1 teaspoon of blood per day that you bleed from stomach. Vitamin C can prevent some of that but it still exists.
  - agsdfgsd 8y ago
    It has such effects only in a small portion of people, and only in high doses. That is not a reason for average people to avoid a daily low dose, which has a direct reduction in all cause mortality.

raspasov 8y ago

Yes, the fraud product from a one-product-wonder public company Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN). (see my comment below).

devonEnlis 8y ago
"fraud product" - Do you mean the product that has been FDA approved for 6 years? Is the FDA "in" on the fraud? Is the New England Journal of Medicine in too? Does having one product (that sold $xxx mil last year) make a bad company? Or one that put all of it's chips into this long term outcomes study? (which has now paid off) Why do you care so strongly about this?
- coldtea 8y ago
  >"fraud product" - Do you mean the product that has been FDA approved for 6 years? Is the FDA "in" on the fraud? No, but something can be both FDA approved and fraud, e.g. snake oil. It just can't be particularly dangerous. >Why do you care so strongly about this? Wasn't you who devoted 4-5 arguments to a single comment the parent made? Why add this pop-psychology facile dismissal? What does "care so strongly" even means as an argument?
  - devonEnlis 8y ago
    Trying to understand the commenter's motivations. This product has reduced cardiovascular death - if his fraud conspiracy theory convinces appropriate patients not to take it, it could literally kill people.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      First time hearing about the product, but looking at the facts, the parent seems to be right. It's more snakeoil than product. Your argument was that FDA approved it, but here's the actual story: "On 10/16/2013 after FDA's ADCOM panel had voted 9-2 against recommending to expand Vascepa's label for treatment of cardiovascular disease, shares dropped over 60%" "In March 2016, after losing a court case, the FDA agreed to allow some off-label marketing" So, it's not like FDA approved it as a drug for cardiovascular disease. They overwhelmingly rejected it as so, and then were forced to allow it to market it self off-label as such (for "free speech" purposes, as opposed for medical reality).

agsdfgsd 8y ago

But since statins increase deaths from cardiovascular disease, it is very possible that EPA is only protective against the damage of statins, rather than being beneficial in general.