Omega-3 fats offer no cancer protection

[kebaldwin]

Omega-3 fats offer no cancer protection: study
Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:03 PM GMT



CHICAGO (Reuters) - The fatty acids found in some fish may help combat heart disease but there is no strong evidence they prevent cancer as some research has suggested, a study said on Tuesday.

Researchers at RAND Health and the Greater Los Angeles VA Healthcare System said they reached the conclusion after reviewing 38 studies published between 1966 and 2005 on omega-3 fatty acids, found in some fish and certain vegetables and sold as dietary supplements.

"Omega-3 fatty acids have been shown to have beneficial health effects, particularly reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease," said RAND's Catherine MacLean, chief author of the report. "We found cancer prevention isn't one of the health benefits."

She said there had been a few studies that showed reduced risk of cancer from consuming the fatty acids. "But we found even more studies that showed no decrease in cancer risk and even a few that suggested a higher risk. Our conclusion is that there is no relationship between omega-3 fatty acids and lower rates of any types of cancer."

The study was published in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2006-01-24T210150Z_01_N24146480_RTRIDST_0_HEALTH-OMEGA-DC.XML

[Dodger]

As I take omega-3s for cardiovaluclar improvements, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other if they affect cancer.

[Rosebud]

As I take omega-3s for cardiovaluclar improvements, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other if they affect cancer.
I take it for cardiovascular health, as well as for its anti-inflammatory properties. It never occurred to me it was supposed to prevent cancer too. ;)

But let's fact it, although a low carb diet probably can't prevent every disease going, at least we are way less likely to get cancer what with the myriad fruit and vegetables we eat, not to mention a total absence of sugar. :thup:

Rosebud:rose:

[Zuleikaa]

She said there had been a few studies that showed reduced risk of cancer from consuming the fatty acids. "But we found even more studies that showed no decrease in cancer risk and even a few that suggested a higher risk. Our conclusion is that there is no relationship between omega-3 fatty acids and lower rates of any types of cancer."They say there's no STRONG evidence and while some studies showed an effect, others did not. It makes me interested in seeing the complete report. One of the fatty acids is fish oil, cod and salmon oil contain vitamin D in their fatty acids and vitamin D has been shown to prevent cancer. So, it would be interesting to see if the studies that showed a positive correlation would be the ones with high levels of fish oils.

I also take omega 3's for the heart along with CoQ10. I take vitamin D for cancer prevention as well as etc, etc, etc, etc, endless things, lol!!!

[cs_carver]

And besides, how on EARTH could you be doing a legitimate double-blind on this? Looking at non-smoking high fish eaters who don't live in polluted areas with other carcinogenic risks, vs. non-fish eaters, all self-reported, studied over 20-40 years, and allowing for major differences in type of cancer. With no payback because fish oils aren't a drug.

Sorry. Meaningless conclusions either way. And CERTAINLY not controlled for ambient insulin levels, which is (IMO) one of the biggest determinants of anything to do with long term health.

AND THEN, recent reading suggests that more and more cancers and long term chronic health problems actually have smoldering infections at their core, which then leads to the conclusion that good habits and healthy eating have more to do with the ability to fight the infection that causes the chronic condition, or avoid it by luck or birth or handwashing in the first place, than being anything directly causative, or preventative, depending on which side you're on.

[Whoa182]

I am quite confident that what this study really says is that we can't just look at one EFA or one vitamin to prevent diseases like cancer. Omega 3 while having good overall nutrition would show more positive benifits. When the rest of the diet sucks really bad with lots of refined sugars etc... then what you expect?

Bottom line is eat healthy, avoid bad foods and all nutrients that you gain from diet will act together to prevent diseases like cancer.

One thing that Omega 3 does do well is act as a anti-inflammatory. Some cancers for instance could be caused or promoted by chronic inflammation. If a person were to take omega 3 but still eat foods that promote inflammation then the maybe the effects on omega 3 are reduced. In lab mice it's easier to control the rest of their diet, they don't go out for McDonalds every few days for one...

When omega 3 is given to mice with tumors, the fatty acids do slow down the rate of tumor growth and metastasis.

[cs_carver]

Some cancers for instance could be caused or promoted by chronic inflammation.

One of the points made in Plague Time was that we are starting to look at "chronic inflammation" without asking the question, "what's driving it?" I've pondered that myself, with all the promo about supplements that reduce inflammation.

Under normal circs, red stripes runnirg up my leg mean there's trouble--usually that I've stepped on something bad and the wound needs treatment. Removing the inflammation may not necessarily treat the triggering infection. But that's not the way we're treating whole-body inflammation.

Interesting to observe how this line of research and paradigm-shifting is developing.

[ProfGumby]

Me thinks this article has done more good, than harm to the use of Suppliments in general to prevent diseases.

Despite what the skewed reporting of the findings were intended to do......