Omega 3 - no major health benefits

[ryancostill]

Here is a recent meta-analysis by a group of British researchers which has just been published in the British Journal of Medicine. Their conculsion? Long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fats do not have a clear effect on total mortality, combined cardiovascular events, or cancer.


I see a couple of methodological flaws with this study, which can be found here:

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/rapidpdf/...ourcetype=HWCIT (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/rapidpdf/bmj.38755.366331.2Fv1?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&R ESULTFORMAT=&author1=hooper&fulltext=omega&searchi d=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=H WCIT)

But I thought i would open the topic to discussion first.

[stillflabby]

thanks for the link.
I've heard about this, but hadn't found an article discussing it.

BTW, that comes up as a PDF, and PDF sometimes creates issues for browsers.

Mine just froze for a while, then came back.

[ryancostill]

Yes it is a pdf document, most journal articles are usually hosted online in this format.

You might want to select the "begin manual download" option.

Right click on it and "save target as". This may avoid any stalling problems, although if your PC has adobe reader I dont see any reasons you should have problems.

[Venom]

Sweet! This has a lot of intrest to me. I cannot wait to check this out when I get a chance.

[ryancostill]

My initial thought on this meta-analysis is that the authors have not considered the possibility of excess omega-6 fat in the diet. AS we know, excess omega-6 fats interfere with the health benefits of omega-3 fats because they compete for the same rate-limiting enzymes (i think this is discussed in abc's EFA article?).

Intaking omega 3, is only half the battle really. Omega 3 fats will provide little if any benefit if there are excessive dietary omega-6 fats in the diet.

[Venom]

Great analysis, Ryan. Yes, I discuss that in my article. I am going to look and analyze this over the weekend. FUN! /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Adam Knowlden]

lol I'm laughing because I just shot a PM to Venom with this link, asking his opinion.

[ryancostill]

[ QUOTE ]
Great analysis, Ryan. Yes, I discuss that in my article. I am going to look and analyze this over the weekend. FUN! /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Look forward to it. This study got quite a bit of media attention upon its release in the UK, because some of the findings appear to go against what the public had been advised over the last couple of years.

[psaturn]

So far we have observed positive results with the usage of Omega 3 for our patients after they go through keratomileusis. The post-surgical symptoms seem to be far fewer.

[stillflabby]

[ QUOTE ]
So far we have observed positive results with the usage of Omega 3 for our patients after they go through keratomileusis. The post-surgical symptoms seem to be far fewer.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, that's awesome

[Venom]

Hey, guys

I would say there are several potential problems in this analysis.

The first two have to do with the methodologies of the experiments analyzed. Specially, the dosages, sources, and omega 3:6 content.

This meta-analysis analyzed studies that used various types of omega 3’s. Including plant oils that contained linolenic acid, which must be converted into EPA and DHA for its ergogenic benefits to take place. As Ryan said, this process is greatly hindered with high omega 6 consumption. In fact, a diet with a high omega-6-3 ratio can reduce this conversion process by 40 to 50%! I never once saw this considered in the meta-analysis.

Second, the dosages were suboptimal at best. Participants received 0.4 g to 7.0 g per day! That is nothing. I discussed this with one of my mentors, Dr. Brown. He said that a Clerk at K-mart could tell you a couple grams of fish are not optimal lol!

Next, allow me to quote my article.

[ QUOTE ]
There is no set number for total EFA consumption, or the ratio between omega-6s and omega-3s.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be frank, most of these scientists are not up to date on optimal dosages.

An interesting situation is in the United States (USA). An increase in vegetable oils, rich with w6s, has the USA’s ratio of n6:n3 skyrocketed to about 10:1. It has been postulated that this is a major factor for the increased diseases (especially cardiovascular) within our society today [37].

With these statistics in mind, many authorities recommend a higher ratio of n6:n3, much lower than the United States average, however. Between 4:1 (In favor of n6) and 1:1 has been recommended [10], but this is based on just the minimal requirements and normal everyday function, not the athlete.

But we have not established the optimal dosage, or ratio of omega 3:6.

So they are examining studies, which I believe are clearly using suboptimal ratios of omega 3:6 and dosages of omega 3’s.

Let me give you an example.

I just read a study on protein, and they increased protein intake from 1.0 g/kg, to 2.2 g/kg. They found no benefits to muscular hypertrophy or strength.

But guess what source of protein they used? Soy! President showed unequivocally in his article that this is a suboptimal form of protein.

What I want to know, is what are the effects of consuming proteins such as eggs, whey, and casein. And when they have done this, the results are clear—protein augments muscular hypertrophy and strength.

Same thing with these studies.

I want to see studies that exam the effects of better ratios, such as 3:1 in favor of omega 3’s; and having 30 grams of essential fats a day, instead of 2!

Until then, it is really hard to analyze this. Because you are asking me to analyze flawed studies.

They also reported that there results were conflicting with several other analysis, and that the studies which they analyzed that “Studies with stronger methodology had more
consistent results”

I don’t want to get much into this now, but I have numerous issues with Meta-analysis themselves.

I did a Seminar Lecture on this, and the Effects of External Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation. And it was disheartening to see how data can be so mis-skewed using a meta-analysis, which is often times erroneously assumed to be objective. There are many issues with a meta-analysis, and I saw similar ones in this one. I hope to publish more on this in JHR, when I get time.

[ryancostill]

^^^ good analysis. Yes, any additional information you hav addressing any issues to do with meta-analyses would be much appreciated.

[CelticKnot]

Nice, interesting information.