Pages

Thursday, 11 July 2013

Omega-3 supplements 'could raise prostate cancer risk'

Men who take omega-3 supplements for a health boost may be putting themselves at higher risk of prostate cancer, researchers claim. (Update - Also read article by Life Extension - see link at the end of this article)


Omega-3 supplements 'could raise prostate cancer risk'
A study found that men with high levels of omega-3 in their blood were at 43 per cent
greater risk of prostate cancer than those with low concentrations Photo: ALAMY
Nick Collins
9:00PM BST 10 Jul 2013
 
Omega-3 fatty acids, which are found naturally in oily fish, are widely hailed for their anti-inflammatory properties which are thought to protect against a raft of maladies including heart attacks and strokes, arthritis and various cancers.
 
But a study found that men with high levels of omega-3 in their blood were at 43 per cent greater risk of prostate cancer than those with low concentrations, while less common aggressive “high-grade” tumours were 71 per cent more likely than in those not taking supplements.
 
The difference in blood concentrations of the fatty acids between the two groups was the equivalent of more than two portions of salmon per week, researchers said.
 
The team from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle compared blood samples from 834 prostate cancer patient against 1,393 healthy controls.
 
Previous studies into prostate cancer and omega-3 have produced differing results, with some suggesting the fatty acids could be protective rather than harmful, but the researchers said the new findings support an earlier paper they published in 2011.
 
Dr Alan Kristal, senior author of the paper, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, said: “We’ve shown once again that use of nutritional supplements may be harmful.”

It is unclear why omega-3 increased the risk of the disease but the effect could be related to the body’s conversion of fatty acids into compounds which can damage cells and DNA, and suppress the immune system, researchers said.

The study did not examine how omega-3 might affect the progression of prostate cancer in men who already had the disease.

Omega-3 is one of the most popular supplements sold on the high street, with estimated sales of £116 million each year in Britain alone.

Each year around 41,000 men in the UK are diagnosed with prostate cancer and 11,000 die from the disease.

Dr Iain Frame, Director of Research at Prostate Cancer UK said: “Omega 3, such as is found in oily fish, has been the focus of a large amount of research in recent years, the majority of which points to it having wide ranging health benefits when eaten as part of a balanced diet.

“Therefore we would not encourage any man to change their diet as a result of this study, but to speak to their doctor if they have any concerns about prostate cancer.”

Sarah Williams, health information officer at Cancer Research UK, said: “The evidence as to whether omega 3 fats affect prostate cancer risk is mixed and unfortunately this study doesn’t resolve the debate. Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers, and the risk increases as men get older."
 
Comments
 
This study makes little sense. If these results are to be believed, then cultures that have a high fish and seafood diet with high omega-3 would naturally experience higher incidents of prosate cancer, and mortality.
The reality is the reverse is true, Japan for example consumes a large seafood diet, but has one of the lowest incidences of prostate cancer among men.
Clearly more studies are needed.

ScienceFM
The author may claim to have shown "that use of nutritional supplements may be harmful", but this is incorrect. They have only looked at omega-3.
Cause and effect is important here. The presence of high levels of omega-3 does not mean that is causing prostate cancer. 
 
I would not trust anything said on behalf of the American National Cancer Institute.
 
“We’ve shown once again that use of nutritional supplements may be harmful.”
The pharmaceutical industry once again trying to put us off our food.  Hey, food is bad for you - our chemicals are good for you.  Horseh*t.
 
I wish these scientists would shut up. If we followed their advice we would not be allowed to eat anything. No more oily fish? What a farce - they should go and perform some useful medical trials
 
willpenny
Today 02:58 AM
Somehow the credibility of the medical profession appears to be largely influenced by MONEY [perish the thought]. Thus to discover that FLORA MARGARINE sponsors the British Heart Foundation, tends to dilute all research to the persona of Bullshit..! Not unlike this current one.

Waterguru
Today 02:09 AM
So populations that have a high oily fish diet should have a higher incidence of prostate cancer.  However the opposite seems to apply:
http://www.prostate-cancer.com...
Traditional Diet and Prostate Cancer
Asian men seem to have the lowest chances of developing prostate cancer. Japan has the lowest rates in world. Some researchers attribute these numbers to the traditional rural Japanese diet which is based on fish rather than red meat. Supporting this theory are the rising levels of the disease which coincide with the westernization of the Japanese diet. Additionally, Asian men who immigrate to the United States have incidence rates similar to the majority population.

cliveofindia
Yesterday 09:01 PM
So many of these so-called 'supplements' which are heavily promoted at vulnerable cancer patients or those anxious to reduce their risk are often 'super-nutrients' which can often accelerate tumour growth. Avoid these products which have little or no levels of scientific evidence to support them. Stick with a balanced diet including plenty of fresh vegetables -especially those in the cruciferous group.

elderlyfox
Yesterday 09:38 PM
The problem with supplements of Omega3, is that there will be less business for the Heart mafiosi, so they constructed this hit-piece study. Not unusual!
As regards a prostate cancer, this study is meaningless as the known causes of prostate and other cancers were not incliuded. The scientifically valid findings of the causes of all cancers are not 'recognised' by mainstream science nor medicine, not being officially published.
The UK Cancer Act of 1939 doesn't help.  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/... It prohibits any cancer cure information publication or advertisement.
Dr H R Clark, (PhD ND) carried out over half a million repeatable so scientifically valid bio-resonance tests to identify the causes and pathways of all cancers.
Dr Clark found that 2 allergens inflame the prostate. An inflamed body part allows an easy entry for the cancer nucleus and cancer complex, in the presnce of nickel, and a few other identified 'players,' to start and fuel all maligancies at that site. The prostate is specifically  inflamed by acetic acid, vinegar, and naringenin, a plant phenol high in tangerenes and in most citrus.  (The Cure and Prevention of All cancers 2007). My intake of vinegar and citrus is thus ZERO.
For the heart, to normalise the LDL marker, which Omega3 achieves, I consume 3 raw egg yolks daily, the shells well washed, the whites to be cooked. The egg yolk contains suffcient anti-oxidant vitamins, selenium and l-cysteine amino acid to stop arterial inflammation, which is what causes the calcification, clogging, and in turn also raises the LDL marker. Idiotic 'healthy eating'  advice to eat just 2 egg yolks a week, is deliberate misinfo.
Toxic Statin drugs, lacking in anti-oxidants, do not even slow arterial calcification, but merely alter the LDL reading by chemically interferring with liver and gut function.
 
David Camerpong
Today 03:24 AM
 
bill
Today 02:01 AM
70 years old, Omega 3 taken in heavy doses for the last twenty + years on top of a healthy diet including regular meals of fish and when I go for my annual medical check-up all my doctor says is that I continue to get younger by the day.
I can only speak from experience and say categorically that the article doesn't apply to me! 

Those are very high figures!! ........ what do they actually mean?
Do you have a 43% chance of contracting cancer if you take the supplements or is the 43% a percentage of the risk of 1 in 8 who are expected to get prostate cancer?
And this is the next point if (as their website states) 1 in 8 will get prostate cancer =12.5% of the male population, how does that equate to the 41,000 per year = 0.14%.
In the UK black African and black Caribbean men are 3 times more likely to develop prostate cancer than white men of the same age!!
Pertinent only because apparently the Prostate Cancer people make the point about it.
So is the 43% representative of ethnic backgrounds or merely a 'Boooga booga' moment for research scientists seeking some new budget funding!?
Over how many years are they applying these figures to?
I don't know if this is just shoddy reporting or another scare story without substance!?
Another kipper?
 
 
 
UPDATE - Read Life Extension's response: