[ad_1]
A new study on the benefits of fish oil has some weaknesses, the least of which is that it is not fish oil
Headlines that once again claim the benefits of fish oil seem poised to meet the growing demand for omega-3 supplements. Since the depletion of the ocean in fish to extract the right things and put them in a pill seems to be a trend that TreeHugger should question, we looked at the science behind headlines and found more than just sustainability issues.
This is not fish oil
Responsible news agencies take care to refer to the drug tested as "derived from fish oil" or at least as "fish oil-containing drug", but the many supplement providers of Fish oil will certainly use the fanfare to reinforce the image of their products. association.
In fact, the study did not test "fish oil-based" supplements, but a drug called Vascepa, which is a highly purified ethyl icosapent (also known as ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid). Eicosapentaenoic acid, abbreviated as EPA, is one of the types of omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil. Omega-3 fatty acids are important in the diets of humans and all mammals because we can not make them ourselves. The term "omega-3" refers to the fact that the first chemical double bond is 3 bonds from the end of the molecule. (A double bond is known to chemists as "unsaturation", which is why we use the terms saturated and unsaturated fatty acids.)
The study of this single-molecule drug may not be representative of the effects of fish oil on overall health. In particular, the provision of a highly purified omega-3 fish oil component could solve some problems, such as the possibility that fish oils contain contaminants such as PCBs that bioaccumulate in the fats of marine creatures.
Did the placebo make people sick?
The biggest problem of the study is neither fish oil nor the drug derived from fish oil. It's the placebo.
Scientific discussions on this study are full of voices that fear that the mineral oil used in placebo pills to give them the shine that people associate with fish oil supplements can actually have adverse effects on the health of the population control. Mineral oil can reduce the effectiveness of statins that patients in this study used to control their cholesterol levels. If this is the case, the suggested margin of protection could be falsely high.
Some health professionals believe that even if the placebo had an effect, it would not be enough to account for the 25% reduction in the risk of heart attack or detected stroke. Cardiologist Carl Orringer, of the Miller School of Medicine at the University of Miami (who did not participate in this study), states: "Even though there was a slight effect of the disease, it was not a problem. mineral oil, it would be so minimal that I do not believe that it could explain the striking difference. "
Other studies using a placebo in corn oil can help elucidate the truth.
Will the drug derived from fish oil improve people's health?
Like many studies, this one targets a very particular group of patients – people with high triglyceride levels and high risk of heart disease or diabetes, who are already taking statins, drugs that aim to control levels of bad cholesterol.
In short, this means that the drug may not be beneficial for people who are not part of this particularly at-risk group. This may help explain why many studies do not confirm the same benefits.
What is the business game?
The current titles communicate the results of a clinical study called REDUCE-IT announced on November 10th during the annual scientific sessions of the American Heart Association in Chicago and published in the New England Journal of Medicine. REDUCE-IT clinical trials are paid for by Amarin Pharma Inc., which produces the fish oil studied.
Funding sources with potential for conflict of interest have been implicated in the lack of reproducibility of scientific results. Although this does not discredit in any way a particular study, Amarin did not do service in the scientific community by broadcasting the expected results of the study before the details of the study design. and the results are available. This leads people to make big claims, to enrich a stock of pharmaceuticals, before the scientific truth is fully understood. This gives the impression that the study is more like marketing and less an objective effort to search for truth.
So, should people take fish oil supplements or not?
If you are worried about the heat, talk to your doctor. He or she will determine if a drug is worth it based on the specific conditions of each patient.
But if you want to improve and maintain your general health, try eating fish rather than fish oil. Or better yet, look for vegetable sources of omega-3 fatty acids, such as flaxseed, chia, hemp and sesame. And do not neglect the importance of exercise and balance in your diet.
If you simply need to get on the supplement train, look for one of the many products based on algae or other sources of oils rather than fish, to minimize your impact on Sustainable development.
The full study is available online:
Cardiovascular risk reduction with Icosapent Ethyl for hypertriglyceridemia
A new study on the benefits of fish oil has some weaknesses, the least of which is that it is not fish oil
[ad_2]Source link
