Study confirms link: high blood levels of omega-3 fatty acids & risk of aggressive prostate cancer

[avaistheone1]

Source: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

SEATTLE – July 10, 2013 – A second large, prospective study by scientists at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has confirmed the link between high blood concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids and an increased risk of prostate cancer.

Published in the online edition of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, the latest findings indicate that high concentrations of EPA, DPA and DHA – the three anti-inflammatory and metabolically related fatty acids derived from fatty fish and fish-oil supplements – are associated with a 71 percent increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer. The study also found a 44 percent increase in the risk of low-grade prostate cancer and an overall 43 percent increase in risk for all prostate cancers.

The increase in risk for high-grade prostate cancer is important because those tumors are more likely to be fatal.

The findings confirm a 2011 study published by the same Fred Hutch scientific team that reported a similar link between high blood concentrations of DHA and a more than doubling of the risk for developing high-grade prostate cancer. The latest study also confirms results from a large European study.

Read more: http://www.fhcrc.org/en/news/releases/2013/07/omega-three-fatty-acids-risk-prostate-cancer.html

---

Consumption of fatty fish and fish-oil supplements linked to 71 percent higher risk of aggressive prostate cancer.

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. Damn

Cleaning out my vitamin cupboard right now.

[trof]

13. Yeah, me too. Dang.

[sense]

2. I would wonder if the subjects

consumed fatty fish or synthetic supplements.

"the latest findings indicate that high concentrations of EPA, DPA and DHA – the three anti-inflammatory and metabolically related fatty acids derived from fatty fish and fish-oil supplements – are associated with a 71 percent increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer."

This paragraph only indicates two of the ways to ingest omega 3's, not what the participants actually ingested. The paragraph leads one in a certain direction but gives no actual facts about it. It's designed to mislead and frighten.

Synthetic substitutions for actual nutrients, vitamins, minerals, etc. are inferior and can be harmful. The full details of the study would be much more helpful, than the ghost written "results".

[formercia]

15. Many sources of Fish Oils are contaminated

Perhaps it's not the Omega-3 but the contaminants in the Fish Oils that increase the Cancer risk.

[closeupready]

41. That's exactly what I'm wondering about - when the FDA

recommends limits on tuna consumption, you gotta wonder about the kinds of toxins, and their effects on your health and body.

[u4ic]

42. I think that may be the issue

and/or the North American mentality that if something helps, then EVEN MORE will be better. I'm sure there is a tipping point where too much isn't helpful, and becomes harmful. That can be said of basically everything, including necessities like water.

[thereismore]

49. It is the omega-3's. There are controlled rat experiments where omega-3's speed up

growth of metastatic colon cancer by a factor of 100.

[Nihil]

23. Excellent points there.

> This paragraph only indicates two of the ways to ingest omega 3's, not what the participants actually ingested.
> The paragraph leads one in a certain direction but gives no actual facts about it. It's designed to mislead and frighten.
>
> Synthetic substitutions for actual nutrients, vitamins, minerals, etc. are inferior and can be harmful.
> The full details of the study would be much more helpful, than the ghost written "results".

Advertisements for all manner of synthetic supplements abound but, strangely enough, none for the actual food
that would easily & cheaply avoid any need to buy these expensive, concentrated, artificial tablets.



There again, I suppose if you're gullible enough to waste your money on those supplements, you're gullible enough
to swallow the OP "report" in all of its fearmongering redirection so they might as well start their advance publicity
to get the target consumer to switch product lines ... just like they did to get them onto "Omega 3 supplements"
in the first place ...

[Igel]

24. The abstract just looks at blood serum concentrations of the fatty acids.

And compares them with likelihood of cancer.

The abstract seems to suggest that it's a kind of snapshot: Given X # of men with no diagnosis, Y # of men with cancer, they grouped them into no, low, and high cancer cohorts.

Then they checked the blood serum concentration of the fatty acids they were studying.

I don't think they took steps to adjust the concentrations by supplementing dietary intake or restricting it. I don't think they checked differences in dose delivery. All molecules of a chemical are equivalent. Then again, we're just not that into vitalism any more--piss and vinegar (urea-synthesis by Woehler and acetic-acid synthesis by Kolbe) knocked that on the head.

They also found no dose correlation, even though the overall correlations were robust. That's intriguing.

There's work to be done there. Don't know that anybody'll care enough to do it. Or what it'll show. Perhaps the prostate cancer patients were dosing omega-3s. Perhaps a nice mechanism will be found to show causality. Perhaps it's a statistical fluke (ah ... flukes).

[Bluenorthwest]

25. I've seen hundreds of fish based suppliements, never a synthetic.

Do you have any idea how many synthetic versions exist, how much they sell of such things?
Here is the full study, linked in the posted article...
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/07/09/jnci.djt174.abstract

This quote from the article posted in the OP states that the issue is with Marine omega
“What’s important is that we have been able to replicate our findings from 2011 and we have confirmed that marine omega-3 fatty acids play a role in prostate cancer occurrence,” said corresponding author Theodore Brasky, Ph.D., a research assistant professor at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center who was a postdoctoral trainee at Fred Hutch when the research was conducted. “

[panzerfaust]

52. Which is why one should get nutrition from foods, not from pills

Even if they are so-called nutraceuticals.

For example, antioxidants from blueberries have several demonstrated benefits, whilst antioxidant pills from the "health food" store are associated with increased all-cause mortality.



Eat real food folks!

---
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17327526
JAMA. 2007 Feb 28;297(8):842-57.
Mortality in randomized trials of antioxidant supplements for primary and secondary prevention: systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS:

Treatment with beta carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E may increase mortality. The potential roles of vitamin C and selenium on mortality need further study.

[andym]

3. Not completely surprising-- there are tradeoffs in biological systems

So,
Omega 3 fatty acids may help lower inflammation and possibly benefit the cardiovascular system, but apparently they may also promote growth of prostate cancer cells. So, for men, it may depend on which pathology you are more likely to incur whether you want to take fish oil.
There's another study published yesterday that showed an inverse correlation between Alzheimer's disease and many cancers. Again illustrating the possible tradeoffs evolution has made in the human body.

[DFW]

4. Lose-lose proposition then

I have serious heart problems, and was recommended to eat several portions of fatty fish high in Omega 3 to help out my heart. Both my parents (and ALL their siblings) had cancer, including prostate cancer that my dad licked at age 70 (pancreatic cancer killed him 8 years later), so with me, it's not a question of "if" but "when."

There's always the option of worrying myself sick about it until it comes, but somehow, I think I'll just file it for now, and deal with it it's time. A guy I've known since the early 70s just died after a four year (!!!!!) battle with multiple myeloma. That usually kills you within 6 months of diagnosis. He said he'd keep going until he couldn't, and he did. So did my dad. So, at some point, I suppose, will I.

Like Warren Zevon sang, "I'll sleep when I'm dead."

[steve2470]

7. I'm with you, my dad had two serious heart attacks

I'm almost 55, so I'm a tad concerned myself. I take one standard pill of omega-3 a day, and leave it at that to lower my cholesterol. I need to get back into my doctor to restart my statin, also.

[DFW]

9. I'm a littler farther gone

Just missed a "probably fatal" coronary 9 years ago by reacting to warning signs. Got two stents put into 2 major arteries, put on Statins and aspirin, told not to touch red meat, cheese, eggs, ice cream or any other dairy products, the whole nine yards.

Then, 2 years ago, prior to a routine colonoscopy, was told to go off the blood-thinning aspirin ten days prior to the procedure. BAAAAD advice. Ten days is exactly how long the artery-blocking white cells need to re-generate to the point where they will clog up arteries again. Half an hour after the colonoscopy I had the honor of my very first heart attack.

It was extremely mild, and I suffered no permanent damage, but what a warning! Luckily, my wife is a brillant chef (along with everything else). After the stents were put in, the cardiology team summoned her in and read out the new laws of cuisine: Only fish and poultry, many grains, leafy veggies, no butter EVER (olive oil OK), no dairy products AT ALL, no eggs, no red meat, in other words the classic cardiologist's admonition: if it tastes good, SPIT IT OUT. Well, almost, anyway. Dark (over 70% pure) chocolate is ok in moderation.

I follow it 98.5 religiously, take the statins every night, and my cardiologist in Germany was so pleased with my progress that I get to eat one lobster and one cheese omelet a year, and ice cream at New Year's. It's torture, but at least I'm alive to complain about it.

We're both 61. My wife went though the whole cancer scare 12 years ago, but after operations, chemo and radiation, she's OK. She can eat anything she wants, and at 61 still has a figure like a top model. I'm not sure who got the better end of that deal, but we're not spending a lot of time contemplating the question.

[Schema Thing]

10. you are very close to the diet that got Bill Clinton looking so good

the Forks Over Knives recommendations. Take a look at the documentary by the same name when you have an hour or two.

[DFW]

39. I have followed Bill Clinton's dietary evolution for a while.

He must have lost 50 pounds between 1995 and 2005, and he looked great last time. Joe Wilson, too, by the way. He used to have quite a gut, and he has lost almost all of it, and he didn't even have to get a bypass to inspire him to do it. Of course, Valerie is slim like a model, so it's not he like he didn't have a daily inspiration staring at him right across the breakfast table.

I haven't gone vegan like Clinton, but I have gone a long way in that direction. I still miss the cheese, but not to the point where I'm willing to live 20 years less to eat it.

[Schema Thing]

43. I'm right there with you.

Doing a juice fast, which of course isn't a fast at all, but it has dropped my caloric intake in about half. And I'm feeling great from it and am surprisingly not all that hungry feeling (past the first few days).


I just needed something to kickstart a return to a good *moegan diet

*moegan= mostly vegan

[formercia]

16. Life goes on without me

I don't plan on bankrupting my family for just a little more Time.

[angrychair]

5. A little confused

I have been eating ground flax and chia seeds for a couple of years. Are we saying that this is bad for me now??? They have FAR more Omega 3 and 6 than any fish does.

[marions ghost]

21. Be careful with flax

A little goes a long way and flax is potent. Dunno about chia seeds. But if its for O3s I would not overdo. Sometimes more isn't better and a small amount will still have benefits.

[thereismore]

33. All seed-derived omega-3's are short chained and are ineffective at best,

by which I mean really toxic, compared to fish-derived omega-3's.

[bitchkitty]

38. You'd have to eat a truckload of flax seed for it to be harmful.

And it is not ineffective unless you are deficient in certain vitamins - B3, B6, C, and the minerals zinc and magnesium.

[thereismore]

46. Perhaps. I am talking about eating the pressed oils. Or frying in canola oil, for example. nt

[bitchkitty]

47. Ah - I don't use the oil.

It goes rancid very quickly.

[thereismore]

48. It does that inside the body too, and fast. Oxidizes and ends up in your arteries. nt

[bitchkitty]

50. I like the seed - I grind it into

meal and sprinkle it on oatmeal, or blend it into smoothies. Not too much though as it is quite laxative!

[truthisfreedom]

6. Everything in moderation?

[TreasonousBastard]

8. I'm not sure exactly what this means...

"The difference in blood concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids between the lowest and highest risk groups was about 2.5 percentage points (3.2 percent vs. 5.7 percent), which is somewhat larger than the effect of eating salmon twice a week, Kristal said."

But, this being the second study that confirms the first one, it sounds like I should toss those fish oil supplements and maybe just eat one or two pieces of salmon a week.

(I've already stopped taking several other supplements that recent research show are harmful-- bummer that there's really no magic bullet...)

[mainer]

11. What does it mean if you're female?

Can we continue with our high-Omega 3 diets?

[formercia]

18. Last I heard, Women don't have a Prostate Gland.

Enjoy

[bemildred]

19. It means very little for anyone, from what I can see.

It's an interesting correlation, might be worth further investigation.

And clearly, if you have no prostate, it means nothing to you.

[jybarz]

12. This doesn't seem

to be right. The Japanese people are big fish eaters and they have low incidence of prostate cancer compared to people from other Countries

+++ Location and Prostate Cancer Risk

The United States, Canada, countries of Western Europe (excluding Italy and Greece) and Australia are the countries with the highest incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates of prostate cancer in the world. These countries are considered high-risk countries. Countries in Asia, particularly Japan, are considered low-risk countries. Researchers attribute prostate cancer risk based on location to three factors: UV light, testing prevalence, and traditional diet. +++

That's from: http://www.prostate-cancer.com/location-prostate-cancer.html

[Benton D Struckcheon]

30. I'm sure dairy is the real difference.

Having dairy as an adult male (cheese, milk, sour cream, any dairy product) will significantly increase your risk of getting any sort of cancer. Ditto for women, although somewhat less so as I recall. The culprit is milk protein: casein.
Just don't have dairy products of any sort. If you do that and keep your red meat consumption low, your cancer odds will decrease nicely, along with your risk of a heart attack too. Then you can help further with the heart risk with some fish.
I have bread w/margarine, oj, and coffee for breakfast. For lunch, a salad or a can of sardines or black beans and salsa or some chips with salsa, or even a peanut butter sandwich. Notice, no red meat or dairy in there. The only exception is a little skim milk in the coffee with my breakfast.
For dinner, a couple of times a week there might be red meat. Else, poultry, or some form of seafood - shrimp, mussels, some fish, something like that. So, low red meat consumption, no dairy. More seafood more frequently than most people will have. My cholesterol has declined nicely in the two years since I started to do this.

[GliderGuider]

31. From that link, it looks similar to the situation with heart disease:

Speaking English is the single biggest risk marker....

[safeinOhio]

14. Simple fun solution.

http://www.askmen.com/sports/health_400/410_4-fun-ways-to-prevent-prostate-cancer.html

According to the largest study of its kind, a 2004 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, to gain any protective benefit against prostate cancer, more than 12 ejaculations per month (i.e. masturbating or having sex every other day) was necessary. What’s more, each increase of three ejaculations per week was associated with a 15% decrease in prostate cancer risk.

[formercia]

20. Live, Love and be Happy.

The best Medicine.

[Babel_17]

35. I don't dare tell you

[safeinOhio]

36. You have to hand it to him

For his honesty.

[yurbud]

40. that's a mental picture it will take a while to shake

[marions ghost]

17. Interesting

I don't doubt the results showing a link, but correlation is not always causation.

Probably don't need the amounts people are ingesting especially through supplements, is how I read it. Too much stimulates cellular issues. That is true of a LOT of things.

One day medical science will evolve to the point where we will know exactly how much of any substance an individual needs. Tailored to the individual. Not there yet.

People who feel they need heart protective Omega-3s should talk to their doc about achieving a balance. Your may get by with less than you think.

[PATRICK]

22. Overall then

Despite the temptation to increase doses of supplements encouraged very much by the shelves you can peruse at any store and by the search for useful or maximum effect dosages(as if they were medicinal magic bullets or some elixir of life), relying on any limited and unbalanced diet with supplements lumps poorly integrated will have unplanned effects. The complexities are way beyond supplemental treatment as a sure, no consequence, way to perfect health and disease prevention or cure.

Any pill is not the best delivery form, or since unknown in nature, possibly its effects are unknown. Oral vitamin D is not as safe as sun based D(oops UV again!) and companies push high doses with impunity. Despite some of the controversies(who knows who is trustworthy?) an easy picture does emerge.

Before you get sick or get a condition that needs more than holistic lifestyle, eat a well balanced and varied diet, identifying the super bad stuff Americans tend to eat in megadoses and reducing them to insignificance, not the "occasional", and iffy foods to the occasional. Balancing out your cholesterol with moderate fish oil should switch over to diet and exercise and abandoned for light doses, or none, once accomplished.

Super adding anti-oxidants has an unintended effect of unbalancing the bodies mechanisms for coping with the presence of those damaging oxidants. That stupid glucosamine megadose NOW seems to shut down the pancreas' ability to process sugar. Is there a warning for diabetics clearly on those bottles? Ever? That same product is now disputed to have any real effect. Unless you can keep up full time with your role as guinea pig and fad tester, IMHO, very humble and weakly informed opinion and experience, all things(except the really well known dumb things) in moderation skewing below the popular and marketing push even if they tell you lower portions are useless and things are as perfectly safe as the Fukishima reactor once was.

Old enough to remember the vitamin E "miracle"?

How to unscrew yourself from a bad location, bad diet, heredity, mortality, pervasive industrial pollution? If you add up all the factors, you won't do it and you can't push them into a pill. Modifying human genetics will be a breathtaking horror show if it proceeds from this kind of human experimentation especially if it too tries to escape coping with the environment and the complexity. Really boosting the immune system to take the punishment we will increase might really satisfy- until some other blow back is discovered from ignoring the whole picture.

Ask your doctor. At least you can judge from their uncertainty or need to try something new not to go overboard and still ignore basics.

I started a lot more veggies with an anti-inflammatory lean. Almost anything processed except plain spices turned out to be a mistake(shredded cheese with cellulose filler) olive oil that is not extra virgin, inferior greens, but I have trimmed down perfectly, still in search of better protein.

There is a placebo cycle effect that causes harm if you enjoy eating what does real physical damage and the body reinforces it by asking you to keep eating. Or you do feel better initially but later something seems to be missing or is it just getting used to better health? Deny? Double down? Retreat?
Is it age or fatigue? Did I start this too late? Rosy picture or denial about the later blood test results?

I find all things have to be moderated, especially ideas, and judge by results- although the long term may have an unpleasant surprise. Being your own lab rat would seem to make you very cautious, but for many people it doesn't at all.

Goals accomplished by diet change: less weight, better condition all around, less pain and injury, less likelihood of developing a diabetic condition or heart condition from cholesterol. No tobacco or alcohol. An ordinary senior multi vitamin a day. Sleep. Exercise. Some are easy winners, others partial. Still doing some stupid things or necessarily harmful ones like working at night. Still not immortal or perfectly immune to everything yet. I will let you know after my seven trillionth post.

[JackN415]

26. I used to take it, but decided that I don't want any processed stuffs, including all..

supplements except for vitamin B12 (since I'm vegetarian).

Nothing beats natural whole food.

[bitchkitty]

27. Flax seeds -

ground up and sprinkled on cereal or grains - tastes delicious! Or used as a substitute for eggs in baking - one tablespoon ground flax seeds, 3 tablespoons of water, let thicken and use in place of an egg.

And now I have another argument for my fellow health freaks who are not vegan and who tell me that I'm missing nutrients!

[kestrel91316]

28. I am increasingly convinced that my recent decision to

cut animal products (except honey, lol) from my diet is a wise one, even though prostate cancer is of course not a risk for me.

[fpasko]

29. not so sure about this study..

Before people here start throwing away all their vitamin supplements, keep in mind that Big Pharma, many doctors, are no fans of vitamin supplements, natural healing practices. Vitamins, herbal remedies, are much cheaper than filling a prescription, making Big Pharmaceutical companies ZERO dollars. They need people to stay sick and tired. Healthy people, are no good to them. Don't fall for it people!!

[u4ic]

44. I use supplements which help me with a condition allopathic medicine can't do much about

Also use complementary modalities like acupuncture. They definitely help me, and I know they help others.

However, the Natural Health Industry is also a billion dollar industry. They are also selling you stuff you don't necessarily need. I can't tell you how many times a new product comes out, and I'll say "they'll advertise it's been used for 30 yrs in Europe", then bingo, there it is. It's the standard template.

They BOTH have a lot at stake. $$$

[byeya]

32. I am going to wait until publications I trust interpret these two studies. I am glad you posted

it and it's a good warning but i am not going to stop easting the fatty fish I like - salmon, sardines, herring, anchovies - until I see this analysed.
I don't take any supplement and believe in eating a wide variety of vegetables and whole grains along with the fish.
If the study proves out, then I will change my eating habits.

[postulater]

34. Not a big surprise. Nt

[Babel_17]

37. "not quite the final word"

http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/cancer-2/2013/07/essential-fatty-acids-and-prostate-cancer-not-quite-the-final-word/

Omega-3 eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) was not associated with risk of high-grade prostate cancer, and associations were similar when there were both high levels of EPA and DHA to that of DHA alone.
There were no significant associations between omega 3 alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) and high- or low-grade prostate cancer.

I agree about getting quality omega 3's. I get mine from ethically harvested tuna from the Pacific Northwest and from eggs that come from chickens that are pastured.

Which is not say I am any kind of an authority.

[geomon666]

45. Holy shit

I just started taking these too. Oh well.

[TM99]

51. Not so fast.

Here is an excellent & well-sourced rebuttal concerning this research study and the media presentation of it.

http://www.lef.org/featured-articles/Fish-and-Prostate-Cancer-Risk-Fact-or-Fiction.htm

The last paragraph sums it all up quite nicely.

I will NOT be stopping my Omega-3 fish oil supplementation anytime soon.