Doc’s Response to “Fish Oil and Prostate Cancer”

Any way since I am expected to have a response here it is.

Simply put its BS.

Here is a slightly longer response.

I am 100% convinced that these study results will never be proven in people in a real study, illuminated or found to be accurate. I am 100% convinced that at this point negative Omega 3 stuff is getting more press.  Watch for something completely opposite in 1 or 2 weeks. The problem is a positive study will not get any press since it’s not “news” I do not know that for a fact, it simply is the way things have been going. Think of this more as marketing-getting your “study read” and getting attention than actual scientific fact. Also remember this is not a real study, it’s a meta analysis which means any conclusion can be supported with the “desired” data base. I have not seen anything that makes me rethink any of my positions on this topic.  It’s kinda like telomerase activators and cancer LOL! How many times have I had to refute that with real information and it still comes up on occasions

Here is a study from just 2 months ago and it was a real study not a metanalysis. Also remember NO ONE is checking levels or attempting to duplicate the high tissue levels of the Intuits and Owkinawans who have almost no cancer of any kind… except me and Tom Gilhooley.

 PLoS One. 2013 Apr 17;8(4):e59799. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059799. Print 2013.

I get very frustrated at all this sensationalism which to me is clearly done to call attention to whatever is published even if its misinformation.  The scientists who do this understand very clearly the impressions they make on people. Their response is “Well we are just reporting our data”. The problem is no one actually reads the info. The average person is sound bite oriented and will believe anything they read good or bad without question and without research. Just look at Brian Peskin LOL! People still send me his nonsense. And I still send them the links delineating his activities at the * below.

Anyway  if you can read Bill Lands book Fish,Omega 3 and Human Health.  I have spent hours on the phone with him researching my upcoming books. He’s now in his 80’s and is really the godfather of the whole Omega 3/6 thing. The book is the only $80 paperback I have ever seen but it will tell you everything we do and don’t know as of a few years ago.  Ironically a lot of scientists are still in the dark about the research classic example “Fish oil may make high blood pressure worse” a headline from a few months ago. . This was actually another DHA only study so the use of the term “fish oil” is already misleading. But it was a mouse study and drew human conclusions.  Someone forgot to tell the brilliant UCLA scientists that did it that mice are herbivores and have a totally different eicosanoid system and a totally different response since they DON”T FRIGGIN EAT FISH.

And speaking of not eating fish. If this study connecting DHA to cancer had any basis in reality then the populations with the highest levels of Omega 3’s would also have the highest incidence of cancer and the populations with the lowest Omega 3’s would have the lowest rate of cancer. In reality it is the exact opposite. It never stops LOL!  Hope all is well with you!

Dr Dave

*In January 2003, the District Court of Harris County, Texas issued a permanent injunction ordering Peskin and his company to pay $100,000 to the State of Texas and to refrain from making certain claims [1]. Among other things, the injunction ordered that Peskin must refrain from:(i) “Advertising or labeling any food product or drug which makes any express or implied claims that such product will …(4) reduce the risk of breast, prostate and other cancers…”

(ii) “Representing, expressly or by implication, in any advertising of any product, that Defendant Brian Scott Peskin is a ‘scientist,’ ‘Professor,’ or ‘Doctor,’ or that Brian Scott Peskin is the ‘holder of the Emeritus Life-Systems Engineering Chair, College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences at Texas Southern University’ “