Heh Melissa,

Why didn't they use the bread in both groups - in one, a placebo-containing margarine (or regular margarine), in the other omega-3 and/or ALA-containing margarine. Still loads of carbs, but at least no offset by the calorie load all in one arm. Or do it in pill form? 

Great point DGH.  I think I'd rather have seen a trial with carbs vs. no carbs, and then placebo arm as well!  Guess this comes under the "they didn't ask us" heading !

Thanks for reading/posting! 

Melissa

Melissa,

I think that is great that you noticed this study also.

Butter would have been better vehicle than margarine, in my mind.

Margarine is not healthy at all, and could cause enough extra

inflamation to overshadow gains from any source.  I agree also

that the control of dosages each day appeared very loose. Not

a good study to be shooting into the air.  Unfortunately, though, that

is way most studies are done that receive a lot of publicity.

Ray

Ray,

hu?

What is the meaning of "not healthy" in this context?

I'd think that the use of butter would not be a solution which is "neutral" in the sense of hidden variables ;-)

But I agree with you last  statement that such studies gain a lot of publicity due to pseudo simple conclusions made.

Regards,

Thomas 

Dr. Walton-Shirley,

While there's lots of excitement regarding the therapeutic benefits of omega-3s, what I'd like to see, is some trials in which omega-6 is reduced. It's well publicized that Americans consume an estimated ten to thirty times more omega-6s than omega-3s. About a decade ago researchers had this to say about the imbalance.

 "One recommendation deserves explanation here. After much discussion consensus was reached on the importance of reducing the omega-6  polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) even as the omega-3 PUFAs are increased in the diet of adults and newborns for optimal brain and cardiovascular health and function. This is necessary to reduce adverse effects of excesses of arachidonic acid and its eicosanoid products. Such excesses can occur when too much LA and AA are present in the diet and an adequate supply of dietary omega-3 fatty acids is not available. The adverse effects of too much arachidonic acid and its eicosanoids can be avoided by two interdependent dietary changes. First, the amount of plant oils rich in LA, the parent compound of the omega-6 class, which is converted to AA, needs to be reduced. Second, simultaneously the omega-3 PUFAs need to be increased in the diet. LA can be converted to arachidonic acid and the enzyme, {Delta}-6 desaturase, necessary to desaturate it, is the same one necessary to desaturate LNA, the parent compound of the omega-3 class; each competes with the other for this desaturase. The presence of LNA in the diet can inhibit the conversion of the large amounts of LA in the diets of Western industrialized countries which contain too much dietary plant oils rich in omega-6 PUFAs (e.g. corn, safflower, and soybean oils). The increase of LNA, together with EPA and DHA, and reduction of vegetable oils with high LA content, are necessary to achieve a healthier diet in these countries."

 Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 18, No. 5, 487-489 (1999)
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/full/18/5/487

 More recently, science writer Susan Allport's conducted a 30 day experiment in which she increased her intake of omega-6? http://omega-6-omega-3-balance.omegaoptimize.com/2010/07/25/case-study-30days-of-high-omega6-dietstiffens-arteries-and-increases-belly-fat.aspx

Currently, some of the best research on essential fatty acids is being conducted by Charles Serhan, BBS faculty member of Harvard Medical School. http://www.hms.harvard.edu/dms/bbs/fac/serhan.html

Since the study used low doses of omega 3, the serum levels were done on a random basis in the 20th and 40th month, and the method of delivery was carbohydrate force-feeding, with omega-3 spiked margarine, this report only confuses, not clarifies. Applicability to the general public is quite limited. Was the purpose here to justify and market a new spread? The last thing needed is to have yet another "functional food" with a small amount of a beneficial ingredient used as an excuse to consume more calories.

Good data on omega-3 in primary and secondary prevention would be most welcome, but this study disappoints. Better design, conrols and rigor are called for, using blood levels as a continuous variable vs hard outcomes for a longer period--a tough study to coordinate. I am setting it aside with a big question mark.

Sure agree with MWS, in that there is something awry.

Meanwhile, undoubtedly the media will present these data without perspective, and the public, unfortunately, will again have confidence undermined in the ability of scientists and physicians to give clear advice.

Nice to see that EUROASPIRE motivated greater awareness of the guidelines, however.

Roby: I could not agree more. I believe that despite everything that is being done, way less than 40% of the total CV risk is being addressed. Did you see the AJC paper on McStatin as a condiment next to the ketchup, to "train" people about the risk per double burger? The authors, like many, think that the statin will fully neutralize the effect, but it does not. Take the JUPITER controversy. Sure JUPITER isn’t a perfect, end-all study. Everyone is up in arms that "healthy" people should be given Crestor. The JUPITER population was just like ours... ostensibly healthy, but really not. 41% MetSyn, 22% hyperlipidemia, etc.  Those patients grumbling have a clear choice—take the weight off and shape up, or face the consequences. But when you tell people to take off weight, stop their slobbering and get serious, they get angry, doctor shop, or hit a few "cleanses" in sequence!  They really want a magic pill, without statin side effects, that costs $7.42, works in 3 hours, and allows them to gorge again.

How does JUPITER, which causes such backlash, differ from a polypill, which people accept? This fish oil study is a farce in the same way. I published a review recently and had to hold back my language when it came to risk factor reduction. Insanity is an understatement.  http://www.dovepress.com/recent-advances-in-the-management-of-chronic-stable-angina-ii-anti-isc-peer-reviewed-article-VHRM

As long as there are studies that allow justification for what people expect and do (or further the delusions), and the food industry is permitted to continue status quo, and the Dept Agriculture subsidizes unwisely, and politicians do not act because of their allegiances, it will continue.