Examine.com is an independent organization that presents un-biased, non-commercial research on supplements and nutrition. They have just e-published the most comprehensive catalog of nutritional supplements that is updated every day. I highly recommend it! You can find it HERE
These days, parents, student athletes and coaches are much more aware of the long-term medical problems that concussions can cause. Fortunately, many efforts are being made to protect kids from head injuries.
Sports equipment companies have jumped on the bandwagon and have improved the protection their helmets and pads offer. However, some of these newer products, like football helmets, are quite expensive. Parents want to know if these more expensive football helmets actually offer more protection. According to a new study, just because a helmet may be heavier and more expensive, it will not lower a player’s risk of concussion. Read full article here.
Because of a diet low in fish and seafood, children and adults in North America and other parts of the world, have a “nutrition gap” of omega-3 fatty acids, particularly docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). Read full article here.
Reaction to last week’s study linking omega-3 with prostate cancer have been vociferous and near-unanimous in condemning its methods and conclusions. Here Alan Ruth, PhD, and CEO of the Irish Health Trade Association (IHTA), explains why that condemnation was justified and not just sourced from an industry concerned with defending its own patch. Read full article here.
Obviously, the big news of this past week in the world of omega-3s is a study published claiming that “omega-3s cause prostate cancer.” I have had friends and family call, text, stop me in person, and email their concerns about what is clearly a headline grabbing ploy by the press to make a huge deal out of poorly designed manuscript masquerading as a scientific publication.
First of all, the study did not look at omega-3 supplementation, but was a look at if there is an association between Vitamin E and selenium and cancers (including lung, colorectal, and prostate). The manuscript was done looking retrospectively at people with prostate cancer and what their omega-3 levels were at a single point in time. When I did a study looking at omega-3 levels and documented suicide, I was very careful not to conclude that low omega-3 levels CAUSE suicide because that would not be a true statement. Low omega-3 levels measured were ASSOCIATED with a 62% increase risk they came from a suicide, but there is absolutely NO WAY POSSIBLE to conclude a causal relationship. These researchers and the press that followed obviously did not feel the need to adhere to such ethical parsing of words in order to grab headlines. Come on, the study showed a possible increase of prostate cancer had a confidence interval of 0-192%!!!!
I am always amazed, though I’m not sure why, when the press blow things out of proportion about a study demonstrating their complete lack of understanding of scientific studies. I could go into details for a long time, but let me just say clearly that this case-control study was not designed to look at the question in which the researchers draw their incorrect conclusions. In the worst case, there may be an association between higher omega-3 levels and prostate cancer, but to conclude that omega-3s cause prostate cancer? Really??? Given that the study was a single snapshot looking at if someone has prostate cancer and what their omega-3 blood level was at that moment, it is completely reasonable to state that prostate cancer causes higher omega-3s in the blood. Or that people with prostate cancer increased their fish or supplement intake because it is fairly well known that omega-3s may be helpful in cancer due to their anti-inflammatory properties. But that is not what catches headlines.
Not sure which argument you might want to use, but the biggest one is that it was a study not designed to look at this question and the investigators completely drew conclusions from data that don’t support their conclusions. So which argument do you want? You mean besides that it is a poorly designed evaluation of data from a totally different study never designed to look at prostate cancer and omega-3s and should have never been published? Or the part where countries and societies that have the most fish intake actually have the lowest rates of all cancers including prostate? Or that there is specific research designed to actually look at that question and everyone of those studies shows decreased rates of cancer? Or that this same study also showed that there are higher rates of prostate cancer in nonsmokers and nondrinkers (so should we recommend everyone drink, smoke, and stay away from fish?)?
One rebuttal can be found at: http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Research/Experts-slam-omega-3-link-to-prostate-cancer-as-overblown-scaremongering. A more scientific-oriented review can be found at http://examine.com/blog/fish-oil-and-your-prostate .
What we do know is that omega-3s are anti-inflammatory and well known and documented to decrease overall and cardiovascular mortality, the incidence of cancer, heart disease, and have a positive benefit on brain health especially in the absence of brain health. What is really sad is how many people will decrease their intake of fish or stop their supplementation because of ridiculous studies/reporting like this. How much additional suffering will occur because of it?
One of the biggest problems is persuading people to eat more healthy fat in their diet. Fat has unfortunately been demonized by mass media, and even by medical practitioners, who claim that fat is bad for our health. That is only half the truth. Bad fats will make us gain weight and lead to many common disorders like high blood pressure but good fats are a vital part of our health. Read full article.
A survey shows that depression and other psychiatric disorders are common after a head injury.
Previous research has suggested that depression may be a complication of traumatic brain injury (TBI), but the issue has not been extensively investigated. Researchers at the University of Iowa compared 91 patients with TBI with 27 patients who suffered multiple trauma, but without any nervous system involvement. They found that a third of the patients had clinical depression during the year after their injury. This was far more frequent than in the control group. Those with TBI and depression were more likely to have a history of mood and anxiety disorders than those who had TBI without depression.
Of the patients with TBI and depression, 77 per cent also reported anxiety and 57 per cent exhibited aggressive behavior. Major depression was also linked to poorer social functioning six and twelve months after the injury. Brain scans also revealed a reduced level of gray matter in this group.
The weight loss benefits associated with omega-3 have been well-documented in the past, but can it actually deter our cravings for junk food? Researchers from the University of Liverpool’s Institute of Aging and Chronic Disease examined 185 research papers dealing with fish oil’s effect on weight loss and neurogenesis, the process that generates nerve cell growth. Read full article.
Increased intakes of the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA may counter the alleviate oxidative stress in older people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), says a new study from Malaysia. Read full article.