One last thing regarding the dubious fish oil study and increase risk of prostate cancer.
It’s been two weeks since the fish oil / prostate cancer study was published and I am still answering questions from concerned patients, readers and radio show listeners. The media clearly succeeded in inducing a false scare by sensationalizing the misleading conclusion of a study that one can argue should have never been published.
By now you know my views on this multi-flawed study.
In case you don’t:
But here is one thing I did not mention which further emphasizes why this study shouldn’t have been published in the first place.
Not only did they never study the consumption of fish or fish oils and its relation to aggressive prostate cancer, but Brasky and clan categorized gleason 7 cancers (4 +3) as aggressive cancers. Gleason 7 cancer are considered intermediate cancers not aggressive. So part of the “70% higher risk of aggressive prostate cancer” that they purported included those with gleason 7 disease.
The gleason grading system is used only in prostate cancer and measures how aggressive the cancer is. It also help to determine a prognosis. The higher the number, the more aggressive, therefore, the higher the potential for cancer to spread.
I wonder how Dr. House would respond to this study?
Other excellent reads on this by topic:
Prostate.net – click HERE
Dr. Michael Murray: click HERE
Dr. Ron Hoffman: click HERE
Dr. Duffy Mackay from the Council from Responsible Nutrition: click HERE
Dr. Mark Hyman writes in the Huffington Post: click HERE