December 5, 2014 — A new meta-analysis indicates no associations between omega-3s and aggressive or high-grade prostate tumours. Adam Ismail, Executive Director and Harry Rice, VP, Regulatory and Scientific Affairs, GOED, look at where the media scare stories originated.
During the summer of 2013, the omega-3 industry began defending itself from a barrage of criticism, stimulated by the publication of 'Plasma Phospholipid Fatty Acids and Prostate Cancer Risk in the SELECT Trial', which concluded that higher omega-3 fatty acid levels are associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer.1
In the absence of the authors’ over-extrapolation of the data, unsubstantiated conclusions and comments reached the media that went beyond the study’s design; the results per se wouldn’t have been an issue. Although scientists are obligated to propose an explanation for their results, it was irresponsible of them to mislead the public by creating a media circus. In this case, correlation became causation in the media — an impossibility, given the research conducted.
Fast forward 14 months and the scientific evidence has changed significantly. A new meta-analysis examining the associations between the concentrations of circulating fatty acids, including omega-3s, and subsequent risk of prostate cancer in a reanalysis of individual participant data from seven prospective studies was published by a group of scientists, including two of the co-authors of the infamous summer 2013 article2, Drs Theodore Brasky and Alan Kristal. In contrast to the 2013 publication, this one is appropriately tempered and was not accompanied by an author-stimulated media frenzy.