I have seen some pretty irresponsible studies published over the last 14 years but this would have to be one of the worst. It seems to be designed to attack supplements even though it was not even about comparing control groups who did or did not take Omega 3 supplements. Instead it measured a slight difference in Omega 3 levels in different groups. The difference between the groups on which conclusions were drawn was 0.2% percent. The difference is so minute that it could come about from eating a fish sandwich before the test was done.
That is what the authors drew their conclusions from.
As many scientific experts have pointed out the conclusion was irrational and the study should never have been published. They point out that if the correlation was really true then why is it that populations that have the highest intake of Omega 3 from fish also have the lowest incidence of prostate cancer? The Japanese for example!
As I mentioned earlier the authors also found that non-smokers and those who didn't drink were also at greater risk of getting prostate cancer!! This was in the same study but was not picked up on by the media.
For the last 16 years I have been a heavy user of Omega 3 fish oil. I take 4 soft gels of our QH/Ultra every day, and before we had that version I used our basic Omega DHA/Fish Oil. I will be 66 years old next month and my PSA levels are 0.5 which is exceptional even for a young man let alone someone of my age. Interestingly it has improved over the last 16 years, not got worse and in my opinion proof of one of the benefits of a high daily intake of Omega 3.
You may wish to read an article published in Nutraingredients in which there are a number of comments from experts relating to the study which frightens people from using their Omega 3 supplements.
You can access it by clicking here.
In conclusion, don't stop enjoying the benefits of your Omega 3 supplements as a result of the media coverage of such an irresponsible study.