Life Extension Forums

Dear valued Life Extension Forum user,

Life Extension will be closing the Forum on August 18th, 2015. We sincerely appreciate your participation and support in building this community over the years. Your input has made a difference. Moving forward, we encourage you to join us on social media to keep the conversation going. Connect with us here:

Thank you again for your continued support!

The Life Extension Team

Main stream media citing studies showing omega--3s don't reduce heart...

Author Message
 Posted 2/12/2014 9:30:24 AM


Status: Lifetime Membership
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24:34 AM
Posts: 102, Visits: 1,114
Last year, there was a study called "VITAL"  (VITAL,NCT01169259), that used tiny amounts of Vitamin D3 and omega-3 (1g omega3, 1000 IU D3), and therefore concluded that they don't help anything. I think Bill Faloon may have answered that one.  Now, the NEJM published a study, showing 1g omega-3 per day (miniscule) amount do not help anything.

n–3 Fatty Acids and Cardiovascular
Outcomes in Patients with Dysglycemia
The ORIGIN Trial Investigators* (requires NEJM subscription).

Tryiing to drum up business for the heart surgeons?

I am sure Bill Faloon has probably seen this and will issue a rebuttal.
Maybe Bill already did and I missed it. 


Post #11879
Add to Twitter Add to Facebook
 Posted 2/13/2014 6:44:18 AM
Forum Coordinator

Forum Coordinator

Status: LE Employee
Group: Managers
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:05:55 AM
Posts: 2,246, Visits: 8,519
There was no formal rebuttal, but one of Life Extension's doctors submitted the following:

Thisstudy is just another case of setting supplements up to fail.One of the best ways to do that is to use small amounts of a supplement thatare unlikely to make a difference. In the study they used the following:


Participants underwent randomization,after a 10-day run-in period, to receive either 1 g of n–3 fatty acids(containing 465 mg of eicosapentaenoic acid [EPA] and 375 mg of docosahexaenoicacid [DHA]) or placebo containing approximately 1 g of olive oil.

· The dose was too small
· Further the “placebo” they compared it to was healthyolive oil. Why didn’t they compare it to a more appropriate placebo and not ahealthy oil.
· Their study was restricted to patients with impairedfasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes who are the subjectswho need more than the 1 gram dose.
· Participants in the trial were taking more concomitantcardioprotective therapies than were those in many previously published trials.These therapies may have reduced the incidence of death from cardiovascularcauses, thereby reducing the statistical power to detect any effect of n–3fatty acids, especially given the low dose used in this study.

Wecould have saved them a lot of money on this study by predicting limitedbenefit of such a small 1g dose for a study population who already has impairedfasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes. 

Thedose for this study should have been 4 g day, the placebo should not have beenhealthy olive oil, and confounding factors such as concomitant cardioprotectivetherapies should have been factored out.

Post #11892
Add to Twitter Add to Facebook

Similar Topics

Expand / Collapse

Reading This Topic

Expand / Collapse