Is fish oil good for you? Maybe not.

BobTbay

BobTbay

Mr. Nice Guy
Trusted Member
PBS Frontline are pretty well respected journalists for their in depth analysis of complex and controversial topics. They looked into fish oil supplements. Fish oils are the 3rd most common dietary supplement and on the advice of others in this forum, I myself have been supplementing with fish oils.

If you don't have time to watch the video here's the two takeaways.

1. A lot of fish oil supplements when tested are found to be heavily oxidized. Fish oils are very susceptible to oxidation during processing and oxidized oils are known to be inflammatory and bad for your health. Sometimes you can even smell the difference, when you break open a capsule, if you can smell that "fishy" smell your oil is likely heavily oxidized.

2. Now that we've been supplementing with fish oil for decades, the data is coming back, and a growing body of evidence is now accumulating in the scientific literature that fish oil supplementation is ineffective in preventing first and second heart attacks. Fish oil supplementation may be a waste of your money if you think they confer cardiac benefits.

 
The oxidation comes from purification. I keep mine in the fridge and away from light. Similar to why good olive oil comes in tinted containers. Some store bought stuff could already be rotten while still on the shelf but like you said, crack the first tab open and smell it, if it's fishy toss them out.
 
Total bs, the oil cod liver oil back on the day was nasty.
If a supplement company doesn't, keep up with technology they will go under.
Big pharma does so much, bad press on supplements. There behind these bs studies.
Even the carbohydrate companies, do studies on how fats are bad.
 
I always thought high epa count was important but recently my doc said get a higher ratio of dha to target hdl and ldl better. I'm going to try it out and see what results I get.
 
CoolRick said:
If fish oils dont work, why do they tell you not to use them for 2 weeks before surgery? There are now prescription omega 3 oils too.
Click to expand...
The data isn't saying they aren't biologically inert, just that they aren't preventing heart attacks. And yes, there are prescription omega 3's and the video mentions they are less likely to be oxidised.
Cheapshot said:
Of course they dont want you taking fish oil. Take this medication instead, oh and this one, and this one.
Fish oil has 100s of benifits, not just heart health.
Click to expand...
Most scientists are honest hardworking people trying to improve the world. They were definitely smart enough to become lawyers or bankers, but they went into research instead. Also, the same breed of scientists are the ones who are telling the world that the data shows statins also seem to be ineffective in preventing heart attacks and that's a 20 billion dollar a year pharma cash cow they're attacking with no benefit to their wallets.
Rolls roydz said:
The video is 7 yrs old. Doing a quick surf on Harvard health magazine you can find recent ones supporting fish oil with large samples.

It definitely looks like an attack to the supps industry lol. Even the format of the video 🤢
Click to expand...

I looked up the two top results from Harvard health magazine. The headline excerpt in the google search results were positive,

with

A subsequent meta-analysis, which included data from over 10 studies, found fish oil omega‐3 supplements lowered risk for heart attack and death

but when you click on the links and read the actual articles,

there was stuff like

This study enrolled over 13,000 patients who were randomized to receive either the EPA/DHA combination pill or the placebo (a pill filled with corn oil). The trial was terminated early due to an interim analysis revealing no difference between the two treatment groups.

and

A meta-analysis published in JAMA Cardiology found no clear benefit to fish oil supplements in preventing heart disease or major cardiovascular disease (CVD) events such as heart attack or stroke, in people who were at increased risk for CVD.

and the conclusion of the articles were stuff like this

My patients commonly ask me whether they should try one supplement or another. Often my answer is equivocal, because for most supplements we just don’t have enough evidence to give a definite answer. This doesn’t mean that a particular patient couldn’t benefit from a specific supplement; it just means I don’t have standardized research to guide my recommendations. Sadly, this remains true of omega-3 fatty acid supplements. The results of studies looking at omega-3 supplements have been inconsistent, and have left both physicians and patients wondering what to do.

and from a different scientist.

Many people believe that fish oil supplements are somehow beneficial for their heart. Unfortunately, research does not back that up. Multiple randomized trials have compared fish oil supplements with placebo to look for cardiovascular benefit – and found nothing.

Despite this lack of data for benefit, fish oil use continues to rise. It is the most common non-multivitamin/mineral supplement in the United States. The fish oil market was valued at nearly $12 billion in 2021 and is expected to exceed $17 billion by 2028.

So why do so many people take fish oil?

Research shows that people who eat more fish have lower rates of heart attack and stroke. Similarly, people with high blood levels of two key omega-3 fatty acids – docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) – also have less heart disease.

SO----my takeaway is that the evidence is mixed at best. I'm going to keep taking my fish oils, because I get them for free, but the science is far from clear about cardiovascular benefits.

I do find it telling that there are people who think that when big pharma makes billions selling a product, they're automatically evil trying to hurt us, but when big supplement companies make billions selling a product, they're automatically angels trying to save us.
 
BobTbay said:
The data isn't saying they aren't biologically inert, just that they aren't preventing heart attacks. And yes, there are prescription omega 3's and the video mentions they are less likely to be oxidised.

Most scientists are honest hardworking people trying to improve the world. They were definitely smart enough to become lawyers or bankers, but they went into research instead. Also, the same breed of scientists are the ones who are telling the world that the data shows statins also seem to be ineffective in preventing heart attacks and that's a 20 billion dollar a year pharma cash cow they're attacking with no benefit to their wallets.


I looked up the two top results from Harvard health magazine. The headline excerpt in the google search results were positive,

with

A subsequent meta-analysis, which included data from over 10 studies, found fish oil omega‐3 supplements lowered risk for heart attack and death

but when you click on the links and read the actual articles,

there was stuff like

This study enrolled over 13,000 patients who were randomized to receive either the EPA/DHA combination pill or the placebo (a pill filled with corn oil). The trial was terminated early due to an interim analysis revealing no difference between the two treatment groups.

and

A meta-analysis published in JAMA Cardiology found no clear benefit to fish oil supplements in preventing heart disease or major cardiovascular disease (CVD) events such as heart attack or stroke, in people who were at increased risk for CVD.

and the conclusion of the articles were stuff like this

My patients commonly ask me whether they should try one supplement or another. Often my answer is equivocal, because for most supplements we just don’t have enough evidence to give a definite answer. This doesn’t mean that a particular patient couldn’t benefit from a specific supplement; it just means I don’t have standardized research to guide my recommendations. Sadly, this remains true of omega-3 fatty acid supplements. The results of studies looking at omega-3 supplements have been inconsistent, and have left both physicians and patients wondering what to do.

and from a different scientist.

Many people believe that fish oil supplements are somehow beneficial for their heart. Unfortunately, research does not back that up. Multiple randomized trials have compared fish oil supplements with placebo to look for cardiovascular benefit – and found nothing.

Despite this lack of data for benefit, fish oil use continues to rise. It is the most common non-multivitamin/mineral supplement in the United States. The fish oil market was valued at nearly $12 billion in 2021 and is expected to exceed $17 billion by 2028.

So why do so many people take fish oil?

Research shows that people who eat more fish have lower rates of heart attack and stroke. Similarly, people with high blood levels of two key omega-3 fatty acids – docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) – also have less heart disease.

SO----my takeaway is that the evidence is mixed at best. I'm going to keep taking my fish oils, because I get them for free, but the science is far from clear about cardiovascular benefits.

I do find it telling that there are people who think that when big pharma makes billions selling a product, they're automatically evil trying to hurt us, but when big supplement companies make billions selling a product, they're automatically angels trying to save us.
Click to expand...
Well me personally I don’t think either X or Y are angels trying to save us lol. Business are business. But, for this particular topic I have tried it myself and close people around me. Lower blood pressure and significant improvement in lipid profile. I did not always have Carlson’s, sometimes just cheap fish oil and both smell fish and both improve my health in a very positive way. This oxidation thing has been going on for years but I have never experienced any inflammation, this people using the term “inflammation” tend to use it deliberately with the only purpose of forcing thesis that they can’t actually prove. My inflammation markers have never changed because of rancid oil. I have had olive oil for months without the best conditions, and yes, it gets rancid, it tastes different, is it that unhealthy? I don’t have “inflammation”.

I still think that the more impact you can have on your lipid profile the best outcome you will have in the long run. Have you tried moderate to large dose? Probably this is why you don’t see huge difference in your blood work? I tell you this assuming you don’t see a difference and you take them just because they are for free -quoting you 😅-.
 
Rolls roydz said:
I still think that the more impact you can have on your lipid profile the best outcome you will have in the long run. Have you tried moderate to large dose? Probably this is why you don’t see huge difference in your blood work? I tell you this assuming you don’t see a difference and you take them just because they are for free -quoting you 😅-.
Click to expand...
I don't know if it's helping my health markers or not because I have confounding factors.

I went from smoking three packs a day, and smoking weed all day long, and being morbidly obese and ignoring diabetes, to quitting smoking, drinking, weed, caffeine, and sugar, (carbs in general, really) and losing 200 lbs over about five years. I also started taking alot of supplements and vitamins after losing the first hundred pounds, and quitting smoking.

My blood makers, and blood pressure all got significantly better, but I'm guessing the other stuff was the majority of that effect, and not the fish oils.

I do have some hope in fish oils, I only take them on non-fasting days, and i take 4000 mg.

It's also not uncommon for me to eat 2 or 300 grams of herring fillets on an eating day, which from the research I did from these forum posts, might actually be more beneficial than the pills.
 
BobTbay said:
The data isn't saying they aren't biologically inert, just that they aren't preventing heart attacks. And yes, there are prescription omega 3's and the video mentions they are less likely to be oxidised.

Most scientists are honest hardworking people trying to improve the world. They were definitely smart enough to become lawyers or bankers, but they went into research instead. Also, the same breed of scientists are the ones who are telling the world that the data shows statins also seem to be ineffective in preventing heart attacks and that's a 20 billion dollar a year pharma cash cow they're attacking with no benefit to their wallets.


I looked up the two top results from Harvard health magazine. The headline excerpt in the google search results were positive,

with

A subsequent meta-analysis, which included data from over 10 studies, found fish oil omega‐3 supplements lowered risk for heart attack and death

but when you click on the links and read the actual articles,

there was stuff like

This study enrolled over 13,000 patients who were randomized to receive either the EPA/DHA combination pill or the placebo (a pill filled with corn oil). The trial was terminated early due to an interim analysis revealing no difference between the two treatment groups.

and

A meta-analysis published in JAMA Cardiology found no clear benefit to fish oil supplements in preventing heart disease or major cardiovascular disease (CVD) events such as heart attack or stroke, in people who were at increased risk for CVD.

and the conclusion of the articles were stuff like this

My patients commonly ask me whether they should try one supplement or another. Often my answer is equivocal, because for most supplements we just don’t have enough evidence to give a definite answer. This doesn’t mean that a particular patient couldn’t benefit from a specific supplement; it just means I don’t have standardized research to guide my recommendations. Sadly, this remains true of omega-3 fatty acid supplements. The results of studies looking at omega-3 supplements have been inconsistent, and have left both physicians and patients wondering what to do.

and from a different scientist.

Many people believe that fish oil supplements are somehow beneficial for their heart. Unfortunately, research does not back that up. Multiple randomized trials have compared fish oil supplements with placebo to look for cardiovascular benefit – and found nothing.

Despite this lack of data for benefit, fish oil use continues to rise. It is the most common non-multivitamin/mineral supplement in the United States. The fish oil market was valued at nearly $12 billion in 2021 and is expected to exceed $17 billion by 2028.

So why do so many people take fish oil?

Research shows that people who eat more fish have lower rates of heart attack and stroke. Similarly, people with high blood levels of two key omega-3 fatty acids – docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) – also have less heart disease.

SO----my takeaway is that the evidence is mixed at best. I'm going to keep taking my fish oils, because I get them for free, but the science is far from clear about cardiovascular benefits.

I do find it telling that there are people who think that when big pharma makes billions selling a product, they're automatically evil trying to hurt us, but when big supplement companies make billions selling a product, they're automatically angels trying to save us.
Click to expand...
In this case big pharma and supplement companies are selling the same product. The same product that was demonized for years as being snake oil. Come to find out it does have a medicinal use case. That or big pharma is trying to cash in on selling snake oil?(it wouldnt suprise me). Wouldn't having thinner blood help prevent heart attacks? I mean big pharma sells script blood thinners for this purpose if i recall its one of their top selling products too, especially after the vaccine roll out.

For years I'd say that the supplement industry had a worse reputation. It probably wasnt until the opioid crisis and or prescription drugs becoming popular for recreational use that big pharma became as demonized as it has, covid took it to another level. Before that it was snake oil supplements claiming easy fat loss, "pixie dusting", amino spiking you name it. With the popularization of herbal or natural medicine, and eastern spiritual practices, its easy for people to think because it's natural its safe when this is clearly not the case. The old adage "the dose makes the poison" comes to mind.

But at least supplement companies aren't part of some sort of international racket involving government, the entire bought and paid for medical community etc forcing their products down our throats. It should be pretty clear that they have the money and the appetite for greed to not give a shit about what their products do to people and with that I'd say they're a lot further along on the evil spectrum.

At least thats my two cents on that.
 
Last edited:
BobTbay said:
I don't know if it's helping my health markers or not because I have confounding factors.

I went from smoking three packs a day, and smoking weed all day long, and being morbidly obese and ignoring diabetes, to quitting smoking, drinking, weed, caffeine, and sugar, (carbs in general, really) and losing 200 lbs over about five years. I also started taking alot of supplements and vitamins after losing the first hundred pounds, and quitting smoking.

My blood makers, and blood pressure all got significantly better, but I'm guessing the other stuff was the majority of that effect, and not the fish oils.

I do have some hope in fish oils, I only take them on non-fasting days, and i take 4000 mg.

It's also not uncommon for me to eat 2 or 300 grams of herring fillets on an eating day, which from the research I did from these forum posts, might actually be more beneficial than the pills.
Click to expand...
I concur with you, if everything has improved overall better not to change anything in the equation! Congratulations by the way on your health seeking journey.
 
BobTbay said:
The data isn't saying they aren't biologically inert, just that they aren't preventing heart attacks. And yes, there are prescription omega 3's and the video mentions they are less likely to be oxidised.

Most scientists are honest hardworking people trying to improve the world. They were definitely smart enough to become lawyers or bankers, but they went into research instead. Also, the same breed of scientists are the ones who are telling the world that the data shows statins also seem to be ineffective in preventing heart attacks and that's a 20 billion dollar a year pharma cash cow they're attacking with no benefit to their wallets.


I looked up the two top results from Harvard health magazine. The headline excerpt in the google search results were positive,

with

A subsequent meta-analysis, which included data from over 10 studies, found fish oil omega‐3 supplements lowered risk for heart attack and death

but when you click on the links and read the actual articles,

there was stuff like

This study enrolled over 13,000 patients who were randomized to receive either the EPA/DHA combination pill or the placebo (a pill filled with corn oil). The trial was terminated early due to an interim analysis revealing no difference between the two treatment groups.

and

A meta-analysis published in JAMA Cardiology found no clear benefit to fish oil supplements in preventing heart disease or major cardiovascular disease (CVD) events such as heart attack or stroke, in people who were at increased risk for CVD.

and the conclusion of the articles were stuff like this

My patients commonly ask me whether they should try one supplement or another. Often my answer is equivocal, because for most supplements we just don’t have enough evidence to give a definite answer. This doesn’t mean that a particular patient couldn’t benefit from a specific supplement; it just means I don’t have standardized research to guide my recommendations. Sadly, this remains true of omega-3 fatty acid supplements. The results of studies looking at omega-3 supplements have been inconsistent, and have left both physicians and patients wondering what to do.

and from a different scientist.

Many people believe that fish oil supplements are somehow beneficial for their heart. Unfortunately, research does not back that up. Multiple randomized trials have compared fish oil supplements with placebo to look for cardiovascular benefit – and found nothing.

Despite this lack of data for benefit, fish oil use continues to rise. It is the most common non-multivitamin/mineral supplement in the United States. The fish oil market was valued at nearly $12 billion in 2021 and is expected to exceed $17 billion by 2028.

So why do so many people take fish oil?

Research shows that people who eat more fish have lower rates of heart attack and stroke. Similarly, people with high blood levels of two key omega-3 fatty acids – docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) – also have less heart disease.

SO----my takeaway is that the evidence is mixed at best. I'm going to keep taking my fish oils, because I get them for free, but the science is far from clear about cardiovascular benefits.

I do find it telling that there are people who think that when big pharma makes billions selling a product, they're automatically evil trying to hurt us, but when big supplement companies make billions selling a product, they're automatically angels trying to save us.
Click to expand...


Yes most probably are honest.. not sure about the hardworking part..lol. but either way there test can be paid for by anyone. Tests can also be useless depending what they did. What was the dose? What was the quality? What was the duration of the test?
 
Rolls roydz said:
Well me personally I don’t think either X or Y are angels trying to save us lol. Business are business. But, for this particular topic I have tried it myself and close people around me. Lower blood pressure and significant improvement in lipid profile. I did not always have Carlson’s, sometimes just cheap fish oil and both smell fish and both improve my health in a very positive way. This oxidation thing has been going on for years but I have never experienced any inflammation, this people using the term “inflammation” tend to use it deliberately with the only purpose of forcing thesis that they can’t actually prove. My inflammation markers have never changed because of rancid oil. I have had olive oil for months without the best conditions, and yes, it gets rancid, it tastes different, is it that unhealthy? I don’t have “inflammation”.

I still think that the more impact you can have on your lipid profile the best outcome you will have in the long run. Have you tried moderate to large dose? Probably this is why you don’t see huge difference in your blood work? I tell you this assuming you don’t see a difference and you take them just because they are for free -quoting you 😅-.
Click to expand...
Quit buying cheap supplements..lol and keep your fish oil in the fridge. The quality brands never smell
 
Cheapshot said:
Yes mst probably are honest.. not sure about the hardworking part..lol. but either way there test can be paid for by anyone. Tests can also be useless depending what they did. What was the dose? What was the quality? What was the duration of the test?
Click to expand...
I'll just leave this here

"If you wanna keep getting those donations..."
Screenshot_20220114-205429_Telegram.jpg
 
1 @BobTbay , thanks for posting about this kind of thing, it's important for us to keep reexamining things.

2 I'm a huge FO advocate, big effect on BP, they are an important part of my sup routine. I became aware of my relatively minor CV issues 10-12 years ago and had comprehensive diagnostics done at that time, some plaque blockage was shown, slightly higher than expected for my age. It is important to note that most of the currently used diagnostics have some variability of result to consider. For example I was told that a nuclear medicine stress test is about 90% accurate but can vary 4 or 5 percent day to day.
Taking that into consideration my latest annual round of tests shows marked improvement from the first ones in every test with the exception of two that have "not gotten worse". Cardiologist is thrilled as well as confused by some things I do lol

3 IMO the most important words in this thread with regard to the video, any meta-analysis and most studies/links listed - "confounding factors".
how well were they consider? Pretty tough and costly to do effectively.
Why were these old men "at risk" ? Shit diet and exercise habits? Smoking? Hereditary?

My experience is anecdotal at best though I would give myself credit for being extremely scientific and using a very tight protocol to back up my BP findings. So many confounding factors for the rest though. I'll continue taking large doses of FO for now I ran a guesstimated set of numbers a while back and I'm not exceeding what is found in the average Eskimo diet as far as I can tell.
 
this is true actually, lots of fish oils are junk, some even contain mercury, supplement industry isn't regulated by the FDA so you'll only find out after the fact
i only use kirkland

i only take 1 capsule every few days, high epa/dha, essential fatty acids because i dont get it from my diet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top