http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/12/health...html?hpt=hp_c4

While it is interesting, it is about a topic with many many conflicting studies done with other nutrients and prostate cancer or helping it or not.

Supplement studies tend to vacillate back and forth depending on well they are conducted, and how the subjects are chosen.

It will have to be replicated and refined and done by others before gaining credence IMO.

Can you fix the subject line for me? I wrote this in a rush out the door.

No problem! I'll edit my post accordingly too.

I've taken fish oil for over 20 years and I am not worried about this new study. I am not a man either, obviously, so I have no prostate.

I am still a believer in fish oil and am not going to stop it now.

Just my nickels worth.

pm

I have read the comments by a PhD in epidemiology and an MD with an additional PhD from MIT. Both say the methodology in this study is seriously flawed. There may be a slight increase in risk but other factors need to be considered.

This, the last sentence of the article, is the most important part of the whole.

They don't know what the combinations do , but our bodies do.

Much biochemical research was frowned upon back in the 70's, (I wish I had saved my old literature from college to provide references) when articles surfaced about it - Omega 6,9 - from Europe/ Germany, etc. - however thats the only place with requisite studies in the supplemental arena by practitioners before recommending their use by patients. Their research is far more intense compared to the U.S., and not stiffled by the A.M.A. or those other Medical 'powers that be' looking for any way to deny supplements usefulness in the public nutritional regimens.

As Mark relates, their studies, or many studies that make fast "news" - flashes have flaws.... publish the reports, show the proofs publicly, not just a CNN report with picked spot reports.... publish the reference to be publicly reviewed.

Current research here is looking for single nutrient usefulness , not combination nutrient usefulness - because to do so means the business world of the large Pharmaceutical companies can't "refine" it to make it "better" and patent that product, to charge the public more for the product, when its already available at a more reasonable price from other companies in combination form..... such as Puritan Pride, or any of those you all deal with.

The European and most importantly German pharmaceutical companies have been trying to gain control over the supplement industry for decades. They try to use this kind of research to promote the need for central control of supplements.