Omega 3, cholesterol, good nutrition, choleserol reducing,
Omega 3's - Better than Cholesterol Drugs?
09/04/08 18:08
Omega 3's - Better than Cholesterol Drugs?
The journal Lancet published a study on Sunday showing omega-3 fatty acid supplements (from fish oil) not only helps chronic heart failure patients avoid future heart failure, but the fish oil actually performed slightly better than Crestor, a popular cholesterol-reducing prescription drug.
For More Info see Wall Street Journal- Supplements of Fish Oil Outdo Drug in Heart Study.
Note that the lead sentence of the story was, “Fish-oil supplements may work slightly better than a popular cholesterol-reducing drug to help patients with chronic heart failure, according to new research”, going on to note that “the researchers concluded that fish oil is slightly more effective than the drug because the oil performed better against a placebo than did Crestor”, and quoting the past president of the American Heart Association as saying "It's a small benefit, but we should always be emphasizing to patients what they can do in terms of diet that might help".
Is it me or does he sound like he's minimizing the benefit of nutrition over drugs because it is only “slightly” better? I understand that journalistically they are merely reporting his opinion, but the spin is something the pharmaceutical industry certainly appreciates in the light of this and other stories about expensive drugs causing more harm than good (eg Vytorin).
The journal Lancet published a study on Sunday showing omega-3 fatty acid supplements (from fish oil) not only helps chronic heart failure patients avoid future heart failure, but the fish oil actually performed slightly better than Crestor, a popular cholesterol-reducing prescription drug.
For More Info see Wall Street Journal- Supplements of Fish Oil Outdo Drug in Heart Study.
Note that the lead sentence of the story was, “Fish-oil supplements may work slightly better than a popular cholesterol-reducing drug to help patients with chronic heart failure, according to new research”, going on to note that “the researchers concluded that fish oil is slightly more effective than the drug because the oil performed better against a placebo than did Crestor”, and quoting the past president of the American Heart Association as saying "It's a small benefit, but we should always be emphasizing to patients what they can do in terms of diet that might help".
Is it me or does he sound like he's minimizing the benefit of nutrition over drugs because it is only “slightly” better? I understand that journalistically they are merely reporting his opinion, but the spin is something the pharmaceutical industry certainly appreciates in the light of this and other stories about expensive drugs causing more harm than good (eg Vytorin).