Why Fish Oil has been consistently discredited By Medical Journals

heart diseaseThe effectiveness and worth of fish oil supplements have been consistently discredited by the major medical journals since 2007.  Physician recommendations often lag behind the most current research.

As reported in the New England Journal of Medicine (NJM), in Italy an extensive, well-done study showed that fish oil was completely ineffective in preventing heart disease for a very large group of high-risk patients. Subsequently, Dr. Eric Topol, a renowned cardiologist at Scripps Health (La Jolla, California) and editor-in-chief of Medscape, and Medscape’s premier publication for cardiologists, theheart.org—recommended discontinuing all fish oil supplementation for the prevention of heart disease. It doesn’t get any more mainstream than Dr. Topol, it was then accepted that the designation of advocate for a rational, now mainstream approach for combating heart disease.

“Inconvenient” facts or truths should not be concealed by science as though they did not exist. Rather, all progress comes from making all observations known and using the scientific method to account for them.

The recommended amounts of fish oil are harmful to many and they are not effective to any disease especially heart disease and cancer. In the desperation of both physicians and patients to counter America’s ever-increasing health issues, regardless of the lack of science to justify the supposed positive effects of such doses, a huge industry was created. However, physicians are not aware of these important, often underpublicized journal articles. And it is better for physicians to understand their significance and do what is best for their patients. An advocate of skeptical inquiry and the scientific method, the eminent astrophysicist/cosmologist, Dr. Carl Sagan, warns about eager blind acceptance without personal understanding.


Mike Maunu – Founder