The Global Organization of EPA and DHA (GOED) has stated that the new meta-analysis published in JAMA questioning the heart health benefits of omega- 3s is flawed. “Our findings do not justify the use of omega-3 as a structured intervention in everyday clinical practice or guidelines supporting dietary omega-3 PUFA administration,” concluded researchers from the University Hospital of Ioannina in Greece. Adam Ismail, GOED executive director, disputed the findings: “Given the flawed design of this meta-analysis, bypassing the advice of the American Heart Association or the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans by stating that omega-3s are not cardioprotective, could be harmful to public health.” Duffy MacKay, ND, vice president, scientific and regulatory affairs for the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) added that many of the studies included in the meta-analysis were conducted on diseased individuals already undergoing treatment with one or more drugs (e.g., statins), which may mask the less potent and more long-term effects of omega-3 fats. “Along these lines, the researchers apparently did not examine within each individual study included in the meta-analysis whether individuals in the placebo group were sufficient or insufficient in their dietary intake omega-3 fats. Without that information, they could not have controlled for this variable.”
