« Fast Food Nation | Main | Understatement »
September 09, 2006
Omega 3
George Monbiot recently:
The more it is tested, the more compelling the hypothesis becomes.
Dyslexia, ADHD, dyspraxia and other neurological problems seem to be
associated with a deficiency of Omega 3 fatty acids, especially in the
womb. The evidence of a link with depression, chronic fatigue syndrome
and dementia is less clear, but still suggestive. None of these
conditions is caused exclusively by a lack of these chemicals, or can
be entirely remedied by their application, but it's becoming pretty
obvious that some of our most persistent modern diseases are, at least
in part, diseases of deficiency.
Ben Goldacre today:
Fish oil is clearly a matter of huge national importance. Channel 4 and
ITV (and the Daily Mail, and the BBC) all report on a plan by education
officials in County Durham to give £1m worth of omega-3 fish oils to
5,000 children as they approach their GCSEs, and see how it improves
performance.Contrary to what the pill pedlars would tell you, the
evidence as it stands is incredibly thin. There is a handful of small
trials published in proper journals, at last count three positive, two
negative and none in "normal" mainstream children. All these "studies"
you keep hearing about in the media are little more than cheap promos
for the pill pushers, with no control group, and crippled by inadequate
research methods.
Hhhm. D’ye think these Grauniad types ever actually talk to each other? Goldacre again, on the latest "trial" in Durham.
In four solid years of moron baiting, this is definitely the most surreal defence I've come across.
September 9, 2006 in Health Care | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d834e5144569e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Omega 3:
Comments
Unaccustomed as I am to "dissing" Guardian writers, don't these guys ever ponder how humanity has survived this far?
The sooner they dump the medical model as a "catch-all" and face up to the human condition the sooner they can deal with depression etc and "get a life".
As for them talking to each other... No one serious is going to talk to anyone who writes "There is a handful of small trials published in proper journals," It's lousy English and "published in proper journals" is unauthorative.
I took the trouble to check Ben Goldacre's site. The Durham trial is not Bad Science, it's non-science. They don't consider the variables, leave alone contemplate controlling them.
And now I notice at the bottom of his "comments" column "You must bee (sic) logged in.
Gawd gimmee strength!!!
Posted by: sam_m'wooster | Sep 9, 2006 9:23:16 PM
I have commented at:
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/2006%20September.htm#wooster
But I would like to know: what is wrong with the English?
Posted by: John Brignell | Sep 10, 2006 9:41:31 AM
I am not an expert on these things, but it is entirely possible for a deficiency of some vitamin or other to be associated with all sorts of problems, but for supplements to be useless; this is the case with vitamin C in most British people because they get enough of it in their regular diet. So it doesn't seem to me that Goldacre and Monbiot are necessarily talking about the same thing there.
Posted by: dsquared | Sep 10, 2006 11:41:38 AM
