Re: Dietary omega-3 polyunsaturated fattyacidspromote colon carcinoma metastasis

[Guest guest]

Well, your husband has a point, and that is why the Science Citation Index

was important to me, in evaluating the relevance of studies. However, a

study may be extrapolated upon without being directly repeated. And

sometimes repeated studies are damned with the same flaws as original

studies. The HeLac cell line comes to mind. There was a lot of respected,

but tainted research, associated with that cell line.

Sometimes scientists do not choose to test a particular study, regardless of

its validity. Studies must be funded and funding tends to be according to

what is " sexy " at the time.

I prefer to analyze the research myself, if the subject is important to me.

I am amazed to see a fair amount of what I consider trash, making it into

journals. Basing evaluations of exercise on memory may be one example of

questionable research methodology. Using small sample size or badly

designed statistical analysis are others.

And sometimes, important research is pointedly ignored. If your husband is

well-ensconced in research, he has no doubt also told you about how

important it is to know someone on a journal editorial board, etc, in order

to even get an audience for your paper, regardless of how good it is. The

more paradigm breaking your study is, the more difficult it may be. Most of

the physiologists with whom I worked publish on a regular basis in Nature

and Science, and I have seen the process in close detail.

I stayed away from margerine, based on my own analysis of research and the

basis of recommending it, right from the beginning. I am glad I did. I

went on the Mediterranean diet, based on Ornish's material, and it was not

good at all for me. My cholesterol went to 236. On a more " Zone " eating

plan, my cholesterol is in the 170's.

I will continue to analyze each study that I consider important to me, on a

case by case basis, regardless of age. And if I want to see if other

scientists consider it relevant, I will look to see who is citing it, and

what their research thrust is.

Best,

Kayce

From: Francesca Skelton <fskelton@...>

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:05:16 -0400

A basic rule of science is that an experiment (or study) is valid only if it

can be repeated or verified by other researchers. My husband, a respected

scientist and researcher in his field, has drilled this into me.

In fact, Einstein's theories have indeed been verified since he first

proposed them, by other scientists through their experiments.

Walford talked about this " show me more " when he mentioned the soy-dementia

(one only) study. He said that until he saw further evidence, he was going

to continue eating soy.

So show me more recent verification by others, (following this 8 year old

study) and perhaps I might change my mind. Until that happens, my previous

comments stand.

on 7/12/2006 9:27 PM, kayce cover at k_cover@... wrote:

Hi all,

Francesca,I don't agree that a study is meaningless due to its age, and I

don't understand why you chide people on the basis of the age of a study,

put perhaps I am missing something here. I would like to see some discussion

of the relevance of the age of a study, in scientific research.

My understanding is that sound research is still sound research, regardless

of when it is conducted. New research is based on older research, and the

relevance of a study is often evaluated in terms of how often, and for how

long, it is cited, not just by how new it is.

Many substances have therapeutic thresholds, or other characteristics, which

may be determined early in our history of using the substances, but don't

subsequently change. For example, before a drug can come to market, a

company conducts LD 50 tests. Unless the formulation for that drug is

changed, there is no reason to think that the LD 50 results will ever be out

of date.

In my involvement in research, some of the articles that are most cited are

" old " but still define the basis of the most current thinking. Einstein's

Theory of Relativity is " old " but not currently in danger of being obsolete.

On the other hand, as Kuhn describes in " The Structure of a

Scientific Revolution " , anomolies lying at the edges, or outside, a current

paradigm, are often ignored by those invested in that paradigm. These

anomolies nontheless,require consideration, and are often at the base of a

newly evolving paradigm. So, any study that disagrees with a paradigm may

be ignored, regardless of relevance or merit. Candace Pert talks about this

issue in the field of cell receptor biology, and receptor based therapies

versus often toxic pharmaceutical therapies.

Any many, if not all, substances can be both beneficial and harmful, and a

tendancy for a substance to increase metastases of colon cancer does not

necessarily negate its other therapeutic properties. Both properties may be

simultaneously valid. For example, Vitamin C has been shown to be both a

substance that boosts immune response, and a substance that speeds the

growth of certain cancers.

CRON'ing is itself at the edge of the current paradigm, so I think it

behooves us to be cognizant of the limitations of science as an institution,

as well as of its benefits.

Best,

Kayce

From: Francesca Skelton <fskelton@...>

Reply-

< >

Subject: Re: [ ] Dietary omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty

acidspromote colon carcinoma metastasis

Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:37:01 -0400

The age of this article is 1998 or an eternity in terms of nutritional

science. There have been dozens of studies since then promoting the health

benefits of fish and fish oil. Now if you were to come up with a RECENT

study such as this, it might be worth taking note of, but the old age of

this one renders it almost meaningless......

on 7/8/2006 3:49 PM, bill4cr at bill4cr@... wrote:

I haven't seen this association before so I was taken aback by this!

" Rats were kept on either a low-fat diet or on a fish oil (omega-3

PUFAs) or safflower oil (omega-6 PUFAs) diet for 3 weeks before the

administration of colon ......(snippped)

Cancer Res. 1998 Aug 1;58(15):3312-9. Related Articles, Links

_________________________________________________________________

Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®

Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963