Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation does not appear to reduce the risk of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, a meta-analysis showed.

In pooled results from 20 randomized trials including more than 68,000 patients, supplementation did not reduce the risks of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, sudden death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke, according to Moses Elisaf, MD, PhD, of the University Hospital of Ioannina in Greece, and colleagues.

>> Full Article Here

The meta-study is not very convincing for a number of reasons.

What confidence can we have that there was not a high emphasis on the usual confonders plauging those at risk of CV illness. That is reduce sat fats, replace with all poly's. Increase "healthy whole-grains".

In particular how much of the Omega-3 was practically useless plant-based?
What was the O6/O3 balance in their diets?

What was their O6/O3 tissue balance at Start and End and were the various supplementation regimes sufficient to change it?
(excess tissue O6 cancels out O3, leading to a functional O3 deficiency even where absolute O3 amounts appear sufficient.)

Was there any correlation between O6/O3 tissue ratio and cv events (as others have found).

In short the failure to prove a theory in an experiment does not necessarily disprove the theory. It may just show up some poor experiments.

I read somewhere that poly unsaturated fats oxidize FASTER than saturated fats, may even FASTER than cholesterol.

Saturated fats appear to oxidize the slowest, or not oxidize.

Little by little we are being advised to eat every kind of fat except saturated..... whereas if we want to stop pouring oxidized fats and cholesterol into our artery walls, we should improve our redox status (lower carbs, eat antioxidant rich foods) and prefer fats that resist oxidation, like saturated fats.

The "recommended fats" tour (from trans (cook with crisco, not butter!), to vegetable oils, to pufas) is making me paranoid. Maybe there is some evil lobby out there, and its out to get us.

I also agree with the previous post. Most of the pufa stuff i've read confounds 'increased pufa" with increased fat which = decreased carbs. If an article doesn't simultaneously compare all three macronutrients, I tend to disregard it. _tfup