Fish consumption and PCa Mortality. A meta-analysis.

[pca2004]

New study below. [1]

"In total, 25 prospective cohort studies, recruiting 1,216,474 men, were included in the systematic review, and 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. During the follow-up periods, ranging from 6 to 33 years, a total of 44,722 cases of prostate cancer were recorded."

" ... the summary RR {relative risk} was 0.55 ... for prostate cancer mortality and 0.84 ... for prostate cancer progression, indicating an inverse association between fish intake and prostate cancer mortality."

"Also, in the dose-response analyzes, each 20 gram/day increase in total fish intake was associated with a 12% lower risk of prostate cancer mortality.

"Our findings support the protective association between total fish intake and the risk of prostate cancer mortality."

***

The meta-analysis is about fish intake rather than pescetarianism (no meat - sometimes described as "vegetarian + fish"), which may be an excellent strategy for PCa survival. I'll go out on a limb & predict that a Mediterranean pescetarian diet (40% fat) would be the best bet for cardiovascular & PCa survival. imo

-Patrick

[1] pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/375...

[Magnus1964]

As a pecatarian I welcome this report.

Magnus

[Peppertree602]

Perfect!!! My kind of diet

[MateoBeach]

So about 175 grams fish per day may take PC cancer mortality to zero. Go fish! 😆 (joking)

[pca2004 in reply to MateoBeach]

Hi Paul,

I always wonder how many increases the data supports before that risk reduction rule breaks down. At least three, I suppose. (Similarly, when a constant benefit has been observed "per standard deviation".)

20 grams of fish is only 0.7 ounces.

But we should not exceed the protein needs of our bodies. In fact, limiting intake of pre-formed protein may lower IGF-I levels.

-Patrick

[Nusch in reply to pca2004]

I’m vegan since 6 years and just recently added fish to replace my too many supplements by good fish. I agree with IGF-1 and would avoid all dairy and of course other meet.

[treedown]

Having just finished some delicious wild Alaskan Sockeye this is a welcomed read. Guess I'll get more next weekend.

[Cooolone]

Well, if I recall correctly, the Eskimo's were very healthy, until a variety of diseases appeared and with investigation found it was the industrial rainwater bringing Mercury poisoning via their heavy fish diet to be a major contributing factor.

Okinawan's who enjoy the highest population density of centurians, also have a high ration fish diet, including vegetables...

Good stuff, thanks for posting!

[pca2004 in reply to Cooolone]

The advice generally given is to eat fish that are low down in the food chain. But I can't eat sardines every day.

The following link has a table of 66 fish, showing median/mean mercury levels:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercu...

One can also search for PCB data.

-Patrick

[cigafred]

I too am betting on a pescatorian diet with Mediterranean characteristics.

[Kuanyin]

Hi Patrick,

A few comments re fish. The other night on the PBS nightly news, there was a segment that covered the latest developments on that gift that keeps on giving, the radioactive water from the Japanese nuclear reactors at Fukushima. The Japanese are preparing to increase the water dumped from the holding tanks built to contain the contaminated water—it seems that the Japanese have run out of land to build additional tanks. I suspect that we on the West coast have had our diets enhanced with these radioactive wastes in addition to the so-called “forever chemicals,” PFAS found in our drinking water. I used to rage against fish farming because of the many reports on the disgusting way the fish are raised, a la Costco chickens. However, for these past few years I won't eat wild fish, except possibly, those caught around Norway or maybe Portugal (I love their sardines). Although we are told how great “wild caught” Alaskan salmon is, I am very suspicious about the safety of these animals. Supposedly, the fish farmers have cleaned up their act. If this is true, at least there is a possibility of some kind of quality control vs the fish coming across the Pacific to us from Fukushima.

[Magnus1964]

Another 50 years and whole planet will be uninhabitable. It will only take another 100,000 years before we can start over.

[Sunlight12 in reply to Magnus1964]

I can't help but think that if we made the problem, we should be able to undo the problem; it's just a matter of figuring out *how*. ...And of getting those who have the resources to focus on the *how*! (instead of just dumping waste water and shrugging🙄)

-Sun

[Nusch in reply to Magnus1964]

One of my sons is just finishing his PhD in technical physics and he’s much more optimistic than you and me. He feeds me with links about innovations and I start trusting him that we‘ll manage the turn around.

[Sunlight12 in reply to Nusch]

Oh how cool, Nusch!! Is there anywhere you or he recommends to read about some of them? I like to read positive things; it helps balance out the negativity!

-Sun

[Nusch in reply to Sunlight12]

‘We’re changing the clouds.’ An unintended test of geoengineering is fueling record ocean warmth | Science | AAAS

Read this e.g.

[cujoe]

Hi, Patrick,

In the spirit our resident HU humorist, j-o-h-n, I can only add that:

"This topic seems more than a bit fishy to me . . . and maybe, even somewhat radioactive."

Fall approaches and you are in very good location to appreciate it. Stay S&W while you do.

Ciao, Kaptin K9