Fish-rich diet can slow progression of multiple sclerosis, study suggests
Feb. 25 (UPI) -- A diet rich in fish may help slow down the progression of the incurable, often disabling autoimmune disease of multiple sclerosis, according to new, long-term Swedish study published Tuesday.
While several past studies have shown a powerful relationship between the omega-3 fatty acids found in oily fish, such as salmon and cod, and the prevention of MS, the new effort appears to also show that fish consumption can slow down the progression or worsening of the disease over lengthy periods of time.
New evidence also exists that lean, as well as oily fish, can provide long-term benefits for battling MS, leading researchers to surmise that other ingredients present in all fish -- perhaps the abundant amino acid taurine -- could provide new avenues for MS treatment.
The new study appeared Tuesday in the Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. One of its lead authors, Dr. Anna Hedstrom of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, said the results are significant because they are among the first to show that a diet rich in fish can do more than just prevent the onset of the disease, which affects about 1 million U.S. residents.
"We found that patients who increased their fish consumption post-diagnosis also experienced a lower risk of disability progression," Hedstrom told UPI in an email. "This suggests that dietary modifications -- even after MS diagnosis -- may still influence disease course, which is highly relevant for patients looking for lifestyle-based strategies to complement medical treatment."
The longitudinal study, which tracked more than 2,700 MS patients over a period of 15 years across Sweden, provides "robust" evidence that higher total fish consumption is associated with a reduced risk of MS disability worsening, including progression from a "3" rating on a widely used disability status scale to a "4."
Moreover, the results yielded another finding that could trigger a push into new treatment avenues for MS, a disease in which the body's immune system attacks the "myelin sheath" fatty layer surrounding nerves. Results showing lean fish consumption also producing long-term benefits indicates other micronutrients rather than just omega-3 acids could be at play.
Hedstrom one such ingredient could be taurine, an abundant amino acid found in natural dietary sources such as eggs, milk, seafood and meat. It is thought to play a central role as a neurotransmitter and a protector of the nervous system.
"The fact that both lean and oily fish were associated with a reduced risk of disability progression suggests that multiple nutrients in fish may contribute to their beneficial effects," she said.
"While omega-3 fatty acids in oily fish are well known for their anti-inflammatory properties, the similar findings for lean fish consumption suggest that other bioactive compounds, such as taurine, may also play a role."
Taurine, she added, "is an interesting candidate for further exploration as a potential modulator of neuroinflammation in MS and other autoimmune diseases."
Many MS sufferers already take omega-3 supplements for their anti-inflammatory and neurological health benefits.
The National Multiple Sclerosis Society has cited earlier research associating fish consumption with lower risks of developing MS, including one in study in which participants with a high fish intake had a 45% reduced risk of having diagnoses of MS or a related condition, Clinically Isolated Syndrome, when compared with the ones with a low fish intake.
Kathy Zackowski, the MS Society's associate vice president for research, told UPI that while the apparent link between fish consumption and controlling the disease is a promising one, sufferers shouldn't assume any one food alone will affect their condition.
"It's easy to get the message 'eat fish' when you have MS, but we really need to understand what features in the fish are actually contributing to fighting MS -- is it the omega-3 fatty acids? Is it other things that are in certain kinds of fish? Is it the way the fish are grown that make a difference? Do we need a certain volume to get the benefits?
"No one knows. I think these are questions that we haven't even gotten to yet. There are still many holes in what we understand."
Zackowski said it's crucial for MS sufferers who are desperately seeking answers for their debilitating plights to understand that while eating fish may be beneficial, it's just one aspect of a diet that requires "a wide variety of nutrients for a healthy life."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
UCLA study: COVID vaccinations may lessen severe kidney damage
June 13 (UPI) -- A new study from UCLA Health suggests COVID vaccines may protect patients from severe kidney damage. The study found hospitalized COVID patients were less likely to have severe kidney damage if they were vaccinated. UCLA Health researchers found 16% of unvaccinated patients were more likely to need a constant dialysis therapy, compared with 11% of vaccinated patients. The study data came from roughly 3,500 patients admitted to hospitals between March 2020 and March 2022. Study lead author and UCLA nephrology professor Dr. Niloofar Nobakht said the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) form of dialysis is vital for intensive care patients with damaged kidneys. The goal of the study was to asses the severity of kidney injury in COVID patients needing CRRT while hospitalized. According to University of Pennsylvania biostatistics professor Yong Chen, serious kidney complications are typically associated with severe COVID cases. Study participants had received at least two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccines or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson Janssen vaccine. Yale University Dr. F. Perry Wilson said the main reason vaccinated people have lower kidney injury rates is the vaccines tend to lessen the chances of severe illness. He said the vaccines don't act directly on the kidneys but instead reduce overall illness severity, which in turn helps to prevent complications such as multi-organ failure.


UPI
9 hours ago
- UPI
UCLA study: COVID vaccinations may lessen severe kidney damage
A new study from UCLA Health suggests COVID vaccines (pictured, 2022) may protect patients from severe kidney damage. The study found hospitalized COVID patients were less like to have severe kidney damage if they were vaccinated. File Photo by Debbie Hill/UPI | License Photo June 13 (UPI) -- A new study from UCLA Health suggests COVID vaccines may protect patients from severe kidney damage. The study found hospitalized COVID patients were less likely to have severe kidney damage if they were vaccinated. UCLA Health researchers found 16% of unvaccinated patients were more likely to need a constant dialysis therapy, compared with 11% of vaccinated patients. The study data came from roughly 3,500 patients admitted to hospitals between March 2020 and March 2022. Study lead author and UCLA nephrology professor Dr. Niloofar Nobakht said the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) form of dialysis is vital for intensive care patients with damaged kidneys. The goal of the study was to asses the severity of kidney injury in COVID patients needing CRRT while hospitalized. According to University of Pennsylvania biostatistics professor Yong Chen, serious kidney complications are typically associated with severe COVID cases. Study participants had received at least two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccines or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson Janssen vaccine. Yale University Dr. F. Perry Wilson said the main reason vaccinated people have lower kidney injury rates is the vaccines tend to lessen the chances of severe illness. He said the vaccines don't act directly on the kidneys but instead reduce overall illness severity, which in turn helps to prevent complications such as multi-organ failure.

Boston Globe
13 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Anti-vaxxer or ‘highly capable'? Ex-Harvard Medical School expert tapped by RFK Jr. for vaccine panel defies easy categories
Yet the Swedish-born scientist's views on vaccines are complex, and the rush to categorize him underscores the intense polarization of public science that accelerated during the pandemic and has continued unabated, some in the scientific community argue. His appointment came two days after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Advertisement Critics of Kennedy's move pointed out the former members had undergone a lengthy vetting process that ensured they had the right expertise and no conflicts of interest. Advertisement '[Kulldorff] is a serious and highly capable vaccine scientist who was unjustly put forth as part of a bad tribe of people who wanted to hurt the health of the nation, when all he was doing was trying to put forth a better plan for managing the country's response to the pandemic,' said Dr. Jeffrey Flier, an endocrinologist and former dean of Harvard Medical School. 'The opposition to contrarian views was pathological and ultimately detrimental to public health.' Kulldorff, who works as an infectious-disease and vaccine consultant in Connecticut, is best known as the co-author of the But, because it was published at the height of the pandemic in October 2020, many public health officials excoriated the declaration, saying lifting lockdowns that early would have caused many more deaths and hospitalizations and overwhelmed the health care system. Kulldorff is among other skeptics of lockdown and vaccine measures who were once vilified but have now gained new influence in the Trump administration. Advertisement 'It is unfortunate if each administration is trying to promote its preferred views, while vaccine science does have a lot of strong evidence and it should not be politicized,' said Kulldorff on Thursday declined to comment on his appointment to the CDC panel or discuss his views on vaccines. But in a January interview with the Globe, Kulldorff said the Great Barrington Declaration was borne out of frustration. In the fall of 2020, Kulldorff said he began communicating with several other scientists who were dismayed by the 'one-sided nature' of the public policy discussion over the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Among them was The trio ultimately agreed to meet for three days in Great Barrington, a town nestled in the Berkshire Mountains of Western Massachusetts. Between walks in the woods, they crafted a succinct statement opposing the lockdowns, noting that there was no scientific consensus for school closures and other stringent measures. They argued for a more targeted approach focused on protecting those most vulnerable, particularly the elderly, while life should resume as normal for everyone else. 'It's a basic principle of public health to protect those most vulnerable,' Kulldorff said in the January interview. 'Instead, [lockdown measures] protected the laptop class while exposing the working class.' Advertisement Almost immediately after its publication online, the declaration prompted a visceral backlash in the scientific community and among members of the Biden administration. Kulldorff said he received anonymous death threats via email and accusations that he supported 'mass murder,' he recalled. Others alleged that he was part of a right-wing conspiracy financed by the the oil billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch, he said. Facebook deleted a page set up by the scientists, and Kulldorff's account on Twitter, now X, was suspended. It later emerged that two of the nation's top federal health officials — National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Francis Collins, the former head of the National Institutes of Health — worked behind the scenes However, Kulldorff has repeatedly stressed that he is a supporter of vaccines and has called them 'one of the most significant health inventions in history.' At the same time, Kulldorff said he opposed the vaccine mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic in part because, in his view, people who had already been infected with the virus did not need them; and vaccination efforts should have been focused on the elderly, who were dying at far greater rates. 'Vaccines are a vital medical invention, allowing people to obtain immunity without the risk that comes from getting sick,' Kulldorff Advertisement Kulldorff was dismissed from his hospital, Mass General Brigham, and from Harvard Medical School, over the hospital's requirement for staff to be vaccinated against Covid-19. Kulldorff has said he declined to get the COVID shot because he had already been infected with the virus, which gave him immunity; and he didn't consider it ethical to get the vaccine while others needed it more. Kulldorff also said he has an immune deficiency that made him especially vulnerable to complications from vaccines. 'I am very much in favor of vaccines, but I was against the vaccine mandates for a few reasons,' Kulldorff said in the January interview . 'If you already had COVID, there is no need for the vaccine. It gives you natural immunity. It's better for others to take it.' Chris Serres can be reached at