News RSS Feed


‘Proof’ – fish oils make you smart


THE world’s biggest experiment to see if food supplements can boost exam results has concluded that fish oil capsules do make a difference.

The results have been revealed two years after Durham County Council held a press conference at Belmont comprehensive school, near Durham City, to announce that 3,000 teenage pupils would be offered free fish oil capsules supplied by supplement company Equazen.

Effectively, the youngsters would become guinea pigs in the world’s largest attempt to see if supplements can improve a child’s academic performance.

Yesterday, in response to request from The Northern Echo, Durham County Council issued a statement making it clear that education officials believe that the omega-3 fish and evening primrose oil capsules improved exam room performances.

The local education authority’s (LEA) conclusion was last night attacked by Ben Goldacre, who recently published a book called Bad Science.

Mr Goldacre has always maintained that the fish oil experiment was a missed opportunity because the council failed to establish a control group of youngsters who were not given the capsules. Yesterday, he said the results were “meaningless” and amounted to “laughably incompetent science, in an experiment performed on thousands of Durham children”.

The LEA came to its conclusion after discovering a significant difference in GCSE exam results between students who took regular fish oil capsules, and youngsters of a similar background and academic ability who did not take the supplements.

The council’s education chiefs believe that, while the results of the study are not definitive, they could justify more clinically-based scientific trials to determine whether fish oil supplements boost educational attainment.

Dave Ford, head of achievement for Durham County Council’s Children and Young People’s Services, said: “We have always maintained that if the outcome was positive, it would then be for scientists to examine in more detail.

“The findings of our study suggest it may now be worth them following it up in more depth through proper clinical trials.”

Initially, just over 3,000 year 11 pupils began the study, taking the omega-3 tablets at school and at home.

By the time GCSE examinations came round last summer, 832 pupils had 80 per cent or greater compliance in terms of taking the supplements every day.

Mr Ford and his colleagues then sought to identify the same number of year 11 pupils who had not taken the supplement and match them to those who had, according to school, gender, prior attainment and social background.

The GCSE results of 629 “matched pairs” – fish oil takers and non-fish oil takers – were then analysed.

“To reach comparative levels of their attainment prior to the study, we used a nationally accepted system, which took into account the results for each pupil at key stages two and three,” said Mr Ford.

At both stages, the difference in predicted GCSE outcomes between the groups was on average less than three points. But when it came to GCSEs – results between those who had taken the supplement and those who had not – rose to 17.7 points.

In terms of GCSE grades, this is the difference between a student getting three C grade GCSEs and five D grades, and another getting five Cs and three Ds.

By stepping up to five good GCSE passes, the student has the opportunity to take A-levels and go on to university.

“If there had been no difference in attainment between the two groups, we would be tempted to dismiss the benefits of omega-3,” said Mr Ford.

“However there seem to be some very clear indications that pupils taking the supplement do significantly better.”

Mr Ford said the council made no claim that the results of its GCSE study could be attributed only to omega-3 supplementation.

“Other factors may be responsible for the difference in performance – for instance, the benefit may be a placebo effect, or it may be that those students who achieved 80 per cent compliance were better organised and had families who provided support at home and so might have done better anyway,” he added.

Mr Ford said the study has produced “some interesting and possibly exciting issues”

for further investigation that could be the basis for future scientific trials.

Mr Goldacre, who has a column in The Guardian, said: “They could easily have determined if fish oil capsules are beneficial in this ‘trial’ if they had performed it competently, which they chose not to, despite all offers of help and criticism at the time.”


Your Say YourNorth-East

McCruiskeen, Great Lumley says...
8:24pm Thu 25 Sep 08

So, £1m worth of fish oil capsules have been swallowed, Durham County Council has changed its story innumerable times and the only benefit is to the company who supplied the "free" capsules, who have got acres of free advertising and endorsement. It's hard to believe that this farrago was set up and implemented by the people who run education for our bairns in County Durham.

dpmsurf, Virginia Beach VA says...
10:33pm Thu 25 Sep 08

I can see the flaws in the sudy but why throw out the baby with the bath water. I think that the fact that an increase in tests scores were recorded they should do a more scientific study to prove the usefulness of fish oil. It is an increase in Omega 3 that has all the healthy effects. I think this was an excellent try but they need to do the same study but use the scientific methods. This way when the same reults happen they can't just laugh them off as they are trying to do now.
To Learn More About -> Omega 3 Sources

bwg, says...
11:19pm Thu 25 Sep 08

What were the "matched pairs" matched by? Just age and fish oil versus no fish oil? What about IQ matched, maternal education matched? What about other dietary habits? What about IQ and baseline scores? Compliance might be better in certain educational or family settings. Were positive findings based upon funding biases?
What about blind, double blind and placebo in al this. What was the methodology?

Statistical controls can be effective for some of those questions but if the methodology was intrinsically flawed then it's all bit wrong.

It seems like a cynical ploy to get people with slightly dim kids, or people with aspirations for their offspring to buy fish oils.

How's about kids are provided with a good balance between a healthy, all encompassing diet, a bit of kiddie junk and enough exercise. Not to mention reading (for fun) and learning (morals and ethics) by example......

nope...magic fish oil capsule smight just be the key.

*bangs head on desk*

graemek, says...
1:02am Fri 26 Sep 08

This debacle has, from start to finish, been a waste of public money on promotion for a nutritional supplement company.

Worse, due to the incompetence of the organisers, it has been an unjustifiable experiment on children that contradicts any imaginable code of ethics.

The council officials involved should be sacked and the 'trial' organisers should at the very least be banned from any future experiments on children.

ossian, Easthouses says...
2:24pm Fri 26 Sep 08

"THE world’s biggest experiment to see if food supplements can boost exam results has concluded that fish oil capsules do make a difference. "

It concluded this but failed to prove it. Sorry but as a scientist I am disappointed that snake oil pedlars are being promoted at the expense of Council tax payers and childrens time and good will.

Where are the thousands of childrens results? Where is the control group? How on earth did they produce the matched pairs?

The only thing that can be said with certainty is that this "trial" will have it's "results" used to peddle snake oil. It's a shame that their was an opportunity here to involve children in some proper research and it was missed.

I'd be interested to see a peer reviewed paper published on this. I doubt I ever will.

Scrotley, Bowburn says...
12:30am Sat 27 Sep 08

This isn't just an embarrassingly bad design, wasting time and money - it's a bit sinister that the company providing the supplement gets free advertising.

It's also a fallacy to say that this provides a basis for further study. It doesn't. Absolutely nothing has been proved, because the study was not randomised and double-blinded.

Seriously, Mr. Ford - Go and read Goldacre's book before you think about doing anything like this again.

Your sayYour North-East

comment Add your comment

Register for a FREE The Northern Echo account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.

Please register now or sign in below to continue.


Local Advertisers

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »