Does it seem like every time you turn around there’s another report telling you to eat fish? But the next time you turn around you see a story about mercury or lead contamination? Scientists at the University of Utah have conducted the largest study yet on the effects of eating fish. The results of their study were published today in the Nova Scotia Journal of Medicine.

The researchers interviewed twenty thousand North Americans about their eating habits,and then examined their health records after four, eight and twelve years.
Some of the striking results: Compared to those who report eating no fish, those who report eating the most (at least five servings a week) cut their risk of death by heart attack by 50%. The authors also compared the effects of eating fish, especially fatty fish like Salmon that contain the most Omega-3 fatty acids, to those who ate the plant-based
Omega-3 fats found, for instance, in flax seed. The researchers conclude that there was no statistically significant difference in death rates between those who ate plant based Omega-3s and the general population.
The researchers concluded that eating fish had no significant effect on, for instance, prostate cancer, despite some promising results in earlier, smaller studies. But the effect on heart disease was enough for them to recommend that everyone eat fish at least twice a week. But what about the fears of contaminants? “It probably makes sense to not always eat the same kind of fish,” says Dr Milly Onaire of U Utah. “But even if you do, the health
benefits would far outweigh the theoretical risks posed by contaminants in the fish you’ll
find in the supermarket.”

Is the study described a retrospective, prospective, or randomized experimental design study? How do you know?

Question

Does it seem like every time you turn around there’s another report telling you to eat fish? But the next time you turn around you see a story about mercury or lead contamination? Scientists at the University of Utah have conducted the largest study yet on the effects of eating fish. The results of their study were published today in the Nova Scotia Journal of Medicine.

The researchers interviewed twenty thousand North Americans about their eating habits,and then examined their health records after four, eight and twelve years.
Some of the striking results: Compared to those who report eating no fish, those who report eating the most (at least five servings a week) cut their risk of death by heart attack by 50%. The authors also compared the effects of eating fish, especially fatty fish like Salmon that contain the most Omega-3 fatty acids, to those who ate the plant-based
Omega-3 fats found, for instance, in flax seed. The researchers conclude that there was no statistically significant difference in death rates between those who ate plant based Omega-3s and the general population. 
The researchers concluded that eating fish had no significant effect on, for instance, prostate cancer, despite some promising results in earlier, smaller studies. But the effect on heart disease was enough for them to recommend that everyone eat fish at least twice a week. But what about the fears of contaminants? “It probably makes sense to not always eat the same kind of fish,” says Dr Milly Onaire of U Utah. “But even if you do, the health
benefits would far outweigh the theoretical risks posed by contaminants in the fish you’ll
find in the supermarket.”

Is the study described a retrospective, prospective, or randomized experimental design study? How do you know?

rEsTiNpEaCe · Answer

@Shadow