No results for omega 3 supplementation are valid unless the person or
animal is already overloaded with omega 6s to begin with.  Such studies
do not control for the possibility that Mead acid, an omega 9 PUFA that
human cells can make on their own, is optimal.  Such studies either
used a mixed fat control versus a fat free diet, or, as is more often
the case recently, a high omega 6 diet versus a mixture of omega 3s and
6s.  Omega 3s are ineffectual: blood doesn't clot, proper skin barriers
can't form, etc., so when you have a mixture in your body, some have
concluded, there is a "balance" that is optimal.  The problem is that
there are very unstable molecules that do great harm when lipid
peroxidation occurs, which it will unless your diet is very high in
antioxidants.  Nobody knoww what the correct amounts would be, so it is
really a kind of Russian roulette.  Note that even the omega 9 PUFA,
Mead acid, can be dangerous if it were eaten in large amounts in the
diet without enough antioxidants.  The point is to let your body make
it's own PUFA and don't eat more than trace amounts in the diet.  Fats
like coconut oil and butter have all kinds of beneficial effects, with
no problematic qualities.  The studies that show that "saturated fat"
is bad usually use lard, which is indeed not healthy, but it is because
it is about 60% unsaturated, and with no antioxidants, and thus causes
free radical damage and molecular dysfunction (inhibiting enzymes,
turning on the genetic machinery - NF-bK, etc.).