This is an example of drawing faulty conclusions from a study that was not properly designed to reach a meaningful conclusion. The information was drawn from a retrospective cohort design that was initially intended to study something completely different. A proper study design would have been to observe two identical groups of men. These men would need to be matched by age, eating habits, exercise habits, smoking and drinking habits and family history of no prostate cancer. Once the groups were matched, one group would be instructed to take fish oil supplements and the other to not take these supplements. The groups would then be followed for at least ten years in order to determine whether there was a significant difference between the groups in the incidence of prostate cancer. This was not done.
A simpler way to determine whether there is a risk in having a higher level of omega-3s is to look at large populations. For example Japanese men until recently have lived in fish loving culture and have the highest levels of EPA and DHA. They also have some of the lowest rates of prostate cancer of any culture studied.
The famous American Will Rogers once said "Believe nothing that you read and only half of what you see." This study is a perfect example. I will continue taking my fish oil supplements daily.