Benjamin Sailas, Prakasan Priji, Sreedharan Sajith, Wright Andre-Denis G, Spener Friedrich
Biotechnology Division, Department of Botany, Enzyme Technology Laboratory, University of Calicut, Kerala, 673 635 India.
School of Animal and Comparative Biomedical Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA.
Nutr Metab (Lond). 2015 Feb 3;12:4. doi: 10.1186/1743-7075-12-4. eCollection 2015.
This comprehensive review critically evaluates whether supposed health benefits propounded upon human consumption of conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs) are clinically proven or not. With a general introduction on the chemistry of CLA, major clinical evidences pertaining to intervention strategies, body composition, cardio-vascular health, immunity, asthma, cancer and diabetes are evaluated. Supposed adverse effects such as oxidative stress, insulin resistance, irritation of intestinal tract and milk fat depression are also examined. It seems that no consistent result was observed even in similar studies conducted at different laboratories, this may be due to variations in age, gender, racial and geographical disparities, coupled with type and dose of CLA supplemented. Thus, supposed promising results reported in mechanistic and pre-clinical studies cannot be extrapolated with humans, mainly due to the lack of inconsistency in analyses, prolonged intervention studies, follow-up studies and international co-ordination of concerted studies. Briefly, clinical evidences accumulated thus far show that CLA is not eliciting significantly promising and consistent health effects so as to uphold it as neither a functional nor a medical food.
本综述批判性地评估了人类食用共轭亚油酸(CLA)所宣称的健康益处是否得到临床验证。在对CLA的化学性质进行总体介绍后,评估了与干预策略、身体成分、心血管健康、免疫力、哮喘、癌症和糖尿病相关的主要临床证据。还研究了CLA可能产生的不良影响,如氧化应激、胰岛素抵抗、肠道刺激和乳脂降低。即使在不同实验室进行的类似研究中,似乎也没有观察到一致的结果,这可能是由于年龄、性别、种族和地理差异,以及所补充CLA的类型和剂量不同所致。因此,在机制研究和临床前研究中报告的看似有前景的结果不能外推至人类,主要原因是分析缺乏一致性、干预研究时间过长、随访研究以及协同研究的国际协调不足。简而言之,迄今为止积累的临床证据表明,CLA并未产生显著有前景且一致的健康效果,因此既不能将其视为功能性食品,也不能视为医用食品。