4.6 Article

Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation for 8 Weeks Does Not Affect Body Composition, Lipid Profile, or Safety Biomarkers in Overweight, Hyperlipidemic Men

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 141, 期 7, 页码 1286-1291

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/jn.110.135087

关键词

-

资金

  1. Advanced Foods and Materials Network, Canada
  2. Fonds de la recherche en sante du Quebec, Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The usefulness of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) as a nutraceutical remains ambiguous. Our objective was, therefore, to investigate the effect of CLA on body composition, blood lipids, and safety biomarkers in overweight, hyperlipidemic men. A double-blinded, 3-phase crossover trial was conducted in overweight (BMI >= 25 kg/m(2)), borderline hypercholesterolemic [LDL-cholesterol (C) >= 2.5 mmol/L] men aged 18-60 y. During three 8-wk phases, each separated by a 4-wk washout period, 27 participants consumed under supervision in random order 3.5 g/d of safflower oil (control), a 50:50 mixture of trans 10, cis 12 and cis 9, trans 11 (c9, t11) CLA:Clarinol G-80, and c9, t11 isomer:c9, t11 CLA. At baseline and endpoint of each phase, body weight, body fat mass, and lean body mass were measured by DXA. Blood lipid profiles and safety biomarkers, including insulin sensitivity, blood concentrations of adiponectin, and inflammatory (high sensitive-C-reactive protein, TNF alpha, and IL-6) and oxidative (oxidized-LDL) molecules, were measured. The effect of CLA consumption on fatty acid oxidation was also assessed. Compared with the control treatment, the CLA treatments did not affect changes in body weight, body composition, or blood lipids. In addition, CLA did not affect the beta-oxidation rate of fatty acids or induce significant alterations in the safety markers tested. In conclusion, although no detrimental effects were caused by supplementation, these results do not confirm a role for CLA in either body weight or blood lipid regulation in humans. J. Nutr. 141: 1286-1291, 2011.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据