QUICKLINKS AND VIEW OPITONS
Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) changes fat burning during sleep—You’ve got to be kidding me!
Friday, September 14, 2007 9:21 am Email this article
People given a supplement of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) burned slightly more fat and less protein during sleep than people given a supplement of safflower oil according to a study from researchers at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Fat Burned During Sleep
CLA burns an extra 4 grams of fat during sleep
People given 3.2 grams (3200 mg) of CLA per day burned 4 grams more fat while sleeping than they did at the beginning of the study, while the group given safflower oil burned 7 grams less fat than they did at the start of the study.
Protein Burned During Sleep
CLA burns 3% less protein during sleep
Those given CLA burned 3 percent less protein for energy during sleep compared to no change in the safflower group.
No Change in Calories Burned During Sleep
CLA did not change the number of calories burned during sleep
They also found that there was no change in the amount of calories burned during sleep in those given CLA, but those given safflower oil burned 43 fewer calories.
No Difference in Body Weight
CLA did not affect body weight
But was there any difference in body weight?
I don’t know for sure because I don’t have copy of the study yet, but I assume not because the summary of the study does not mention anything about body weight and I’m sure if there was a difference, they would have mentioned it.
Conclusion: CLA increases fat burning and calorie burning during sleep? This is only half true.
The authors of the study concluded that, “Mixed isomer CLA supplementation, but not placebo, positively altered fat oxidation and energy expenditure during sleep.”
Wait a minute. That’s not what the study showed.
The study did not show that CLA increased calories burned. Instead it showed that safflower oil decreased calories burned.
Their conclusion is not correct.
Comments: Don’t let somebody sell you CLA based on these results
I hate these types of studies because nutritional companies will take the results of this study and use it to sell CLA for weight loss even though the results do not show any weight loss.
The CLA supplement was 4 grams (4000 mg) of CLA of which 78 percent or 3.2 grams (3200 mg) was active.
It contained a mixture of:
- 39.2% cis-9,trans-11
- 38.5% trans-10,cis-12
Close R, Schoeller D, Watras AC, Nora EH. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation alters the 6-mo change in fat oxidation during sleep. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Sep, 86(3):797-804.
AUTHOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
Departments of Nutritional Sciences and Internal Medicine
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Articles on the same subject can be found here:
On Mar 30, 2008 at 10:56 pm Kara wrote:
. . . . .
European studies claim CLA does promote body fat loss. In all honesty I have more faith in European studies than what comes out from here because the European ones are seldom commercially motivated. Studies in this country are almost always financed by some investor or pharmaceutical company. How do we know that this study is not aimed at sidetracking people to another product being manufactured for the same purpose instead of CLA?
On Mar 31, 2008 at 7:50 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
I agree that there is a lot of biased research out there because of who pays for the study.
But I think it happens in Europe just as much as it happens in the US.
It depends who did the study in Europe on CLA.
I've seen at least one study on CLA out of Europe -- I think it was Denmark -- done maybe 10 years ago that I believe was bogus.
They claimed that people lost a bunch of weight, but I don't believe it. Research done here on humans have found very little weight loss.
If you have the reference, I'll see if I can get a copy of the study and review it.
Other studies on CLA can be found here:
I'm not impressed with any of them.
On Mar 31, 2008 at 9:39 am Kara wrote:
. . . . .
Very few studies in Europe are biased, because they have socialized medicine and most studies are conducted with government grants and different regulations than here. Medications are not sold on the profit basis as in the U.S. but are very cheap under the socialized medicine scheme meaning profit margins for manufacturers are generally low. Cosmetic medical products are more commerically based with higher profits as they are not covered under socialized medicine (free of cost).
I recenly read an article where Europe was clamping down on fake pharmaceutical reports. You'd be surprised how many popular brands actually were little else but sugar pills when the true facts came out!
The medical industry in Europe is a completely different deal than the U.S.
Perhaps only U.K. differ in this and is more commercialized than other European nations.
On Mar 31, 2008 at 9:45 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
I believe the CLA study I saw about 10 years ago from Denmark -- I think that is where it was from -- was funded by a CLA supplement manufacturer.
I don't remember the exact weight loss they claimed, but let's say they claimed that people lost 15 pounds of fat with CLA.
I would conclude that this is bogus because other studies have little or no weight loss with CLA.
When one study is way out of line with everything else, I have to conclude that the results were made up.
On Mar 31, 2008 at 10:20 am Kara wrote:
. . . . .
Well, that would make sense then...
The medical industry has unfortunately become the worse scam business around. Really a pity!
On Mar 31, 2008 at 10:42 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
Money affects everything.
I agree that there are a lot of biased studies.
I believe this is true even from researchers at large universities, although I'm sure they'd strongly disagree.
All of the drug studies I've looked recently have somebody from the drug company as one of their co-authors.
My guess is that they do this so that the drug company employee can write the paper and edit the paper the way they want to.
You can always word something to sound good or sound bad depending on how you say it.
Having somebody from the drug company as a researcher on the study, also gives the study access to the data before it is published.
It's good that you're skeptical. I wish everybody, both doctors and the public, was more skeptical.
On Apr 01, 2008 at 12:27 pm Kara wrote:
. . . . .
I contacted the European researchers for one of the studies on CLA, and actually did not expect them to answer my curiosity.
Anyways I got a very interesting response to my blunt questions:
1) Why did your study show weight loss when other studies contradicts it?
2) Was it financed and influences by commerical supporters?
Here's their response in brief:
1) Absolutely no commercial support was given for the studies, and they are all academic studies related to a whole group of health related studies. Government grants supported.
2). The CLA study was a pilot study, and pilot studies should not be treated as any final study results. The results were accurate, but people reading the study should understand the weight loss was marginal and therefore clinically irrelevant.
They said their resrearch group completely avoids recommending CLA supplements as their studies show that long term CLA use in high dosage can be potentially harmful for health. Some isomers in CLA can cause oxidated stress (increase free radicals formation) insulinresistance and other metabolic distrubances particularly in persons with metabolic syndrom or type-2 diabetes. Whether CLA should have anti-aging properties have no basis supported by any studies.
On Apr 01, 2008 at 12:33 pm Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
Thanks for making the call and for interesting the information.
I appreciate it.
On May 04, 2009 at 6:30 pm iszlq wrote:
. . . . .
"Instead it showed that safflower oil decreased calories burned."
It would make sense that both groups - the CLA group and the control group - would have been given safflower oil. I believe I've read that CLA is synthesized from safflower oil, so that is likely the reason for using it in the controls. Just a guess, but if I was a researcher, that's what I'd do.
Please feel free to share your comments about this article.
© Copyright 2003-2017 - Larry Hobbs - All Rights Reserved.