Esterified Oil Research

Esterified oils have been studied with nineteen (19) animal and clinical studies, with six (6) studies presented at scientific meetings and six (6) published in pre-eminent scientific journals – two of which have been published in the prestigious medical journal, The Journal of Periodontology and two in the equally notable, The Journal of Rheumatology.

A brief description of these studies and a link to the actual studies is below. Following these studies there is also a brief discussion about glucosamine featuring the world renowned Cochrane Collaborative and the GAIT trial, which is the largest most rigorous clinical trial of glucosamine ever conducted.

Journal of Periodontology 2009

Journal of Periodontology 2007

Esterified Oils for Osteoarthritis Presented at Scripps Conference San Diego 2007

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 2005

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 2005

Journal of Rheumatology 2004

Journal of Rheumatology 2002

Esterified Oils for Canine Arthritis

US Patent Awarded

As a testament to the importance of the following research, a US patent (#7,612,111) was awarded in 2009 for the unprecedented properties of esterified oils.

Journal of Periodontology 2009

Click here to read the study

This study investigated the effects of esterified oils that were applied topically to the gums of animals with periodontal disease. Study highlights were: resolved infection, a reduction in pocket size, increased bone density of the teeth, increased activity of the osteoblasts (bone building cells), reduction of the activity of osteoclasts (bone resorbing or breakdown cells) and overall connective and osseous tissue restoration.

Journal of Periodontology 2007

Click here to read the study

This research demonstrated the ability of esterified oils to resolve periodontal infection from P. Gingivalis when applied topically.

Udani Arthritis Abstract EFAC

Click here to read the abstract.

This is recently completed research using EFAC as an oral supplement for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. This was a double blind, placebo controlled trial with 93 patients.

The trial participant’s pain levels were assessed. An objective functional parameter was also measured. Patients were tested prior to starting medication and then after 2, 4 and 8 weeks to see how far they could walk in 6 minutes. Presumably the pain and stiffness of knee OA would cause one to walk slower and if pain relief occurred, then one could then speed up and walk farther in the given time. Patients receiving EFAC had less pain and were able to walk 233 feet farther after just 2 weeks. And they continued to improve over time with less pain and an increased distance walked. After 8 weeks they walked on average 537 feet farther than they could at the beginning of the clinical trial. A truly amazing result! Just as impressive was the difference between the two groups, as those receiving the placebo did not improve, which implies that the results were due to EFAC and not something else, such as improved fitness levels.

Awarded first prize . . .

out of the 90 papers presented at the
Scripps Medical Conference
San Diego CA, in 2007.

JOURNAL of RHEUMATOLOGY-2002 EFAC Improves Knee Function in OA Patients

Click here to read the study

This placebo controlled clinical trial of EFAC as an oral supplement was the first to investigate whether EFAC could be used to treat osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The overall function of the knees, as well the range of motion improved in the patients receiving EFAC. This very successful study paved the way for further studies.

JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY-2004

Effect of EFAC Topical Cream on Functional Mobility

Click here to read the study

This double blind, placebo controlled clinical trial investigated whether EFAC topical cream could reduce pain and improve the functional mobility of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knees. OA patients typically have impaired physical performance, presumably at least in part due to pain. Patients were tested at baseline and then 30 minutes later to determine the short-term effects and also 30 days later after applying the cream twice daily for long-term effects.

The EFAC cream reduced pain and was found to increase the range of motion of the knees, improve the ability of patients to ascend and descend stairs, made it easier to get up from a sitting position and improved the balance of patients stepping down.

Most interesting was the result that after only 30 minutes of the first application of EFAC cream there were real improvements. Further improvements were recorded after a month, demonstrating that the cream provides not only short-term benefit, but also cumulative long-term benefit with regular daily use.

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 2005

Effect of EFAC on Static Postural Stability and Plantar Distribution in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

Click here to read the study

Data indicated that 30 days of treatment with a topical cream consisting of EFAC improves static postural stability in patients with knee OA presumably due to pain relief during quiet standing.

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 2005

EFAC Topical Cream with Menthol Reduces Pain and Improves Functional Performance in Individuals with Arthritis

Click here to read the study

EFAC cream is comprised of EFAC and a minimal amount of menthol (1.25%). This clinical trial was designed to test whether menthol affected the efficacy, since previous tests were conducted without menthol. Patients with either OA of the knee, elbow or wrist were tested. One week of treatment of the cream containing menthol was found to be similarly effective for reducing pain and improving functional performance as prior tests that used EFAC cream without menthol.

EFAC for Canine Arthritis

This study investigated whether esterified fatty acid complex (EFAC) could improve the quality of life in arthritic canines. 75% of the dog owners noted improvement in their pet’s daily quality of life. Common observations were that the animals seemed “happier,” “more energetic” and “to have better temperament.” Information obtained from questionnaires indicated that animals exhibited improved gait, stair climbing and affect.

Click here to read the study

EFAC vs Glucosamine Cochrane Collaborative

The Cochrane Collaboration is an international, not-for-profit, independent organization that produces and disseminates systematic reviews of health care interventions. Cochrane is one of the most, if not the most respected organization of its type in the world.

According to their 2010, issue # 4 review of glucosamine, which included 25 studies with 4963 patients, only one brand of glucosamine was found more effective than placebo. The brand is called Rotta and is the original glucosamine from Italy.

The vast majority of the glucosamine used in America is not Rotta brand. It is quite amazing that so many people, including physicians just assume that glucosamine is effective. This is understandable when we consider how much joint health advertising takes place. The sad reality is that in well controlled clinical trials that the placebo pills produced just as good effects as glucosamine.

Click here to read the review

GAIT: Glucosamine Arthritis Intervention Trial

The clinical trial that highlights the confusion surrounding glucosamine is the GAIT or Glucosamine Arthritis Intervention Trial. GAIT is the largest and most rigorous investigation of glucosamine that has ever taken place in America. The GAIT trial took place at 16 universities across America, was conducted by the National Institute for Health (NIH) and included 1583 patients.

In Gait, participants were randomly assigned to one of 10 treatment groups:

groups 1 and 2- received glucosamine only,

groups 3 and 4- received chondroitin only,

groups 5 and 6- received the combination of glucosamine and chondroitin,

groups 7 and 8- received Celebrex the drug

groups 9 and 10- received a placebo.

Groups 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, which are the glucosamine and/or chondroitin groups failed to show benefit over the placebo for pain relief after 6 months.

Only group 6, which was one of the two groups receiving both glucosamine and chondroitin appeared to benefit. This group was small with only 72 participants, which is less than 5% of the total participants. Therefore only a few patients responding or not responding from this group could make the difference between a benefit or no benefit relative to the placebo group.

Even the GAIT researchers cautioned not to draw any conclusions from this 6th group because of its small size and also most importantly because the results were inconsistent with the results from the other 5 groups.

Joint Spacing and Cartilage Loss

GAIT participants were given the opportunity to continue for another 18 months in order to see if there were any benefits to the cartilage after 2 years. If glucosamine and/or chondroitin was beneficial to the cartilage, then the researchers would see a reduction in cartilage loss.

When the cartilage and joint spacing was measured, the result was that there was no statistically significant difference between the glucosamine/chondroitin groups and placebo. Ironically the participants receiving both glucosamine and chondroitin, groups 5 and 6 from above, had slightly more cartilage loss than placebo. It was a minor difference and not statistically significant, but certainly not a benefit!

Now for the confusing part: Companies selling glucosamine often refer to GAIT as “Proof” that glucosamine works, despite the researcher’s conclusions that overall there were no benefits over placebo. There were even TV ads referring to GAIT. The ads sounded very credible, as they said that glucosamine was clinically proven in the GAIT trial, which was conducted by the NIH. For most people a trial conducted by the NIH would certainly sound credible. Glucosamine was proven in GAIT, but if anything, proven ineffective! Advertisers have frequently referred to GAIT and the 72 patient’s that seem to benefit, but they fail to mention the other 95% of trial participants or the fact that this 72 patient group went on to experience more cartilage loss than placebo. Of course everyone is confused!

Click here to read about GAIT