The way ms-uk did not accurately quote that article. They misquoted the most important part. But first thing they did is mark themselves as the source when the actual source is:
https://onlinelibrary.ectrims-congress. ... ?f=media=3
Here is what the MS-UK article says: There was a significant correlation between intakes of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) including linolenic acid and linoleic acid with EDSS
This means PUFAs are BAD for EDSS and consequently MS. This is the opposite of what OMS says.
The original article states:
here was a negative significant correlation between intakes of Polly Unsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFAs) including Linolenic Acid(r=-0.418, p=0.018), Linoleic Acid(r=-0.312, p=0.031) with EDSS in all participants.
Note the word *negative* which is what we want. That means the more PUFA's the lower the EDSS score which is what you want and in line with OMS.