6 posts Page 1 of 1
This recent study shows limited benefit for following a plant based diet:

http://multiple-sclerosis-research.blog ... arian.html

It's interesting that most of these studies all kind of follow the same pattern--they are underpowered, involve small groups, and always seem to show that the main benefit is improvement of fatigue as compared to helping with any disability progression.
It takes more than just diet to get on top of MS.

Edit:
Diet is extremely important but for best opportunity combining with vitamin d, exercise, mediation as OMS is stronger.
Well, they even say so themselves in their own article:

Longer studies with larger sample sizes are needed to better understand the long-term health benefits of this diet.


One year isn't nearly long enough. For example, the relapse reduction benefit from the first year of the diet weren't even realized until the 2nd year was completed...

The bad thing is, people will still point to studies like these and say this doesn't work. :-(
They talk of a “very-low-fat, plant-based diet” which the diet group in their study adhered to for the length of one year, but I can find no specification, what exactly a “very-low-fat, plant-based diet” means. How much fat per day? And how much saturated fat?
I would suspect that this “very-low-fat, plant-based diet” is not so close to the OMS diet, that the results of this study should discourage us in any way. The OMS diet is not primarily a low-fat diet, but a low-sat-fat diet.
1) In OMS we take great care to avoid the plant saturated fats of cocoa butter, palm oil and coconut products, so that our sat-fat intake may be lower than in the “very-low-fat, plant-based diet” which they tested.
2) The “very-low-fat, plant-based diet” which they studied did probably not contain a substantial amount of flaxseed oil, as this would have raised the overall fat intake too much. Therefore, the participants in the diet group may have had little chance to benefit from the anti-inflammatory effect of Omega-3 fatty acids.
I really regret that this study did not show more impressive results for the diet group, as such results would have supported what we do (and we could have taken the reference to this study to our disbelieving neurologists or other doctors), but I feel in no way discouraged by this study.
Hi all,

Copy link below into search engine for more comprehensive information:

http://www.msard-journal.com/article/S2211-0348(16)30100-6/fulltext#s0055

Donna
(hope it works)
This study is not that new and has been commented on a few times on this forum.

Here are a few links on the same study, the last link is the oldest and has a couple of indepth comments from Goerge.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7106&p=44651&hilit=mcdougall#p44651

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7036&p=44375&hilit=mcdougall#p44375

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=5222&hilit=mcdougall

BG
6 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest