Lisa suggested I share some of my findings in researching the MS literature over the last decade. Here is my take on one of the many positive trials showing the benefits of a low saturated fat diet in MS. Most of these studies were uncontrolled, that is there was no control group. But in 2005, a randomized controlled trial on dietary fat in MS was published.(1) This was unfortunately only a very small study of limited duration but is an important addition to the evidence base on dietary fats in MS. In a one-year study, 31 patients with relapsing-remitting MS were assigned to a low-fat diet (15% of calories) supplemented with fish oil or the standard American Heart Association heart diet in which fat made up 30 per cent of calories, supplemented with olive oil.
Clearly there are problems with this study which might weaken the dramatic effects seen in Professor Swank's landmark 34 year study of a low saturated fat diet in MS.(2) Firstly it was a relatively short study: the maximal benefit of diet in Swank's study did not occur until at least the three-year mark. Secondly, the fat reduction was not specifically directed at saturated fat, and both groups lowered their fat intake. Thirdly, it was a small study: only 27 patients were available for analysis of the 31 enrolled. Lastly, olive oil is likely to have some benefit based on animal work in experimental MS, so should not have been used as a control treatment. Additionally, only around two-thirds of the participants were able to stick to their diets.
Despite these issues, the study showed that patients felt better according to standard MS quality of life questionnaires. But more importantly, their relapse rates fell quite significantly from pre-trial rates, more so for the fish oil group. In fact the fish oil group had a mean relapse rate of 1.14 relapses per year in the year prior to the trial, and dropped by 0.79, a reduction of 69 per cent, and the olive oil group had a pre-trial rate of 1.17 which dropped by 0.69, a 59 per cent reduction. These findings were statistically significant despite the small numbers of participants. Interestingly, the drop of 69 per cent for the low-fat plus fish oil group is remarkably similar to the relapse rate reduction in the first year of Swank's study. This should really give us confidence that the findings in Swank's study were real.
The authors concluded that despite the study limitations, a low-fat diet supplemented with omega-3 fatty acids may complement the beneficial effects of concurrent disease-modifying therapies. They suggested this because virtually all patients were on disease-modifying drugs for the year prior and the year of the study. The 69 per cent relapse rate reduction associated with the diet compares very favorably with the reduction of about 30 per cent for these drugs in the major clinical trials. The MS community is crying out for more well-designed research in the area, and researchers have speculated that with more research diet may well become standard treatment.(3) It is interesting to note that the Oregon Health and Science University is now enrolling patients in a major randomized controlled trial of a low saturated fat diet in MS (see http://www.facebook.com/MultipleSclerosisManagement?ref=ts).


Thank you for posting this information. I wonder how much the first study mentioned supplemented by Omega-3's? The abstract doesn't specify and the full article requires purchase or subscription for viewing.
My rheumatologist recommends a low-fat diet (she calls it anti-inflammatory) with Omega-3 supplements to equal at least 1gram of DHA, EPA, etc. This just takes 3 large capsules daily to meet that requirement. But sometimes I wonder if it is not enough.
Hi Lisa
The fish oil (FO) group in this study received 3.3g of EPA/DHA daily, or the equivalent of 11 capsules of standard FO as you would buy them at a health food shop, although they received a more concentrated form. The literature suggests that even this is actually not enough, and certainly the 3 capsules you describe is insufficient for a real immune effect.
Gallai and co-workers showed that there was a marked decrease in the chemicals which promote inflammation after only four weeks' supplementation with FO (Gallai V, Sarchielli P, Trequattrini A, et al. Cytokine secretion and eicosanoid production in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of MS patients undergoing dietary supplementation with n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. J Neuroimmunol 1995; 56:143-53). IL-1beta, IL-2, IFN-gamma and TNF-alpha were all significantly decreased. The decreases were even more pronounced after three and then six months. The pro-inflammatory eicosanoids PGE2 and LTB4 were also decreased.
This is important because these chemicals have been shown to be involved in causing relapses in MS patients. This sort of change in the inflammatory chemicals in MS is roughly equivalent to that seen with the major immunosuppressant drugs, but the difference is that the immune system is not suppressed with FO, but modulated. The patients in this study were taking quite large doses, of the order of 5g a day of EPA/DHA. In most fish oil capsules, only 30 per cent of the oil is EPA/DHA, so about 16 or 17 of the 1000mg capsules a day is equivalent, and that is why I recommend 20 standard FO capsules daily, or 20mls of flaxseed oil for people with MS (see http://www.takingcontrolofmultiplesclerosis.org/index.php?mode=The_Taking_Control_Program).
In fact, personally I haven't taken FO for 6 or 7 years: I get mine from oily fish (eg sardines, mackerel, etc) several times a week, and flaxseed oil on my food as salad dressing or on baked potatoes for example the rest of the time. One 110g can of John West sardines in springwater for example contains around 18g of FO.
Actually, I am much more impressed with the work of Professor Swank than with Weinstock-Guttman's study, and I will post more on this later. I posted about this study just because there is such an obsession with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in medicine, and people often say there is no RCT on diet in MS. In fact, as one of the key figures in the development of evidence-based medicine has stated: ‘Evidence-based medicine is not restricted to randomized trials and meta-analyses. It involves tracking down the best external evidence with which to answer our clinical questions . . . if no randomized trial has been carried out for our patient's predicament, we follow the trail to the next best external evidence and work from there.' (Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312:71-2). Clearly, if there is only one RCT on a low fat diet in MS and that was positive, and we need more evidence (which I agree with), then we proceed to the next level of evidence, and that is Swank's longitudinal, prospective, uncontrolled cohort study over 34 years, with its quite stunning findings. More on that later....
Be well
George