Alpha Lipoic Acid vs R Lipoic Acid

[Paleowoman]

I've taken Alpha Lipoic Acid for years -- 100 mg 2 or 3 times per day. Now I've been reading about a supposedly better form -- R Lipoic Acid -- does anyone know more about the various forms of lipoic acid and the pros and cons of each?

[David M]

The better form you refer to is R+ Alpha Lipoic Acid (ALA). The difference between Alpha Lipoic Acid and R+ Alpha Lipoic Acid is that the former is what is referred to as a racemic molecule (contains both the cis (natural) and trans (unnatural) whereas the latter is strictly the cis (natural) form of ALA. Alpha Lipoic Acid is less effective than the R+ version and the racemic version also has some adverse effects. The main reason R+ ALA is not in wide use appears to be cost. It costs several times more than the racemic version. R+ ALA is hard to find. Most products on the market are the racemic version as are products containing ALA Both versions of ALA have a very short life in the human body. For this reason it is better to take a sustained release (SR) version of ALA. I use a product made by Advanced Orthomolecular Research (www.aor.com). I use their R+ SR ALA 150 mg taken 4 times a day, first thing in the morning, at lunch, at dinner and at bedtime. There is a good article on R+ ALA on the a.o.r web site. Please note that I do not work for a.o.r.. Nor am I in any way associated with the company.

[maxlharris]

I wonder. If you're eating really paleo, keeping it to grass fed meats and naturally healthy animal proteins, do you really need to supplement with ALA at all? Someone on my other group suggested that you get all the Omega-3 you need from your meats that were raised more in line with nature's intent, the very same stuff a real paleo eater would eat. And that it's cheaper than getting R+ALA and CLA supplements.

Just a thought.

[David M]

Getting the ratio of ALA, omega 3 to LA, omega 6 required for optimal health (not just survival) has always been a challenge on a Paleo or any other diet. You are right in referencing grass fed beef. Feedlots never existed in nature and cattle in nature never ate grain. Feeding beef grain distorts the normal ALA to LA ratio. But getting grass fed beef where I live is next to impossible especially now that the Canadian government has banned the sale of local meat -- to protect us of course.

But natural is not necessarily the same as optimal. In order to ensure survival organisms have layers of backup systems that ensure they do not perish when they are temporarily unable to get adequate amounts of such things as EFAs. When we can't, other fatty acids will be used in place of EFAs. But there is a catch. They don't replace the functionality of EFAs. And this is the crux of the problem. The toxic PUFAs that are endemic in our modern foods will in many cases be incorporated into tissues in place of EFAs. Among other things, this will affect the cell membrane permeability that regulates such things the uptake of oxygen and transporters of glucose. Research has shown that an inadequate supply or an imbalance of EFAs can reduce oxygen transfer through the cell membrane by up to 50%. This has very serious implications.

I do a lot of reading of research on EFAs. I consider EFAs 2nd in importance only to oxygen. In my opinion EFAs are getting far less attention in our diet than they should and people are not paying enough attention to the issue of toxic PUFAs which includes most, if not all commercial vegetable oils whether used for deep frying our not.

[David M]

And that it's cheaper than getting R+ALA and CLA supplements.

R+ALA is short for R+ Alpha Lipoic Acid. This is not a fatty acid. Nor is it an EFA.

CLA is short for Conjugated Lenoleic Acid. This is also not an EFA

The EFAs are LA (Lenoleic Acid) omega-6 and LNA (Linolenic Acid)-omega 3. I erroneously stated ALA as omega-3.

Just a thought.[/quote]

[maxlharris]

CLA = very expensive as a supplement. Much cheaper to get in grass fed beef, pork, etc.

EFA. Really, you need about 3g in some combo of DHA and EPA a day. The other Omega-3 EFAs are only really essential if you're not getting your DHA & EPA, and the conversion rate is really abysmal, IIRC. A good Omega-3 supp is relatively inexpensive. Flax is not a source of EPA or DHA, but rather Linolenic Acid. Slow conversion. And the fiber probably isn't good for you either (per Mike Eades).

CLA is supposed to burn fat better. I'm unsure of the mechanism, but have seen it recommended a lot. You can conjugate your own LA internally, but I understand that's very far from efficient or optimal. In the old days, before feed lots, when people ate steak, they got a lot of CLA. Feed lot beef is still a decent dietary source, but nowhere near grass fed. Grass fed buffalo is also a good source.

David, if you're interested and possessed of some disposable income, you might be able to buy some good meats from your neighbors to the south and get it imported. With the new strength of the Canadian Dollar, it wouldn't be as cost prohibitive as it used to be.

[David M]

The only 2 EFAs are LA omega 6 and LN (or ALA) omega 3. CLA, DHA, EPA, GLA etc. are derivitives of the 2 parent EFAs. The parent EFAs generate an array of other PUFAs, derivitives and eicosinoids. The normal conversion rate of LN omega 3 to DHA and EPA is around 5%, not the 100% as many seem to believe.

The pivotal issue with EFAs is that they must be present in the body at the same time in adequate amounts and within the correct ratio range. Derivatives are produced from the 2 parent EFAs on an as need basis.

[waltc]

R-ALA acts like Metformin in reducing the insulin sensitivity. People I know who use it show lower Blood Glucose numbers.

[maxlharris]

The only 2 EFAs are LA omega 6 and LN (or ALA) omega 3. CLA, DHA, EPA, GLA etc. are derivitives of the 2 parent EFAs. The parent EFAs generate an array of other PUFAs, derivitives and eicosinoids. The normal conversion rate of LN omega 3 to DHA and EPA is around 5%, not the 100% as many seem to believe.

The pivotal issue with EFAs is that they must be present in the body at the same time in adequate amounts and within the correct ratio range. Derivatives are produced from the 2 parent EFAs on an as need basis.

This is an old one, but since Waltc woke it up and I know more now, I feel obligated to finish this one off.

ALA is the parent, but DHA and EPA are the ones you actually use. You get some ALA, your body converts it into useful forms, DHA/EPA being the most useful, though CLA is a fat burner (theoretically) and GLA has some brain use if I remember correctly. The conversion rate is, well, 2-15% for the DHA/EPA depending on a whole host of things. But at 15%, to get your 3 grams, you're talking a whole hell of a lot of flax seed oil. At which point, you're talking a lot of calories. I don't like having to track supplements as food sources, but at 3/.15 - 3/.02 (aka 20g to 150g, we'll call it 75g on average), you're looking at anywhere from 180 to 1350 calories, with a mean of 675. If the goal is weight loss, not just weight maintenance, that's less food, just to get my DHA/EPA. The stuff I'm actually gonna use.

What's clear here is that this is a difference of semantics. That said, taking your essential oils in the quantities that I feel I would need to get my essential oils, I'm gonna be blowing the diet, which was the whole reason to get the supplement in the first place.

As to the essential nature of Oemga-6's, I don't know. My diet is pretty low in 6's, so I've never worried much about it.

Sorry for the long post in a dead thread, but I'd hate for people to come back and thin it ended with a recommendation for Flax Oil supplementation or some other ALA product rather than a more cost efficient, calorie efficient and end product efficient fish, cod or krill oil recommendation.