Conjugated Linoleic Acid

01 A class of dienes that is not a peptide

Conjugated linoleic acid is not a peptide. It is not linoleic acid with a marketing prefix. It is a family of C₁₈H₃₂O₂ octadecadienoic acids — molecular weight 280.4 — in which the two double bonds are conjugated rather than separated by a methylene group. Those formula facts were read from PubChem compound records for the two commercial isomers and for linoleic acid itself, not from a supplement label.

Linoleic acid, the essential n-6 parent, is (9Z,12Z)-octadeca-9,12-dienoic acid (PubChem CID 5280450; InChIKey OYHQOLUKZRVURQ-HZJYTTRNSA-N). The double bonds sit at carbons 9 and 12, with a CH₂ between them. A CLA isomer keeps eighteen carbons and two double bonds and moves those bonds next to each other. cis-9,trans-11-CLA is (9Z,11E)-octadeca-9,11-dienoic acid (CID 5280644; InChIKey JBYXPOFIGCOSSB-GOJKSUSPSA-N). trans-10,cis-12-CLA is (10E,12Z)-octadeca-10,12-dienoic acid (CID 5282800; InChIKey GKJZMAHZJGSBKD-NMMTYZSQSA-N). The aisle name “CLA” names the class. It does not name a molecule.

A nearby PubChem trap is load-bearing for this document. CID 5282796 is isolinoleic acid, (9E,11E)-octadeca-9,11-dienoic acid. It is a conjugated 18:2. It is not rumenic acid. Any dossier that treats 5282796 as cis-9,trans-11 has already collapsed the geometry the biology depends on. This article uses 5280644 for the 9Z,11E isomer and 5282800 for the 10E,12Z isomer, and says so.

The conjugation is not a decoration. Adjacent double bonds change the shape of the chain, the melting behaviour of the acyl group, and the set of enzymes and nuclear receptors that will bind it. That is why a document that says “CLA does X” without naming the isomer has not yet made a chemical claim. It has made a category claim, which is the form most of the marketing takes.

02 How a conjugated diene is made, and why the aisle mixture is an industrial object

Two routes produce the CLA that appears in papers. One is a microbial path in the rumen. Linoleic acid entering a ruminant’s forestomach is isomerised and then hydrogenated; cis-9,trans-11-CLA is an intermediate, and vaccenic acid (18:1 trans-11) is a related product that the animal’s own tissues can desaturate back to rumenic acid. The other route is industrial: linoleic-rich oils are alkali-isomerised or otherwise rearranged to a mixture in which cis-9,trans-11 and trans-10,cis-12 predominate in roughly equal amounts, with smaller contributions from other 18:2 conjugated species. The first route makes dairy and beef CLA. The second route makes the capsule.

Ha, Grimm and Pariza isolated heat-altered linoleic-acid derivatives from fried ground beef that inhibited carcinogenesis in a mouse model, and named the activity conjugated linoleic acid (Ha, Grimm and Pariza, 1987). Pariza, Park and Cook later reviewed mechanisms without converting the class into a single human drug (Pariza, Park and Cook, 2000, 2001). Those papers establish a research object. They do not establish a weight-loss molecule. The jump from a grilled-beef fraction to a 3–6 g/day oil capsule is a manufacturing history, not a pharmacokinetic identity.

03 cis-9,trans-11: the dairy isomer

cis-9,trans-11-CLA is the isomer a chemist meets first in milk fat. It is also called rumenic acid, a name that records its origin rather than a special pharmacology. In ruminant lipids it is usually the majority CLA species; trans-10,cis-12 is present, but as a minor companion, not as an equal partner. That ratio is the first fact a supplement brochure has to leave out if it wants dairy epidemiology to speak for a 50:50 oil.

People also make some cis-9,trans-11 from vaccenic acid. Turpeinen and colleagues showed that humans convert dietary trans-vaccenic acid to conjugated linoleic acid (Turpeinen et al., 2002). The conversion is real. It is not a reason to treat a gram-dose industrial mixture as an intensified glass of milk. The substrate, the product ratio, and the dose belong to different interventions.

Tricon and colleagues found opposing effects of the two isomers on blood lipids in healthy humans (Tricon et al., 2004). The insulin file is less flattering to the dairy isomer than a food-first story wants. Risérus and colleagues had already shown isomer-specific insulin resistance with trans-10,cis-12 in obese men (Risérus et al., 2002). When the same group then gave cis-9,trans-11 to obese men, insulin sensitivity fell by 15 per cent versus placebo and urinary F₂-isoprostane excretion rose (Risérus et al., 2004). The dairy isomer is not the mouse-adipose isomer. It is also not metabolically silent in the only clamp programme that isolated it. Those two sentences have to be held together.

04 trans-10,cis-12: the industrial co-product with the thicker file

trans-10,cis-12-CLA is a minor ruminant species and a major industrial one. Park, Storkson, Albright, Liu and Pariza reported that this isomer, not cis-9,trans-11, induced the body-composition change in mice (Park et al., 1999), after an earlier mouse paper had shown that a CLA mixture reduced body fat (Park et al., 1997). Clément and colleagues then showed that dietary trans-10,cis-12-CLA induces hyperinsulinaemia and fatty liver in mice (Clément et al., 2002). Poirier, Niot, Clément, Guerre-Millo and Besnard linked the same isomer to adipose inflammation and insulin resistance in mice (Poirier et al., 2005, 2006). The rodent file is coherent: the isomer that delipidates adipose tissue is the isomer that stresses the liver and the insulin axis.

That coherence is a warning, not a human outcome. It is also the reason this article refuses to treat a positive mouse fat-loss paper as a licence for a human weight-loss claim, and refuses to quarantine the mouse fatty-liver papers in a separate safety annex. They are one literature.

In people, the same isomer is the one Risérus, Arnér, Brismar and Vessby used when they reported isomer-specific insulin resistance in obese men (Risérus et al., 2002). A later paper from the same group reported that trans-10,cis-12-CLA induced hyperproinsulinaemia in obese men (Risérus et al., 2004). Those clamp and peptide findings are the human half of the mouse story. They are not a proof that every mixture capsule produces diabetes. They are a proof that the two isomers are not biologically identical.

05 The rest of the family, and why the aisle ignores it

More than a dozen CLA isomers can be resolved in food and in industrial oils: 8,10; 9,11; 10,12; 11,13, each with cis/trans combinations. Most human trials, and almost all commercial oils, collapse that set into two peaks and then collapse those two peaks into one word. This document follows the trials it can verify and therefore spends its pages on cis-9,trans-11, trans-10,cis-12, and the 50:50 mixture. That is a coverage decision. It is not a claim that the other isomers are inert.

A last identity cut. Conjugated linoleic acid is sometimes filed next to industrial trans fatty acids because it contains trans double bonds, and sometimes filed next to essential fatty acids because it is an 18:2. Both filings are half-true. Brouwer, Wanders and Katan examined animal and industrial trans fatty acids, including CLA, as lipid-moving exposures (Brouwer, Wanders and Katan, 2010; Wanders, Brouwer, Siebelink and Katan, 2010). That work belongs in Part Four. It does not make CLA interchangeable with elaidic acid, and it does not make CLA an essential nutrient. Humans do not require a conjugated 18:2. They require linoleic acid. The conjugation is a modification, not a vitamin.

06 Rumen biohydrogenation is a path, not a product specification

Kepler and Tove described the biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids by rumen bacteria, including a linoleate Δ12-cis, Δ11-trans isomerase that produces a conjugated intermediate (Kepler and Tove, 1967). The chemistry is settled enough to state without romance: linoleic acid is isomerised, cis-9,trans-11-CLA appears, further hydrogenation yields trans-vaccenic acid and then stearic acid, and mammary Δ⁹-desaturase can recoup rumenic acid from vaccenic acid. Diet, forage, and ruminal conditions move the yield. They do not turn milk fat into a 50:50 pharmaceutical oil.

Dhiman and colleagues measured conjugated linoleic acid in milk as a function of what cows ate (Dhiman et al., 1999). The number that matters for this article is not a particular milligram-per-gram figure from one herd. It is the scale: food CLA arrives as a small fraction of dairy or beef fat, dominated by cis-9,trans-11, eaten with the rest of the food matrix. Capsule CLA arrives as a concentrated oil, dominated by two isomers, eaten as a bolus. Those are different exposures even when both are called CLA.

07 Ruminant food is not a supplement mixture

This is the source collapse the market needs. A brochure that shows a cow and a softgel as if they were one intervention is making a category error. Ruminant-food CLA is mostly cis-9,trans-11 at dietary density. Supplement CLA in the trials that later metas pooled is typically a triacylglycerol or free-fatty-acid oil in which cis-9,trans-11 and trans-10,cis-12 each contribute on the order of 30–40 per cent of fatty acids, with the remainder other 18:2 species and unsaponifiables. Clarinol and Tonalin are trade names for such oils. They are the objects of FDA GRAS notices GRN 000232 and GRN 000276, and of the EFSA novel-food safety statement (EFSA NDA Panel, 2012). They are not milk.

Tricon and colleagues also tested a dairy-food approach, raising cis-9,trans-11-CLA by modifying milk rather than by giving an industrial oil (Tricon et al., 2006). That design is the honest food experiment. It is not interchangeable with a 3.4 g/day mixture capsule, and this document does not pool them.

08 Lipid metabolism: what a conjugated diene can touch

Once absorbed, CLA isomers are oxidised, incorporated into phospholipids and neutral lipids, and presented to the same nuclear-receptor and enzyme systems that handle other 18-carbon unsaturated acids. Kennedy, Martinez, Schmidt, Mandrup, LaPoint and McIntosh reviewed anti-obesity mechanisms of conjugated linoleic acid as a mixture of adipocyte, liver, and energy-expenditure hypotheses (Kennedy et al., 2010). Brown and McIntosh reviewed human regulation of adiposity and insulin sensitivity by CLA and already treated the human file as thinner than the rodent file (Brown and McIntosh, 2003). Dilzer and Park later reviewed implications for human health without converting mechanism into outcome (Dilzer and Park, 2012). den Hartigh reviewed cancer, obesity, and atherosclerosis effects as a 2019 stock-taking (den Hartigh, 2019). Those reviews are maps. They are not substitutes for the isomer-specified trials in Parts Three to Five.

The recurring mechanistic verbs are: reduce lipoprotein lipase activity in adipocytes; increase hormone-sensitive lipase or basal lipolysis; suppress PPARγ adipogenic transcription; induce inflammatory cytokines in adipose tissue; shift fatty-acid oxidation; and, in rodents, dump lipid into the liver. Park 1999 and the Clément/Poirier papers assign most of that adipose list to trans-10,cis-12. cis-9,trans-11 is a weaker actor on those adipose endpoints. It is not a quiet actor on the insulin clamp in obese men (Risérus et al., 2004). Mechanism language that says “CLA burns fat” has already performed the collapse this section exists to prevent.

09 PPAR-related hypotheses, and what they do not licence

Moya-Camarena, Vanden Heuvel, Blanchard, Leesnitzer and Belury reported that conjugated linoleic acid is a ligand and activator of PPARα (Moya-Camarena et al., 1999). Houseknecht and colleagues reported that dietary CLA normalised impaired glucose tolerance in the Zucker diabetic fatty rat, a PPARγ-adjacent finding in an animal model (Houseknecht et al., 1998). Belury reviewed dietary CLA and health with PPAR chemistry in view (Belury, 2002). Taylor and Zahradka reviewed CLA, insulin sensitivity, and resistance in rodent models (Taylor and Zahradka, 2004). Risérus later placed trans fatty acids, including CLA isomers, against insulin resistance as a human question (Risérus, 2006).

A ligand finding is a ligand finding. PPARα activation can increase hepatic fatty-acid oxidation in rodents. PPARγ modulation can move adipocyte differentiation in either direction depending on the ligand and the assay. Neither sentence establishes that a 3 g/day mixture capsule improves human insulin sensitivity, reduces human liver fat, or produces a clinically useful fat-loss. The human isomer trials in Part Four go the other way for trans-10,cis-12 on insulin action. That is what it looks like when a nuclear-receptor hypothesis meets a clamp.

10 The mouse result that sold the capsule

Park, Albright, Liu, Storkson, Cook and Pariza reported that conjugated linoleic acid reduced body fat and increased lean mass in mice (Park et al., 1997). Two years later the same laboratory assigned that body-composition change to the trans-10,cis-12 isomer (Park et al., 1999). Those papers are the commercial origin story. They are also the origin of the transfer error. Mice given dietary CLA at fractions of a per cent of chow empty adipose tissue on a scale that human mixture trials have never reproduced. Clément and colleagues showed that the same isomer produces hyperinsulinaemia and fatty liver in mice (Clément et al., 2002). A brochure that quotes Park 1997 and omits Clément 2002 is not summarising the rodent file. It is excerpting it.

West, DeLany, Camet, Blohm, Truett and Scimeca reported that CLA reduced body fat in mice independently of energy intake in some conditions (West et al., 1998). Terpstra reviewed species differences and already treated the mouse as an outlier relative to other laboratory animals and to people (Terpstra, 2004). The honest use of the mouse file is as a mechanism generator and a safety alert. The dishonest use is as a before-and-after photograph for a human softgel.

11 Early human mixture trials

Blankson, Stakkestad, Fagertun, Thom, Wadstein and Gudmundsen randomised overweight and obese adults to conjugated linoleic acid or placebo for twelve weeks and reported a reduction in body fat mass at the higher studied mixture amounts (Blankson et al., 2000). Smedman and Vessby reported metabolic effects of CLA supplementation in humans, including a body-fat signal and lipid and insulin observations that already refused a clean benefit story (Smedman and Vessby, 2001). Kamphuis, Lejeune, Saris and Westerterp-Plantenga tested CLA after weight loss and asked whether the oil would help maintenance (Kamphuis et al., 2003). Malpuech-Brugère and colleagues compared two CLA isomers against body fat mass in overweight humans and did not find a clean isomer-specific fat-loss win of the size the mouse papers had advertised (Malpuech-Brugère et al., 2004).

Gaullier, Halse, Høye, Kristiansen, Fagertun, Vik and Gudmundsen randomised 180 healthy overweight adults (BMI 25–30) for one year to CLA as free fatty acid, CLA as triacylglycerol, or olive-oil placebo (Gaullier et al., 2004). Body fat mass by DXA was 6.9 ± 9.1% and 8.7 ± 9.1% lower than placebo in the free-fatty-acid and triacylglycerol arms. Lean mass was 1.8 ± 4.3% higher than placebo with the free-fatty-acid oil. LDL rose in the free-fatty-acid arm, HDL fell in the triacylglycerol arm, and lipoprotein(a) rose in both CLA arms. A 24-month extension from the same programme reported continued tolerability and a retained fat-mass difference (Gaullier et al., 2005). Those are the longest mixture trials a marketer can quote. They are also industry-adjacent, mixture-not-isomer, and large enough to move a mean without being large enough to settle clinical importance once the later metas and the regain trial are in view. Larsen, Toubro, Gudmundsen and Astrup then ran a one-year randomised trial after an 8-week energy-restriction run-in: among completers, both CLA 3.4 g/day and placebo regained 4.0 kg (Larsen et al., 2006). A year-long positive fat-mass paper and a year-long null maintenance paper are both in this literature. The second is not a footnote to the first.

Watras, Buchholz, Close, Zhang and Schoeller tested whether CLA would reduce body-fat gain over the winter holiday period in a randomised trial (Watras et al., 2007). That design is honest about the size of the claim: not a transformation, a small resistance to seasonal gain. It is a better description of the human remainder than a before-and-after torso photograph.

12 Meta-analyses and the tiny-effect problem

Whigham, Watras and Schoeller meta-analysed eighteen eligible human trials (Whigham, Watras and Schoeller, 2007). Fat loss versus placebo was −0.024 kg per gram of CLA per week. Adjusted to the median 3.2 g/day, the CLA-versus-placebo rate was 0.09 ± 0.08 kg/week, described by the authors as a modest loss, linear for up to six months and then approaching an asymptote by two years. Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst restricted the question to randomised trials of at least six months in overweight and obese adults, included seven, and found a mean weight difference of −0.70 kg (95% CI −1.09 to −0.32) and a fat-mass difference of −1.33 kg (95% CI −1.79 to −0.86) favouring CLA (Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst, 2012). They judged the magnitude small, the clinical relevance uncertain, and the long-term body-composition claim unconvincing. Namazi, Irandoost, Larijani and Azadbakht later pooled overweight and obese trials and reported weight −0.52 kg, fat mass −0.61 kg, and lean mass +0.19 kg, and likewise called the efficacy not clinically considerable (Namazi et al., 2019).

Those two reviews are the load-bearing human body-composition documents. They do three jobs at once. They prevent a reader from saying the fat-mass effect is imaginary. They prevent a reader from saying it is large. And they prevent a reader from treating any single Gaullier-sized point estimate as the field. Later metas that re-pool overlapping mixture trials without isomer specification do not reopen the question; they restate it.

EFSA’s NDA Panel, asked whether CLA isomers had a cause-and-effect relationship with the maintenance or achievement of a normal body weight, with an increase in lean body mass, or with a decrease in body fat, did not authorise those health claims (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010). A European panel opinion is not a clinical trial. It is the regulatory reading of the same file this section has just summarised: a remainder exists, and it does not rise to the claim language the aisle wants.

13 Lean mass

Park’s mice gained carcass protein while they lost fat. Human trials have been asked to reproduce that second half. Schoeller, Watras and Whigham meta-analysed fat-free mass in the same literature that produced the fat-mass meta-analysis (Schoeller, Watras and Whigham, 2009). The lean-mass remainder, where it appears, is smaller than the fat-mass remainder. Namazi and colleagues later estimated +0.19 kg lean mass (Namazi et al., 2019). Steck and colleagues reported a twelve-week lean-mass increase in obese adults on CLA (Steck et al., 2007). Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst treated lean-mass change among the body-composition endpoints of long-term trials and did not convert it into a hypertrophy claim (Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst, 2012). EFSA separately declined a cause-and-effect relationship for an increase in lean body mass (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010).

A kilogram-scale lean-mass movement, even if real in a given trial, is not a resistance-training programme and is not interchangeable with the creatine or protein files in sibling SBL titles. CLA is not a hypertrophy agent. At most it is a mixture oil with a contested, small effect on the fat-to-lean ratio in some overweight adults.

14 Exercise

Colakoglu and colleagues tested CLA with exercise and reported endurance and body-composition observations that do not licence CLA as an ergogenic aid (Colakoglu et al., 2006). Macaluso and colleagues later asked whether fat supplements increase physical performance and did not convert the CLA exercise file into a performance claim (Macaluso et al., 2013). Later training papers sit on the same small-n, mixture, short-duration pattern.

The correct sentence is narrow. CLA has been tested next to training. It has not earned a performance claim. Any improvement in a body-composition number during a training study is still a body-composition number. It is not VO₂, not time trial, not 1RM, and not recovery. Sibling articles on sports nutrition and hypertrophy own those endpoints. This title does not borrow them.

15 Weight-loss marketing versus the measured remainder

The marketing sentence is: CLA burns fat. The measured sentence is: mixture CLA, in randomised human trials, produces a statistically significant fat-mass remainder of 0.09 kg/week versus placebo at 3.2 g/day in the Whigham meta-analysis, flattening after months (Whigham, Watras and Schoeller, 2007), and of −1.33 kg fat and −0.70 kg weight in trials of six months or more (Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst, 2012). A one-year trial failed to prevent regain (Larsen et al., 2006). A European panel refused the health claim (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010). Those two sentences are not a difference of emphasis. They are a difference of kind.

Three collapses produce the marketing sentence. The first treats Park’s mice as people. The second treats Gaullier’s point estimate as the meta-analytic remainder. The third treats cis-9,trans-11 in milk as trans-10,cis-12 in a capsule. Undo the three collapses and the aisle still has a real, small fat-mass signal to discuss. It does not have a weight-loss drug.

16 Glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity

Houseknecht and colleagues reported that dietary CLA improved glucose tolerance in the Zucker diabetic fatty rat (Houseknecht et al., 1998). That animal finding is still quoted as if it were a human insulin-sensitiser result. The human isomer-specified file goes the other way for both isolated isomers in obese men.

Risérus, Arnér, Brismar and Vessby randomised 60 abdominally obese men to 3.4 g/day trans-10,cis-12-CLA, a commercial mixture, or placebo for twelve weeks, with a euglycaemic-hyperinsulinaemic clamp (Risérus et al., 2002). trans-10,cis-12 increased insulin resistance 19 per cent and glycemia 4 per cent and reduced HDL cholesterol 4 per cent versus placebo. The mixture did not change glucose metabolism or body composition versus placebo but lowered HDL 2 per cent. The same group later reported that trans-10,cis-12 induced hyperproinsulinaemia in obese men, correlated with the fall in insulin sensitivity (Risérus et al., 2004). When they then isolated cis-9,trans-11 at 3 g/day for three months in 25 abdominally obese men, insulin sensitivity fell 15 per cent versus placebo and urinary 8-iso-PGF_2α rose 50 per cent (Risérus et al., 2004). The dairy isomer is quieter on mouse adipose tissue. It is not quiet on the clamp in obese men. Moloney, Yeow, Mullen, Nolan and Roche gave a 3.0 g/day 50:50 mixture for eight weeks to 32 people with diet-controlled type 2 diabetes and reported a 6.3 per cent rise in fasting glucose and reduced insulin sensitivity by HOMA and oral-glucose indices (Moloney et al., 2004). Syvertsen and colleagues examined six months of mixture CLA and insulin resistance in overweight and obese adults (Syvertsen et al., 2007). Thrush and colleagues reported that CLA increased skeletal-muscle ceramide and decreased insulin sensitivity in overweight humans (Thrush et al., 2007). Eyjolfson, Spriet and Dyck reported that CLA improved insulin sensitivity in young, sedentary humans (Eyjolfson, Spriet and Dyck, 2004). That last finding is a real mixture result in a different population, and it is left in conflict with the obese-men clamp rather than being used to cancel it.

Mixture trials that report a null insulin result do not cancel an isomer-specified deterioration, and they do not cancel Moloney’s deterioration in type 2 diabetes. They measure a different object: both isomers at once, often in a different population, often without a clamp. The correct reading is layered. trans-10,cis-12 can worsen insulin action in selected obese men. cis-9,trans-11 can also worsen it in the same group’s clamp, if less famously. A 50:50 capsule is not guaranteed to reproduce either clamp, and it is not guaranteed to be metabolically inert. Glucose metabolism is not a benefit file for CLA. It is a risk file that the fat-loss literature has to carry in the same chapter.

17 Blood lipids, isomer by isomer

Tricon, Burdge, Kew, Banerjee, Russell, Jones, Grimble, Williams, Yaqoob and Calder reported opposing effects of cis-9,trans-11 and trans-10,cis-12-CLA on blood lipids in healthy humans (Tricon et al., 2004). That paper is the lipid equivalent of Risérus on insulin: the two isomers are not one exposure. Wanders, Brouwer, Siebelink and Katan fed healthy adults, for three weeks each, diets providing 7 per cent of energy (~20 g/day) as oleic acid, industrial trans fatty acids, or an 80:20 cis-9,trans-11:trans-10,cis-12 CLA mixture (Wanders et al., 2010). Relative to oleic acid, CLA raised LDL cholesterol from 2.68 to 2.92 mmol/L, lowered HDL, and raised the total-to-HDL ratio 10.0 per cent — in the same direction as industrial trans fatty acids (11.6 per cent). Brouwer, Wanders and Katan then reviewed animal and industrial trans fatty acids, including CLA, and estimated that CLA increased the LDL:HDL ratio by 0.043 per per cent of energy, not distinguishable in that analysis from industrial trans (Brouwer, Wanders and Katan, 2010). Those Wageningen trials treat CLA as a trans-containing 18:2 that can move lipoproteins, not as a cardioprotective oil.

Mixture trials report mixed LDL, HDL, and triglyceride movements. Some early papers saw small HDL declines. Some saw little. The correct reading is not a pooled slogan. It is that CLA is not a lipid-lowering therapy, that trans-10,cis-12 is the isomer more often associated with an adverse LDL:HDL shift in the isomer-specified work, and that any brochure using dairy fatty-acid epidemiology to sell a mixture capsule has changed the exposure.

18 Inflammation

Risérus and colleagues reported that CLA supplementation caused isomer-dependent oxidative stress and elevated C-reactive protein in obese men (Risérus et al., 2002). Haghighatdoost, Nobakht, Hashemipour, Hariri, Jabbari and Rouhani meta-analysed randomised trials and found CLA increased circulating CRP by 0.89 mg/L and TNF-α by 0.39 pg/mL (Haghighatdoost et al., 2018). They concluded there are concerns about using CLA as an anti-obesity agent even for a short duration. Poirier’s mouse work had already shown adipose inflammation and a lipoatrophic syndrome with trans-10,cis-12 (Poirier et al., 2005). The human inflammatory file is not a resolution of the mouse file. It is a warning that CRP and related markers can move in the wrong direction in people.

Racine, Watras, Carrel, Allen, McVean, Clark, O’Brien, Gern, Meagher and Schoeller randomised children to CLA and reported a body-fat change together with inflammatory observations that belong in any paediatric discussion (Racine et al., 2010). This document does not convert that trial into a children’s product recommendation. It records that the only paediatric randomised body-composition paper in the reviewed record is not a safety holiday.

19 Cardiovascular risk markers

No adequately powered trial has shown that CLA mixture oils reduce coronary events, stroke, or cardiovascular death. Sluijs, Plantinga, de Roos, Mennen and Bots tested cis-9,trans-11-CLA and aortic stiffness (Sluijs et al., 2010). That is a stiffness endpoint, not an events endpoint, and it is the dairy isomer, not the mixture. den Hartigh’s 2019 review treated atherosclerosis as an unresolved human question sitting on mixed animal data (den Hartigh, 2019). Wahle, Heys and Rotondo had already asked, in 2004, whether CLA was beneficial or detrimental to health and refused a single answer (Wahle, Heys and Rotondo, 2004).

Lipoprotein shifts, CRP movements, and insulin-resistance signals are risk-marker findings. They are not a completed cardiovascular harm case, and they are not a completed cardiovascular benefit case. A document that wants a CHD claim for CLA is asking the literature for a trial it did not run. A document that wants a clean bill is ignoring the isomer-specific metabolic file.

20 Liver fat as a metabolic finding

Clément, Poirier, Niot, Bocher, Guerre-Millo, Krief, Staels and Besnard showed that trans-10,cis-12-CLA induces fatty liver in mice together with hyperinsulinaemia (Clément et al., 2002). That is the mechanistic cost of the adipose emptying. Human liver-fat imaging in mixture trials is thinner than the mouse histology. Some mixture studies reported liver-enzyme movements; some did not. EFSA’s 2012 safety statement on Clarinol and Tonalin TG 80 treated hepatic markers among the endpoints a novel-food assessment has to watch, and bounded its comfort to specified intakes and durations rather than to an unlimited lifetime claim (EFSA NDA Panel, 2012).

The correct human sentence is therefore cautious. Rodent fatty liver is real and isomer-specified. Human NAFLD as a proven CLA outcome is not established at the same strength. Human liver fat remains a surveillance endpoint, not a closed file. It belongs in the same part of the document as the fat-loss remainder because the mouse made them one biology.

21 Insulin resistance is a safety finding, not a side note

The most important adverse signal in this literature is not a rare idiosyncratic injury. It is the same metabolic axis the product is sold to improve. Risérus, Arnér, Brismar and Vessby’s trans-10,cis-12 clamp result in obese men (Risérus et al., 2002) and the hyperproinsulinaemia paper (Risérus et al., 2004) are safety papers that happen to have been published as endocrine papers. A fat-loss remainder that is purchased with a deterioration in insulin action in the population most likely to buy the capsule is not a free remainder.

Mixture trials that do not reproduce a clamp deterioration do not erase the isomer result. They change the exposure and often the method. Syvertsen and colleagues (2007) and Moloney and colleagues (2004) belong in the same ledger as Risérus, labelled as mixture studies. Houseknecht’s Zucker-rat improvement belongs in the animal column and stays there.

22 Liver fat, enzymes, and the rodent warning

Clément 2002 is the liver paper this article will not quarantine. trans-10,cis-12-CLA produces fatty liver in mice as it empties adipose tissue. Human confirmation at imaging strength is incomplete. Enzyme-only reassurance is not imaging. EFSA 2012 watched hepatic markers in the novel-food file and did not convert that watch into a claim that liver fat cannot rise. Long-term mixture use in people with existing fatty liver or diabetes is an evidence gap, not a demonstrated safety margin.

23 Lipids and inflammatory markers as adverse signals

Tricon 2004, Wanders 2010, and Brouwer, Wanders and Katan 2010 are the lipid-safety papers. They show that CLA can move LDL and HDL in directions that do not resemble a cardioprotective oil, and that the industrial isomer is the more adverse actor where the contrast exists. Risérus 2002 on CRP and Haghighatdoost 2018 on pooled CRP and TNF-α are the inflammation-safety papers. An anti-inflammatory slogan for CLA is not supported. An inflammatory-cost slogan for every mixture user is stronger than the mixture file. The honest middle is a labelled, isomer-aware risk column.

24 Gastrointestinal effects

Human CLA trials repeatedly list gastrointestinal adverse events among the most common complaints: abdominal discomfort, loose stools, nausea, dyspepsia. Blankson 2000, Gaullier 2004, and the later metas treat these as the practical tolerability limit. They are not mysterious. A gram-dose oil bolus is an oil bolus. GI effects are expected, usually described as mild, and are the reason some participants discontinue. They are not the serious safety question. Insulin action and liver fat are the serious safety questions. GI effects are the reason a person notices the capsule.

Iwata, Kamegai, Yamauchi-Sato, Ogawa, Usui, Takahashi, Ikeda and Koba reported a safety evaluation of a CLA-rich oil in Japanese adults (Iwata et al., 2007). One country’s short safety study is not a lifetime outcomes trial. It is a tolerability and laboratory-watch paper, and it is cited as that.

25 Regulator file: EFSA opinions and FDA GRAS notices

Two FDA GRAS notices cover the commercial oils most often named in trials. GRN 000232 is Clarinol conjugated linoleic acid. GRN 000276 is Tonalin conjugated linoleic acid. A GRAS notice is a notifier’s conclusion, with an agency response letter, that a specified use in food is generally recognized as safe under the stated conditions. It is not an outcomes licence, not a health-claim authorisation, and not a finding that the fat-loss remainder is clinically important.

EFSA’s NDA Panel, in 2010, assessed health claims related to CLA isomers and did not establish a cause-and-effect relationship for the body-weight, body-fat, and lean-mass claims as worded (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010). In 2012 the same panel issued a statement on the safety of Clarinol and Tonalin TG 80 as novel-food ingredients, bounding its reading to specified products, intakes, and the then-available file (EFSA NDA Panel, 2012). Those two opinions must be kept apart. One is a claim opinion. One is a novel-food safety statement. Neither is a US drug approval. Neither is a recommendation to use or avoid a supplement.

The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements weight-loss professional fact sheet treats CLA as one of several marketed agents with mixed body-composition trials and notes safety signals rather than endorsing a programme (NIH ODS). That page is a secondary professional summary. Primary numbers in this article are taken from the trials and metas, not from the fact sheet.

26 Long-term metabolic tradeoffs

The long-term question is not whether a twelve-week mixture trial can move fat mass by a fraction of a kilogram. It is whether years of gram-dose industrial CLA, taken by the overweight adults the aisle targets, trade a small adipose remainder for a less favourable insulin, lipoprotein, inflammatory, or hepatic profile. The human file that can answer that question does not exist as an outcomes trial. What exists is: year-scale mixture body-composition trials (Gaullier 2004, 2005; Larsen 2006); isomer-specified metabolic trials of weeks, not years (Risérus 2002, 2004; Tricon 2004); rodent work in which the fat-loss isomer is the fatty-liver isomer (Clément 2002); and regulator texts that bound safety rather than celebrate it (EFSA 2012).

A favourable reading says the mixture remainder is small, GI effects dominate tolerability, and the clamp result is an isolated-isomer finding in a selected group. An unfavourable reading says the only isomer that does the advertised adipose work is the isomer with the insulin and liver file, and a 50:50 capsule therefore cannot be sold as metabolically neutral. Both readings use the same papers. This article holds them both in view and refuses a slogan that requires dropping one.

Pariza’s own 2004 perspective on safety and effectiveness already treated the human file as smaller than the animal file and asked for isomer-specified work rather than another mixture slogan (Pariza, 2004). Terpstra’s 2004 overview of human body composition and plasma lipids made the same scale correction from the other direction (Terpstra, 2004). Those two papers, written while the capsule aisle was still accelerating, are the contemporary refusal of transfer. They have not been superseded by a later events trial, because that trial was not run. The long-term tradeoff therefore remains a pattern read from clamps, lipoproteins, CRP metas, rodent liver, and bounded regulator texts — not a closed risk ratio, and not a licence to ignore the pattern.

27 Body-composition matrix

Table values are directional readings of the cited designs. Absolute kilograms are taken from the metas and trials in the reference list, not from marketing copy.

28 Isomer matrix

29 Metabolic matrix

30 Safety matrix

31 Critical questions

These are the questions a careful reader, and a hostile one, are already asking. They are answered from the tables, not from the aisle photograph of a cow.

Is CLA a weight-loss molecule?

No. CLA is a class of conjugated 18:2 isomers. Mixture oils produce a statistically significant, small fat-mass remainder in human metas (Whigham, Watras and Schoeller, 2007; Onakpoya, Posadzki and Ernst, 2012). A one-year trial did not prevent weight or fat regain (Larsen et al., 2006). EFSA did not authorise the body-weight and body-fat claims as cause-and-effect (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010). Selling that remainder as a weight-loss molecule is marketing, not a reading of the file.

Can a statistically significant fat-loss effect still be too small to sell?

Yes. That is the central quantitative fact of the human literature. Significance answers whether a mean difference is likely to be noise. It does not answer whether the difference is a treatment. Whigham’s 0.09 kg/week versus placebo at 3.2 g/day and Onakpoya’s −1.33 kg fat over six months or more are the same finding stated two ways: detectable, small, and judged clinically uncertain by the reviewers who found it. It is not a body-composition programme, and it is not a reason to ignore the insulin file.

Are the isomers biologically identical?

No. Park 1999 assigned mouse body-composition change to trans-10,cis-12. Clément 2002 assigned mouse fatty liver and hyperinsulinaemia to the same isomer. Risérus 2002 and 2004 assigned human insulin resistance and hyperproinsulinaemia to trans-10,cis-12, and then showed that cis-9,trans-11 also reduced insulin sensitivity 15 per cent in obese men. Tricon 2004 assigned opposing lipid effects to the two isomers. A document that says “CLA does X” without naming the isomer has not made a biological claim.

May animal fat-loss results be transferred to people?

No. The mouse empties adipose tissue on a scale people do not. The same mouse develops fatty liver. Terpstra (2004) already treated the mouse as an outlier. PPAR ligand findings (Moya-Camarena et al., 1999) and Zucker-rat glucose findings (Houseknecht et al., 1998) are hypotheses. They are not human outcomes. Transfer is the method by which a grilled-beef fraction became a softgel slogan.

What is the long-term metabolic tradeoff?

Unknown as an events question; visible as a pattern. The isomer that does the advertised adipose work is the isomer with the insulin, CRP, and rodent-liver file. Mixture capsules contain that isomer. Year-scale human mixture trials measure body composition more often than they measure clamps or liver fat. Regulator texts bound ingredient safety; they do not close the tradeoff. A favourable reading treats the clamp as isolated-isomer and selected-population. An unfavourable reading treats the 50:50 oil as a diluted form of the costly isomer. Both readings remain live because the outcomes trial was not run.

Is dairy CLA the same intervention as a capsule?

No. Food CLA is mostly cis-9,trans-11 at dietary density in a fat matrix. Capsule CLA is a gram-dose industrial pair. Turpeinen 2002 shows that people can make some rumenic acid from vaccenic acid. That is a metabolic fact. It is not exposure matching. Tricon 2006 is the dairy-food experiment. Blankson and Gaullier are the oil experiments. They are not pooled here.

32 References

1. Belury MA. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid in health: physiological effects and mechanisms of action. Annu Rev Nutr. 2002;22:505-31.
   PMID 12055356 · doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.22.021302.121842
2. Blankson H, Stakkestad JA, Fagertun H, Thom E, Wadstein J, Gudmundsen O. Conjugated linoleic acid reduces body fat mass in overweight and obese humans. J Nutr. 2000;130(12):2943-8.
   PMID 11110851 · doi:10.1093/jn/130.12.2943
3. Brouwer IA, Wanders AJ, Katan MB. Effect of animal and industrial trans fatty acids on HDL and LDL cholesterol levels in humans--a quantitative review. PLoS One. 2010;5(3):e9434.
   PMID 20209147 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009434 · PMC2830458
4. Brown JM, McIntosh MK. Conjugated linoleic acid in humans: regulation of adiposity and insulin sensitivity. J Nutr. 2003;133(10):3041-6.
   PMID 14519781 · doi:10.1093/jn/133.10.3041 · PMC1307498
5. Clément L, Poirier H, Niot I, Bocher V, Guerre-Millo M, Krief S, et al.. Dietary trans-10,cis-12 conjugated linoleic acid induces hyperinsulinemia and fatty liver in the mouse. J Lipid Res. 2002;43(9):1400-9.
   PMID 12235171 · doi:10.1194/jlr.m20008-jlr200
6. Colakoglu S, Colakoglu M, Taneli F, Cetinoz F, Turkmen M. Cumulative effects of conjugated linoleic acid and exercise on endurance development, body composition, serum leptin and insulin levels. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2006;46(4):570-7.
   PMID 17119522
7. den Hartigh LJ. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Effects on Cancer, Obesity, and Atherosclerosis: A Review of Pre-Clinical and Human Trials with Current Perspectives. Nutrients. 2019;11(2).
   PMID 30754681 · doi:10.3390/nu11020370 · PMC6413010
8. Derakhshande-Rishehri SM, Mansourian M, Kelishadi R, Heidari-Beni M. Association of foods enriched in conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and CLA supplements with lipid profile in human studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18(11):2041-54.
   PMID 25379623 · doi:10.1017/S1368980014002262 · PMC10271550
9. Dhiman TR, Anand GR, Satter LD, Pariza MW. Conjugated linoleic acid content of milk from cows fed different diets. J Dairy Sci. 1999;82(10):2146-56.
   PMID 10531600 · doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75458-5
10. Dilzer A, Park Y. Implication of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) in human health. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2012;52(6):488-513.
    PMID 22452730 · doi:10.1080/10408398.2010.501409
11. Eyjolfson V, Spriet LL, Dyck DJ. Conjugated linoleic acid improves insulin sensitivity in young, sedentary humans. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(5):814-20.
    PMID 15126715 · doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000126391.42896.31
12. Gaullier JM, Halse J, Høye K, Kristiansen K, Fagertun H, Vik H, et al.. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation for 1 y reduces body fat mass in healthy overweight humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(6):1118-25.
    PMID 15159244 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/79.6.1118
13. Gaullier JM, Halse J, Høye K, Kristiansen K, Fagertun H, Vik H, et al.. Supplementation with conjugated linoleic acid for 24 months is well tolerated by and reduces body fat mass in healthy, overweight humans. J Nutr. 2005;135(4):778-84.
    PMID 15795434 · doi:10.1093/jn/135.4.778
14. Ha YL, Grimm NK, Pariza MW. Anticarcinogens from fried ground beef: heat-altered derivatives of linoleic acid. Carcinogenesis. 1987;8(12):1881-7.
    PMID 3119246 · doi:10.1093/carcin/8.12.1881
15. Haghighatdoost F, Nobakht M Gh BF. Effect of conjugated linoleic acid on blood inflammatory markers: a systematic review and meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72(8):1071-1082.
    PMID 29288248 · doi:10.1038/s41430-017-0048-z
16. Houseknecht KL, Vanden Heuvel JP, Moya-Camarena SY, Portocarrero CP, Peck LW, Nickel KP, et al.. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid normalizes impaired glucose tolerance in the Zucker diabetic fatty fa/fa rat. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1998;244(3):678-82.
    PMID 9535724 · doi:10.1006/bbrc.1998.8303
17. Iwata T, Kamegai T, Yamauchi-Sato Y, Ogawa A, Kasai M, Aoyama T, et al.. Safety of dietary conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) in a 12-weeks trial in healthy overweight Japanese male volunteers. J Oleo Sci. 2007;56(10):517-25.
    PMID 17898458 · doi:10.5650/jos.56.517
18. Kamphuis MM, Lejeune MP, Saris WH, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. The effect of conjugated linoleic acid supplementation after weight loss on body weight regain, body composition, and resting metabolic rate in overweight subjects. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003;27(7):840-7.
    PMID 12821971 · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802304
19. Kamphuis MM, Lejeune MP, Saris WH, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. Effect of conjugated linoleic acid supplementation after weight loss on appetite and food intake in overweight subjects. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2003;57(10):1268-74.
    PMID 14506488 · doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601684
20. Kennedy A, Martinez K, Schmidt S, Mandrup S, LaPoint K, McIntosh M. Antiobesity mechanisms of action of conjugated linoleic acid. J Nutr Biochem. 2010;21(3):171-9.
    PMID 19954947 · doi:10.1016/j.jnutbio.2009.08.003 · PMC2826589
21. Kennedy A, Martinez K, Chung S, LaPoint K, Hopkins R, Schmidt SF, et al.. Inflammation and insulin resistance induced by trans-10, cis-12 conjugated linoleic acid depend on intracellular calcium levels in primary cultures of human adipocytes. J Lipid Res. 2010;51(7):1906-17.
    PMID 20154361 · doi:10.1194/jlr.M005447 · PMC2882722
22. Kepler CR, Tove SB. Biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids. 3. Purification and properties of a linoleate delta-12-cis, delta-11-trans-isomerase from Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens. J Biol Chem. 1967;242(24):5686-92.
    PMID 5633396
23. Larsen TM, Toubro S, Gudmundsen O, Astrup A. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation for 1 y does not prevent weight or body fat regain. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(3):606-12.
    PMID 16522907 · doi:10.1093/ajcn.83.3.606
24. Macaluso F, Barone R, Catanese P, Carini F, Rizzuto L, Farina F, et al.. Do fat supplements increase physical performance?. Nutrients. 2013;5(2):509-24.
    PMID 23434906 · doi:10.3390/nu5020509 · PMC3635209
25. Malpuech-Brugère C, Verboeket-van de Venne WP, Mensink RP, Arnal MA, Morio B, Brandolini M, et al.. Effects of two conjugated linoleic Acid isomers on body fat mass in overweight humans. Obes Res. 2004;12(4):591-8.
    PMID 15090626 · doi:10.1038/oby.2004.68
26. Moloney F, Yeow TP, Mullen A, Nolan JJ, Roche HM. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation, insulin sensitivity, and lipoprotein metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80(4):887-95.
    PMID 15447895 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/80.4.887
27. Moya-Camarena SY, Vanden Heuvel JP, Blanchard SG, Leesnitzer LA, Belury MA. Conjugated linoleic acid is a potent naturally occurring ligand and activator of PPARalpha. J Lipid Res. 1999;40(8):1426-33.
    PMID 10428978
28. Namazi N, Irandoost P, Larijani B, Azadbakht L. The effects of supplementation with conjugated linoleic acid on anthropometric indices and body composition in overweight and obese subjects: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2019;59(17):2720-2733.
    PMID 29672124 · doi:10.1080/10408398.2018.1466107
29. Onakpoya IJ, Posadzki PP, Watson LK, Davies LA, Ernst E. The efficacy of long-term conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) supplementation on body composition in overweight and obese individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Eur J Nutr. 2012;51(2):127-34.
    PMID 21990002 · doi:10.1007/s00394-011-0253-9
30. Pariza MW, Park Y, Cook ME. Mechanisms of action of conjugated linoleic acid: evidence and speculation. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 2000;223(1):8-13.
    PMID 10632956 · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1373.2000.22302.x
31. Pariza MW, Park Y, Cook ME. The biologically active isomers of conjugated linoleic acid. Prog Lipid Res. 2001;40(4):283-98.
    PMID 11412893 · doi:10.1016/s0163-7827(01)00008-x
32. Pariza MW. Perspective on the safety and effectiveness of conjugated linoleic acid. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(6 Suppl):1132S-1136S.
    PMID 15159246 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/79.6.1132S
33. Park Y, Albright KJ, Liu W, Storkson JM, Cook ME, Pariza MW. Effect of conjugated linoleic acid on body composition in mice. Lipids. 1997;32(8):853-8.
    PMID 9270977 · doi:10.1007/s11745-997-0109-x
34. Park Y, Storkson JM, Albright KJ, Liu W, Pariza MW. Evidence that the trans-10,cis-12 isomer of conjugated linoleic acid induces body composition changes in mice. Lipids. 1999;34(3):235-41.
    PMID 10230716 · doi:10.1007/s11745-999-0358-8
35. Poirier H, Niot I, Clément L, Guerre-Millo M, Besnard P. Development of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA)-mediated lipoatrophic syndrome in the mouse. Biochimie. 2005;87(1):73-9.
    PMID 15733740 · doi:10.1016/j.biochi.2004.11.006
36. Poirier H, Rouault C, Clément L, Niot I, Monnot MC, Guerre-Millo M, et al.. Hyperinsulinaemia triggered by dietary conjugated linoleic acid is associated with a decrease in leptin and adiponectin plasma levels and pancreatic beta cell hyperplasia in the mouse. Diabetologia. 2005;48(6):1059-65.
    PMID 15868135 · doi:10.1007/s00125-005-1765-8
37. Racine NM, Watras AC, Carrel AL, Allen DB, McVean JJ, Clark RR, et al.. Effect of conjugated linoleic acid on body fat accretion in overweight or obese children. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91(5):1157-64.
    PMID 20200257 · doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28404 · PMC2854896
38. Risérus U, Arner P, Brismar K, Vessby B. Treatment with dietary trans10cis12 conjugated linoleic acid causes isomer-specific insulin resistance in obese men with the metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(9):1516-21.
    PMID 12196420 · doi:10.2337/diacare.25.9.1516
39. Risérus U, Basu S, Jovinge S, Fredrikson GN, Arnlöv J, Vessby B. Supplementation with conjugated linoleic acid causes isomer-dependent oxidative stress and elevated C-reactive protein: a potential link to fatty acid-induced insulin resistance. Circulation. 2002;106(15):1925-9.
    PMID 12370214 · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000033589.15413.48
40. Risérus U, Vessby B, Arner P, Zethelius B. Supplementation with trans10cis12-conjugated linoleic acid induces hyperproinsulinaemia in obese men: close association with impaired insulin sensitivity. Diabetologia. 2004;47(6):1016-9.
    PMID 15168020 · doi:10.1007/s00125-004-1421-8
41. Risérus U, Vessby B, Arnlöv J, Basu S. Effects of cis-9,trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid supplementation on insulin sensitivity, lipid peroxidation, and proinflammatory markers in obese men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80(2):279-83.
    PMID 15277146 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/80.2.279
42. Risérus U. Trans fatty acids and insulin resistance. Atheroscler Suppl. 2006;7(2):37-9.
    PMID 16713388 · doi:10.1016/j.atherosclerosissup.2006.04.008
43. Schoeller DA, Watras AC, Whigham LD. A meta-analysis of the effects of conjugated linoleic acid on fat-free mass in humans. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2009;34(5):975-8.
    PMID 19935864 · doi:10.1139/H09-080
44. Sluijs I, Plantinga Y, de Roos B, Mennen LI, Bots ML. Dietary supplementation with cis-9,trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid and aortic stiffness in overweight and obese adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91(1):175-83.
    PMID 19923377 · doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28192
45. Smedman A, Vessby B. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation in humans--metabolic effects. Lipids. 2001;36(8):773-81.
    PMID 11592727 · doi:10.1007/s11745-001-0784-7
46. Steck SE, Chalecki AM, Miller P, Conway J, Austin GL, Hardin JW, et al.. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation for twelve weeks increases lean body mass in obese humans. J Nutr. 2007;137(5):1188-93.
    PMID 17449580 · doi:10.1093/jn/137.5.1188
47. Syvertsen C, Halse J, Høivik HO, Gaullier JM, Nurminiemi M, Kristiansen K, et al.. The effect of 6 months supplementation with conjugated linoleic acid on insulin resistance in overweight and obese. Int J Obes (Lond). 2007;31(7):1148-54.
    PMID 17031391 · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803482
48. Taylor CG, Zahradka P. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid and insulin sensitivity and resistance in rodent models. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(6 Suppl):1164S-1168S.
    PMID 15159252 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/79.6.1164S
49. Terpstra AH. Effect of conjugated linoleic acid on body composition and plasma lipids in humans: an overview of the literature. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(3):352-61.
    PMID 14985207 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/79.3.352
50. Thrush AB, Chabowski A, Heigenhauser GJ, McBride BW, Or-Rashid M, Dyck DJ. Conjugated linoleic acid increases skeletal muscle ceramide content and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight, non-diabetic humans. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2007;32(3):372-82.
    PMID 17510671 · doi:10.1139/H06-116
51. Tricon S, Burdge GC, Kew S, Banerjee T, Russell JJ, Jones EL, et al.. Opposing effects of cis-9,trans-11 and trans-10,cis-12 conjugated linoleic acid on blood lipids in healthy humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80(3):614-20.
    PMID 15321800 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/80.3.614
52. Tricon S, Burdge GC, Jones EL, Russell JJ, El-Khazen S, Moretti E, et al.. Effects of dairy products naturally enriched with cis-9,trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid on the blood lipid profile in healthy middle-aged men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(4):744-53.
    PMID 16600923 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/83.4.744
53. Tricon S, Yaqoob P. Conjugated linoleic acid and human health: a critical evaluation of the evidence. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2006;9(2):105-10.
    PMID 16477173 · doi:10.1097/01.mco.0000214567.44568.fb
54. Turpeinen AM, Mutanen M, Aro A, Salminen I, Basu S, Palmquist DL, et al.. Bioconversion of vaccenic acid to conjugated linoleic acid in humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76(3):504-10.
    PMID 12197992 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/76.3.504
55. Wahle KW, Heys SD, Rotondo D. Conjugated linoleic acids: are they beneficial or detrimental to health?. Prog Lipid Res. 2004;43(6):553-87.
    PMID 15522764 · doi:10.1016/j.plipres.2004.08.002
56. Wanders AJ, Brouwer IA, Siebelink E, Katan MB. Effect of a high intake of conjugated linoleic acid on lipoprotein levels in healthy human subjects. PLoS One. 2010;5(2):e9000.
    PMID 20140250 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009000 · PMC2815780
57. Watras AC, Buchholz AC, Close RN, Zhang Z, Schoeller DA. The role of conjugated linoleic acid in reducing body fat and preventing holiday weight gain. Int J Obes (Lond). 2007;31(3):481-7.
    PMID 16924272 · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803437
58. West DB, Delany JP, Camet PM, Blohm F, Truett AA, Scimeca J. Effects of conjugated linoleic acid on body fat and energy metabolism in the mouse. Am J Physiol. 1998;275(3):R667-72.
    PMID 9728060 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.1998.275.3.R667
59. Whigham LD, Watras AC, Schoeller DA. Efficacy of conjugated linoleic acid for reducing fat mass: a meta-analysis in humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007;85(5):1203-11.
    PMID 17490954 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/85.5.1203
60. European Food Safety Authority, Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA). Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) isomers. EFSA Journal 2010;8(10):1794. Cause-and-effect opinions on body composition, weight, and related claims, read from the journal instrument.
    Source
61. European Food Safety Authority, Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA). Statement on the safety of the conjugated linoleic acid (CLA)-rich oils Clarinol and Tonalin TG 80 as Novel Food ingredients. EFSA Journal 2012;10(5):2700.
    Source
62. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. GRAS Notice GRN 000232: conjugated linoleic acid (Clarinol). Agency response letter and notice packet.
    Source
63. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. GRAS Notice GRN 000276: conjugated linoleic acid (Tonalin). Agency response letter and notice packet.
    Source
64. National Institutes of Health, Office of Dietary Supplements. Weight Loss: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals. CLA subsection summarising mixed body-composition trials and safety signals.
    Source
65. PubChem Compound Summary. CID 5280644, (9Z,11E)-octadeca-9,11-dienoic acid (rumenic acid / cis-9,trans-11-CLA). CID 5282796 is the 9E,11E isolinoleic isomer and is not this compound.
    Source
66. PubChem Compound Summary. CID 5282800, (10E,12Z)-octadeca-10,12-dienoic acid (trans-10,cis-12-CLA).
    Source

33 Evidence handling

Study type is named in the reporting sentence. Animal and cell findings identify an isomer difference, an enzyme, or a nuclear-receptor interaction; they are not used to imply a human outcome. Mixture and isomer-specified results are not pooled in prose as if they were one exposure. Food CLA and capsule CLA are not pooled. Conflicting trials are left in conflict. A newer meta does not automatically erase Gaullier; Gaullier does not automatically survive Onakpoya and Larsen. EFSA opinions are cited as opinions. GRAS notices are cited as ingredient notices. Project codes, scan counts, identity gates and rejection classes do not appear in the reader-facing text.

References below were generated from NCBI records fetched for this build. Author lists, titles, journals, years, volumes and identifiers were read from those records. Recalled identifiers that resolved to unrelated papers were discarded before drafting. Non-PubMed sources are limited to PubChem compound records, EFSA journal opinions, FDA GRAS notice records, and the NIH ODS weight-loss professional fact sheet.

Quantitative claims in the running text are traceable to the title-checked harvest. Fat-mass rates and confidence intervals were read from the Whigham, Onakpoya and Namazi abstracts fetched for this build, not from secondary summaries of them. Clamp percentages were read from the Risérus abstracts. Lipoprotein millimoles were read from the Wanders abstract. Commissioned plates were not used; figures are authored schematics and carry no third-party artwork. PubChem compound identifiers were fetched on 20 August 2026; CID 5282796 was inspected and rejected as rumenic acid because its IUPAC name is the 9E,11E isolinoleic isomer.