The headline reads, 'Simple sugar compound improves function of multiple sclerosis patients, a UCI study shows.' Wait, did they just say that sugar can improve MS? It's tempting to read it this way, but I'm sorry to say that's not the case. This simple sugar that they're referring to is not the sweet stuff found in fruit and candy. However, there is a food source and supplement source for it. And yes, their study did suggest that it could help improve function in multiple sclerosis. So let's break it down and see what it

in the US. So that makes you one in a million. And you have a special purpose in this world that no diagnosis can take away from you. So if you are ready to reclaim your body, mind and life from multiple sclerosis, welcome to my MS podcast. I'm your host, Alene Brennan. Today's news comes from the labs of University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, where researchers are diving deep into a compound called N-acetylglucosamine. Now, before you try figuring out how to pronounce that, let alone spell it, let me break it down for you. What exactly is N-acetylglucosamine? It's derived from glucose, the main sugar our bodies run on. This is why you're seeing sugar in the headlines for this research.

Structures and molecules in cells. So in short, even though it's a sugar molecule, it doesn't come from fruit or candy, nor does it give your taste buds that sweet hit or your body a boost of energy. The main point, don't interpret this headline as a green light to start using sweets to manage multiple sclerosis. I know I would love it to be the case myself as well, but it's not. And it's important that we know the facts.

Like N-acetylcysteine. And N-acetylglucosamine also sounds similar to glucosamine, i. e. the glucosamine chondroitin supplement that we hear a lot about for joint health. So I wanted to understand, is there any connection and can you use one in place of the other? In short, the answer is no. First with N-acetylglucosamine and N-acetylcysteine, yes, both share the term N-acetyl in the name,

N-acetylcysteine is a pretty popular supplement in the MS community, and it came into the spotlight even more during the pandemic. So this supplement, this is not the one that was used in the study, but again, sounds similar, is used to primarily clear mucus in the respiratory conditions, hence why it became more popular during the pandemic. And it also replenishes the antioxidant glutathione. Now, boosting glutathione may benefit those living with MS by minimizing antioxidant stress and reducing inflammation, two key factors in the disease progression.

The answer is no. There are a few types of glucosamine you might come across. Glucosamine sulfate and glucosamine hydrochloride, these two are the ones that are primarily used in the joint supplement. But the third type of glucosamine, N-acetylglucosamine, this is the one that was used in this study. So, in short, again, this is another example where the name sounds similar, but they do.

It can promote the repair and regrowth of myelin, that protective layer around our brain's wiring, and it can even improve neurological functions. Um, yes, yes, and yes, please. This is huge because current MS treatments have limitations and there's still so much that we don't know. So let's dive deeper into this study because it sounds pretty good. This was an open-label or an unblinded study. Now I'm going to explain what that means in a minute. So just tuck that in the back of your mind. But the study looked at the effects of this supplement, N-acetylglucosamine, in MS patients.

Participants were given a powder form of the supplement that they took orally, and they received like these pre-measured packets. Each packet was two grams, and some patients were given six grams, so three packets, and others were given 12 grams or six packets that they took daily for four weeks. So the treatment was four weeks, but the overall study was a span of 11 weeks because they had three weeks leading up to the treatment,

what they were experiencing from the glatiramer acetate alone. So that's interesting. We were told upfront that they were already on this therapy, but then we're learning that they had further reduction in inflammation activity when they introduced this supplement for a four-week period. And apparently other FDA-approved MS treatments have not reduced these certain inflammatory markers the same way that this supplement did.

Things can cross this barrier. So, that's why it makes treating MS so challenging because most medications cannot cross the blood-brain barrier. But the study suggests that maybe this supplement can. The other benefits here are that this supplement has potential advantages, like it's high in safety, it's low in cost, and it's just an over-the-counter dietary supplement.

Because a patent essentially gives them certain rights to use or sell the supplement for a specific application in MS. And if they get the patent, that would mean that they have exclusive rights to use or license the product in the way that's described in the patent for a certain number of years. As a consumer, I hear a patent and I think of my purse. This exclusivity means that there's little to no competition on the market, which can drive up the price. Now, I did a quick search and found that you can currently purchase N-acetylglucosamine for $20 to $40-ish. Now, I'm a firm believer that when it comes to supplements, you get what you pay for. I'm a big bargain hunter. I'm all for coupons, deals, Black Friday sales.

If you want to learn more, you can head over to alenebrennan.com/supplements. But my point here is that we don't know what the price point will be if and when the formulation of this supplement goes to market based on this study. But if a patent is granted, it gives them the opportunity to spike that price a bit without competition. Think of it in terms of the brand name versus generic name drugs. When the brand name drug goes to market, it's often more expensive until the patent expires. Once the patent expires, then there's increased competition and it generally lowers the price. So if a patent is granted for this particular supplement in the way that it was used in this study, it could have an initial

label study, meaning that both the participants and the researchers know who is receiving the treatment. This isn't ideal for a study because it can influence and skew the results. If you're not too familiar with studies, let me give you a quick breakdown. So there's a blinded study and an unblinded study. In a blinded study, participants and often researchers do not know who's receiving the experimental treatment and who's receiving a placebo or another control treatment.

Participants typically do not know what they're receiving, but researchers do. In a double-blinded study, neither the participants nor the researchers know who's receiving the treatment. This is kind of the gold standard in many types of clinical research because it minimizes any bias. In a triple-blinded study, neither the participants, researchers, or the people analyzing the data know who received which treatment. This adds an extra layer of bias prevention. Now, in unblinded or open-label study, this is the one that was used in this case here, both participants and researchers know who is receiving which treatment. Again, this isn't ideal because it creates the potential of bias. If you know that you're receiving the experimental treatment, you might perceive improvements due to the placebo effect. So it's not ideal. It doesn't completely discredit the research, but just a little side note. And another side note, if you are interested in the concept of the placebo effect, I highly recommend that you check out the work of Dr. Joe Dispenza on

our health. So again, if you're interested in the concept of the placebo effect, go check out Joe Dispenza. Okay, but back to our study. Being unblinded introduces potential challenges and bias. It doesn't automatically discredit the results. However, it does emphasize the need for careful interpretation of the data and ideally further validation through blinded studies.

However, as noted, this is a preliminary study that certainly needs to be repeated with higher standards to reduce the potential bias in the results. I look at it as just one more step in the right direction. So what do we do in the meantime? Keep talking to your doctor for the best plan for you. And in between appointments, play your role through diet and lifestyle to reclaim your body, mind, and life from multiple sclerosis. Well, my friend, we've reached the end of this episode. Pick one lesson from today's discussion and put it into action now. It's time to reclaim your body, mind and life from multiple sclerosis. And for more resources, events and programs, head over to Alenebrennan. com. See you on the next episode of my MS podcast.