The findings regarding green tea extract appear to have been based on a study published in 2009. In that early study, the dogs were fed green tea extract in a fasting state — without food and in varying doses.
Green tea extract is poorly absorbed. That is probably why the 2009 study was conducted on fasting animals — i.e. to increase bio-availability and absorption.
More importantly, a follow-up study published about 2 years later (2011) in the International Journal of Toxicology in 2011 concluded:
“Conduct of the study in nonfasted dogs under the same testing conditions and dose levels showed unremarkable results. Assuming both studies were valid, at the identified no observed adverse effect levels (NOAEL) of each study, systemic exposures (based on area under the curve [AUC]) were actually lower in fasted than nonfasted dogs, suggesting that fasting may have rendered the target organ systems potentially more vulnerable to the effects of green tea extract.”
The phrase “unremarkable results” implies the findings were within normal limits.
We’re always on the lookout for additional peer-reviewed information and commentary regarding any controversial ingredient
So, if you come across anything else (in a peer-reviewed journal, of course), please feel free to share it.
3 months, 4 weeks ago
