Results of Oil Research
January 1997
Michael
Whitehouse, Department of Medicine,
University of Queensland,
Princess Alexandra Hospital,
BRISBANE
4102
Late last year I started testing some oil
samples that had been supplied by Peter Thompson (Qld), John Snowden (WA)
and Greg Barowski (VIC) to assist us with research into the differences in
arthritis treatment in emu oil. In
the last 12 months we have tested about 40 samples and have obtained some
interesting results.
This research has primarily involved emus
sourced in Queensland and much encouragement from Peter Thompson, John and
Fay Spencer, and it would also not have been possible without assistance from
Craig Davis of Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Desley Butters
and Athol Turner. Whilst this work
would not have been possible without their help, there is no way that the
challenges confronting the research needs of emu oil will be satisfied if
we continue to rely on this level of funding and assistance.
I therefore applaud these people for
agreeing to let me indicate the results form what I have been doing. Following therefore is an overview of
what we have been trying to do and a summary of results to date. It is too early to draw any conclusions
other than to state that there is a very large variation in the
anti-inflammatory potency of emu oil samples that I have tested to date. My colleague in the Hospital, Dr. Sherree
Cross, and Dr. Snowden (Ag. West, S Perth)
will be looking at the wound healing potential of some of these oils to see
if this correlates with the anti-inflammatory activity.
Further research is needed and I am
extremely please to know that Peter will be setting up several pens for
different nutritional regimes so that we can follow these through in a few
months time to see what, if any, variation we find in the medicinal
potential of the oils.
The major objective of the research has
been to find a source of oil with a consistent high level of biological
activity that we can use as a benchmark for further testing and for
development of a chemical test that does not require the use of rats. Dependence on rats for testing for beneficial
medicinal properties is not only expensive and time consuming but likely to
be limited due to the pressures associated with animal rights pressure
groups.
Having had the opportunity to test
samples where we know the whole history of the birds that the fat has been
supplied form has been an essential prerequisite for these trials. Also knowledge that we will be able to
source additional birds form the same supplier when we locate the ideal
outcome has been equally as important.
Results of this research have revealed a
large variation different samples.
Based on our scoring system which provides an overall anti-arthritis
score of from 1 to 100, we have obtained results ranging from 0 to 81.
Whilst it is too early to draw
conclusions as to what conditions or prerequisites provide the best oil in
terms of biological activity (particularly for treating arthritis) we have
been rather dismayed by the large variation in samples.
The samples tested have included
differences based on genetic background (ie Queensland of West Australian origin),
nutritional regime (ie several proprietary mixes with and without access to
pasture as well as straight native vegetation);
Sex;
Age;
Native of farmed;
Gut versus back fat.
We have also tested oils which are
commercially available in the UK, USA, Canada, and sourced from five
Australian States.
In concluding this article I would like
to make a special appeal for the Industry as a whole to get behind this
research. If we are unable to get
national funding for the work that needs to be done, individuals, such as
those who have so far contributed to this research, will be forced to keep
any information obtained to themselves to enable them to be remunerated for
their contributions.
|
