We appreciate Dr David Briskey’s comments on our article. We do indeed refer to the LipiSperse system, stating that further studies on bioavailability of the LipiSperse system are needed. However, Dr Briskey’s literature reference 27 describes a bioavailability test compared to the standard form of PEA, with results that seem to indicate better bioavailability for the LipiSperse system. Therefore, we believe it can be stated that PEA under this oral absorption system, the LipiSperse system, is of benefit and superior to the standard formulation of PEA. In our article, we have not compared the bioavailability of the micronised and ultra-micronised forms with the LipiSperse system, as, to our knowledge, there are no comparative studies between these dosage forms. Here, too, we agree with Dr Briskey. Finally, the enterohepatic cycling that appears to occur with LipiSperse may contribute to better bioavailability of this form.