Sugradik is a 100% natural formulation made from pure organically cultivated herbs used to care diabetes sugaradik is a polyherbal medicine in the form of powder which control diabetic dislepidemia, blood pressure and cholesterol.
Table
1: Baseline characteristics of study groups
|
Parameters |
Group
I (n=38) |
Group
II (n=36) |
t |
p |
|
|
Mean
+ SE |
Mean
+ SE |
||||
|
Age |
52.79+1.38 |
54.11+1.77 |
0.58 |
NS |
|
|
Sex
(M:F) |
24:14 |
22:14 |
- |
- |
|
|
BMI |
24.48+0.64 |
28.17+0.89 |
3.38 |
<0.001 |
|
|
Waist
/ Hip Ratio |
0.96+0.01 |
0.95+0.01 |
1.00 |
NS |
|
|
Pulse |
80.08+0.91 |
81.00+0.91 |
0.15 |
NS |
|
|
Blood
Pressure (mmHg) |
Systolic |
136.05+3.30 |
140.42+3.38 |
0.92 |
NS |
|
Diastolic |
86.21+1.88 |
85.47+2.16 |
0.26 |
NS |
|
|
Glycemic
Control |
FBS(mg/dl) |
233.03+8.81 |
246+5.81 |
1.20 |
NS |
|
HbA1c
(%) |
8.39+0.30 |
10.01+0.17 |
4.76 |
<0.001 |
|
|
Renal
Function |
B.
Urea (mg/dl) |
28.80+1.18 |
29.33+0.91 |
0.35 |
NS |
|
S.
Creainine (mg/dl) |
0.97+0.25 |
0.99+0.04 |
0.12 |
NS |
|
|
LFT |
S.
Bilirubin (mg/dl) |
0.76+0.19 |
0.70+1.5 |
0.15 |
NS |
|
SGOT
(IU/L) |
24.50+1.21 |
25.15+1.06 |
0.41 |
NS |
|
|
SGPT
(IU/L) |
25.29+1.27 |
24.07+0.86 |
1.05 |
NS |
|
Table
2: Comparative effect of poly herbal powder (Sugaradik) and placebo drug on
different paramet
|
Parameters |
Drug |
Placebo |
|||||||
|
Baseline |
After
3 months |
t |
p |
Baseline |
After
3 months |
t |
p |
||
|
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
||||||
|
BMI |
24.48+0.64 |
26.44+0.62 |
2.18 |
<0.05 |
28.17+0.89 |
28.45+0.77 |
0.22 |
NS |
|
|
W/H
Ratio |
0.96+0.01 |
0.96+0.01 |
- |
- |
0.95+0.01 |
0.96+0.01 |
1.00 |
NS |
|
|
Pulse |
80.08+0.91 |
80.76+0.61 |
0.64 |
NS |
81.00+0.91 |
82.89+0.69 |
1.65 |
NS |
|
|
BP |
Systolic |
136.05+3.30 |
126.42+1.51 |
2.66 |
<0.02 |
140.42+3.38 |
141.67+3.00 |
0.27 |
NS |
|
Diastolic |
86.21+1.88 |
83.37+1.05 |
1.31 |
<0.2 |
85.47+2.16 |
88.94+1.37 |
1.47 |
NS |
|
|
FBS |
233.03+8.81 |
136.16+4.96 |
9.59 |
<0.001 |
246.31+5.81 |
272.50+4.73 |
3.29 |
<0.001 |
|
|
Hba1c |
8.39+0.30 |
6.37+0.10 |
6.51 |
<0.001 |
10.01+0.17 |
11.43+0.19 |
1.67 |
NS |
|
Table
3: Comparative effect of poly herbal powder (Sugaradik) and placebo drug on 0
and 3 months
|
Parameters |
0 |
3 |
|||||||
|
Drug |
Placebo |
t |
p |
Drug |
Placebo |
t |
p |
||
|
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
||||||
|
BMI |
24.48+0.64 |
28.17+0.89 |
3.38 |
<0.001 |
26.44+0.62 |
28.45+0.77 |
2.10 |
<0.05 |
|
|
W/H
Ratio |
0.96+0.01 |
0.95+0.01 |
1.00 |
NS |
0.96+0.01 |
0.96+0.01 |
- |
- |
|
|
Pulse |
80.08+0.91 |
81.00+0.91 |
0.15 |
NS |
80.76+0.61 |
82.89+0.69 |
2.31 |
<0.05 |
|
|
BP |
Systolic |
136.05+3.30 |
140.42+3.38 |
0.92 |
NS |
126.42+1.51 |
141.67+3.00 |
4.55 |
<0.001 |
|
Diastolic |
86.21+1.88 |
85.47+2.16 |
0.26 |
NS |
83.37+1.05 |
88.94+1.37 |
3.23 |
<0.001 |
|
|
FBS |
233.03+8.81 |
246.31+5.81 |
1.20 |
NS |
136.16+4.96 |
272.50+4.73 |
19.72 |
<0.001 |
|
|
Hba1c |
8.39+0.30 |
10.01+0.17 |
4.76 |
<0.001 |
6.37+0.10 |
11.43+0.19 |
24.63 |
<0.001 |
|
Table
4: Comparison of side effect profiles in drug and placebo
|
Parameters |
Placebo |
Placebo |
|||||
|
0
months |
3
months |
p |
0
months |
3
months |
p |
||
|
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
Mean+SE |
||||
|
Renal
Function |
B
urea (mg/dl) |
24.48+0.64 |
28.17+0.89 |
NS |
26.44+0.62 |
28.45+0.77 |
NS |
|
S.
Creatinine (mg/dl) |
0.96+0.01 |
0.95+0.01 |
NS |
0.96+0.01 |
0.96+0.01 |
NS |
|
|
BP |
S.
Bilirubin |
80.08+0.91 |
81.00+0.91 |
NS |
80.76+0.61 |
82.89+0.69 |
NS |
|
SGOT
(IU/L) |
136.05+3.30 |
140.42+3.38 |
NS |
126.42+1.51 |
141.67+3.00 |
NS |
|
|
SGPT
(IU/L) |
86.21+1.88 |
85.47+2.16 |
NS |
83.37+1.05 |
88.94+1.37 |
NS |
|
Table
5: Side effect profile of poly herbal powder (Sugaradik) (N=38)
|
Side
Effect |
n |
|
Poor
Glycemic Control |
2 |
|
Vomiting |
0 |
|
Loss
of appetite |
0 |
|
Burning
epigastrium |
0 |
|
Liver
dysfunction |
0 |
|
Renal
dysfunction |
0 |
Discussion
:
Type
2 diabetes is a progressive disease, characterized by a slow but steady
deterioration of beta cell function. The current study was undertaken to
evaluate the safety and efficacy of this herbal product in newly diagnosed type2
diabetic patients.
We
cannot compare our results with earlier studies because of non-availability of
similar studies in the literature however various ingredients of this compound
has been shown to have positive effect on glycemic control by various workers.
Shekelle
et al (2005) underwent a study to evaluate and synthesize the evidence on the
effect of ayurvedic therapies for diabetes mellitus, a systematic review of
trials were assessed and found that botanical therapy was by far the most
commonly studied ayurvedic treatment. The most – studied herbs were Gymnema
Sylvester, Curcuma Indica, Fenugreek, and Eugenia Jambolana.
Grover
et al (2002) presented exhaustive research conducted in last few decades on
plants mentioned in ancient literature of used traditionally for diabetes has
shown anti-diabetic Property2
Cicero et al (2004) reviewed what do ltalian herbalists suggest for glycemic control were frequently suggested herbal remedies like gymnema, psyllium for , fenugreek, bilberry, garlic, Chinese ginseng , dandelion, burdock, prickly pear cactus, and bitter melon and among dietary supplements, alpha-lipoic acid, and frutooligosaccharides (by 685 herbalists) and found efficacious in reducing glycemia3.
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 ekhvaabs.
All Rights Reserved.
Site Conceived, Designed, Hosted and Maintained by ekhvaabs