Bay Leaves Improve Glucose and Lipid Profile of People with Type 2 Diabetes

Bay leaves (Laurus nobilis) have been shown to improve insulin function in vitro but the effects on people have not been determined. The objective of this study was to determine if bay leaves may be important in the prevention and/or alleviation of type 2 diabetes. Forty people with type 2 diabetes were divided into 4 groups and given capsules containing 1, 2 or 3 g of ground bay leaves per day for 30 days or a placebo followed by a 10 day washout period. All three levels of bay leaves reduced serum glucose with significant decreases ranging from 21 to 26% after 30 d. Total cholesterol decreased, 20 to 24%, after 30 days with larger decreases in low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of 32 to 40%. High density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol increased 29 and 20% in the groups receiving 1 and 2 g of bay leaves, respectively. Triglycerides also decreased 34 and 25% in groups consuming 1 and 2 g of bay leaves, respectively, after 30 d. There were no significant changes in the placebo group.

5 Replies

  • Good information!Thanks for posting!!

  • Great, bay leaves it is then!

    Problem solved and continue with the diet that got you to T2.

  • I am surprised that normally, almost none of these studies look at the changes in insulin levels -- which should be the first thing to focus on . Unless that's also brought in the picture, how do we know what's causing the drop?

  • Drop could be due to more insulinsenstivity or insulin level....

    You are right@anup they should check insulin level alongwith drop.

  • “Bay Leaves Improve Glucose and Lipid Profile of People with Type 2 Diabetes”quoted in the link here

    is a PubMed Central® (PMC) full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM) and is not belief as casually remarked here.

    It is conclusion based on in vitro research.

    “In vitro” comes from the Latin term "in glass". The term refers to studies of biological properties that are done in a test tube (i.e. under glass) rather than in a human or animal. It is often contrasted to in vivo ("in life")studies which are done inside an organismWhat is the definition of in vitro?

    In vitro studies allow scientists to isolate specific cells, bacteria, and viruses etc.,and study them without the distractions of having to look at a whole organism.This means that sometimes results found in in vitro studies do not translate well to "real life."

    Humans are much more complicated than test tubes. However, compared to in vivo studies in vitro studies are substantially faster. They are also less expensive, and can be done with fewer ethical and safety concerns.Then those results can be compared to whatever is the gold standard test.

    In vitro research is important across all fields of medical research. With the exception of research that has to be done in a living organism, it's safer. In vitro research is essential to making medical advances. It can't do everything that in vivo research can, but it can do a lot.

    Human pharmacokinetic in vivo studies are often presumed to serve as the “gold standard” to assess product bioequivalence (BE) of immediate-release (IR) solid oral dosage forms. However, when this general assumption is re-visited, it appears that in vitro studies are sometimes better than in vivostudies in assessing BE of IR solid oral dosage forms. Reasons for in vitro studies to sometimes serve as the better method are that in vitro studies: (a) reduce costs, (b) more directly assess product performance, and (c) offer benefits in terms of ethical considerations. Reduced costs are achieved through avoiding in vivo studies where BE is self-evident, where biopharmaceutic data anticipates BE, and where in vivo BE study error is high. In vitro studies more directly assess product performance than do conventional human pharmacokinetic BE studies since in vitro studies focus on comparative drug absorption from the two products, while in vivoBE testing can suffer from complications due to its indirect approach.

    Regarding ethical considerations, in vitro studies better embrace the principle “No unnecessary human testing should be performed” and can result in faster development. Situations when in vitro test should be viewed as preferred include Class I drugs with rapid dissolution, Class III drugs with very rapid dissolution, and highly variable drugs with rapid dissolution and that are not bio(equivalence)problem drugs. Sponsors of potential in vivo human pharmacokinetic BE testing should be required to justify why in vitro data is insufficient, similar to proposed animal testing requires justification to not employ an in vitro approach.

You may also like...