Decreasing, Null and Increasing Effects of Eight Popular Types of Ginseng on Acute Postprandial Glycemic Indices in Healthy Humans: The Role of Ginsenosides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether other ginseng sources can replicate the glycemic-lowering efficacy observed previously with American ginseng and whether ginsenosides are mediators. We assessed the effect of eight popular ginseng types on postprandial plasma glucose (PG) and insulin (PI) indices, linking effects to ginsenoside profiles. METHODS: Using a double-blind, randomized, multiple-crossover design, 12 healthy participants (gender: 6M:6F, age: 34 +/- 3 y, BMI: 25.8 +/- 1.2 kg/m(2)) received 10 3g treatments: American, American-wild, Asian, Asian-red, Vietnamese-wild, Siberian, Japanese-rhizome, and Sanchi ginsengs and two placebos. Each treatment was given 40-minutes before a 75g-oral-glucose-tolerance-test (75g-OGTT) with blood drawn at -40, 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120-minutes. HPLC-UV analysis quantified seven principal ginsenosides. RESULTS: Two-factor analysis showed the main effects of ginseng-type and time were significant for PG and PI, with an interaction for PG (p < 0.05). Subsequent one-factor analysis showed an effect of ginseng-type on 90-min-PG and 90-min-PI (p < 0.05). This was reflected in effects on peak-PG, area under the curve (AUC)-PG and AUC-PI (p < 0.05). But the effect on 90-min-PI and AUC-PI were significant (p < 0.05) only in overweight participants (BMI > 25 kg/m(2), n = 6). Planned comparisons with placebo showed a tendency for American ginseng and Vietnamese ginseng to lower 90-min-PG (p < 0.06), while Asian ginseng raised peak-PG and AUC-PG, American-wild ginseng raised 120-min-PG, and Siberian ginseng raised 90-min-PG, 120-min-PG, and AUC-PG (p < 0.05). Stepwise-multiple-regression assessed the protopanaxadiol:protopanaxatriol (PPD:PPT)-ginsenoside ratio as the sole predictor (p < 0.05) for 90-min-PG (beta = -0.43, r(2) = 0.072), AUC-PG (beta = -0.25, r(2) = 0.06), 90-min-PI (beta = -0.26, r(2) = 0.065), AUC-PI (beta = -0.20, r(2) = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Ginseng has variable glycemic effects, in which the PPD:PPT-ginsenoside ratio might be involved. But the low variance explained suggests the involvement of other unmeasured ginsenoside or non-ginsenoside components.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".