1

An ad for a supplement called "Zuccarin" in our local paper included a variety of claims:

"The slimming effect of stable blood sugar levels:

"A recent italian study of Zuccarin showned the impressive weight loss results of blocking carbohydrates. The diet group on Zuccarin lost substantially more weight than the placebo group and their waist shrunk more as well."

"Zuccarin...mullberry leaf supplementation...the tablets naturally block carbohydrates from being digested into simple sugar. This helps your waistline and your blood sugar levels."

"Test yourself: Sugar problem:

  • Lack of energy
  • Difficulty losing weight
  • Sugar cravings
  • Feeling tired and irritated

These are some clues that your blood sugar may be unstable or too high. Try Zuccarin..."

Impressively, they cite:

Da Villa, G., et al. "White mulberry supplementation as adjuvant treatment of obesity." Journal of biological regulators and homeostatic agents 28.1 (2014): 141-145.

I couldn't access the full text, but I found this snippet, which sounds pretty impressive - I'm not qualified to know how good their methodology was. There appear to be several studies on similar subjects.

Are the claims posed accurate - is blood sugar a mechanism for the symptoms described, and can "White Mullberry" produce the effects claimed?

0xDBFB7
  • 1,934
  • 1
  • 12
  • 20
  • It'a pretty obscure journal https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Biological_Regulators_and_Homeostatic_Agents IF of 2. Even if the research was summarized correctly... – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:01
  • [WebMD does mention](https://www.webmd.com/vitamins-supplements/ingredientmono-1250-white%20mulberry.aspx) that "There are some chemicals in white mulberry that work in a similar way to some medicines used for type 2 diabetes." So it's perhaps not implausible. – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:06
  • And Wikipedia names the substances "Moracin M, steppogenin-4′-O-β-D-glucoside and mulberroside A were isolated from the root bark of Morus alba L. and all produced hypoglycemic effects". The ref for that being https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19545615 which has about 79 citations in GS so it's perhaps not complete bullshit although I'm unfamiliar with [the journal](https://www.journals.elsevier.com/fitoterapia) in which this was published as well. It's about par with the other one on IF, so likewise pretty obscure research. – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:13
  • On the other hand: https://sciencebasedpharmacy.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/mulberry-for-weight-loss/ – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:27
  • Also http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144861716302727 was cited by https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/natural-ingredients-health-products/mulberries/ – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:40
  • Finally there's a review https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29287458 it has full page on anti-diabetic activity but only a paragraph or two on anti-obesity, mostly suing the paper I mentioned in the comment right before this one. The latter paper is in a somewhat better rated journal: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/food-chemistry IF 4+ – Fizz Jan 12 '18 at 20:49
  • @Fizz whew, you've done some research! That science basedpharmacy link seems to summarize things pretty well, I think... – 0xDBFB7 Jan 13 '18 at 06:55

0 Answers0