THE MAJOR ANTI-DIABETIC HERBAL MEDICATIONS USED IN BARINGO COUNTY KENYA, THEIR BIOCHEMICAL PROFILES, ACTIVITY AND SAFETY

Abstract

The use of herbal medicine in the management of Diabetes Mellitus in the world today has been steadily increasing. In the African continent, approximately 80% of its inhabitants, use herbal products, whose’ biochemical, efficacy, and safety are unclear. In the test for safety and efficacy for diabetic herbal medicine, rodents have traditionally been used, though recently, it has received criticisms from ‘animal rights’ advocates, who see their use as unethical. Hence the need for an alternative protocol which is less ethically demanding, compared to the traditionally rat’s protocol. This study therefore, identified the major anti-diabetic herbal medications used in Baringo County, Kenya, analyzed their biochemical profiles, and investigated two commonly used herbs for efficacy and safety, in the University of Eldoret (UOE) Biotechnology Centre, by firstly determining the safe dosages of the identified herbs using, Frog Embryo Teratogenic Assay-Xenopus 96HR protocol (FETAX), to guide the use of less numbers of rats, in succeeding experiments. A descriptive cross-sectional survey was adopted during the field work, whereby thirty-nine (39) diabetics, and twelve (12) herbalists, were recruited. A researcher-administered questionnaire was used to gather data from diabetics, while an interview guide was used to collect data from the herbalists. In UOE laboratories, the safety of the two most commonly used herbs, was firstly determined, using FETAX 96Hr protocol and using the LD50 obtained, and findings from previous studies, safe dosages was determined, and used in rats’ protocol. Descriptive statistics, probit analysis, and regression analysis were used to analyze the frequency & use of major herbs, biochemical profiles, determination of LD50’s, and efficacy, respectively. From the field studies, the commonly used antidiabetic herbs in Baringo county were Urtica dioica (UD) (75%) and Carissa edulis (CE) (58%), herbs. They were both endowed with the major known anti- diabetic phytochemicals (saponins +++, alkaloids ++, and flavonoids ++). On analysis of safety levels in vitro studies, CE extracts had and LD50 of, 4,321.67mg/l, and 14,706.3 mg/l and, UD extracts, and LD50 of 21,706mg/kg, and 3955mg/kg, for crude ethanolic and aqueous respectively, similar with dosages from previous studies. The identified dosages from in-vitro studies [FETAX], did not only manifest an antidiabetic activity of the herbs, but also portrayed some significant levels of safety, when extrapolated to in vivo studies. With reference to histological outcomes on the selected tissues of rats, no change was seen in those exposed to CE extracts, while a change was seen in those exposed to UD extracts- Kidney (interstitial nephritis)’, and liver (inflammation. In terms of antidiabetic activity -crude CE root extracts were much more efficacious compared to UD crude leave extracts [(CE p-value<0.001 (ethanolic) & p-value=0.011 (aqueous) and UD p-value <0.001 (ethanolic) & p-value =0.026 (aqueous)]. CE extracts purified forms showed a much more significant antidiabetic activity compared to its crude version, as opposed to UD extracts. In conclusion, CE extracts, are not only safe, but efficacious while UD extracts, though efficacious, they are not safe. The in-vitro (FETAX Assay) study used, helped in determination of the safe dosages used in, in-vivo(rats) studies, which significantly helped reduce the mortality of the animals [rats] used in in vivo studies, however, much more studies are needed with regards to UD extracts