Traditional Chinese medicine for treating abdominal obesity

Abstract

The present disclosure relates to the field of health food technology, in particular to a traditional Chinese medicine composition, preparation method and use thereof. The traditional Chinese medicine composition is made from Coicis Semen, Hippophae Fructus, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma. The traditional Chinese medicine composition uses less species of Chinese herbs and has significant effect on reducing the circumference of waist and abdomen, reducing the weight of visceral fat and anti-inflammation by reasonable combination, and does not have side effects.

Claims

1. A traditional Chinese medicine composition for treating abdominal obesity, which is made from the following raw materials consisting of: TABLE-US-00016 Coicis Semen 50 parts; Hippophae Fructus 25 parts; Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts; and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 12.5 parts.

2. A health food, comprising the traditional Chinese medicine composition according to claim 1.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

(1) The present disclosure discloses a traditional Chinese medicine composition, preparation method and use thereof, and it can be achieved by one of ordinary skill in the art through improving process parameters based on the contents here. In particular, it needs to be pointed out that all similar substitutions and modifications are apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art and are considered to be included in the present disclosure. The method and use of the present disclosure have been described by way of preferred embodiments, and it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that changes and combinations of the method and use described herein may be made without departing from the content, spirit and scope of the present invention to achieve and use the techniques of the present disclosure.

(2) The raw materials and the excipients used in the traditional Chinese medicine composition, the preparation method and use thereof provided by the present disclosure are all commercially available.

(3) The present disclosure is further described in conjunction with the following Examples:

Example 1

(4) Preparation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Composition

(5) 1. Raw Materials

(6) The weight proportion of every raw materials: Coicis Semen 50 parts, Hippophae Fructus 25 parts, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 12.5 parts.

(7) 2. Preparation Method

(8) The active pharmaceutical ingredients of Coicis Semen, Hippophae Fructus, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma were mixed, soaked in added water, and the amount of water added was 8 times as much as the weight of raw materials, and the soaking time was 1 h. Decoction was performed twice, 2 h each time. The decoction solution was filtered and concentrated until soluble solids concentration was 80%, said traditional Chinese medicine composition of the present disclosure was obtained.

Example 2

(9) Preparation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Composition

(10) 1. Raw Materials

(11) The weight proportion of every raw materials: Coicis Semen 20 parts, Hippophae Fructus 35 parts, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 10 parts, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 20 parts.

(12) 2. Preparation Method

(13) The preparation method was the same as that in Example 1.

Example 3

(14) Preparation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Composition

(15) 1. Raw Materials

(16) The weight proportion of every raw materials: Coicis Semen 70 parts, Hippophae Fructus 10 parts, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 35 parts, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 5 parts.

(17) 2. Preparation Method

(18) The preparation method was the same as that in Example 1.

Example 4

(19) Preparation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Composition

(20) 1. Raw Materials

(21) The weight proportion of every raw materials: Coicis Semen 100 parts, Hippophae Fructus 10 parts, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 10 parts, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 15 parts.

(22) 2. Preparation Method

(23) The preparation method was the same as that in Example 1.

Example 5

(24) Pharmacodynamic Experiment of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Compositions for Treating Abdominal Obesity

(25) 1. Experimental Materials

(26) (1) Main Reagents

(27) Feed (whole milk protein, corn starch, sucrose, soybean oil), minerals, vitamins, raw materials were self-purchased, were completed by the preparation method of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, were completed by the processing of the Experimental Animal Center of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

(28) Chlorpromazine injection, Southwest Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., national medicine permission number H50020116.

(29) Kit, Nanjing Jiancheng Bioengineering Institute.

(30) (2) Experimental Animals

(31) SD rats, male, SPF grade, body weight (18015) g, provided by the Animal Experimental Center of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

(32) (3) Main Instruments

(33) Electronic analytical balance, BS124S, Startorius (Germany); microplate reader, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (USA); ultra low-temperature freezer, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (USA); ultra pure water machine, Mill-Q II, Milipore (Bedford, Mass., USA); DDL-5 freezing centrifuge, Shanghai Anting Scientific Instrument Factory.

(34) 2. Test Methods

(35) Healthy male SD rats were housed in normal maintenance feed (equivalent to normal diet) for 3 days.

(36) Blank group, model group, test group were set up respectively. The blank control group was given intraperitoneal injection of saline once and freely drank and ate; the model group and each test group were all injected intraperitoneally with chlorpromazine 3 mg/kg once and freely drank and ate. During the experiments, the blank group was given basic feed; the model group and the test groups were given medium-fat feed (including: 140 g/kg whole milk protein, corn starch 538.1 g/kg, sucrose 87.6 g/kg, soybean oil 137 g/kg), and minerals and vitamins (minerals 35 g/kg, vitamin 50 g/kg, choline 2.3 g/kg) were complemented into it. All of them continued 15 days.

(37) After the model group was set up, each test group took the test sample for 6 weeks: the low, medium and high dosage groups of Example 1 (4.5:9.0:18.0 g/kg), high dosage group (18.0 g/kg) of Examples 2, 3 and 4, the administration volume was 2.0 mL/kg. The model group was given the corresponding dosage of distilled water.

(38) 3. Test Indexes

(39) After 6 weeks, the animals were sacrificed, blood was taken and dissection was performed. The circumference of waist and abdomen, body weight and body length of the rats were measured accurately and the Lee's index was calculated.

(40) Perinephric fat, epididymal fat, epicardial fat, retroperitoneal fat, greater omental fat and mesenteric fat, and total visceral adipose tissue (VAT) were weighed.

(41) The concentrations of inflammation-related factors in serum: IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1 (Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor), adiponectin, IL-6, CRP were determined.

(42) 4. Statistical Methods

(43) In general, the analysis of variance was used; however, it was needed that the homogeneity of variance test was firstly performed according to the variance analysis procedure. If the variance was homogeneous, the F value was calculated. F<F.sub.0.05, conclusion: the difference between the averages of each group was not significant. FF.sub.0.05, p0.05, statistical analysis was performed by the pairwise comparison between the average of multiple experimental groups and the average of control group. For non-normal or non-homogeneous data, appropriate transformation(s) of variables was carried out. The transformed data was subjected to statistical analysis after meeting the normal or homogeneous variance requirements. If the transformed data still did not reach the normal or homogeneous variance after the transformation of variables, statistical analysis was performed by rank sum test.

(44) 5. Results of the Experiment

(45) After the completion of the experiments, the index level changes of each group were shown in Table 1 to Table 3.

(46) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 1 The effects of each dosage group on Lee's index and circumference of waist and abdomen of rats Circumference Number of of waist and Group cases Lee's index abdomen Blank group 15 293.61 1.08 14.25 0.05 Model group 15 309.18 1.22.sup.# 17.90 0.10.sup.# Low dosage group of 15 301.51 2.25.sup. 17.01 0.15 Example 1 Medium dosage group of 15 300.59 4.70.sup. 16.23 0.05.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 15 295.08 0.19.sup. 15.05 0.05.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 15 295.12 0.22.sup. 15.22 0.24.sup. Example 2 High dosage group of 15 296.33 1.13.sup. 15.99 0.15.sup. Example 3 High dosage group of 15 295.98 2.34.sup. 15.45 0.08.sup. Example 4 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05.

(47) The comparisons of Lee's index of each rat group are shown in Table 1. The difference was statistical comparing the Lee's index of the rats in the model group with that in the blank group (p<0.05). There was statistical difference between the Lee's index in each sample group and the model group (p<0.05). As to the index of circumference of waist and abdomen, there was statistical difference comparing each sample group with the model group (p<0.05).

(48) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 2 The comparisons of body fat (g) of each rat group Retroperitoneal Epididymal Epicardial Greater omental Perinephric Mesenteric Visceral adipose Group fat fat fat fat fat fat tissue (VAT) Blank group 2.33 0.60.sup. 1.58 0.29.sup. 0.31 0.09.sup. 0.98 0.09.sup. 0.35 0.05.sup. 2.56 0.20.sup. 8.11 0.32 Model group 3.98 0.65.sup.# 1.95 0.38.sup.# 0.39 0.23.sup.# 1.39 0.31.sup.# 0.42 0.14.sup. 4.10 1.10.sup.# 13.39 2.61.sup.# Low dosage group of 3.79 1.82.sup. 1.86 0.45.sup. 0.38 0.20.sup. 1.39 0.43.sup. 0.38 0.10.sup. 2.76 1.08.sup. 11.48 5.24.sup. Example 1 Medium dosage group of 3.10 0.41.sup. 1.57 0.68.sup. 0.36 0.17.sup. 1.36 0.10.sup. 0.35 0.22.sup. 2.70 0.49.sup. 10.15 2.19.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 3.02 0.40.sup. 1.50 0.39.sup. 0.34 0.01.sup. 1.35 0.21.sup. 0.28 0.17.sup. 2.67 0.23.sup. 9.89 1.26.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 3.17 0.25.sup. 1.49 0.27.sup. 0.35 0.08.sup. 1.35 0.34.sup. 0.29 0.16.sup. 2.69 0.56.sup. 9.99 1.11.sup. Example 2 High dosage group of 3.15 0.23.sup. 1.51 0.44.sup. 0.34 0.10.sup. 1.35 0.27.sup. 0.30 0.18.sup. 2.71 0.44.sup. 10.01 1.67.sup. Example 3 High dosage group of 3.13 0.41.sup. 1.50 0.23.sup. 0.35 0.11.sup. 1.36 0.16.sup. 0.31 0.27.sup. 2.78 0.47.sup. 10.09 1.26.sup. Example 4 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05.

(49) There were statistical differences comparing the weight of retroperitoneal fat, epididymal fat, epicardial fat, greater omental fat, mesenteric fat and total visceral adipose tissue (VAT) of the rats in the model group with those in the blank group (p<0.05), which indicated the success of modeling.

(50) As to the indexes of weight of retroperitoneal fat, epididymal fat, mesenteric fat and total visceral adipose tissue, there were statistical differences between the medium dosage group of Example 1 and the model group (p<0.05).

(51) As to the indexes of weight of retroperitoneal fat, epicardial fat, greater omental fat, perinephric fat, epididymal fat, mesenteric fat and total visceral adipose tissue (VAT), there were statistical differences between high dosage groups of Examples 1 to 4 and the model group were statistically significant(p<0.05).

(52) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 3 The comparisons of inflammation-related factors of each group IL-10 IL-18 PAI-1 Adiponectin CRP IL-6 Group (pg/mL) (pg/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (pg/mL) Blank group 85.93 16.98.sup. 34.92 3.98 16.83 0.26.sup. 19.535 10.524.sup. 1.256 0.262.sup. 96.068 9.869.sup. Model group 26.33 6.924.sup.# 133.40 25.96.sup.# 40.67 5.22.sup.# .sup.4.55 0.276.sup.# 5.381 0.253.sup.# 239.757 17.210.sup.# Low dosage group of 35.58 3.87.sup. 70.32 6.10.sup. 28.82 0.99.sup. 6.710 0.392.sup. 4.679 0.217.sup. 196.557 7.996.sup. Example 1 Medium dosage group of 41.52 16.31.sup. 66.88 18.24.sup. 26.95 2.84.sup. 9.226 1.823.sup. 4.091 0.218.sup. 202.266 11.841.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 56.12 2.303.sup. 59.42 1.721.sup. 25.67 1.96.sup. 13.053 1.504.sup. 3.485 0.748.sup. 186.876 13.656.sup. Example 1 High dosage group of 50.12 11.13.sup. 56.77 1.234.sup. 25.11 1.11.sup. 7.234 1.112.sup. 3.662 0.225.sup. 196.876 3.332.sup. Example 2 High dosage group of 52.12 10.09.sup. 59.23 0.728.sup. 26.67 0.96.sup. 7.123 0.347.sup. 3.485 0.447.sup. 191.363 8.225.sup. Example 3 High dosage group of 49.12 12.43.sup. 59.67 9.721.sup. 26.23 0.88.sup. 6.934 0.593.sup. 3.485 0.388.sup. 190.245 17.656.sup. Example 4 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05.

(53) Comparing the concentrations of IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1, adiponectin, IL-6 and CRP of the rats in the model group with those in the blank group, all the differences were statistically meaningful (p<0.05), which indicated the success of modeling.

(54) There were statistic differences between the concentrations of IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1, adiponectin, IL-6 and CRP of each sample group (p<0.05).

(55) 6. Summary of the Experiment

(56) Comprehensive analysis of the above data shows that all of the sample groups can reduce the circumference of waist and abdomen, and eliminate the visceral fat to varying degrees. There are significant differences when comparing with the model group.

(57) Compared with the blank group, all of the inflammation-related factors IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1, adiponectin, TNF-, IL6, CRP, etc. in serum of model group show significant increase or decrease, while each sample group can improve the change(s) of these factors to certain degrees. It indicates that each test group has an intervention effect on the imbalance of inflammation-related factors in abdominal obesity model.

Example 6

(58) Pharmacodynamic Experiment of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Compositions for Treating Abdominal Obesity

(59) 1. Experimental Materials

(60) (1) Main Reagents

(61) Feed (whole milk protein, corn starch, sucrose, soybean oil), minerals, vitamins, raw materials were self-purchased, were completed by the preparation method of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, were completed by the processing of the Experimental Animal Center of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

(62) Chlorpromazine injection, Southwest Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., national medicine permission number H50020116.

(63) Kit, Nanjing Jiancheng Bioengineering Institute.

(64) (2) Animals

(65) SD rats, male, SPF grade, body weight (18015)g, provided by the Animal Experimental Center of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

(66) (3) Main Instruments

(67) Electronic analytical balance, BS124S, Startorius (Germany); microplate reader, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (USA); ultra low-temperature freezer, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (USA); ultra pure water machine, Mill-Q II, Milipore (Bedford, Mass., USA); DDL-5 freezing centrifuge, Shanghai Anting Scientific Instrument Factory.

(68) 2. Test Methods

(69) Healthy male SD rats were housed in normal maintenance feed (equivalent to normal diet) for 3 days.

(70) Blank group, model group, test group were set up respectively. The blank control group was given intraperitoneal injection of saline once and freely drank and ate; the model group and each test group were injected intraperitoneally with chlorpromazine 3 mg/kg once and freely drank and ate. During the experiment, the blank group was given basic feed; the model group and the test groups were given medium-fat feed (including: 140 g/kg whole milk protein, corn starch 538.1 g/kg, sucrose 87.6 g/kg, soybean oil 137 g/kg), and minerals and vitamins (minerals 35 g/kg, vitamin 50 g/kg, choline 2.3 g/kg) were complemented into it. All of them continued 15 days.

(71) After the model was set up, each test group took the test sample for 6 weeks: the high dosage group of Example 1 (18.0 g/kg), single herb group of Coicis Semen, Hippophae Fructus, Citri Rubrum Exocarpium and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma (18.0 g/kg, preparation method of the single herb was the same as in Example 1), the administration volume was 2.0 mL/kg. The model group was given the corresponding dosage of distilled water.

(72) 3. Test Indexes

(73) After 6 weeks, the animals were sacrificed, blood was taken and dissection was performed. The circumference of waist and abdomen, body weight and body length of rats were measured accurately and Lee's index was calculated.

(74) Perinephric fat, epididymal fat, epicardial fat, retroperitoneal fat, greater omental fat and mesenteric fat, and total visceral adipose tissue (VAT) were weighed.

(75) The concentrations of inflammation-related factors in serum: IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1 (Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor), adiponectin, IL-6, CRP were determined.

(76) 4. Statistical Methods

(77) In general, the analysis of variance was used, however, it was needed that homogeneity of variance test was firstly performed according to the variance analysis procedure. If the variance was homogeneous, the F value was calculated. F<F.sub.0.05, conclusion: the difference between the averages of each group was not significant. FF.sub.0.05, p0.05, statistical analysis was performed by the pairwise comparison between the average of multiple experimental groups and the average of control group. For non-normal or non-homogeneous data, appropriate transformation(s) of variables was carried out. The transformed data was subjected to statistical analysis after meeting the normal or homogeneous variance requirements. If the transformed data still did not reach the normal or homogeneous variance after the transformation of variables, statistical analysis was performed by rank sum test.

(78) 5. Results of the Experiment

(79) After the completion of the experiments, the index level changes of each group are shown in Table 4 to Table 6.

(80) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 4 The effects of each dosage group on Lee's index and circumference of waist and abdomen of rats Circumference Number of of waist and Group cases Lee's index abdomen (cm) Blank group 15 293.61 1.08 14.25 0.05 Model group 15 309.18 1.22.sup.# 17.90 0.10.sup.# Coicis Semen group 15 301.45 1.25.sup.* 17.01 0.15* Hippophae Fructus group 15 302.51 0.93.sup.* 16.98 0.06* Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 15 303.51 1.09.sup.* 16.87 0.11* group Glycyrrhizae Radix et 15 299.51 0.23.sup.* 17.11 0.23* Rhizoma group High dosage group of 15 295.08 0.19.sup. 15.05 0.05.sup. Example 1 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05; *stands for being compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.

(81) The comparisons of Lee's index of each rat group are shown in Table 4. The difference between the Lee's index of rats in the model group and the blank group was statistically meaningful (p<0.05). There was statistical difference between the Lee's index in each sample group and the model group (p<0.05). As to the circumference of waist and abdomen, there was no statistical difference between each single herb group and the model group.

(82) Also, there were statistical differences between the Lee's indexes in the high dosage group and each single herb group (p<0.05). As to the circumference of waist and abdomen, there were significant differences between Example 1 group and each single herb group (p<0.05).

(83) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 5 The comparisons of body fat (g) of each rat group Retroperitoneal Epididymal Epicardial Greater omental Perinephric Mesenteric Visceral adipose Group fat fat fat fat fat fat tissue (VAT) Blank group 2.33 0.60 1.58 0.29 0.31 0.09 0.98 0.09 0.35 0.05 2.56 0.20.sup. 8.11 0.32 Model group 3.98 0.65.sup.# 1.95 0.38.sup.# 0.39 0.23.sup.# 1.39 0.31.sup.# 0.42 0.14 4.10 1.10.sup.# 13.39 2.61.sup.# Coicis Semen group 3.81 0.86* 1.70 0.33* 0.38 0.09* 1.39 0.03* 0.39 0.03* 2.87 1.08.sup.* 11.95 0.46* Hippophae Fructus 3.83 0.93* 1.78 0.63* 0.37 0.12* 1.38 0.21* 0.38 0.11* 2.98 0.35.sup. 10.98 0.06* group Citri Rubrum 3.60 1.73* 1.81 0.09* 0.38 0.23* 1.38 0.44* 0.40 0.03* 2.70 1.27.sup. 10.09 0.15* Exocarpium group Glycyrrhizae Radix et 3.66 1.74* 1.80 0.12* 0.37 0.21* 1.38 0.09* 0.38 0.09* 2.74 0.06.sup.* 10.54 0.45* Rhizoma group High dosage group of 3.02 0.40.sup. 1.50 0.39.sup. 0.34 0.01.sup. 1.35 0.21.sup. 0.28 0.17.sup. 2.67 0.23.sup. .sup.9.89 1.26.sup. Example 1 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05; *stands for being compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.

(84) As to the indexes of weight of retroperitoneal fat, epididymal fat, epicardial fat, greater omental fat, mesenteric fat and total visceral adipose tissue (VAT), there was statistical difference between each single herb group and the high dosage group of Example 1 of the sample groups (p<0.05).

(85) TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 6 The comparisons of inflammation-related factors of each group IL-10 IL-18 PAI-1 Adiponectin CRP IL-6 Group (pg/mL) (pg/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (pg/mL) Blank group 85.93 16.98.sup. 34.92 3.98 16.83 0.26 19.535 10.524 1.256 0.262 96.068 9.869 Model group 26.33 6.924.sup.# 133.40 25.96.sup.# 40.67 5.22.sup.# 4.55 0.276.sup.# 5.381 0.253.sup.# 239.757 17.210.sup.# Coicis Semen group 34.67 9.37.sup.* 78.32 7.76.sup.* 30.82 0.03.sup.* 6.053 1.275.sup.* 4.669 0.210* 200.334 11.345.sup.* Hippophae Fructus 35.78 3.09.sup.* 89.67 6.18.sup.* 36.82 0.77.sup.* 6.539 1.206.sup.* 4.876 0.287* 190.043 21.333.sup.* group Citri Rubrum 30.34 5.56.sup.* 70.53 8.10.sup.* 28.82 0.34.sup.* 5.883 1.407.sup.* 4.544 0.654* 209.986 8.235.sup.* Exocarpium group Glycyrrhizae Radix et 30.11 5.39.sup.* 95.11 11.66.sup.* 32.82 0.89.sup.* 5.932 1.512.sup.* 4.987 0.198* 203.045 7.978.sup.* Rhizoma group High dosage group of 56.12 2.303.sup. 59.42 1.721.sup. 25.67 1.96.sup. 13.053 1.504.sup. 3.485 0.748.sup. 186.876 13.656.sup.* Example 1 Note: .sup.#compared with the blank group, p < 0.05; .sup.compared with the model group, p < 0.05; *stands for being compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.

(86) The differences between the concentrations of IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1, adiponectin, IL-6 and CRP in the high dosage group of Example 1 and each single herb group were statistically meaningful (p<0.05).

(87) 6. Summary of the Experiment

(88) Comprehensive analysis of the above data shows that all sample groups can reduce the circumference of waist and abdomen, and eliminate the visceral fat to varying degrees. There are significant differences when comparing the sample group with each single herb group.

(89) The inflammation-related factors IL-10, IL-18, PAI-1, adiponectin, TNF-, IL6, CRP, etc. all show significant increases or decreases in serum in the embodiments, the improvement function of sample group is better than that of each single herb group. These results indicate that the traditional Chinese medicine composition(s) of the present disclosure has an intervention effect on the imbalance of inflammation-related factors in abdominal obesity model.

Comparative Example 1

(90) The experimental method was referred to that in Example 6, pharmacodynamics of multiple combinations of each traditional Chinese medicine extracts were investigated. Results are shown in Table 7 to Table 9.

(91) TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 7 The effects of each dosage group on Lee's index and circumference of waist and abdomen of rats Circumference Number of waist of Lee's and abdomen No. Group cases index (cm) 1 Blank group 15 293.61 1.08 14.25 0.05 2 Model group 15 309.18 1.22.sup.# 17.90 0.10.sup.# 3 High dosage group of Example 1 15 295.08 0.19 15.05 0.05 4 Coicis Semen 50 parts + Hippophae 15 300.13 0.12.sup. 16.87 0.17.sup. Fructus 25 parts 5 Coicis Semen 50 parts + 15 298.11 0.22.sup. 16.78 0.28.sup. Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts 6 Coicis Semen 50 parts + Glycyrrhizae 15 298.62 0.20.sup. 17.03 0.18.sup. Radix et Rhizome 12.5 parts 7 Hippophae Fructus 25 parts + 15 299.98 0.19.sup. 16.56 0.17.sup. Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts 8 Hippophae Fructus 25 parts + 15 301.51 0.08.sup. 16.34 0.23.sup. Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizome 12.5 parts 9 Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts + 15 299.90 0.10.sup. 16.69 0.25.sup. Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma 12.5 parts 10 Coicis Semen 50 parts + Hippophae Fructus 15 298.89 0.17.sup. 16.51 0.07.sup. 25 parts + Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts 11 Coicis Semen 50 parts + Hippophae 15 297.38 0.14.sup. 16.48 0.11.sup. Fructus 25 parts 12 Hippophae Fructus 25 parts + 15 299.51 0.08.sup. 16.60 0.15.sup. Citri Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts 13 Coicis Semen 50 parts + Citri 15 299.98 0.06.sup. 16.71 0.10.sup. Rubrum Exocarpium 25 parts Note: .sup.compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.

(92) TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 8 The comparisons of body fat (g) of each rat group Retroperitoneal Epididymal Epicardial Great omental Perinephric Mesenteric Visceral adipose No. fat fat fat fat fat fat tissue (VAT) 1 2.33 0.60 1.58 0.29 0.31 0.09 0.98 0.09 0.35 0.05 2.56 0.20 8.11 0.32 2 3.98 0.65.sup.# 1.95 0.38.sup.# 0.39 0.23.sup.# 1.39 0.31.sup.# 0.42 0.14 .sup.4.10 1.10.sup.# 13.39 2.61.sup.# 3 3.02 0.40 1.50 0.39 0.34 0.01.sup. 1.35 0.21 0.28 0.17 2.67 0.23 9.89 1.26 4 3.60 0.73.sup. 1.81 0.09.sup. 0.38 0.23.sup. 1.38 0.04.sup. 0.40 0.03.sup. 2.70 1.27 11.09 0.15.sup. 5 3.62 0.82.sup. 1.81 0.35.sup. 0.38 0.20.sup. 1.39 0.03.sup. 0.38 0.10.sup. 2.71 0.08.sup. 11.16 2.24.sup. 6 3.70 0.65.sup. 1.81 0.04.sup. 0.38 0.09.sup. 1.38 0.04.sup. 0.40 0.01.sup. 2.70 0.27 11.02 0.35.sup. 7 3.60 0.98.sup. 1.82 0.13.sup. 0.37 0.04.sup. 1.39 0.11.sup. 0.39 0.02.sup. 2.69 1.26 11.19 0.07.sup. 8 3.61 0.73.sup. 1.82 0.12.sup. 0.36 0.23.sup. 1.38 0.27.sup. 0.39 0.01.sup. 2.69 0.78 10.99 0.10.sup. 9 3.60 0.56.sup. 1.83 0.14.sup. 0.38 0.13.sup. 1.39 0.17.sup. 0.38 0.09.sup. 2.68 0.35 10.82 0.16.sup. 10 3.65 0.92.sup. 1.84 0.09.sup. 0.37 0.14.sup. 1.38 0.15.sup. 0.38 0.03.sup. 2.67 1.34 10.54 0.21.sup. 11 3.72 0.03.sup. 1.85 0.13.sup. 0.38 0.13.sup. 1.39 0.14.sup. 0.37 0.13.sup. 2.68 0.46 10.52 0.20.sup. 12 3.73 0.11.sup. 1.86 0.02.sup. 0.37 0.11.sup. 1.39 0.23.sup. 0.37 0.07.sup. 2.68 0.24 10.23 0.11.sup. 13 3.79 0.22.sup. 1.86 0.01.sup. 0.38 0.15.sup. 1.39 0.12.sup. 0.37 0.06.sup. 2.68 0.27.sup. 10.32 0.05.sup. Note: the sample groups to which the numbers in Table 8 correspond are the same as that in Table 7; .sup.stands for being compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.

(93) TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 9 The comparisons of inflammation-related factors of each group IL-10 IL-18 PAI-1 Adiponectin CRP IL-6 No. (pg/mL) (pg/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (ng/mL) (pg/mL) 1 85.93 16.98 34.92 3.98 16.83 0.26 19.535 10.524 1.256 0.262 96.068 9.869 2 26.33 6.924.sup.# 133.40 25.96.sup.# 40.67 5.22.sup.# 4.550 0.276.sup.# 5.381 0.253.sup.# 239.757 17.210.sup.# 3 56.12 2.303 59.42 1.721 25.67 1.96 13.053 1.504 3.485 0.748 186.876 13.656 4 30.34 5.45.sup. 70.27 5.10.sup. 28.78 0.23.sup. 6.542 0.392.sup. 4.544 0.654.sup. 209.986 6.0467.sup. 5 30.58 3.73.sup. 70.11 6.23.sup. 30.06 0.09.sup. 6.499 0.235.sup. 4.679 0.217.sup. 196.534 7.274.sup. 6 31.23 2.11.sup. 72.11 7.41.sup. 29.02 0.33.sup. 6.607 0.346.sup. 4.566 0.213.sup. 207.275 6.235.sup. 7 32.56 3.04.sup. 71.53 3.89.sup. 28.67 0.45.sup. 6.609 0.305.sup. 4.600 0.217.sup. 209.268 5.235.sup. 8 32.32 4.34.sup. 70.53 4.37.sup. 27.99 0.25.sup. 6.579 0.284.sup. 4.557 0.109.sup. 200.234 3.246.sup. 9 33.25 4.67.sup. 69.53 4.10.sup. 28.92 0.35.sup. 6.610 0.107.sup. 4.563 0.213.sup. 197.9344 4.257.sup. 10 32.76 1.90.sup. 71.53 3.45.sup. 27.93 0.46.sup. 6.703 0.238.sup. 4.587 0.123.sup. 195.123 1.235.sup. 11 33.04 5.33.sup. 70.53 5.12.sup. 26.90 0.67.sup. 6.701 0.123.sup. 4.623 0.100.sup. 199.100 1.126.sup. 12 32.34 0.56.sup. 70.53 2.24.sup. 28.32 0.34.sup. 6.597 0.146.sup. 4.245 0.253.sup. 200.345 4.245.sup. 13 30.98 5.23.sup. 69.53 4.16.sup. 28.52 0.23 6.631 0.174.sup. 4.535 0.166.sup. 204.245 8.345.sup. Note: the sample groups to which the numbers in Table 9 correspond are the same as that in Table 7; .sup.stands for being compared with the high dosage group of Example 1, p < 0.05.
Results Analysis

(94) Comprehensive analysis of the above data shows that all indexes in each different combination of single herb are significantly different compared with the high dosage group of Example 1. These results indicate that the formula combination of Example 1 has significant effects on reducing the circumference of waist and abdomen, reducing the visceral fat and anti-inflammation. The foregoing is only a preferred embodiment(s) of the present disclosure.

(95) It should be pointed out that a number of improvements and modifications may also be made by those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the principles of the present disclosure, and these improvements and modifications are also considered to be within the scope of the present disclosure.