Method for curing diabetes and damaged organs and tissues affected by diabetes

Abstract

A method of treating diabetes can include administering a therapeutically effective amount of a composition comprising a soluble protein fraction obtained from epidermal gel secretions of catfish to a patient in need thereof. The soluble protein fraction can include soluble proteins and lipids from the epidermal gel secretions of catfish. The soluble protein fraction can include about 87% of the soluble proteins and about 13% of the lipids. The composition can be administered by intraperitoneal (IP) or sub-cutaneous (SC) injection.

Claims

1. A method for treating diabetes, comprising: providing a therapeutic composition, the therapeutic composition including a soluble protein fraction prepared by fractionating epidermal gel secretions of catfish; and administering a therapeutically effective amount of the therapeutic composition to a patient suffering from diabetes, wherein the therapeutic composition is administered by subcutaneous injection.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the soluble protein fraction includes about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the fractionating comprises: mixing the epidermal gel secretions with an extraction buffer to provide an extract; homogenizing the extract with a homogenizer to provide a homogenate; and centrifuging the homogenate to provide the soluble protein fraction and an insoluble protein fraction.

4. The method according to claim 3, wherein the extraction buffer comprises phosphate buffered saline.

5. The method according to claim 4, wherein the fractionating further comprises: fractionating the insoluble protein fraction to provide an additional soluble protein fraction and an additional insoluble protein fraction; and adding the additional soluble protein fraction to the soluble protein fraction obtained by fractionating the epidermal gel secretions.

6. The method according to claim 4, further comprising determining whether the soluble protein fraction includes about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids.

7. The method according to claim 6, further comprising adding at least one additional lipid fraction to the soluble protein fraction.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the catfish is Arabian Gulf catfish.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the therapeutically effective amount includes about 3 mg to about 3.5 mg of the soluble protein fraction per 100 gm of body weight of the patient.

10. A method for treating diabetes, comprising: providing a therapeutic composition, the therapeutic composition including a soluble protein fraction prepared by fractionating epidermal gel secretions of catfish, the soluble protein fraction including about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids; and administering a therapeutically effective amount of the therapeutic composition to a patient suffering from diabetes, wherein the therapeutic composition is administered by intraperitoneal injection.

11. The method according to claim 10, wherein the fractionating comprises: mixing the epidermal gel secretions with an extraction buffer to provide an extract; homogenizing the extract with a homogenizer to provide a homogenate; and centrifuging the homogenate to provide the soluble protein fraction and an insoluble protein fraction.

12. The method according to claim 10, wherein the extraction buffer comprises phosphate buffered saline.

13. The method according to claim 10, wherein the catfish is Arabian Gulf catfish.

14. The method according to claim 10, wherein the therapeutically effective amount includes about 3 mg to about 3.5 mg of the soluble protein fraction per 100 gm of body weight of the patient.

15. The method according to claim 10, wherein the composition is administered while the composition is at a temperature of about 4 C.

16. A method for treating diabetes, comprising: providing a therapeutic composition, the therapeutic composition including a soluble protein fraction prepared by fractionating epidermal gel secretions of catfish; and administering a therapeutically effective amount of the therapeutic composition to a patient suffering from diabetes, wherein the therapeutic composition is administered by intraperitoneal injection.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1A shows a histological slide of the pancreas of control, non-diabetic rats showing Langerhans Islets including the insulin secreting Beta cells.

(2) FIG. 1B shows a histological slide of the pancreas of STZ-treated diabetic rats, showing collapsed Langerhans Islets.

(3) FIG. 1C shows a histological slide of the pancreas of STZ-treated diabetic rats after once a day IP injection with the therapeutic composition for 8 weeks, showing regenerated Langerhans Islets.

(4) FIG. 2 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on blood glucose of STZ-treated diabetic rats.

(5) FIG. 3 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum insulin of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(6) FIG. 4 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on pancreas insulin of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(7) FIG. 5 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum fructosamine of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(8) FIG. 6 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on pancreas insulin of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(9) FIG. 7 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum uric acid of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(10) FIG. 8 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum creatinine of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(11) FIG. 9 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum proinflammatory cytokines of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(12) FIG. 10 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on serum anti-inflammatory cytokines of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(13) FIG. 11 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on liver malondialdehyde (MDA), antioxidants, and catalase of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(14) FIG. 12 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on kidney malondialdehyde (MDA), antioxidants, and catalase of STZ-treated diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(15) FIG. 13 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on liver alkaline phosphatase (ALP) in diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(16) FIG. 14 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on kidney alkaline phosphatase (ALP) in diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(17) FIG. 15 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on heart enzymes (SGOT) of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(18) FIG. 16 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on heart enzymes (LDH) of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(19) FIG. 17A is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on urine output of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(20) FIG. 17B is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on urine protein of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(21) FIG. 17C is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on urine albumin of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(22) FIG. 17D is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on urine creatinine of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(23) FIG. 17E is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on urine uric acid of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(24) FIG. 18 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on body weight of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(25) FIG. 19 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on water intake of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(26) FIG. 20 is a graph showing the effect of the therapeutic composition on water intake of diabetic rats after eight weeks of treatment.

(27) Similar reference characters denote corresponding features consistently throughout the attached drawings.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

(28) A method of treating diabetes can include administering a therapeutically effective amount of a composition comprising a soluble protein fraction obtained from epidermal gel secretions of catfish to a patient in need thereof. The soluble protein fraction can include soluble proteins and lipids. The soluble protein fraction can include about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids. The composition can be administered by intraperitoneal (IP) or sub-cutaneous (SC) injection. A method of preparing the soluble protein fraction can include collecting the epidermal gel secretion of catfish and fractionating the epidermal gel secretion to obtain the soluble protein fraction.

(29) A method of preparing a therapeutic composition from the epidermal gelatinous secretion of catfish can include collecting epidermal gel secretions (EGS) from the catfish and fractionating the epidermal gel secretions to obtain a soluble protein fraction comprising about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids. The therapeutic composition can include the soluble protein fraction comprising about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids.

(30) The soluble protein fractions described herein can be obtained from the epidermal gel secretions (EGS) of Arabian Gulf catfish, such as (Arius bilineatus (Valenciennes)). The Arabian Gulf catfish naturally exudes a gelatinous secretion through its skin after the catfish is shocked, e.g., threatened or injured. For example, once a catfish is caught, it will struggle as it is towed to the surface with the fishing hook still in its mouth (as the catfish is a bottom dweller). As the fish reaches the surface, it struggles to defend itself and to escape the reduction in water pressure. This will cause the fish to secrete the EGS along with one or more contaminants, such as venom from its venom glands, faeces from its anal pore, vomit from its mouth and through its gills, and blood through its gills if the fishing hook catches the gill rays. Shocking the fish can also be accomplished by thermal shock, physical abrasions, or neural stimulation. The fish can be washed one or more times to remove contaminants. While the fish is still alive, the fish can be held through its gills to induce production of additional EGS. The EGS without any remaining contaminants on the skin can be collected by a gentle mechanical scraping or suction of the skin. Preferably, the EGS is immediately frozen, e.g., in dry ice, then cooled to 80 C. (deep freeze) or kept frozen in liquid nitrogen, to limit microbial growth and prevent biochemical decomposition.

(31) The soluble protein fractions described herein can include a mixture of highly active biochemical and pharmacological components. These include, for example, a plasma clotting factor that has been found to be specific to blood clotting factor X1, a hemolytic factor, platelet activating factors (PAFs) at unusually high levels (more than 5,000 times the threshold level required for normal platelet activation), and a hemagglutination factor. The soluble fraction can also include vaso-active components, phosphatases, including an acid phosphatase, a general esterase and a tyrosine specific esterase, and proteins with collagenase-like activities that cleave collagen into fragments. The soluble fraction can include a factor that activates phospholipase A2, tyrosine and serine/threonine protein phosphorylase, proteolytic and antimicrobial activities, leukotrienes, interleukin 1 and growth factors that affect macrophages and pancreatic -cells, along with four protein components that are capable of binding human fibronectin. The lipids in the soluble fraction can include neutral lipids, phospholipids, and glycolipids. For example, the neutral lipids can include eicosanoids, cholesterol, triglycerides, fatty acids and steroids.

(32) It should be understood that a therapeutic composition can be prepared from epidermal gel secretions of other species of catfish or any other aquatic or terrestrial creature (e.g., moray eels, slugs, and worms) that produces epidermal gel secretions having biologically active components similar to those present in the soluble protein fractions described herein.

(33) As used herein, the term about, when used to modify a numerical value, means within ten percent of that numerical value.

(34) According to an embodiment, the method of preparing a therapeutic composition from the epidermal gelatinous secretion of catfish can include collecting epidermal gel secretions (EGS) from the skin of Arabian Gulf catfish (Arius bilineatus (Valenciennes)) and fractionating the EGS to provide a soluble protein fraction (SPF).

(35) In an embodiment, the soluble protein fraction (SPF) can be extracted from the EGS by thawing the frozen EGS to a temperature ranging from about 4 C. to about 6 C. and mixing the thawed EGS with a suitable, non-toxic extraction buffer (e.g., saline in phosphate buffer at pH 7.5) to provide an extract. This step and all subsequent purification procedures can be carried out at about 4 C. to about 6 C. in the dark, unless otherwise indicated. The extraction buffer should not denature or affect the proteins in the EGS in any way. Preferably, the extraction buffer includes phosphate buffered saline having 0.05M (NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4/Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4) and 0.14M NaCl, pH 7.5. The thawed EGS can be mixed with an equal volume of the extraction buffer and homogenized, e.g., with an Ultra Truex (IKA) homogenizer. The homogenized extract can then be centrifuged to provide a soluble protein fraction (SPF) and an insoluble protein fraction. Centrifugation can separate insoluble filamentous proteins and cellular debris from a soluble fraction. Centrifugation can also remove contaminants such as microorganisms. The therapeutic composition is preferably free from insoluble components, as such components are not appropriate for intra-peritoneal or sub-cutaneous injection and will not be absorbed and distributed if injected into an animal or human in this manner. Insoluble components can also clog the injection needle during injection. In an embodiment, the homogenate is centrifuged at 15,000 rpm for about ten to about fifteen minutes to provide the soluble fraction and the insoluble fraction. The soluble fraction can be freeze-dried and maintained at about 80 C. under nitrogen.

(36) In an embodiment, the soluble protein fraction is freeze-dried and maintained at about 80 C. under nitrogen. The freeze-dried soluble fraction can be analyzed to determine a ratio of the concentration of soluble protein to lipids. In an embodiment, the powdered soluble fraction includes about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids. If the powdered soluble fraction includes less than about 13% lipids, the powdered soluble fraction can be supplemented with lipids from an additional lipid fraction to achieve a soluble protein fraction having about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids. The additional lipid fraction can be obtained from the freeze-dried EGS, as described herein. The therapeutic composition can include the soluble protein fraction having about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids. The soluble fraction (SPF) (also referred to herein as Fraction B) can be freeze-dried and stored at about 80 C. under nitrogen.

(37) According to an embodiment, an additional soluble protein fraction can be separated from the insoluble fraction obtained from centrifugation. According to an embodiment, an insoluble fraction obtained from centrifugation in one fractionating cycle can be further fractionated in a subsequent fractionating cycle to provide yet another soluble protein fraction. According to an embodiment, the method can include about two to about four fractionating cycles of insoluble protein fractions, thereby providing a plurality of additional soluble protein fractions. The plurality of additional soluble protein fractions can be pooled and added to the original SPF obtained from the original fractionation of the EGS. The soluble protein fraction (SPF) or Fraction B can include the pooled soluble protein fractions. The SPF can be used for IP injection in an animal or human for treating diabetes. The SPF (Fraction B) can include lipids as well as soluble proteins (about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids).

(38) The concentration of lipids in the soluble protein fraction can be determined, e.g., by extracting the lipids from a freeze-dried soluble protein fraction and weighing the extracted lipids. If the soluble protein fraction includes about 87% soluble proteins, but less than about 13% lipids, additional lipids can be extracted directly from an EGS and added to the freeze-dried soluble protein fraction to increase the lipid percentage to about 13%. The additional lipids can be extracted from the freeze-dried original EGS. As described in detail, below, lipid extraction can be carried out in the dark and the extracted lipids can be stored under nitrogen until added to the soluble protein fraction. The lipids can be added with an organic solvent, e.g., isopropyl alcohol, to the freeze-dried soluble protein fraction to increase the lipid concentration to about 13% of the total soluble protein-lipid fraction. The organic solvent can be evaporated under vacuum at room temperature.

(39) In an embodiment, if it is determined that the soluble protein fraction includes about 87% soluble proteins but less than about 13% lipids (which is generally the case), additional lipids can be provided by extracting lipids from the EGS with an organic solvent mixture. The additional lipids can be obtained from the freeze-dried EGS by extracting the lipids with an organic solvent mixture including chloroform:methanol:isopropanol (2:1:0.250, v/v) for about 72 hours on a stirring plate. The extracted lipids can then be obtained by filtration, e.g., using a vacuum pump and a Buchner funnel. The lipid extracts can be concentrated to dryness on a rotary evaporator at about 25 C. in the dark and weighed to ensure that the required weight of lipids to be added to the soluble protein fraction is achieved. The required amount of lipids can be dissolved in a suitable organic solvent, e.g., isopropyl alcohol, and added to the soluble freeze-dried protein fraction to increase the lipid fraction in the soluble protein fraction to about 13% of the combined weight of the proteins and lipids. The organic solvent can be evaporated under vacuum at room temperature in the dark to provide a freeze dried soluble protein fraction having about 87% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids of the total combined soluble proteins and lipids. The freeze dried soluble protein fraction (soluble proteins combined with the lipids) can be stored under nitrogen at about 80 C. until needed for injection. The freeze dried soluble fraction can be maintained at about 80 C. (deep freeze) for long-term storage to prevent any unwanted chemical reaction. The enzymes in the fraction will not react against the components in the fraction if kept at about 80 C. during storing for lengthy periods of time under nitrogen. Also the lipids in the soluble protein fraction will be protected from decomposition if kept the same way in deep freeze until required for use. Nitrogen will not allow aerial oxygen to react with the lipids. The SPF is preferably stored in portions appropriate for a single injection at 80 C. It can then be thawed, kept in ice, and administered as needed.

(40) A therapeutically effective amount of the composition including the SPF (Fraction B) can be administered to a patient to treat diabetes. A therapeutically effective amount can include about 3 mg to about 3.5 mg of the SPF (e.g., SPF including about 85% soluble protein and about 13% total lipids) per 100 gm of body weight of the patient (animal or human) to be treated. The therapeutic composition can be administered to a patient in need thereof, preferably by intraperitoneal (IP) or sub-cutaneous (SC) injection after dissolution of the SPF in saline, phosphate buffered saline, or other delivery system, such as nanotechnology delivery systems. The therapeutic composition can be combined with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. The therapeutic composition can be administered using other delivery methods, e.g., oral administration, provided that the composition is protected from the digestive effects of the elementary canal for oral administration, such as by encapsulation or nano-particle technology. Prior to injection of the soluble protein fraction, the freeze-dried soluble fraction can be dissolved in saline or phosphate buffered saline.

(41) As set forth herein, the therapeutic composition including the SPF was administered to STZ-treated male rats as a model for diabetic animals. Treatment of these animals with the SPF composition led to production of natural insulin and reduction of glucose levels.

(42) Accordingly, the SPF (Fraction B) composition can be administered to a patient to treat diabetes. A concentration of 3.0-3.5 mg SPF/kg of human body weight can be administered to a patient or animal in need thereof. Prior to the injection of SPF (SPF Fraction B), the SPF can be dissolved in saline or phosphate buffered saline and sterilized with ultrasound or by passing through a membrane filter.

(43) The SPF (Fraction B) composition can be administered to a patient to treat diabetes, diseases that result from diabetes, or diseases similar in symptoms and caused by other reasons. As used herein, treating diabetes can include curing diabetes and repairing damaged organs and tissues affected by diabetes. For example, the SPF (Fraction B) composition can be administered to a patient to treat kidney failure (nephropathy), liver cirrhosis, heart failure, nervous diseases, neuropathy, retinopathy and fertility problems through regeneration of affected organs and tissues.

(44) The SPF is preferably stored in portions appropriate for a single injection at 80 C. It is then thawed, kept in ice and injected as needed.

(45) As described herein, the preparation was injected inter peritoneally (IP) at a concentration of 0.3-0.4 mg protein/100 g body weight in non-fasting Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats previously treated with streptozotocin (STZ) to induce diabetes. Reduction of blood glucose to close to normality was achieved in 5 weeks, with once a day injection of the prepared soluble fraction. The level of insulin in the serum of the treated animals showed significant improvement over non-treated diabetic control animals. Histological studies of the pancreas showed recovery of Langerhans Islets (the insulin secreting Islets) compared to the diabetic control non-treated animals and comparable to the non-diabetic control animals. Biochemical studies indicated significant recovery of functions of the kidneys, the liver, and the heart of the treated animals compared to the normal non-diabetic control animals and the diabetic non-treated animals.

(46) A therapeutically effective amount of the SPF can include about 3 mg to about 3.5 mg of the SPF (which includes about 87% soluble protein and about 13% total lipids) per kg of body weight of the animal or human to be treated.

(47) The following examples illustrate the present teachings.

Example 1

Preparation of SPF and Calculation of Soluble Protein in Solution

(48) EGS was collected from the catfish skin and kept at 80 C. until use. Frozen EGS was thawed to 4 C., mixed with an equal volume of extraction buffer [phosphate buffered saline (PBS), 0.05 M containing (NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4/Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4) and 0.14 M NaCl, pH 7.5], and homogenized with an Ultra Truex (IKA) homogenizer. This step and all subsequent purification procedures were carried out at 4 C. unless otherwise indicated. The homogenate was centrifuged at 15,000 rpm for 15 min. The supernatant was collected, and the pellet (insoluble protein etc.) was re-extracted with extraction buffer (2-4 times). Each time, the soluble fraction was separated by centrifugation as described above, and the two extracted fractions were pooled. The combined extracted fractions provided the soluble protein fraction (SPF) (Fraction B).

(49) To find the concentration of catfish soluble proteins in the SPF (Fraction B), the SPF was diluted with PBS (1:50). 0.1 ml of the diluted sample was mixed well with 5 ml of Coomassie Brilliant Blue solution and kept in tubes at room temperature for about 10 minutes. Absorbance was read at 595 nm for the sample, and its protein concentration was determined by comparing its absorbance against absorbance for a standard curve for different bovine serum albumin concentrations. Fraction B was found to include about 85% soluble proteins and about 13% lipids.

(50) The SPF (Fraction B) was then dissolved in the extraction buffer and diluted with saline for injection.

Example 2

Diabetes Treatment

(51) The SPF (Fraction B) was administered intra-peritoneally to non-fasting Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats (daily dosage of 0.3 mg-0.35 mg SPF/100 g body weight) previously treated with streptozotocin (STZ). This was followed by once a week testing of blood glucose levels over 8 weeks period. Blood glucose levels were measured for diabetic control SD rats and normal non-diabetic control SD rats on the same days as the diabetic treated rats. The glucose level of the treated diabetic rats began to drop starting from the first week of treatment as seen from blood glucose analysis (FIG. 2.) The reduction of glucose in the treated animals continued to drop until the fifth week of treatment, when it became close to the level of blood glucose of normal control animals. Continuation of the treatment for 8 weeks only reduced the glucose level by a small amount. After 8 weeks of daily treatment, the 3 groups of animals were sacrificed after being anaesthetized with ketamine/xylazine (9:1). The insulin levels in the three groups of animals (the normal control, the diabetic non-treated, and the diabetic treated) were measured in their blood serum, as well as in the homogenized pancreas of each of the three groups of animals (FIGS. 3-4, respectively). The pancreas, the kidneys, the heart, and the liver were removed for biochemical and histological studies. The pancreas of the 3 groups of animals were fixed, sectioned and stained for histological studies. The normal, control non-diabetic animals showed well-defined Langerhans Islets, with prominent beta cells (FIG. 1A). The diabetic control, non-treated groups of animals showed only traces of ill-defined structures, which might have been Langerhans Islets (FIG. 1B). Some of the traces of the Islet had a few beta cells. The treated diabetic animals showed clear and well-defined Langerhans Islets with numerous beta cells, indicating regeneration (recovery) of the pancreas (FIG. 1C). Reduction of blood glucose to approximately normal levels was achieved in 5 weeks (FIG. 3). The level of insulin in the serum of the treated animals showed significant improvement over the non-treated diabetic control animals. Biochemical studies indicated significant recovery of kidney, heart, and liver functions, compared to the normal, non-diabetic control animals and the diabetic, non-treated animals.

(52) To find out whether the released insulin in the serum came from the regenerated pancreas of the treated diabetic animals, the pancreas of the three groups of animals (the normal non-diabetic control animals, the diabetic control non-treated animals and the diabetic treated animals) were analyzed for the presence of insulin. The pancreas of the treated diabetic animals showed a concentration of insulin significantly higher than that of the diabetic non-treated animals (FIG. 4). Another confirmatory test to establish that the regenerated Langerhans Islets produced the insulin in the treated diabetic animals included staining the pancreas of the three groups of animals (the normal non-diabetic control animals, the diabetic non-treated control animals and the diabetic treated animals) specifically for the presence of insulin with immunohistochemical staining. The pancreas of the control non-diabetic animals and those of the diabetic, treated animals showed the confirmatory color for insulin, indicating the location of insulin within the Langerhans Islets, while the pancreas of the diabetic non-treated control animals did not show any color for insulin, indicating the lack of Langerhans Islets. Biochemical studies indicated that in the treated diabetic animals, not only the pancreas showed recovery (regeneration), but also significant recovery of the kidneys, the liver and the heart functions were obtained, compared to the normal non-diabetic control animals and the diabetic non-treated control animals. Testes of diabetic non-treated animals were shrunk to a small size after 8 weeks of the animals being diabetic compared to the testes of the normal control animals. The testes of the treated diabetic animals showed significant recovery in their size.

(53) The following biochemical analysis results and other measurements were obtained:

(54) 1Reduction of blood glucose in the treated animals started remarkably from the first week of treatment, and its average in the treated animals reached very close to normal by the end of 5 weeks (FIG. 2).

(55) 2Significant reduction in blood serum fructosamine in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was obtained, indicating less glucose was attached to serum proteins during the 8 week period of the trial experiment (FIG. 5).
3Significant levels of insulin in blood serum and in pancreatic tissues in the treated animals compared to non-treated diabetic animals and non-diabetic control animals was obtained, indicating recovery (regeneration) of the pancreas in the treated diabetic animals (FIGS. 3-4).
4Significant reduction of serum cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL and LDL in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was obtained (FIG. 6).
5Significant reduction of serum uric acid and serum creatinine in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was obtained, indicating recovery (regeneration) of the functions of the kidneys (FIGS. 7-8).
6Significant reduction of serum proinflammatory and increase of anti-inflammatory cytokines in diabetic treated rats compared to the diabetic non-treated rats was observed (FIGS. 9-10).
7Significant increase of liver malondialdehyde (MDA), anti-oxidants and catalase in treated diabetic rats compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was obtained, indicating recovery (regeneration) of the functions of the liver (FIG. 11).
8Significant increase of kidney malondialdehyde (MDA), anti-oxidants and catalase in treated diabetic rats compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was observed, indicating recovery (regeneration) of the functions of the kidney (FIG. 12).
9Significant recovery of liver and kidney alkaline phosphatase (ALP) in treated diabetic animals compared to normal control animals and diabetic control non-diabetic animals was observed, indicating recovery (regeneration) of both liver and kidneys (FIGS. 13-14).
10Significant recovery of heart enzymes (SGOT and LDH) in treated diabetic animals compared to diabetic non-treated animals and normal non-diabetic animals was observed, indicating recovery of heart functions (regeneration) (FIGS. 15-16).
11Significant changes in urine parameters (urine output. Urine protein, urine albumin, urine creatinine and urine uric acid) was observed, indicating recovery (regeneration) of the functions of the kidney (FIGS. 17A-17E).
12Significant body weight % recovery in diabetic treated animals compared to normal non-diabetic animals and diabetic non-treated animals was observed, indicating regeneration of organs and tissues that have been damaged by diabetes and STZ and improvement of metabolism of body functions in treated diabetic animals (FIG. 18).
13Significant improvement in water and food intake by diabetic treated animals compared to non-diabetic control animals and diabetic non-treated control animals was observed (FIGS. 19-20).
14The testes showed remarkable recovery in its size in the treated diabetic rats compared to the normal non-diabetic rats and diabetic control rats.
15Laboratory test results for blood chemistry and CBC for mice treated with SPF for Pane-1 cell tumor were comparable to those of normal control mice, indicating that the material is not toxic to the blood [benign].
16Treatment with the therapeutic composition can also be applied to diseases similar to those described and result from diabetes, such as kidney failure (nephropathy), liver cirrhosis, heart failure, retinopathy and fertility problems.

(56) Reduction of blood glucose in the treated animals started remarkably from the first week of treatment, and its average in the treated animals reached very close to normal by the end of 8 weeks. Significant levels of insulin in the treated animals was observed, indicating recovery of the pancreas in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals. Significant reduction in serum cholesterol in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was observed. Significant reduction in serum fructosamine in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was observed, indicating less sugar attached to serum proteins during the 8 week period of the trial experiment. Significant reduction in serum creatinine in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was observed, indicating significant improvement in kidney functions. Significant reduction in urine creatinine in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals was observed. Kidney malondialdehyde (MDA) was significantly reduced in kidneys of the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals, indicating significant improvement in kidney functions. Liver malondialdehyde (MDA) was significantly reduced in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals, indicating significant improvement in liver functions. Significant increase in kidney catalase (anti-oxidant enzyme) in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals indicated significant improvement in kidney functions. Liver catalase was significantly increased in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals, indicating significant improvement in liver functions. Significant increase in kidney antioxidants in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals indicated significant improvement in kidney functions. Significant increase in liver antioxidants in the treated diabetic animals compared to control diabetic and non-diabetic control animals indicated significant improvement in liver functions. Significant decrease in serum triglycerides in the diabetic treated animals compared to the control non-diabetic and the control diabetic animals was observed. Significant reduction in proinflammatory markers in the treated diabetic animals compared to the other 2 groups was observed. Heart lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in diabetic rats treated with the SPF (fraction B) were close to those of the normal control rats and significantly different from the untreated or control diabetic rats. The LDH levels for the diabetic control rats were significantly different from the normal control rats. The results of biochemical analysis of, blood serum, urine, and other biochemical analysis results of the 3 groups of animals (the normal control, the diabetic control and the treated diabetic animals) are summarized in Tables 1-64 below.

(57) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin I Alpha (IL 1) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME IL 1 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 97.71 5.33 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 215.97 12.24 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 127.49 6.038

(58) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Significance Levels for Table 1 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.004 DC vs. D + FB 0.015 NC vs. D + FB 0.035

(59) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin I Beta (IL 1) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME IL 1 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 165.25 10.33 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 314.31 13.39 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 179.18 8.038

(60) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Significance Levels for Table 3 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.014 DC vs. D + FB 0.020 NC vs. D + FB 0.758

(61) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin 2 (1L 2) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME 1L 2 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 202.25 9.37 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 134.43 4.39 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 152.93 4.038

(62) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Significance Levels for Table 5 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.000 DC vs. D + FB 0.042 NC vs. D + FB 0.009

(63) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin 4 (1L 4) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME 1L 4 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 89.50 2.68 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 306.08 8.39 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 146.51 3.39

(64) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Significance Levels for Table 7 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.002 DC vs. D + FB 0.007 NC vs. D + FB 0.202

(65) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin 12 (1L 12) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME 1L 12 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 204.28 8.19 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 432.00 10.40 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 272.22 6.52

(66) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Significance Levels for Table 9 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.002 DC vs. D + FB 0.008 NC vs. D + FB 0.153

(67) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interleukin 13 (1L 13) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME 1L 13 (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 89.83 9.59 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 227.99 10.40 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 112.80 10.52

(68) TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Significance Levels for Table 11 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.001 DC vs. D + FB 0.002 NC vs. D + FB 0.029

(69) TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Interferon (IFN) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME IFN (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 237.02 5.19 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 70.29 1.46 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 158.32 11.68

(70) TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 Significance Levels for Table 13 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.002 DC vs. D + FB 0.035 NC vs. D + FB 0.024

(71) TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 15 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME TNF (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 35.02 1.14 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 67.74 1.05 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 49.53 2.68

(72) TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 16 Significance Levels for Table 15 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.000 DC vs. D + FB 0.004 NC vs. D + FB 0.011

(73) TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 17 Effect of Fraction B on Granulocyte Macrophage Colony Stimulating (GMCSF) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME GMCSF (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 56.99 2.14 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 138.47 3.09 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 70.38 5.68

(74) TABLE-US-00018 TABLE 18 Significance Levels for Table 17 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.014 DC vs. D + FB 0.043 NC vs. D + FB 0.047

(75) TABLE-US-00019 TABLE 19 Effect of Fraction B on Regulated on activation, normal T Cell Expressed and Secreted (Rantes) in Diabetic Rats GROUP NAME RANTES (pg/ml) NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 1218.66 159.14 DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 2986.01 265.09 DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 1985.38 267.68

(76) TABLE-US-00020 TABLE 20 Significance Levels for Table 19 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS NC vs. DC 0.000 DC vs. D + FB 0.034 NC vs. D + FB 0.019

(77) TABLE-US-00021 TABLE 21 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Insulin in Diabetic Rats after 8 Weeks of Treatment GROUP NAME INSULIN (ng/ml) % Insulin NORMAL CONTROL 1.036 0.158 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 0.052 0.002 .sup.a 6% i.e., 94% RATS (DC) reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.652 0.080 .sup.a, b 63%, i.e., 37% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(78) TABLE-US-00022 TABLE 22 Significance Levels for Table 21 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC vs. DC 0.000 DC vs. D + FB 0.000 NC vs. D + FB 0.009

(79) TABLE-US-00023 TABLE 23 Effect of Fraction B On Pancreas Insulin in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks of Treatment Pancrease insulin % Pancrease GROUP NAME ((pg/g tissue) insulin NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 1003.87 4.634 100% DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 409.61 1.213 .sup.a 40%, ie 60% reduction DIABETIC + FRACTION B 794.63 3.401 .sup.a, b 79%, ie, 21% (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control

(80) TABLE-US-00024 TABLE 24 Significance Levels for Table 23 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(81) TABLE-US-00025 TABLE 25 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Fructosamine In Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks of Treatment FRUCTOSAMINE GROUP NAME (mM) % FRUCTOSAMINE NORMAL CONTROL 2.90 0.712 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 11.36 0.698 .sup.a 291% increase above RATS (DC) normal DIABETIC RATS + 6.25 0.457 .sup.a, b 115% increase above FRACTION B (D + FB) normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control

(82) TABLE-US-00026 TABLE 26 Significance Levels for Table 25 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.001

(83) TABLE-US-00027 TABLE 27 Effect of Fraction B on Serum Cholesterol on Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks of Treatment Cholesterol GROUP NAME (mmol/l) % CHOLESTEROL NORMAL CONTROL 1.36 0.108 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 2.14 0.122 .sup.a 57% increase above RATS (DC) normal control DIABETIC RATS (D) + 1.74 0.087 .sup.a, b 28% increase above FRACTION B (D + FB) normal control .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control

(84) TABLE-US-00028 TABLE 28 Significance Levels for Table 27 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.018 DC Vs D + FB 0.038 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(85) TABLE-US-00029 TABLE 29 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON SERUM HDL IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT HDL GROUP NAME (mmol/l) % HDL NORMAL CONTROL (NC) 0.95 0.077 100% DIABETIC CONTROL (DC) 0.41 0.030 .sup.a 43% i.e., 57% decrease DIABETIC + FRACTION B 0.63 0.022 .sup.a, b 66% i.e., (D + FB) 34% decrease .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control .sup.c no significant difference from normal control?

(86) TABLE-US-00030 TABLE 30 Significance Levels for Table 29 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.018 DC Vs D + FB 0.038 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(87) TABLE-US-00031 TABLE 31 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Uric Acid In Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment Serum uric acid GROUP NAME (mg/dl) % Serum uric acid NORMAL CONTROL 2.79 0.606 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 5.08 0.663 .sup.a 82% increase above RATS (DC) normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 3.02 0.758 .sup.b, c 8% increase above FRACTION B (D + FB) normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control .sup.c no significant difference from normal control?

(88) TABLE-US-00032 TABLE 32 Significance Levels for Table 31 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.008 DC Vs D + FB 0.002 NC Vs D + FB 0.213

(89) TABLE-US-00033 TABLE 33 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Creatinine in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment CREATININE GROUP NAME (mg/dl) % CREATININE NORMAL CONTROL 0.347 0.023 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 0.590 0.024 .sup.a 70% increase RATS (DC) above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.460 0.015 .sup.a, b 23% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic control

(90) TABLE-US-00034 TABLE 34 Significance Levels for Table 33 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.001 NC Vs D + FB 0.002

(91) TABLE-US-00035 TABLE 35 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum INTERLEUKIN 6 (IL 6; pro- inflamatory) in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment GROUP NAME Serum IL 6 ((pg/ml) % IL 6 NORMAL CONTROL 66.87 1.034 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 222.61 1.013 .sup.a 234% increase RATS (DC) above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 134.63 2.101 .sup.a,b 101% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(92) TABLE-US-00036 TABLE 36 Significance Levels for Table 35 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.003

(93) TABLE-US-00037 TABLE 37 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum INTERLEUKIN 10 (IL 10; anti- inflamatory) in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment GROUP NAME Serum IL 10 ((pg/ml) % IL 10 NORMAL CONTROL 83.85 0.854 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 27.18 0.934 .sup.a 32%; 68% RATS (DC) reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 50.69 1.101 .sup.a,b 60%; 40% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(94) TABLE-US-00038 TABLE 38 Significance Levels for Table 37 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.003

(95) TABLE-US-00039 TABLE 39 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Liver MDA (MALONDIALDEHYDE) in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment GROUP NAME MDA (mmol/100 g tissue) % MDA NORMAL CONTROL 0.608 0.043 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 1.02 0.037 .sup.a 68% increase RATS (DC) above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.752 0.026 .sup.a,b 24% increase FRACTION B (D + PE) above normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(96) TABLE-US-00040 TABLE 40 Significance Levels for Table 39 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.021

(97) TABLE-US-00041 TABLE 41 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Liver ANTIOXIDANTS in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment LIVER ANTIOXIDANTS GROUP NAME (mM/g tissue) % ANTIOXIDANTS NORMAL CONTROL 1.32 0.028 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 0.504 0.032 .sup.a 61% ie 39% RATS (DC) reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.778 0.031 .sup.a,b 75% ie 25% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(98) TABLE-US-00042 TABLE 42 Significance Levels for Table 41 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.001 NC Vs D + FB 0.008

(99) TABLE-US-00043 TABLE 43 Effect Of Fraction B On Serum Liver Antioxidants in Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment CATALASE GROUP NAME (U/mg protein) % CATALASE NORMAL CONTROL 1.46 0.063 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 0.507 0.039 .sup.a 34% ie 66% RATS (DC) reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.890 0.092 .sup.a,b 61% ie 39% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(100) TABLE-US-00044 TABLE 44 Significance Levels for Table 43 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.001 NC Vs D + FB 0.002

(101) TABLE-US-00045 TABLE 45 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON KIDNEY MALONDIALDEHYDE (MDA) IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT GROUP NAME MDA (mmol/100 g tissue) % MDA NORMAL CONTROL 0.811 0.083 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 2.23 0.086 .sup.a 175% increase RATS (DC) above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 1.07 0.132 .sup.a,b 32% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(102) TABLE-US-00046 TABLE 46 Significance Levels for Table 45 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.002 DC Vs D + FB 0.003 NC Vs D + FB 0.020

(103) TABLE-US-00047 TABLE 47 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON KIDNEY CATALASE IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT CATALASE GROUP NAME (U/mg protein) % CATALASE NORMAL CONTROL 0.618 0.034 100% RATS (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 0.374 0.030 .sup.a 60% ie, 40% RATS (DC) reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.538 0.018 .sup.a,b 87% ie, 13% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(104) TABLE-US-00048 TABLE 48 Significance Levels for Table 47 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.001 NC Vs D + FB 0.002

(105) TABLE-US-00049 TABLE 49 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON LIVER ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE (ALP) IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT GROUP NAME ALP (moles/mg protein) % ALP NORMAL CONTROL 0.597 0.062 100% (NC) DIABETIC CONTROL 1.003 0.028 .sup.a 68% increase (DC) above normal DIABETIC + FRACTION 0.636 0.017 .sup.a,b 6% increase B (D + FB) above normal .sup.a significant difference from normal control .sup.b significant difference from diabetic

(106) TABLE-US-00050 TABLE 50 Significance Levels for Table 49 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.073

(107) TABLE-US-00051 TABLE 51 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON HEART ASPARTATE AMINOTRANSFERASE (SGOT) IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT SGOT (moles/ GROUP NAME mg protein) % SGOT NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 4.88 0.434 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 2.50 0.283.sup.a 51% ie, 49% reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 3.24 0.281.sup.a,b 66% ie, 34% FRACTION B (D + FB) reduction .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(108) TABLE-US-00052 TABLE 52 Significance Levels for Table 51 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.000 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(109) TABLE-US-00053 TABLE 53 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON HEART LACTATE DEHYDROGENASE (LDH) IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT LDH (moles/ GROUP NAME mg protein) % LDH NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 0.966 0.092 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 0.729 0.048.sup.a 75% ie, 25% reduction DIABETIC RATS (D) + 0.923 0.028.sup.b,c 96% ie, 4% FRACTION B (D +FB) reduction .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(110) TABLE-US-00054 TABLE 54 Significance Levels for Table 53 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.009 DC Vs D + FB 0.021 NC Vs D + FB 0.051

(111) TABLE-US-00055 TABLE 55 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON URINE CREATININE IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT CREATININE GROUP NAME (mg/24 hr) % CREATININE NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 3.34 0.271 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 18.00 2.024.sup.a 438% increase above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 10.22 1.221.sup.a,b 206% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(112) TABLE-US-00056 TABLE 56 Significance Levels for Table 55 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.025 NC Vs D + FB 0.008

(113) TABLE-US-00057 TABLE 57 Effect Of Fraction B On Urine Uric Acid In Diabetic Rats After 8 Weeks Of Treatment Urine uric acid % Urine uric GROUP NAME (mg/24 hr) acid NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 1.29 0.056 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 4.41 0.013.sup.a 242% increase above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 2.28 0.108.sup.a,b 76% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(114) TABLE-US-00058 TABLE 58 Significance Levels for Table 57 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.000 DC Vs D + FB 0.002 NC Vs D + FB 0.035

(115) TABLE-US-00059 TABLE 59 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON WATER INTAKE IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT WATER INTAKE % WATER GROUP NAME (ml/24 hr) INTAKE NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 30 0.548 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 250 2.216.sup.a 733% increase above normal DIABETIC RATS (D) + 180 1.972.sup.a,b 500% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.asignificant difference from normal control bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(116) TABLE-US-00060 TABLE 60 Significance Levels for Table 59 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.008 DC Vs D + FB 0.043 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(117) TABLE-US-00061 TABLE 61 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON FOOD INTAKE IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT FOOD INTAKE % FOOD GROUP NAME (g/24 hr) INTAKE NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 20 0.328 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 38 0.216.sup.a 90% increase above normal DIABETIC RATS(D) + 30 0.387.sup.a,b 50% increase FRACTION B (D + FB) above normal .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control

(118) TABLE-US-00062 TABLE 62 Significance Levels for Table 61 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.008 DC Vs D + FB 0.043 NC Vs D + FB 0.023

(119) TABLE-US-00063 TABLE 63 EFFECT OF FRACTION B ON SERUM LDL IN DIABETIC RATS AFTER 8 WEEKS OF TREATMENT GROUP NAME HDL (mmol/l) % HDL NORMAL CONTROL RATS (NC) 0.237 0.007 100% DIABETIC CONTROL RATS (DC) 1.432 0.037.sup.a 504% increase DIABETIC + FRACTION B (D + FB) 0.917 0.017.sup.a,b 287% increase .sup.asignificant difference from normal control .sup.bsignificant difference from diabetic control .sup.cno significant difference from normal control

(120) TABLE-US-00064 TABLE 64 Significance Levels for Table 63 GROUP NAME SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL NC Vs DC 0.014 DC Vs D + FB 0.023 NC Vs D + FB 0.024

(121) It is to be understood that the method for treating diabetes is not limited to the specific embodiments described above, but encompasses any and all embodiments within the scope of the generic language of the following claims enabled by the embodiments described herein, or otherwise shown in the drawings or described above in terms sufficient to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the claimed subject matter.