Table 3.
The effects of PF on lipid profile of DIO mice after 6 weeks of treatment.
| Groups | HDL (mg/dL) | LDL (mg/dL) | TG (mg/dL) | TC (mg/dL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal Control | 53.40 ± 0.41 | 36.46 ± 0.95 | 95 ± 0.73 | 143.1 ± 0.9 |
| Diabetic control | 25.80 ± 0.46 | 81.78 ± 0.80 | 135.7 ± 1.1 | 259.6 ± 3.7 |
| Glibenclamide | 38.70 ± 0.66 | 80.83 ± 0.94 | 134 ± 0.93 | 262.3 ± 2.0 |
| PF (125 mg/kg.bw) | 24.85 ± 0.48 | 81.61 ± 0.40 | 115.33 ± 2.39 | 233.0 ± 3.0 |
| PF (250 mg/kg.bw) | 24.15 ± 0.68 | 80.29 ± 0.52 | 112.67 ± 2.16 | 218.6 ± 0.8 |
| PF (500 mg/kg.bw) | 32.50 ± 0.80 | 80.22 ± 0.62 | 115.67 ± 1.89 | 211.1 ± 1.4 |
∗ Values represent mean ± SEM (n = 6); PF= Polyherbal formulation; HDL= High density lipoprotein; LDL = Low density lipoprotein, TG = triglyceride; TC = Total cholesterol. Values are statistically significant at p < 0.001 (one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett's test).