Ceylon cinnamon does not affect postprandial plasma glucose or insulin in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance.

Previous studies on healthy subjects have shown that the intake of 6 g Cinnamomum cassia reduces postprandial glucose and that the intake of 3 g C. cassia reduces insulin response, without affecting postprandial glucose concentrations. Coumarin, which may damage the liver, is present in C. cassia, but not in Cinnamomum zeylanicum. The aim of the present study was to study the effect of C. zeylanicum on postprandial concentrations of plasma glucose, insulin, glycaemic index (GI) and insulinaemic index (GII) in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). A total of ten subjects with IGT were assessed in a crossover trial. A standard 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was administered together with placebo or C. zeylanicum capsules. Finger-prick capillary blood samples were taken for glucose measurements and venous blood for insulin measurements, before and at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 min after the start of the OGTT. The ingestion of 6 g C. zeylanicum had no significant effect on glucose level, insulin response, GI or GII. Ingestion of C. zeylanicum does not affect postprandial plasma glucose or insulin levels in human subjects. The Federal Institute for Risk Assessment in Europe has suggested the replacement of C. cassia by C. zeylanicum or the use of aqueous extracts of C. cassia to lower coumarin exposure. However, the positive effects seen with C. cassia in subjects with poor glycaemic control would then be lost.

Beliefs about health and illness in women managed for gestational diabetes in two organisations.

OBJECTIVE: to explore beliefs about health, illness and health care in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) managed in two different organisations based on diabetology or obstetrics. DESIGN: an explorative qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: clinic A: a specialist diabetes clinic with regular contact with a diabetologist and antenatal care provided by a midwife; clinic B: a specialist maternity clinic providing regular contact with a midwife, a structured programme for self-monitoring of blood glucose and insulin treatment, and a 1-day diabetes class by an obstetrician, a diabetologist, a midwife and a dietician. The clinics were located at two different university hospitals in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: a consecutive sample of Swedish women diagnosed with GDM; 13 managed in clinic A and 10 managed in clinic B. MEASUREMENT AND FINDINGS: women described their perceptions of as well-being, being healthy and freedom from disease. All respondents reported a delay in the provision of information about GMD and an information gap about GDM and the management of the condition, from diagnosis until the start of treatment at the specialist clinic. Respondents from clinic A expressed fear about future development of type 2 diabetes. Women from clinic B discussed different causes of GDM, and many claimed that health-care staff informed them that GDM was a transient condition during pregnancy. Respondents from clinic A reported a conflict in their treatment of pregnancy and GDM as two different conditions. KEY CONCLUSIONS: beliefs differed and were related to the health-care model chosen. Women with GDM monitored at a specialist maternity clinic believed GDM to be a transient condition during pregnancy only, whereas women monitored at a diabetes specialist clinic expressed fear about a future risk of developing type 2 diabetes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: relevant information about GDM should be provided without delay after initial diagnosis and thereafter repeatedly. It is important to recognise the context of information given on GDM, as it will substantially influence the beliefs and attitudes of women towards GDM as a transient condition during pregnancy or as a potential risk factor for diabetes.