两种增加骨密度功能保健食品的功效研究

Study on the efficacy of two kinds of functional health food for the enhancing of bone density

目的对2种以碳酸钙、氨基酸葡萄糖、硫酸软骨素为主要组分但不同配比的增加骨密度类保健食品的功效进行验证,从配方角度进行分析评价。方法采用相当于人体推荐剂量的5、10、30倍浓度分别将氨糖软骨素片(0.33、0.67、2.00 g/kg)及骨密度强化胶囊(0.25、0.5、1.5 g/kg)掺入饲料给予大鼠90 d,同时分别设置与30倍剂量组钙含量相同的碳酸钙对照组。测定大鼠体质量、股骨质量、股骨密度及股骨钙含量等指标,对比配方及结果进行分析和讨论。结果股骨质量,增加骨密度胶囊10、30倍剂量组与碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。氨糖软骨素片30倍剂量组与碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);股骨中点骨密度,增加骨密度胶囊30倍剂量组与碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。氨糖软骨素片30倍剂量组与碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);股骨远心端骨密度,增加骨密度胶囊10、30倍剂量组与相应碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。氨糖软骨素片10、30倍剂量组与相应碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);股骨钙含量,增加骨密度胶囊30倍剂量组与相应碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。氨糖软骨素片10倍、30倍剂量组与30倍碳酸钙组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);饲料钙含量,低钙饲料实测钙含量为1.2 mg/g。结论2种配方的保健食品均具有增加骨密度功效,氨糖软骨素片较增加骨密度胶囊配方更合理。

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of 2 kinds of functional health food for the enhancing of bone density with cal-cium carbonate, glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate as the main components but with different concentrations, and also to analyze their different formulae. Methods The rats were fed with the animal feed mixed with glucosamine chondroitin tablets with the concentration levels of 5 , 10 and 30 times of the recommended human doses （ i. e. at the dosages of 0. 33 g/kg, 0. 67 g/kg and 2. 00 g/kg） and bone density-enhancing capsules （with dosages of 0. 25 g/kg, 0.5 g/kg and 1.5 g/kg） for as long as 90 days. At the same time, the group of the animals given calcium carbonate with the concentration level as high as 30 times was set as the control group. Body weight, femur weight, femur bone density and calcium content and other indicators of the rats were detected, and then, analyses and discussions were made against the formulae and the detection results. Results Study results indicated that there were no differences in femur bone weight for those animal groups of 10-time and 30-time bone density-enhancing capsules, as compared with that of the calcium carbonate group or the control group（P 〉 0. 05 ）. There was also no difference for the 30-time dosage group of glucosamine chondroitin tablets, when compared with the calcium carbonate group （ P 〉 0. 05 ） . There were no differences in mid femur bone density for the animal group of 30-time bone density-enhancing capsules, as compared with that of the calcium carbonate group（P 〉0.05）There was also no difference for the 30-time dosage group of glucosamine chondroitin tablets, when compared with the calcium carbonate group（P 〉0. 05） . There were no differences in distal femur bone density for those animal groups of 10-time and 30-time bone density-enhancing capsules, as com-pared with that of the calcium carbonate group（ P 〉 0. 05 ） . There were no differences for the 10-time and 30-time dosage groups of glu-cosamine chondroitin tablets, when compared with the calcium carbonate group（P 〉0.05）. No differences could be seen in femur calcium content for the 30-time bone density-enhancing capsule group, when compared with the calcium carbonate group（P 〉0. 05） . Nei-ther differences could be noted for the 10-time and 30-time dosage groups of glucosamine chondroitin tablets, when compared with the 30-time calcium carbonate group（P 〉0.05）. As for the calcium content in the feed, the actual measured calcium content in the low calcium feed was 1.2 mg/g. Conclusion The health food of the 2 formulae all had the function to increase bone density, and the glu-cosamine chondroitin tablets were more superior to the bone density-enhancing capsules.