What's new

'Sugar gel' helps premature babies

It is timeless but it has been followed without research

Apparently only when you say it do you understand it....Kehtay hain aqalmandoun kay liyea ishara hi kafi hota hai...Maybe I am trying on the wrong person ...


I never said about religion...But a fact that a man we follow did it and people followed it like he did all sorts of other things, drinking water when you get up (nihar moun)....how is that making you burn is over my head! If science is only NOW finding its goodness through THEIR OWN EXPERIMENTAL approaches how can your burning and blaming some civilization already knew it be understood is beyond me! Had they bothered looking at things like science ASKS them to instead of holding grudges like you and dismissing something SOLELY coz you hate it......we could have gone further down, dont you think? Of course there are some wrong too...but already knowing something was practiced and doing research on that is common sense....

The Chinese use acupuncture for centuries before it was verified that it was science.....now in some American institutes it is taught as a module- my cousin was thinking of taking it when he was doing his MD...

Now Buddhist monks practice it and just coz someone would say Buddhist monks practiced it and science only found it now would that puncture you too?

Couldnt it be possible these quirks were known long before your prophet merely passed down the common knowledge to gain more credibility and help people..Islam is only 1400 yrs old after all ..correct me if I am wrong

I too don't like to be overly critical on century old remedies
 
.
sure. Islamic world landed on the moon, flew fighter planes, transported people using 400 km/s bullet trains all in 600 AD

Happy now.
Bro.Why don`t u understand that this thing was a sunnah a was done 1400 years ago by Holy Prophet PBUH.Not every thing West is Best.Why dont u seem to digest that this practice was being done by arabs 1400 years ago and now science came to prove it
 
.
Bro.Why don`t u understand that this thing was a sunnah a was done 1400 years ago by Holy Prophet PBUH.Not every thing West is Best.Why dont u seem to digest that this practice was being done by arabs 1400 years ago and now science came to prove it
Bhai jaan

Did you see the topic is "premature babies".

such babies did not survive before 1900s and used to die. In fact they even die today in poor areas of our country.

And no sugar can help such spcific cases not in 600 AD

Hope you understand now.
 
.
Did you see the topic is "premature babies".
Topic is the gel....How much longer will you make a fool of yourself? Give it a rest....The whole whole reason for SUGAR GEL to come in front of the topic was emphasis rather than premature babies HELPED BY SUGAR GEL or Premature babies survival increased by sugar gel!

Plus why did the topic ONLY talk about how the gel was effective without introduction to how old the babies they tested were and so on? Plus the RESULTS are published so go embarrass yourself!

Researchers from New Zealand tested the gel therapy in 242 babies under their care and, based on the results, say it should now be a first-line treatment.

Same study in another article:

Sugar Gel Prevents Brain Damage In Premature Babies: The Success Of The ‘Sugar Babies’ Study

preterm.jpg


Sugar gel, when rubbed inside a premature baby's cheek, can prevent permanent brain damage as effectively as traditional, more invasive methods. PAHO/WHO, CC BY-ND 2.0

Rubbing a small amount of sugar gel on the inside of a premature baby’s cheek dramatically reduces its risk of hypoglycemic brain damage, a new study has found.

Researchers from New Zealand discovered that a simple dextrose gel, when applied to the baby’s cheek, causes enough of a glucose spike to stave off any risk for permanent brain damage, which, as a condition, occurs in one out of every 10 babies born prematurely. Among fully mature newborns, the risk drops to one in 500.

The experimenters began their study, which they’ve come to call the “sugar babies” study, as a way to compare the physiological response among premature babies with diabetics, another group that faces an increased risk for hypoglycemia. Through testing 242 babies with hypoglycemia (514 in total), the team found dextrose gel to be the cheapest, simplest method for counteracting hypoglycemia’s potentially devastating effects. At just over £1 ($1.60), the method is now being pushed as the suggested first line of defense in treating preemies’ low blood sugar.

"This is a cost-effective treatment and could reduce admissions to intensive care services, which are already working at high capacity levels,” Andy Cole, chief executive of premature baby charity, Bliss, told the BBC. Though Cole lauded the study’s findings, he conceded it’s “clear there is more research to be done to implement this treatment."

Dextrose gel has the added collateral benefit of improving breastfeeding rates among premature babies. Study leader Professor Jane Harding remarked that newborns suffering from low blood sugar are often rushed to intensive care and put on a drip; in the meantime, their nutrition comes from baby formula. The new treatment method sees mother-baby reunion much earlier, potentially eliminating the need for formula.

"The dextrose gel improves the rate of breastfeeding and we think this might be because babies stay with their mothers, and are not given formula in the first few hours to manage their hypoglycemia,” Harding said.

Below are common symptoms of hypoglycemia, according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health:

  • Pale skin with a bluish tinge
  • Sweating, irritation
  • Breathing difficulties
  • Loose muscles
  • Difficulties in preserving warmness of the body
  • Difficulties in feeding
  • Vomiting


Source: Harris D, Weston P, Signal M, Chase J, Harding J. Dextrose gel for neonatal hypoglycaemia (the Sugar Babies Study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet. 2013.

Sugar Gel Prevents Brain Damage In Premature Babies: The Success Of The ‘Sugar Babies’ Study

Poster Presentations: Neonatology - Other
Pediatric Research (2011) 70, 652–652; doi:10.1038/pr.2011.877

Randomised Trial of Dextrose Gel for Treating Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: The Sugar Babies Study
D L Harris1,2, P J Weston1, M R Battin2,3 and J E Harding2

  1. 1Newborn Intensive Care, Waikato Hospital, Hamilton
  2. 2Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
  3. 3Newborn Services, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
Background and Aims:Neonatal hypoglycaemia is common and linked to poor neurodevelopmental outcome. There is a paucity of data to guide treatment. We sought to determine whether treatment with 40% dextrose gel is more effective than feeding alone in reversing hypoglycaemia in the first 48 hours after birth.

Methods: Randomised, placebo controlled, double-blinded trial comparing the incidence of treatment failure in babies randomised to receive 40%dextrose gel or placebo gel. Eligible babies were ≥35 weeks gestation and at risk for hypoglycaemia. Hypoglycaemic babies (blood glucose < 2.6mM, glucose oxidase method) were randomised, received gel 0.5ml (200mg) /kg massaged into the buccal membrane, and were encouraged to feed. Blood glucose was measured 30 minutes after treatment, and gel was repeated if hypoglycaemia persisted. Primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as blood glucose concentration < 2.6mM after two doses of gel 30 minutes apart.

Results: 514 babies were enrolled, of whom 242 (47%) were randomised, 122 to dextrose and 120 to placebo gel. The median (range) birth weight was 2870 (1590-5550) g and gestation 37 (35-42) weeks. Babies randomised to dextrose gel were half as likely to meet criteria for treatment failure (14 (11%) vs 28 (23%), p =0.01), and were also less likely to be admitted to Newborn Intensive Care for treatment of hypoglycaemia (15 (12%) vs 26 (22%), p =0.05).

Conclusion: Dextrose gel 200mg/kg is more effective than feeding alone, and should be considered for first line therapy of hypoglycaemia in late-preterm and term infants.


Pediatric Research - Abstract of article: Randomised Trial of Dextrose Gel for Treating Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: The Sugar Babies Study
 
. .
Cool ..




<---- Born a premature baby..
Weighs 85kgs,6ft height today.
Hahahah putter the article is about the effect of gel they used premature babies for testing it coz they suffer hypoglycemia more than normal babies ....But good to know you are all well :D

"Our study is the first report in babies showing that dextrose gel massaged into the inside of the cheek is more effective than feeding alone for treating hypoglycaemia, and is safe and simple to use," said Jane Harding from the University of Auckland, lead author of the study.


"Dextrose gel has been recommended before, roughly 20 years ago, but a previous randomised trial...did not show differences and...for most services, the use of buccal dextrose, even as an emergency stop-gap, has fallen into disuse. We now have high quality evidence that it is of value and should be part of the response to triggering treatment," Dr Neil Marlow from the Institute for Women's Health at University College London said in a linked comment published in the journal.

Sugar Gel can Help Raise Blood Sugar Levels in Newborns : Health & Medicine : Nature World News
 
.
Bhai jaan

Did you see the topic is "premature babies".

such babies did not survive before 1900s and used to die. In fact they even die today in poor areas of our country.

And no sugar can help such spcific cases not in 600 AD

Hope you understand now.
Bro,do u know that Hazrat Imam Hussian RA was born as a pre mature baby (2 months pre mature).Then tell me how come He RA survived????
 
.
@Syed.Ali.Haider and @Akheilos can we keep those Miricle Hadiths out of the discussion? I dont like the way the discussion is moving so I deleted them

I am asking politely because I didnt want to ban you both from thread and issue infractions
no discussion I am too old to know the intent.


thanks for your support

Bro,do u know that Hazrat Imam Hussian RA was born as a pre mature baby (2 months pre mature).Then tell me how come He RA survived????
request to you and @FaujHistorian as well. lets keep Islam and its history out of it
nothing good or educational will come out of it and you guys will end up offending each other or someone who is reading it
keep the discussion purely scientific
 
.
@Syed.Ali.Haider and @Akheilos can we keep those Miricle Hadiths out of the discussion? I dont like the way the discussion is moving so I deleted them

I am asking politely because I didnt want to ban you both from thread and issue infractions
no discussion I am too old to know the intent.


thanks for your support
When did I bring in a hadith? This is lovely...I open a thread about a METHODOLOGY 1 of your TT trolls me coz he cant apprehend the issue This other old man in USA cant digest the fact that another man some 1400 yrs ago had done this and his name just happened to be Muhammad! And I am the one called out?
 
.
@Syed.Ali.Haider and @Akheilos can we keep those Miricle Hadiths out of the discussion? I dont like the way the discussion is moving so I deleted them

I am asking politely because I didnt want to ban you both from thread and issue infractions
no discussion I am too old to know the intent.


thanks for your support


request to you and @FaujHistorian as well. lets keep Islam and its history out of it
nothing good or educational will come out of it and you guys will end up offending each other or someone who is reading it
keep the discussion purely scientific
Sir i don`t quite like the idea of keeping a well known fact out of discussion just cuz its about a Muslim living centuries ago.Tell me if i had given the example of a non muslim of the same era,will the same restriction imposed on me???/Certainly not.............I don`t get it...,...:hitwall:
 
.
When did I bring in a hadith? This is lovely...I open a thread about a METHODOLOGY 1 of your TT trolls me coz he cant apprehend the issue This other old man in USA cant digest the fact that another man some 1400 yrs ago had done this and his name just happened to be Muhammad! And I am the one called out?
yes you because you are also
Sir i don`t quite like the idea of keeping a well known fact out of discussion just cuz its about a Muslim living centuries ago.Tell me if i had given the example of a non muslim of the same era,will the same restriction imposed on me???/Certainly not.............I don`t get it...,...:hitwall:
talking about a religious miracle is completely out of the domain of science and this thread
and will only bring discomfort to some people.

this is an international forum and if you expect people to show same respect and belief towards using the Prophets saliva or urine so leave the miracles of the deities out when someone will Troll hard then dont blame me I didnt warn you

prevention is better than cure. simple. whatever the faith
 
Last edited:
.
yes you because you are also

talking about a religious miracle is completely out of the domain of science and will only bring discomfort to some people

prevention is better than cure. simple. whatever the faith
Sir,u have definitely a point.But where did i wrote about a religious miracle????....If i had posted something about Hazrat Muhammad PBUH splitting the moon,etc,then that would have been some religious miracle.Now what i potsed about was`nt some miracle rather was just a plain fact
 
.
religious miracle
I swear that is 1 of the weirdest thing I expected from a Mod....It isnt a miracle ....Back then they didnt have science to prove it....
completely out of the domain of science
How is it out of the domain of science when it is BEING PROVEN BY SCIENCE 1400 yrs later?

only bring discomfort to some people
When others speak ill of religion, country, tradition, culture...I dont see you bringing this in

And BTW, why should they feel discomfort? Not only the ones objecting call themselves Muslims, 1 happens to have a medical profession while the other brought in France....which wasnt seen at all discomforting ....

Had it been something during the roman times, you all would have gagaed over it...What a despicable level of identity crisis!
 
.
Sir,u have definitely a point.But where did i wrote about a religious miracle????....If i had posted something about Hazrat Muhammad PBUH splitting the moon,etc,then that would have been some religious miracle.Now what i potsed about was`nt some miracle rather was just a plain fact
check the posts above I am not interested in continuing this discussion
just see what made me post a warning and remove some posts.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom