Effect of Progen Capsule on Male

Effect of Progen Capsule on Male

infertility with special reference to
infertility with special reference to
Oligospermia
oligospermia
Investigator – Dr Shrinivas Patil M.D. (Ayurveda)

www.progenresearchlab.com
 Introduction
• Infertility is a major entity in present scenario
which is increasing day by day, it is more in
urban area than rural. If we go through its
presentation and causative factors, both the
genders shares almost equal responsibility. It
means males are also equally responsible for
infertility.
• Amongst infertile males maximum males are
seen with abnormal semen profile with
Oligospermia, Asthenospermia, Teratospermia or
Azoospermia
• Present study is restricted to Oligospermic
patients, For the same 40 patients pre diagnosed
as Oligospermic were selected. And treated with
Progen capsules (An Ayurvedic unique Formula)
and placebo.
•
 Aims and Objectives

1. Selection of Patients of Oligospermia

1. Treatment of Patients of Oligospermia with Progen capsule

and Placebo

1. Assessment of efficacy of Progen capsule on Oligospermia

on the basis of semen profile before and after treatment.
 Materials and Methods

1. Pre diagnosed patients of oligospermia are selected for study

1. Patients are divided into two groups, one is treated with

Progen capsules and another with Placebo

1. Assessment of efficacy of Progen capsule on Oligospermia was

done on objective parameters i.e. on the basis of semen
profile before and after treatment.
 Methodology
In this study, for assessment, only Objective Parameters are
considered.
Inclusive criteria
Pre diagnosed patients of Oligospermia with history of infertility.
Patients of oligospermia with normal female partner
Exclusive criteria
Patients of Oligospermia along with sub standing Disorders e.g.
Diabetes Mellitus, Tuberculosis etc.
Patients of Oligospermia having female partner also responsible
for infertility.
 40 patients of Oligospermia are selected
Divided into two Groups
Group A of 30 Patients Group B of 10
Patients

Group A was treated with Progen Capsules and Milk.

Group B was treated with Placebo and Milk.

Dosage
1 Capsule twice in a day

Duration of Treatment
90 days (Follow up was after every 30 days)
 Observations
In Group A – Out of 30 patients treated with Progen
capsules and milk
21 Patients attained Normalcy in their sperm counts.
(20 millions/ ml of semen or above)

7 Patients showed increase in their sperm counts but

could not attain normalcy.

2 Patients showed no significant changes in their

sperm counts.
In Group B – Out of 10 patients treated with Placebo and
milk no patient showed any significant changes in their
semen profile.
Click to edit Master text styles
Second level
● Third level

● Fourth level

● Fifth level
.
 Conclusion
Progen Capsules seems to be efficient in treating the Male infertility,
especially Oligospermia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

q The present study was only restricted to objective parameters and that
too only on oligospermia.
v As mentioned in observations out of 30 patients treated with Progen
Capsule and milk, 28 patients showed significant changes in their
semen profile (21 patients attains normalcy and 7 showed increase in
sperm counts but not attained normalcy), when these patients
observed for further changes; out of 28 patients 17 patients reported
pregnancy of their female partner in a span of 6 months.
 References

Pandit Kashinathshastri, Rasatarangini Motilal B. Publishers. 1994 – 183 P.P.

Pandit Narahan Raj Nighantu with Dravy Guna Prakashika Varanasi Krishnadas Academy 1982, 233 P.P.

Anonymas formacopeal standards for Ayurvedic formulations C.C.R.A.S. New Delhi.

Anonymas Kayadev Nighantu Chaukhamb Orint Varanasi (1979) 

Dr. Ramushi Singh Vanoushadhi Nidarshika, Kashi Hindu University P.P. 350. 

Anonymous Shodhala Nighantu Gaekwads Oriental Series Baroda (1978)

Bapalal Vaidya Nighantu Adarsh Chaukhamba Orient (1968) 1977

Anonymous (1970), Charaka Samhita, Commentary by Shastri K.N. et al

Chaukhambha Vidyabhavan, Varanasi, Su. 4,32,27,99, 104, Ci. 3.258; 4.39, 7;14. 202,227, 236; 15.113, 19. 75;25. 63;27. 29(Va);30. 75, 91; Ka
6.8; Si. 7.60; 10. 36.

Anonymous (1976), Medicinal Plants of India Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, Vol. I, PP. 144.

Anonymous (1980), Sushruta Samhita, ed. Acharya, J.T., Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, Su. 14, 36; 46; 249, 281; Ci. 11. 10;15.9;38, 85; Ka.
6. 21; U. 40. 70,98, 113, 119; 45.37.

Anonymous (1982), Ashtanga Hirdayam, ed. Kunte, A.M. et.al Chukahambha Orientalia, Varanasi, Sa. 2.25, 27; Ci. 8. 114, 125;9. 24, 61, 72; U.
322. 19; 34. 46.

Anonymous (1988) Medicinal Plants Bibliography of CSIR Contributions (1950-1987), Publications and Information Directorate, CSIR, New Delhi,
PP 12.

Anonymous (1988), The Wealth of India, Raw Materials, Publications & Information Directorate, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, New
Delhi, Vol 2, PP. 177-185.

Chunekar, K.C. (1982), Bhavaprakasa Nighantu, Chakhambha Bharati Academy, Varanasi, PP. 537.

Nadkarni, A. K. (1976), K.M. Nadkarni’s Indian Materia Medica, Popular Prakashan Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, Vol-1, PP. 207