Systematic review and meta-analysis of different dietary approaches to the management of type 2 diabetes

Background and aims The positive and negative health effects of dietary carbohydrates are of interest to both researchers and consumers. Methods International experts on carbohydrate research held a scientific summit in Stresa, Italy, in June 2013 to discuss controversies surrounding the utility of the glycemic index (GI), glycemic load (GL) and glycemic response (GR). Results The outcome was a scientific consensus statement which recognized the importance of postprandial glycemia in overall health, and the GI as a valid and reproducible method of classifying carbohydrate foods for this purpose. There was consensus that diets low in GI and GL were relevant to the prevention and management of diabetes and coronary heart disease, and probably obesity. Moderate to weak associations were observed for selected cancers. The group affirmed that diets low in GI and GL should always be considered in the context of diets otherwise understood as healthy, complementing additional ways of characterizing carbohydrate foods, such as fiber and whole grain content. Diets of low GI and GL were considered particularly important in individuals with insulin resistance. Conclusions Given the high prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes worldwide and the consistency of the scientific evidence reviewed, the expert panel confirmed an urgent need to communicate information on GI and GL to the general public and health professionals, through channels such as national dietary guidelines, food composition tables and food labels.

Glycemic index, glycemic load and glycemic response: An International Scientific Consensus Summit from the International Carbohydrate Quality Consortium (ICQC)

Prebiotics as functional foods: A review

http://www.inlogic.co.uk/PDFs/GI%20meta_2_258S.pdf

Glycemic response and health—a systematic review and meta-analysis: relations between dietary glycemic properties and health outcomes

Glycemic index (GI) describes the blood glucose response after consumption of a carbohydrate containing test food relative to a carbohydrate containing reference food, typically glucose or white bread. GI was originally designed for people with diabetes as a guide to food selection, advice being given to select foods with a low GI. The amount of food consumed is a major determinant of postprandial hyperglycemia, and the concept of glycemic load (GL) takes account of the GI of a food and the amount eaten. More recent recommendations regarding the potential of low GI and GL diets to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and to treat conditions other than diabetes, should be interpreted in the light of the individual variation in blood glucose levels and other methodological issues relating to measurement of GI and GL. Several factors explain the large inter- and intra-individual variation in glycemic response to foods. More reliable measurements of GI and GL of individual foods than are currently available can be obtained by studying, under standard conditions, a larger number of subjects than has typically been the case in the past. Meta-analyses suggest that foods with a low GI or GL may confer benefit in terms of glycemic control in diabetes and lipid management. However, low GI and GL foods can be energy dense and contain substantial amounts of sugars or undesirable fats that contribute to a diminished glycemic response. Therefore, functionality in terms of a low glycemic response alone does not necessarily justify a health claim. Most studies, which have demonstrated health benefits of low GI or GL involved naturally occurring and minimally processed carbohydrate containing cereals, vegetables and fruit. These foods have qualities other than their immediate impact on postprandial glycemia as a basis to recommend their consumption. When the GI or GL concepts are used to guide food choice, this should be done in the context of other nutritional indicators and when values have been reliably measured in a large group of individuals.

Glycemic index and glycemic load: measurement issues and their effect on diet–disease relationships

The glycaemic index (GI) concept was originally introduced to classify different sources of carbohydrate (CHO)-rich foods, usually having an energy content of > 80 % from CHO, to their effect on post-meal glycaemia. It was assumed to apply to foods that primarily deliver available CHO, causing hyperglycaemia. Low-GI foods were classified as being digested and absorbed slowly and high-GI foods as being rapidly digested and absorbed, resulting in different glycaemic responses. Low-GI foods were found to induce benefits on certain risk factors for CVD and diabetes. Accordingly it has been proposed that GI classification of foods and drinks could be useful to help consumers make 'healthy food choices' within specific food groups. Classification of foods according to their impact on blood glucose responses requires a standardised way of measuring such responses. The present review discusses the most relevant methodological considerations and highlights specific recommendations regarding number of subjects, sex, subject status, inclusion and exclusion criteria, pre-test conditions, CHO test dose, blood sampling procedures, sampling times, test randomisation and calculation of glycaemic response area under the curve. All together, these technical recommendations will help to implement or reinforce measurement of GI in laboratories and help to ensure quality of results. Since there is current international interest in alternative ways of expressing glycaemic responses to foods, some of these methods are discussed.

/pdf/glycaemic-index-methodology-1m9owjyg57.pdf

G Slama

Papers

Glycaemic index methodology.