1.
Dietary Glycemic Index and Load and the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies.
Livesey, G, Taylor, R, Livesey, HF, Buyken, AE, Jenkins, DJA, Augustin, LSA, Sievenpiper, JL, Barclay, AW, Liu, S, Wolever, TMS, et al
Nutrients. 2019;(6)
Abstract
Published meta-analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type-2 diabetes(T2D)-dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is nowover a decade ago that a published meta-analysis used a predefined standard to identify validstudies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose-response meta-analysis(DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relationswould support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit>1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). Thecombined T2D-GI RR was 1.27 (1.15-1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that forthe T2D-GL RR was 1.26 (1.15-1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet.The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56-2.25) (p < 0.001, n =10) and 1.89 (1.66-2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GLwere robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, thissupports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice.Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GLare substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons ofEuropean ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.
2.
The glycemic index: methodology and use.
Kendall, CWC, Augustin, LSA, Emam, A, Josse, AR, Saxena, N, Jenkins, DJA
Nestle Nutrition workshop series. Clinical & performance programme. 2006;:43-56
Abstract
The glycemic index concept owes much to the dietary fiber hypothesis that fiber would reduce the rate of nutrient absorption and increase the value of carbohydrate foods in the maintenance of health and treatment of disease. However, properties and components of food other than its fiber content contribute to the glycemic and endocrine responses postprandially. The aim of the glycemic index classification of foods was therefore to assist in the physiological classification of carbohydrate foods which, it was hoped, would be of relevance in the prevention and treatment of chronic diseases such as diabetes. Over the past two decades low glycemic index diets have been reported to improve glycemic control in diabetic subjects, to reduce serum lipids in hyperlipidemic subjects and possibly to aid in weight control. In large cohort studies, low glycemic index or glycemic load diets (glycemic index multiplied by total carbohydrate) have also been associated with higher levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, reduced C-reactive protein concentrations and with a decreased risk of developing diabetes and cardiovascular disease. More recently, some case-control and cohort studies have also found positive associations between the dietary glycemic index and the risk of colon, breast and other cancers. While the glycemic index concept continues to be debated and there remain inconsistencies in the data, sufficient positive findings have emerged to suggest that the glycemic index is an aspect of diet of potential importance in the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases.