1.
Dietary Glycemic Index and Load and the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: Assessment of Causal Relations.
Livesey, G, Taylor, R, Livesey, HF, Buyken, AE, Jenkins, DJA, Augustin, LSA, Sievenpiper, JL, Barclay, AW, Liu, S, Wolever, TMS, et al
Nutrients. 2019;11(6)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
It is generally accepted that certain diet and lifestyle choices contribute to a person’s risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2D). In this meta-analysis, researchers set out to review previous studies and assess whether there is any evidence that the amount and type of carbohydrate (measured by Glycaemic Index (GI) and Glycaemic Load (GL)) in a person’s diet has a direct influence on their risk of developing T2D. The authors concluded with a high level of confidence that eating high GI and GL foods can lead to a higher risk of developing T2D. They suggest that nutrition advice that favours low GI and GL foods could produce significant cost savings for public healthcare.
Abstract
While dietary factors are important modifiable risk factors for type 2 diabetes (T2D), the causal role of carbohydrate quality in nutrition remains controversial. Dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) have been examined in relation to the risk of T2D in multiple prospective cohort studies. Previous meta-analyses indicate significant relations but consideration of causality has been minimal. Here, the results of our recent meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies of 4 to 26-y follow-up are interpreted in the context of the nine Bradford-Hill criteria for causality, that is: (1) Strength of Association, (2) Consistency, (3) Specificity, (4) Temporality, (5) Biological Gradient, (6) Plausibility, (7) Experimental evidence, (8) Analogy, and (9) Coherence. These criteria necessitated referral to a body of literature wider than prospective cohort studies alone, especially in criteria 6 to 9. In this analysis, all nine of the Hill's criteria were met for GI and GL indicating that we can be confident of a role for GI and GL as causal factors contributing to incident T2D. In addition, neither dietary fiber nor cereal fiber nor wholegrain were found to be reliable or effective surrogate measures of GI or GL. Finally, our cost-benefit analysis suggests food and nutrition advice favors lower GI or GL and would produce significant potential cost savings in national healthcare budgets. The high confidence in causal associations for incident T2D is sufficient to consider inclusion of GI and GL in food and nutrient-based recommendations.
2.
Glycemic index, glycemic load, and risk of type 2 diabetes: results from 3 large US cohorts and an updated meta-analysis.
Bhupathiraju, SN, Tobias, DK, Malik, VS, Pan, A, Hruby, A, Manson, JE, Willett, WC, Hu, FB
The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2014;100(1):218-32
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Carbohydrates are the principle dietary components that effect blood glucose concentrations. The association between Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and diets with different levels of sugars and carbohydrates has been controversial in the prevention of T2D. Foods can be measured for their impact on blood glucose concentration using the Glycaemic Index (GI) and the Glycaemic Load (GL). The objective of this meta-analysis was to update previous studies and evaluate the association between the GI and GL of dietary intake and the risk of T2D. The authors found a significant association between the GI and GL of food intake and T2D risk and conclude that high GI and GL foods increase the risk of T2D. However, GI is more strongly associated to T2D than GL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Epidemiologic evidence for the relation between carbohydrate quality and risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has been mixed. OBJECTIVE We prospectively examined the association of dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with T2D risk. DESIGN We prospectively followed 74,248 women from the Nurses' Health Study (1984-2008), 90,411 women from the Nurses' Health Study II (1991-2009), and 40,498 men from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2008) who were free of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer at baseline. Diet was assessed by using a validated questionnaire and updated every 4 y. We also conducted an updated meta-analysis, including results from our 3 cohorts and other studies. RESULTS During 3,800,618 person-years of follow-up, we documented 15,027 cases of incident T2D. In pooled multivariable analyses, those in the highest quintile of energy-adjusted GI had a 33% higher risk (95% CI: 26%, 41%) of T2D than those in the lowest quintile. Participants in the highest quintile of energy-adjusted GL had a 10% higher risk (95% CI: 2%, 18%) of T2D. Participants who consumed a combination diet that was high in GI or GL and low in cereal fiber had an ~50% higher risk of T2D. In the updated meta-analysis, the summary RRs (95% CIs) comparing the highest with the lowest categories of GI and GL were 1.19 (1.14, 1.24) and 1.13 (1.08, 1.17), respectively. CONCLUSION The updated analyses from our 3 cohorts and meta-analyses provide further evidence that higher dietary GI and GL are associated with increased risk of T2D.