ArticlePDF Available

Glycemic Response of Natural Sweeteners like Sugarcane Juice, Honey and Jaggery in Healthy Individuals

Authors:

Abstract

Use of simple sugars, artificial and processed sweeteners enhances the risk of diabetes and obesity. People were unaware of benefits of natural sweeteners. An experimental study based on sample size of 10 participants was conducted, to find out the glycemic response of natural sweeteners like sugarcane juice, honey and jaggery in healthy individuals. They were instructed to consume all the juice served in a period of 5 min. Further blood samples were taken at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 minutes after consumption. Participants were remained sedentary during each session. Blood was obtained by finger-prick and tested by the glucometer. Dextrose means values 91.3, 138.5, 116.7, 96.2, 88.3, 80.9. Honey mean values 84.5 115.5 96.1 79.7 72.7 75.4. Jaggery mean values 87.4, 129.6, 103.1, 90.4, 86, 80.7. Sugarcane juice means values 83.3, 102.1, 97.4, 91.9, 76.6, 74.6 at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 minutes respectively. In conclusion, detailed study of glycemic values of dextrose, honey, jaggery and sugarcane juice shows that all are good glycemic substances. So, healthy persons can be recommended to use natural sweeteners because of their good glycemic response and nutrient value. Being natural sweeteners (honey, jaggery, sugarcane) they have pure nutrient value and they boost up blood sugar level energizing the body to carry out the daily activities in a healthy way without making people obese.
EAS Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies
Abbreviated Key Title: EAS J Humanit Cult Stud
ISSN: 2663-0958 (Print) & ISSN: 2663-6743 (Online)
Published By East African Scholars Publisher, Kenya
Volume-2 | Issue-5| Sept-Oct 2020 | DOI: 10.36349/easjhcs.2020.v02i05.006
*Corresponding Author: Sidra Khalid 38
Research Article
Glycemic Response of Natural Sweeteners like Sugarcane Juice, Honey
and Jaggery in Healthy Individuals
Amir Iqbal, Hafsa Kamran, Sidra Khalid*, Shaista Jabeen, Maria Aslam
University institute of Diet and Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of allied Health Sciences, The University of Lahore, Pakistan
Article History
Received: 01.10.2020
Accepted: 15.10.2020
Published: 23.10.2020
Journal homepage:
https://www.easpublisher.com/easjhcs
Quick Response Code
Abstract: Use of simple sugars, artificial and processed sweeteners enhances the risk of
diabetes and obesity. People were unaware of benefits of natural sweeteners. An
experimental study based on sample size of 10 participants was conducted, to find out the
glycemic response of natural sweeteners like sugarcane juice, honey and jaggery in healthy
individuals. They were instructed to consume all the juice served in a period of 5 min.
Further blood samples were taken at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 minutes after consumption.
Participants were remained sedentary during each session. Blood was obtained by finger-
prick and tested by the glucometer. Dextrose means values 91.3, 138.5, 116.7, 96.2, 88.3,
80.9. Honey mean values 84.5 115.5 96.1 79.7 72.7 75.4. Jaggery mean values 87.4, 129.6,
103.1, 90.4, 86, 80.7. Sugarcane juice means values 83.3, 102.1, 97.4, 91.9, 76.6, 74.6 at 0,
30, 60, 90, 120, 150 minutes respectively. In conclusion, detailed study of glycemic values
of dextrose, honey, jaggery and sugarcane juice shows that all are good glycemic
substances. So, healthy persons can be recommended to use natural sweeteners because of
their good glycemic response and nutrient value. Being natural sweeteners (honey, jaggery,
sugarcane) they have pure nutrient value and they boost up blood sugar level energizing the
body to carry out the daily activities in a healthy way without making people obese.
Keywords: Glycemic response, Knowledge, Attitudes, BMI, Natural sweeteners, Diabetes,
Hypertension.
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s): This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License (CC BY-NC 4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial use provided the original
author and source are credited.
INTRODUCTION
The glycemic index was invented in 1981 by
David Jenkins and Thomas Wolver to classify
carbohydrates containing foods according to their
ability that how fast they increase blood sugar levels in
body [1]. The glycemic response is a proportion of the
effect of sustenance on blood glucose levels.
Nourishment with quicker rates of processing and
retention of sugars cause blood glucose levels to
increment coming about most elevated glycemic
reaction in contrast with those with lower glycemic
reaction in which glucose is discharges gradually into
blood and is critical in the control of diabetes [2]. The
food and its composition of starch and its digestion rate
are blood glucose determinants [3]. Glycemic index and
glycemic load are diverse terms utilized for glycemic
response [4]. Differences in the thickness of semi-solid
foods would similarly affect glycemic response.
Viscosity of food may modulate insulin and glucose
response [5]. Two kinds of sugars are available i.e.
common sugars of plant origin and artificial sweeteners.
Sweetening agents increase the perception of sweet
taste. Natural sweeteners are flavored over synthetic
sweeteners since they don’t have adverse effects on
health. Non-saccharide is low calorific, nontoxic and
too sweet in nature and can defeat the issues of sucrose
and artificial sweeteners [6]. High glycemic load diets
are thought to be weight gain diets because of higher
postprandial insulin reaction following ingestion of a
high glycemic load dinner, which stimulates uptake of
glucose by insulin responsive tissues, prompting a fall
in blood glucose focus and more suppression of free
fatty acids [7]. Diets high in glycemic load may increase
CVD risks through postprandial hyper-insulinemia and
insulin obstruction prompting dyslipidemia and
irritation and through postprandial hyperglycemia by
inciting oxidative pressure, which adversely impacts
circulatory system clot formation, and endothelium-
dependent blood flow [8]. Vegetables, pasta, leafy foods
items are classified low glycemic index foods (55 or
less on the glucose reference scale). breads, breakfast
grains, rice and snack items, including the whole grains,
are accessible in both high (70 or more) and low
glycemic list frames. Mostly varieties of rice and potato
are high glycemic index foods [9]. The utilization of
high glycemic index foods is noted to increase chances
of diabetes while the utilization of low glycemic list
diets may cause weight reduction and glycemic control.
In any case, the blend of activity preparing with weight
control plans differs by glycemic index [10]. The
utilization of foods and beverages containing non-
nutritive sugars has significantly expanded in the course
of the last few years [11]. Characteristics sugars like
nectar have numerous therapeutic properties, including
antibacterial, hepatoprotective, cell reinforcements and
Amir Iqbal et al; EAS J Humanit Cult Stud; Vol-2: Iss- 5 (Sept-Oct, 2020): 38-41
© East African Scholars Publisher, Kenya 39
anti-hypertensive impacts. It lessens hyperglycemia in
diabetes [12].
Sugarcane juice is a characteristic beverage
well known in most tropical Asian areas. Sugarcane
juice is successful during exercise in comfortable
environment to regulate blood sugar levels [13]. Jaggery
is sugarcane-based product made by the concentration
of sugarcane juice with no utilization of chemicals. It is
accessible as strong squares and in semi-fluid structure.
It contains the natural vitamins and minerals and
nutrients innately present in sugarcane juice and it is
one of the healthiest sugars in the world. The nutrients
present in the jaggery have anti carcinogenic and anti-
toxic properties [14]. High glycemic load diets
apparently improve craving and advance positive
vitality balance [15]. Increase in protein content and an
unassuming decrease in the glycemic record prompted
support of weight loss [16]. The glycemic index
illustrates how quick a carbohydrate food increase sugar
levels in the blood. High glycemic index of a food
indicates its rapid action in increasing glucose levels
and is less beneficial to control sugar whereas a food
with low glycemic index value is more beneficial in this
regard. Use of non-nutritive foods items and beverages
has hiked up in recent years [17].
Consumption of simple sugars and artificial
sweeteners in the form of carbonated drinks is common
now days. People are unaware of benefits of natural
sweeteners like honey, jaggery and sugarcane juice.
These are antioxidants which prevent from various kind
of diseases and are also rich in nutrients. Study was
aimed to find out the glycemic response of natural
sweeteners in healthy individuals so that awareness
could be created regarding use of natural sweeteners.
METHODOLOGY
To carry out the research an experimental
study was designed and experiments were performed in
Nutrition lab 101, University Institute of Diet and
Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences,
The University of Lahore. Total of 10 healthy
individuals with no previous medical diagnosis (aged
between 18 to 45 years) were selected for the study
period of 4 months. Diabetic, Obese or individuals with
any other medical diagnosis, or people below or above
the age limit were excluded.
STUDY PROTOCOL
Subjects were examined physically and
anthropometrically. Day before a test subjects were
asked to restrict their participation in intense physical
activity. The entire products sample prepared contained
50gm carbohydrates in 500ml solution. After a 12 hr.
night fasting blood sample were taken and then
prepared sample were provided to the subjects that they
have to consume in 5 minutes. Further blood samples
were taken at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 minutes. New
lancet were used at every finger prick. Alcohol swab
were used for cleaning finger. New packed sugar sticks
were used at every blood sample. Accu-check
glucometer were used to find out the sugar levels.
Results of samples were noted on time. Subjects were
remaining sedentary during each session of experiment.
RESULTS
Study included 6 subjects were aged between
18 to 27 years and 4 subjects were aged between 31 to
44 years and the mean age of these subjects was 29.2.
Among the total participants 5 were males and 5 were
females. According to the body mass index 4 subjects
were having normal BMI and 6 subjects were having
overweight. According to the results 3 subjects were
smokers and 7 were non-smokers. According to the
results 2 subjects were taking 7-8 hrs. Sleep, 2 were
sleeping 8-9 hrs. 3 subjects were sleeping 8-10 hrs. 1
subject was sleeping 9-10 hrs. And 2 subjects were
taking sleep 10-12 hrs. Sleep. According to the results 9
subjects were having table sugar and 1 subject was
having Jaggery as sweetener. Results showed that 8
subjects preferred whole wheat chapatti and 2 subjects
preferred white floor chapatti. 1 subject preferred
Brown rice and 9 subjects preferred white rice.
According to the results 7 subjects preferred whole fruit
and 3 subjects were preferring fruit juices. According to
the results 5 subjects preferred white sugar, 4 subjects
were preferred brown sugar and 1 subject was prefers
jiggery, Table 1.
Amir Iqbal et al; EAS J Humanit Cult Stud; Vol-2: Iss- 5 (Sept-Oct, 2020): 38-41
© East African Scholars Publisher, Kenya 40
Table-1: Frequency distribution of subjects according to attributes:
Sr.no
ATTRITUBES
1
No of participants
2
Gender
3
Age limit
4
BMI
5
Smoking habit
6
Sweetener preference
7
Use of sugar
Fig-1: Mean glycemic response of Participants after consumption of honey jaggery sugarcane juice and glucose
According to the results at 0-minute glucose
response in blood was 91.3, honey shows 84.5, jaggery
shows 87.4 and sugarcane juice shows 83.3 of means
values. And after 30 minutes dextrose shows highest
mean value which is 138.5 among all other products
(honey, jaggery, sugarcane juice) i.e. 115.5, 129.6,
102.1 respectively. After 60 minutes again dextrose was
at peak point of mean values of 116.7 among all other
products (honey, jaggery, sugarcane juice) i.e. 96.1,
103.1, 97.4 respectively. After 90 minutes again
dextrose was at top of mean values which is 96.2
among all other products (honey, jaggery, sugarcane
juice) with the means values of 79.7, 90.4, and 91.9
respectively. After 120 minutes once again, dextrose
mean value was at peak point which is 88.3 among
other 3 products (honey, jaggery, and sugarcane juice)
which have the mean values of 72.7, 86, and 76.6
respectively. And after 150 minutes dextrose means
values was at peak point which is 80.9 among all other
products (honey, jaggery, sugarcane juice) with the
means values of 75.4, 80.7, and 74.6 respectively as
shown in Figure 1.
DISCUSSION
In current study total of 10 subjects were
included 5 males and 5 females aged between 18- 44
years. Out of 10 participants 6 subjects were slightly
overweight according to BMI measures and only 3 were
addicted smokers having varied sleep patterns between
8-12 hours.
In a comprehensive study by Uma P et al., an
investigation was carried out to discover the glycemic
indices of jaggery, honey and sucrose that honey can be
recommended as alternative sweetener for sucrose or
not. They suggested that glycemic index for jaggery;
sucrose and honey were practically comparative,
recommending that jaggery, sucrose and honey are all
similarly hyperglycemic. Thus, honey and jaggery can’t
be suggested as an elective sugar for sucrose [18].
Results of present study shows that dextrose has highest
glycemic index starting at 91.3 at 0 min then comes
honey at 84.5, jaggery at 87.4 and sugarcane juice at
83.3. And after 30 minutes dextrose shows highest
mean value which is 138.5 among all other products i.e.
115.5, 129.6, 102.1 respectively. After 60 minutes again
dextrose was at peak point of mean value of 116.7
among all other products i.e. 96.1, 103.1, 97.4
respectively. After 90 minutes again dextrose was at top
of mean values which is 96.2 among all other products
with the means values of 79.7, 90.4, and 91.9
respectively. After 120 minutes once again, dextrose
Amir Iqbal et al; EAS J Humanit Cult Stud; Vol-2: Iss- 5 (Sept-Oct, 2020): 38-41
© East African Scholars Publisher, Kenya 41
mean value was at peak point which is 88.3 among
other 3 products which have the mean values of 72.7,
86, 76.6 respectively. And after 150 minutes dextrose
means values was at peak point which is 80.9 among all
other products with the means values of 75.4, 80.7, and
74.6 respectively. Thus, recommending that honey,
sugarcane juice and jaggery can be used by healthy
individuals.
CONCLUSIONS
Study concluded that glycemic response of
honey, jaggery and sugarcane juice showed that all had
good glycemic response except dextrose which had
high glycemic response. So, natural sweeteners such as
honey jaggery sugarcane juice are better options for
healthy individuals.
REFERENCES
1. Kannar, D., Kitchen, B.J., inventors; Horizon
Science Pty Ltd, assignee. (2012). Natural
sweetener. United States patent US, 112(5):1099-
68.
2. Rana, S., Sharma, S., Katare, C., Shrivatava, V.,
Prasad, G.B. (2012). Glycemic response and
glycemic index of common sweeteners and honey
incorporated products. IOSR J Nurs Health Sci, 1,
40-4.
3. Anderson, G.H., Cho, C.E., Akhavan, T., Mollard,
R.C., Luhovyy, B.L., Finocchiaro, E.T. (2010).
Relation between estimates of cornstarch
digestibility by the Englyst in vitro method and
glycemic response, subjective appetite, and short-
term food intake in young men. The American
journal of clinical nutrition, 91(4), 932-939.
4. Augustin, L.S., Kendall, C.W., Jenkins, D.J.,
Willett, W.C., Astrup, A., Barclay, A.W., Björck,
I., Brand-Miller, J.C., Brighenti, F., Buyken, A.E.,
Ceriello, A. (2015). Glycemic index, glycemic load
and glycemic response: an International Scientific
Consensus Summit from the International
Carbohydrate Quality Consortium
(ICQC). Nutrition, Metabolism and cardiovascular
diseases, 25(9), 795-815.
5. Zhu, Y., Hsu, W.H., Hollis, J.H. (2013). The
impact of food viscosity on eating rate, subjective
appetite, glycemic response and gastric emptying
rate. PLoS One, 8(6), e67482.
6. Priya, K., Gupta, V.R., Srikanth, K. (2011). Natural
sweeteners: A complete review. Journal of
Pharmacy Research, 4(7), 2034-2039.
7. Ludwig, D. S. (2002). The glycemic index:
physiological mechanisms relating to obesity,
diabetes, and cardiovascular
disease. Jama, 287(18), 2414-2423.
8. Liu, S., Willett, W.C., Stampfer, M.J., Hu, B.,
Franz, M., Sampson, L., Hennekens, C.H., Manson,
J.E. (2000). A prospective study of dietary
glycemic load, carbohydrate intake, and risk of
coronary heart disease in US women. The
American journal of clinical nutrition, 71(6), 1455-
1461.
9. American Diabetes Association. (2015). Standards
of medical care in diabetes2015 abridged for
primary care providers. Clinical diabetes: a
publication of the American Diabetes
Association, 33(2), 97.
10. Dixon, J.B., Chuang, L.M., Chong, K., Chen, S.C.,
Lambert, G.W., Straznicky, N.E., Lambert, E.A.,
Lee, W.J. (2013). Predicting the glycemic response
to gastric bypass surgery in patients with type 2
diabetes. Diabetes care, 36(1), 20-26.
11. Anton, S.D., Martin, C.K., Han, H., Coulon, S.,
Cefalu, W.T., Geiselman, P., Williamson, D.A.
(2010). Effects of stevia, aspartame, and sucrose on
food intake, satiety, and postprandial glucose and
insulin levels. Appetite, 55(1), 37-43.
12. Jakobsen, M.U., Dethlefsen, C., Joensen, A.M.,
Stegger, J., Tjønneland, A., Schmidt, E.B.,
Overvad, K. (2010). Intake of carbohydrates
compared with intake of saturated fatty acids and
risk of myocardial infarction: importance of the
glycemic index. The American journal of clinical
nutrition, 91(6), 1764-1768.
13. Shera, A.S., Jawad, F., Maqsood, A. (2007).
Prevalence of diabetes in Pakistan. Diabetes
research and clinical practice, 76(2), 219-222.
14. Atkinson, F.S., Foster-Powell, K., Brand-Miller,
J.C. (2008). International tables of glycemic index
and glycemic load values: 2008. Diabetes
care, 31(12), 2281-2283.
15. Solomon, T.P., Haus, J.M., Kelly, K.R., Cook,
M.D., Filion, J., Rocco, M., Kashyap, S.R.,
Watanabe, R.M., Barkoukis, H., Kirwan, J.P.
(2010). A lowglycemic index diet combined with
exercise reduces insulin resistance, postprandial
hyperinsulinemia, and glucose-dependent
insulinotropic polypeptide responses in obese,
prediabetic humans. The American journal of
clinical nutrition, 92(6), 1359-1368.
16. Drakos, S.G., Pagani, F.D., Lundberg, M.S.,
Baldwin, J.T. (2017). Advancing the science of
myocardial recovery with mechanical circulatory
support: a working group of the national, heart,
lung, and blood institute. JACC: Basic to
Translational Science, 2(3), 335-340.
17. Houry, D.E., Salhi, B.A. (2014). Acute
complications of pregnancy. Rosen's Emergency
Medicine: Concepts and Clinical Practice. 8th ed.
Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders. 94(4):1360-
92
18. Uma, P., Hariharan, R.S., Ramani, V., Seshia, V.
(1987). Glycaemic indices of different
sugars. International Journal of Diabetes in
Developing Countries, 7, 78-82.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
The medical burden of heart failure (HF) has spurred interest in clinicians and scientists to develop therapies to restore the function of a failing heart. To advance this agenda, the National Heart Lung Blood Institute (NHLBI) convened a Working Group of experts on June 2-3, 2016 in Bethesda Maryland to develop recommendations for the NHLBI aimed at advancing the science of cardiac recovery in the setting of mechanical circulatory support (MCS). MSC devices effectively reduce volume and pressure overload that drives the cycle of progressive myocardial dysfunction, thereby triggering structural and functional reverse remodeling. Research in this field could be innovative in many ways and the Working Group specifically discussed opportunities associated with genome-phenome systems biology approaches, genetic epidemiology, bioinformatics and precision medicine at the population level, advanced imaging modalities including molecular and metabolic imaging, and developing minimally invasive surgical and percutaneous bioengineering approaches. These new avenues of investigations could lead to new treatments that target phylogenetically conserved pathways involved in cardiac reparative mechanisms. A central point that emerged from the NHLBI Working Group meeting was that the lessons learned from the MCS investigational setting can be extrapolated to the broader HF population. With the precedents set by the significant impact of studies of other well-controlled and tractable subsets on larger populations, such as the genetic work in both cancer and cardiovascular disease, the work to improve our understanding of cardiac recovery and resilience in MCS patients could be transformational for the greater HF population.
Article
Full-text available
Two types of sweeteners are available: natural sweeteners of plant origin and artificial or synthetic sweeteners. Sweetening agents either evoke sweet taste or enhance the perception of sweet taste. Natural sweetening agents are preferred over synthetic sweetening agents since they do not have any adverse impact on health. Non-saccharide natural sweetening agents are low calorific, nontoxic and super sweet (100 to 10,000 times sweeter than sugar) in nature and can overcome the problems of sucrose and synthetic sweeteners. Natural sweeteners are useful sugar substitutes for diabetic patients. The active sweet principles stored in plants can be grouped under: terpenoids, steroidal saponins, dihydroisocoumarins, dihydrochalcones, proteins, polyols, volatile oils, etc. in nature. Common and scientific names of these sweeteners along with their properties, chemical structure of sweet principles, pharmaceutical uses have been presented in this paper.
Article
Full-text available
Understanding the impact of rheological properties of food on postprandial appetite and glycemic response helps to design novel functional products. It has been shown that solid foods have a stronger satiating effect than their liquid equivalent. However, whether a subtle change in viscosity of a semi-solid food would have a similar effect on appetite is unknown. Fifteen healthy males participated in the randomized cross-over study. Each participant consumed a 1690 kJ portion of a standard viscosity (SV) and a high viscosity (HV) semi-solid meal with 1000 mg acetaminophen in two separate sessions. At regular intervals during the three hours following the meal, subjective appetite ratings were measured and blood samples collected. The plasma samples were assayed for insulin, glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), glucose and acetaminophen. After three hours, the participants were provided with an ad libitum pasta meal. Compared with the SV meal, HV was consumed at a slower eating rate (P = 0.020), with postprandial hunger and desire to eat being lower (P = 0.019 and P<0.001 respectively) while fullness was higher (P<0.001). In addition, consuming the HV resulted in lower plasma concentration of GIP (P<0.001), higher plasma concentration of glucose (P<0.001) and delayed gastric emptying as revealed by the acetaminophen absorption test (P<0.001). However, there was no effect of food viscosity on insulin or food intake at the subsequent meal. In conclusion, increasing the viscosity of a semi-solid food modulates glycemic response and suppresses postprandial satiety, although the effect may be short-lived. A slower eating rate and a delayed gastric emptying rate can partly explain for the stronger satiating properties of high viscous semi-solid foods.
Article
Full-text available
OBJECTIVE To find clinically meaningful preoperative predictors of diabetes remission and conversely inadequate glycemic control after gastric bypass surgery. Predicting the improvement in glycemic control in those with type 2 diabetes after bariatric surgery may help in patient selection.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Preoperative details of 154 ethnic Chinese subjects with type 2 diabetes were examined for their influence on glycemic outcomes at 1 year after gastric bypass. Remission was defined as HbA(1c) ≤6%. Analysis involved binary logistic regression to identify predictors and provide regression equations and receiver operating characteristic curves to determine clinically useful cutoff values.RESULTSRemission was achieved in 107 subjects (69.5%) at 12 months. Diabetes duration <4 years, body mass >35 kg/m(2), and fasting C-peptide concentration >2.9 ng/mL provided three independent preoperative predictors and three clinically useful cutoffs. The regression equation classification plot derived from continuous data correctly assigned 84% of participants. A combination of two or three of these predictors allows a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 87% for remission. Duration of diabetes (with different cutoff points) and C-peptide also predicted those cases in which HbA(1c) ≤7% was not attained. Percentage weight loss after surgery was also predictive of remission and of less satisfactory outcomes.CONCLUSIONS The glycemic response to gastric bypass is related to BMI, duration of diabetes, fasting C-peptide (influenced by insulin resistance and residual β-cell function), and weight loss. These data support and refine previous findings in non-Asian populations. Specific ethnic and procedural regression equations and cutoff points may vary.
Article
Full-text available
The optimal lifestyle intervention that reverses diabetes risk factors is not known. We examined the effect of a low-glycemic index (GI) diet and exercise intervention on glucose metabolism and insulin secretion in obese, prediabetic individuals. Twenty-two participants [mean ± SEM age: 66 ± 1 y; body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 34.4 ± 0.8] underwent a 12-wk exercise-training intervention (1 h/d for 5 d/wk at ≈ 85% of maximum heart rate) while randomly assigned to receive either a low-GI diet (LoGIX; 40 ± 0.3 units) or a high-GI diet (HiGIX; 80 ± 0.6 units). Body composition (measured by using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and computed tomography), insulin sensitivity (measured with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with [6,6-(2)H(2)]-glucose), and oral glucose-induced insulin and incretin hormone secretion were examined. Both groups lost equal amounts of body weight (-8.8 ± 0.9%) and adiposity and showed similar improvements in peripheral tissue (+76.2 ± 14.9%) and hepatic insulin sensitivity (+27.1 ± 7.1%) (all P < 0.05). However, oral glucose-induced insulin secretion was reduced only in the LoGIX group (6.59 ± 0.86 nmol in the prestudy compared with 4.70 ± 0.67 nmol in the poststudy, P < 0.05), which was a change related to the suppressed postprandial response of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide. When corrected for changes in β cell glucose exposure, changes in insulin secretion were attenuated in the LoGIX group but became significantly elevated in the HiGIX group. Although lifestyle-induced weight loss improves insulin resistance in prediabetic individuals, postprandial hyperinsulinemia is reduced only when a low-GI diet is consumed. In contrast, a high-GI diet impairs pancreatic β cell and intestinal K cell function despite significant weight loss. These findings highlight the important role of the gut in mediating the effects of a low-GI diet on type 2 diabetes risk reduction.
Article
Full-text available
Studies have suggested that replacing saturated fatty acids (SFAs) with carbohydrates is modestly associated with a higher risk of ischemic heart disease, whereas replacing SFAs with polyunsaturated fatty acids is associated with a lower risk of ischemic heart disease. The effect of carbohydrates, however, may depend on the type consumed. By using substitution models, we aimed to investigate the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) associated with a higher energy intake from carbohydrates and a concomitant lower energy intake from SFAs. Carbohydrates with different glycemic index (GI) values were also investigated. Our prospective cohort study included 53,644 women and men free of MI at baseline. During a median of 12 y of follow-up, 1943 incident MI cases occurred. There was a nonsignificant inverse association between substitution of carbohydrates with low-GI values for SFAs and risk of MI [hazard ratio (HR) for MI per 5% increment of energy intake from carbohydrates: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.07). In contrast, there was a statistically significant positive association between substitution of carbohydrates with high-GI values for SFAs and risk of MI (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.64). There was no association for carbohydrates with medium-GI values (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.80, 1.21). No effect modification by sex was observed. This study suggests that replacing SFAs with carbohydrates with low-GI values is associated with a lower risk of MI, whereas replacing SFAs with carbohydrates with high-GI values is associated with a higher risk of MI.
Article
Full-text available
Starch composition and rate of digestion are determinants of blood glucose concentrations and food intake (FI). Our objective was to describe relations between estimates of digestibility of starches by the in vitro Englyst method and their effect on blood glucose concentrations, subjective appetite, and FI in young men. Subjects consumed 5 soups containing 50 g maltodextrin, whole-grain, high-amylose, regular cornstarch, or no added starch at 1-wk intervals. Ad libitum FI was measured at 30 min (experiment 1) or 120 min (experiment 2) later, which were the estimated times of digestion of a rapidly digestible starch (RDS) and slowly digestible starch, respectively. Blood glucose concentrations and appetite were measured pre- and postmeal. At 30 min, FI was reduced by maltodextrin only [86% RDS, 12% resistant starch (RS); P < 0.05], but at 120 min FI was reduced by whole-grain (24% RDS, 66% RS), high-amylose corn (40% RDS, 48% RS), and regular corn (27% RDS, 39% RS) (P < 0.0001). The premeal blood glucose concentration at 30 and 120 min was highest and lowest after maltodextrin treatment, respectively (P < 0.0001). After the meal, the blood glucose area under the curve at 30 min was lower after all starch treatments (P < 0.05), but at 120 min the blood glucose area under the curve was lower only after the regular cornstarch treatment (P < 0.05). Premeal appetite decreased by all treatments (P < 0.05). The in vitro estimates of starch digestibility by the Englyst method predicted the effects of starch composition on blood glucose concentrations and FI in young men 30 and 120 min after consumption. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00980941 for experiment 1 and NCT00988689 for experiment 2.
Article
Full-text available
To systematically tabulate published and unpublished sources of reliable glycemic index (GI) values. A literature search identified 205 articles published between 1981 and 2007. Unpublished data were also included where the data quality could be verified. The data were separated into two lists: the first representing more precise data derived from testing healthy subjects and the second primarily from individuals with impaired glucose metabolism. The tables, which are available in the online-only appendix, list the GI of over 2,480 individual food items. Dairy products, legumes, and fruits were found to have a low GI. Breads, breakfast cereals, and rice, including whole grain, were available in both high and low GI versions. The correlation coefficient for 20 staple foods tested in both healthy and diabetic subjects was r = 0.94 (P < 0.001). These tables improve the quality and quantity of GI data available for research and clinical practice.
Article
Honey is the sweet and viscous product, produced by the honeybee from the nectar of plants. Honey is composed mainly of carbohydrates, lesser amounts of water and a great number of minor components. Sugars are the main constituents of honey, most important sugars are the monosaccharides hexoses, fructose and glucose, which are products of the hydrolysis of the disaccharide sucrose. Honey is considered a valuable medicinal food in Indian system of medicine and is found to be useful in management of diabetes. Honey is a powerful antioxidant and used in the day to day life as natural sweetener. The study was conducted to determine the glycemic index (GI) of products made with different natural sweeteners. Normal healthy subjects (n=9) and impaired glucose tolerant (IGT) subjects (n=9) were included in the study. Blood glucose curves at 0, 30, 60, 90 & 120 minutes indicated significant difference in incremental area under the curve (IAUC) of glucose and nutribar made with different sweeteners in subjects with IGT as well as in normal healthy subjects. The mean IAUC of nutribar was significantly lower (p=<0.01) than that of glucose in subjects with IGT as well as in normal healthy subjects. Keywords: Natural sweeteners, diabetes, glycemic response (GR), glycemic index (GI).
Article
Unlabelled: Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages may be one of the dietary causes of metabolic disorders, such as obesity. Therefore, substituting sugar with low calorie sweeteners may be an efficacious weight management strategy. We tested the effect of preloads containing stevia, aspartame, or sucrose on food intake, satiety, and postprandial glucose and insulin levels. Design: 19 healthy lean (BMI=20.0-24.9) and 12 obese (BMI=30.0-39.9) individuals 18-50 years old completed three separate food test days during which they received preloads containing stevia (290kcal), aspartame (290kcal), or sucrose (493kcal) before the lunch and dinner meal. The preload order was balanced, and food intake (kcal) was directly calculated. Hunger and satiety levels were reported before and after meals, and every hour throughout the afternoon. Participants provided blood samples immediately before and 20min after the lunch preload. Despite the caloric difference in preloads (290kcal vs. 493kcal), participants did not compensate by eating more at their lunch and dinner meals when they consumed stevia and aspartame versus sucrose in preloads (mean differences in food intake over entire day between sucrose and stevia=301kcal, p<.01; aspartame=330kcal, p<.01). Self-reported hunger and satiety levels did not differ by condition. Stevia preloads significantly reduced postprandial glucose levels compared to sucrose preloads (p<.01), and postprandial insulin levels compared to both aspartame and sucrose preloads (p<.05). When consuming stevia and aspartame preloads, participants did not compensate by eating more at either their lunch or dinner meal and reported similar levels of satiety compared to when they consumed the higher calorie sucrose preload.