Glycemic Index Trends and Clinical Implications: Where Are We Going?

Glycemic index (GI) is currently consideredas an alternative system thatclassifies food according to the carbohydratequality (CHO), measuring its absorption speed;meanwhile, glycemic load GL is a more recent termthat relates the quality and quantity of the CHO pergram of the usual consumption portion. Glycemic indexand glycemic load reduce the post-prandial glycemicimpact without the total restriction of CHO in thediet. Initially, GI was used only in patients with diabetes,currently it is also considered as a risk indicator inother pathologies. However, there is great controversydue to an inaccurate interpretation of the knowledgeabout the methodology used for its determination.The aim of this review is to elucidate this currentdebate and to expand the relationship between the GIand the risk of diabetes and other chronic diseases;thus, highlighting new prospects for its applicability inthe dietary intervention for diabetic athletes and in theproduction of functional food designed for patients withdiabetes. There is strong evidence that this indicatorhas become an innovative system for various multidisciplinaryhealth programs

Índice Glicémico: Tendencias e implicaciones clínicas ¿Hacia dónde vamos?

Glycemic index (GI) is currently considered as an alternative system that classifies food according to the carbohydrate quality (CHO), measuring its absorption speed; meanwhile, glycemic load GL is a more recent term that relates the quality and quantity of the CHO per gram of the usual consumption portion. Glycemic index and glycemic load reduce the post-prandial glycemic impact without the total restriction of CHO in the diet. Initially, GI was used only in patients with diabetes, currently it is also considered as a risk indicator in other pathologies. However, there is great controversy due to an inaccurate interpretation of the knowledge about the methodology used for its determination. The aim of this review is to elucidate this current debate and to expand the relationship between the GI and the risk of diabetes and other chronic diseases; thus, highlighting new prospects for its applicability in the dietary intervention for diabetic athletes and in the production of functional food designed for patients with diabetes. There is strong evidence that this indicator has become an innovative system for various multidisciplinary health programs.Actualmente el índice glicémico (IG) se considera como un sistema alternativo que clasifica los alimentos según la calidad de los carbohidratos (CHO), midiendo su velocidad de absorción; por otra parte, la carga glicémica (CG) es un término más reciente que relaciona la calidad y la cantidad de CHO por gramo de la porción de consumo habitual. El índice glcémico y la carga glucémica reducen el impacto glicémico posprandial sin la restricción total de CHO en la dieta. Inicialmente, el IG era utilizado solo en pacientes diabéticos, actualmente también se considera un indicador de riesgo en otras patologías. Sin embargo, existe una gran controversia debido a una interpretación incorrecta del conocimiento sobre la metodología utilizada para su determinación. El objetivo de esta revisión es dilucidar este debate actual y ampliar la relación entre el IG y el riesgo de diabetes y otras enfermedades crónicas; así, se destacan nuevas perspectivas de su aplicabilidad en la intervención dietética para deportistas diabéticos y en la producción de alimentos funcionales diseñados para pacientes con diabetes. Existen fuertes evidencias de que este indicador se ha convertido en un sistema innovador para varios programas de salud multidisciplinarios

Glycemic Index Trends and Clinical Implications: Where Are We Going?

Glycemic index (GI) is currently consideredas an alternative system thatclassifies food according to the carbohydratequality (CHO), measuring its absorption speed;meanwhile, glycemic load GL is a more recent termthat relates the quality and quantity of the CHO pergram of the usual consumption portion. Glycemic indexand glycemic load reduce the post-prandial glycemicimpact without the total restriction of CHO in thediet. Initially, GI was used only in patients with diabetes,currently it is also considered as a risk indicator inother pathologies. However, there is great controversydue to an inaccurate interpretation of the knowledgeabout the methodology used for its determination.The aim of this review is to elucidate this currentdebate and to expand the relationship between the GIand the risk of diabetes and other chronic diseases;thus, highlighting new prospects for its applicability inthe dietary intervention for diabetic athletes and in theproduction of functional food designed for patients withdiabetes. There is strong evidence that this indicatorhas become an innovative system for various multidisciplinaryhealth programs

Índice glicémico, carga glicémica e insulina posprandial a dos fórmulas isoglucídicas con distintos edulcorantes y fibra en adultos sanos y diabéticos tipo 2.

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) of two formulas with the same glucose content with different sweeteners and dietary fiber for diabetics in healthy adults and in patients with type-2 diabetes (DM2). Methodology: In this randomized, double-blind crossover research, eleven healthy people and six with DM2 consumed two enteral formulas, Glucerna SR®, Laboratorios Abbott C.A. (GF) and Enterex Diabetic®, Victus C.A. (EF), sweetened with fructose y sucralose, with 1.2 and 1.3 g/100 ml of fiber source respectively (four times). Additionally, they consumed glucose solution once, obtaining blood samples at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 min for controls; in the diabetics, minutes 150 and 180 were added for measuring blood glucose, basal and postprandial insulin after two and three hours. Results: The incremental area under the curve (IAUC) was lower for the formulas rather than for SG. In the healthy controls was 12,857 ± 422 for EF and 11,601 ± 272 for GF (