Perceived Barriers to Application of Glycaemic Index: Valid Concerns or Lost in Translation?

The term glycaemic-index (GI) originally appeared in the literature in the early 1980s. GI categorizes carbohydrate according to glycaemic effect postprandially. Since its inception, GI has obtained and maintained interest of academics and clinicians globally. Upon review of GI literature, it becomes clear that the clinical utility of GI is a source of controversy. Can and should GI be applied clinically? There are academics and clinicians on both sides of the argument. Certainly, this controversy has been a stimulus for the evolution of GI methodology and application research, but may also negatively impact clinicians’ perception of GI if misunderstood. This article reviews two assessments of GI that are often listed as barriers to application; the GI concept is (1) too complex and (2) too difficult for clients to apply. The literature reviewed does not support the majority of purported barriers, but does indicate that there is a call from clinicians for more and improved GI education tools and clinician GI education. The literature indicates that the Registered Dietitian (RD) can play a key role in GI knowledge translation; from research to application. Research is warranted to assess GI education tool and knowledge needs of clinicians and the clients they serve

Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies

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 now over a decade ago that a published meta-analysis used a predefined standard to identify valid studies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose-response meta-analysis (DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relations would 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). The combined T2D-GI RR was 1.27 (1.15-1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that for the 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 2000 kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GL were robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, this supports 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 GL are substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons of European ancestry and of East Asian ancestry

Is There a Place for Dietary Fiber Supplements in Weight Management?

Inadequate dietary fiber intake is common in modern diets, especially in children. Epidemiological and experimental evidence point to a significant association between a lack of fiber intake and ischemic heart disease, stroke atherosclerosis, type 2 diabetes, overweight and obesity, insulin resistance, hypertension, dyslipidemia, as well as gastrointestinal disorders such as diverticulosis, irritable bowel disease, colon cancer, and cholelithiasis. The physiological effects of fiber relate to the physical properties of volume, viscosity, and water-holding capacity that the fiber imparts to food leading to important influences over the energy density of food. Beyond these physical properties, fiber directly impacts a complex array of microbiological, biochemical, and neurohormonal effects directly through modification of the kinetics of digestion and through its metabolism into constituents such as short chain fatty acids, which are both energy substrates and important enteroendocrine ligands. Of particular interest to clinicians is the important role dietary fiber plays in glucoregulation, appetite, and satiety. Supplementation of the diet with highly functional fibers may prove to play an important role in long-term obesity management

The Effects of Fructose Intake on Serum Uric Acid Vary among Controlled Dietary Trials1234

Hyperuricemia is linked to gout and features of metabolic syndrome. There is concern that dietary fructose may increase uric acid concentrations. To assess the effects of fructose on serum uric acid concentrations in people with and without diabetes, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for relevant trials (through August 19, 2011). Analyses included all controlled feeding trials ≥7 d investigating the effect of fructose feeding on uric acid under isocaloric conditions, where fructose was isocalorically exchanged with other carbohydrate, or hypercaloric conditions, and where a control diet was supplemented with excess energy from fructose. Data were aggregated by the generic inverse variance method using random effects models and expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q statistic and quantified by I2. A total of 21 trials in 425 participants met the eligibility criteria. Isocaloric exchange of fructose for other carbohydrate did not affect serum uric acid in diabetic and nondiabetic participants [MD = 0.56 μmol/L (95% CI: −6.62, 7.74)], with no evidence of inter-study heterogeneity. Hypercaloric supplementation of control diets with fructose (+35% excess energy) at extreme doses (213–219 g/d) significantly increased serum uric acid compared with the control diets alone in nondiabetic participants [MD = 31.0 mmol/L (95% CI: 15.4, 46.5)] with no evidence of heterogeneity. Confounding from excess energy cannot be ruled out in the hypercaloric trials. These analyses do not support a uric acid-increasing effect of isocaloric fructose intake in nondiabetic and diabetic participants. Hypercaloric fructose intake may, however, increase uric acid concentrations. The effect of the interaction of energy and fructose remains unclear. Larger, well-designed trials of fructose feeding at “real world” doses are needed