BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the metabolic effects of meals with varying glycemic index (GI). METHODS: We measured the glucose, insulin and leptin responses to two contrasting breakfast cereals in a group of 10 young healthy volunteers. Meals were provided on two separate occasions in random order after a 12-hour overnight fast, and consisted of 50 g of available carbohydrate from either Corn Flakes (Kellogg's), or Fiber One (General Mills). Blood samples were obtained at rest, and 30, 60, 90 and 120 min after eating. The GI was calculated from the glucose response to the test meal normalized against a 50 g oral glucose load. RESULTS: The GI for Corn Flakes was 125 +/- 17 units and 49 +/- 8 units for Fiber One(R). These meals were classified as high GI and low GI, respectively, and were significantly different from each other (p < 0.0003). The area under the insulin response curve (AUC) following the low glycemic meal was significantly attenuated compared to the high glycemic meal (14,064 +/- 2,694 vs. 6,828 +/- 1,182 pmol/l.min, p < 0.02). The leptin AUC revealed that circulating leptin was suppressed by the high glycemic meal compared to the low (3.1 +/- 1.5 vs. 9.6 +/- 3.6 ng/ml.min, p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Lower insulin and higher leptin suggests that low glycemic meals promote a postprandial metabolic milieu that is favorable for reduced food consumption; this may be advantageous in the control of obesity and related disorders including insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. (c) 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the metabolic effects of meals with varying glycemic index (GI). METHODS: We measured the glucose, insulin and leptin responses to two contrasting breakfast cereals in a group of 10 young healthy volunteers. Meals were provided on two separate occasions in random order after a 12-hour overnight fast, and consisted of 50 g of available carbohydrate from either Corn Flakes (Kellogg's), or Fiber One (General Mills). Blood samples were obtained at rest, and 30, 60, 90 and 120 min after eating. The GI was calculated from the glucose response to the test meal normalized against a 50 g oral glucose load. RESULTS: The GI for Corn Flakes was 125 +/- 17 units and 49 +/- 8 units for Fiber One(R). These meals were classified as high GI and low GI, respectively, and were significantly different from each other (p < 0.0003). The area under the insulin response curve (AUC) following the low glycemic meal was significantly attenuated compared to the high glycemic meal (14,064 +/- 2,694 vs. 6,828 +/- 1,182 pmol/l.min, p < 0.02). The leptin AUC revealed that circulating leptin was suppressed by the high glycemic meal compared to the low (3.1 +/- 1.5 vs. 9.6 +/- 3.6 ng/ml.min, p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Lower insulin and higher leptin suggests that low glycemic meals promote a postprandial metabolic milieu that is favorable for reduced food consumption; this may be advantageous in the control of obesity and related disorders including insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. (c) 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
Authors: Paula C Chandler-Laney; Shannon A Morrison; Laura Lee T Goree; Amy C Ellis; Krista Casazza; Renee Desmond; Barbara A Gower Journal: Appetite Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: Karen R Kelly; David L Williamson; Ciarán E Fealy; David A Kriz; Raj K Krishnan; Hazel Huang; Janice Ahn; Joseph L Loomis; John P Kirwan Journal: Metabolism Date: 2009-09-17 Impact factor: 8.694
Authors: Alexandra L Jenkins; David J A Jenkins; Thomas M S Wolever; Alexander L Rogovik; Elena Jovanovski; Velimir Bozikov; Dario Rahelić; Vladimir Vuksan Journal: Croat Med J Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 1.351
Authors: Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Kaori Sato; Donna Niedzwiecki; Cynthia Ye; Leonard B Saltz; Robert J Mayer; Rex B Mowat; Renaud Whittom; Alexander Hantel; Al Benson; Devin S Wigler; Alan Venook; Charles S Fuchs Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Andrew O Odegaard; David R Jacobs; Lyn M Steffen; Linda Van Horn; David S Ludwig; Mark A Pereira Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-06-17 Impact factor: 19.112