Re: Evidence to Come on GI?

[Guest guest]

" The rats' meals were strictly controlled to ensure both groups

maintained the same average body weight. "

Does this mean that in the high GI group, the rats actually needed to

eat less calories than the low GI group due to the loss of muscle

mass and increase in body fat??? The " common wisdom " is that fat

cells require less energy to maintain than muscle cells.

Logan

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

> Hi folks:

>

> It looks like this upcoming study may provide some serious evidence

> regarding the relevance of the glycemic index in humans:

>

> " The US team, which is now planning an 18 month study on humans,

says

> the diet, dubbed the " Atkins alternative " led to weight loss,

reduced

> body fat, and reduced risk factors for diabetes and heart disease

in

> the rats. "

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3604384.stm

>

> Rodney.

[Guest guest]

> > Hi folks:

> >

> > It looks like this upcoming study may provide some serious

evidence

> > regarding the relevance of the glycemic index in humans:

> >

> > " The US team, which is now planning an 18 month study on humans,

> says

> > the diet, dubbed the " Atkins alternative " led to weight loss,

> reduced

> > body fat, and reduced risk factors for diabetes and heart disease

> in

> > the rats. "

> >

> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3604384.stm

> >

> > Rodney.

[Guest guest]

> > " The rats' meals were strictly controlled to ensure both groups

> > maintained the same average body weight. "

Hi All,

I apologize for sending the empty message. Below is what I probably

had meant to include.

See the abstract below for the pdf-available, not in Medline paper.

" Partially pancreatectomised " sounds somewhat distortional.

Skimming through the pdf, the low glycemic index animals ate more g

food.

Lancet 2004;364:778–85

Effects of dietary glycaemic index on adiposity,glucose

homoeostasis,and plasma lipids in animals

Dorota B Pawlak,Jake A Kushner, S Ludwig

Summary

Background Clinical studies suggest a role for dietary glycaemic

index (GI)in bodyweight regulation and diabetes

risk.However,partly because manipulation of GI can produce changes in

potentially confounding dietary factors

such as & #64257;bre content,palatability,and energy density,its relevance t=

o

human health remains controversial.This

study examined the independent effects of GI in animals.

Methods Partially pancreatectomised male Sprague-Dawley rats were

given diets with identical nutrients,except for

the type of starch:high-GI (n=11)or low-GI (n=10).The animals were

fed in a controlled way to maintain the same

mean bodyweight in the two groups for 18 weeks.Further experiments

examined the effects of GI in rats in a cross-

over design and C57BL/6J mice in a parallel design.

Findings Despite having similar mean bodyweight (547 ·9 [sE 13 ·4 ]

vs 549 ·2 [15 ·2 ]g),rats given high-GI food had

more body fat (97 ·8 [13 ·6 ]vs 57 ·3 [7 ·2 ]g;p=0 ·0152)and less

lean body mass (450 ·1 [9 ·6 ]vs 491 ·9 [11 ·7 ]g;

p=0 ·0120)than those given low-GI food.The high-GI group also had

greater increases over time in the areas under

the curve for blood glucose and plasma insulin after oral

glucose,lower plasma adiponectin concentrations,higher

plasma triglyceride concentrations,and severe disruption of islet-

cell architecture.Mice on the high-GI diet had

almost twice the body fat of those on the low-GI diet after 9 weeks.

Interpretation These & #64257;ndings provide a mechanistic basis for

interpretation of studies of GI in human beings.

Relevance to practice The term GI describes how a food,meal,or

diet affects blood sugar during the postprandial

period.GI as an independent factor can cause obesity and increase

risks of diabetes and heart disease in animals.

Use of low-GI diets in prevention and treatment of human disease

merits thorough examination.

Cheers, Alan Pater