QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Venn, B. J. Articles by Green, T. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Venn, B. J. Articles by Green, T. J.

---

Methodology and Mathematical Modeling

The Glycemic Load Estimated from the Glycemic Index Does Not Differ Greatly from That Measured Using a Standard Curve in Healthy Volunteers¹

Bernard J. Venn^*,2, Alison J. Wallace, John A. Monro, Tracy Perry^*, Rachel Brown^*, Chris Frampton^** and Tim J. Green^*

^* Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; New Zealand Institute for Crop and Food Research Limited, Christchurch and Palmerston North, New Zealand; and ^** Christchurch School of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand

² To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: bernard.venn{at}stonebow.otago.ac.nz.

Glycemic load (GL) is calculated indirectly as glycemic index (GI) times the weight of available carbohydrate. Alternatively, GL may be measured directly using a standard glucose curve. The purpose of this study was to test the agreement between GL values obtained using direct and indirect methods of measurement in 20 healthy volunteers. A standard curve in which glucose dose was plotted against blood glucose incremental area under the curve (iAUC) was generated using beverages containing 0, 12.5, 25, 50, and 75 g glucose. The GI and available carbohydrate content of 5 foods were measured. The foods (white bread, fruit bread, granola bar, instant potato, and chickpeas) were consumed in 3 portion sizes, yielding 15 food/portion size combinations. GL was determined directly by relating the iAUC of a test food to the glucose standard curve. For 12 of 15 food/portion size combinations, GL determined using GI x available carbohydrate did not differ from GL measured from the standard curve (P > 0.05). For 3 of the test products (100 g white bread, and 100- and 150-g granola bars), GI x available carbohydrate was higher than the direct measure. Benefits of the direct measure are that the method does not require testing for available carbohydrate and it allows portion sizes to be tested. For practical purposes, GI x available carbohydrate provided a good estimate of GL, at least under circumstances in which available carbohydrate was measured, and GI and GL were tested in the same group of people.

KEY WORDS: • glycemic load • glycemic index • available carbohydrate • standard curve

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. A Monro and M. Shaw Glycemic impact, glycemic glucose equivalents, glycemic index, and glycemic load: definitions, distinctions, and implications Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, January 1, 2008; 87(1): 237S - 243S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]