Cited by 147Food composition and propertiesDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Diets high and low in glycemic index versus high monounsaturated fat diets: effects on glucose and lipid metabolism in NIDDM

Luscombe, ND, Noakes, M, Clifton, PM·1999·European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Objective To examine the relative effects of high and low glycemic index (GI) carbohydrates, and monounsaturated fats on blood glucose and lipid metabolism in NIDDM subjects.Subjects Fourteen male and seven female variably controlled NIDDM subjects recruited by advertisement.Setting Free living outpatients.Research design A repeated measures, within-subject design was used such that each subject consumed three diets: (a) a high-GI diet (53% CHO -21% fat, 63 GI units (glucose= 100)); (b) a low-GI diet (51% CHO -23% fat, 43 GI units); and (c) a high-mono high-GI diet (42% CHO -35% fat, 59 GI units) in random order and cross-over fashion for four weeks. Approximately 45% energy was provided as key foods which differed in published GI values and specifically excluded legumes. Dietary fibre intake was > 30 g/d on each diet. At the end of each dietary intervention, we measured fasting plasma lipids, glucose, insulin, total glycated plasma protein, fructosamine, LDL and HDL particle size as well as 24 h urinary excretion of glucose and C-peptide.Results HDL-cholesterol was higher on the low-GI and high-mono high-GI diets compared to the high-GI diet (P < 0.05 for overall diet effect). There were no other significant differences in metabolic control between diets, even when adjusted for BMI, glucose control or gender. Body weight and saturated fat intake remained stable between dietary interventions.Conclusion High-mono high-GI and high-CHO, low-GI diets are superior to high-CHO, high-GI diets with respect to HDL metabolism but no effect was noted on glucose metabolism in variably controlled NIDDM subjects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600779

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luscombe, N., Noakes, M., & Clifton, P.
Affiliations
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Venue
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Published
1999-06-01
Volume
53
Issue
6
Pages
473-478
ISSN
  • 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5640
OpenAlex
W1993715747
Cited by
147
References
35
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
8.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
glycemic index, monounsaturated fatty acids, type 2 diabetes, glucose metabolism, lipid metabolism, HDL cholesterol, insulin, fructosamine, LDL particle size, dietary intervention, dietary fiber
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Blood Glucose, Body Weight, Cholesterol, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Fatty Acids, Monounsaturated, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Triglycerides, Cross-Over Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review