Prebiotic soda lowers postprandial glucose compared to traditional soda pop: a randomized controlled trial

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

There is no demonstrated effect on the postprandial glycemic impact of functional food and beverage products, suggesting a need for human trials that validate the glycemic response to newly emerging 'modern sodas'.

“Despite a healthful formulation of lower sugar and prebiotic fibers, there is no demonstrated effect on the postprandial glycemic impact of functional food and beverage products, suggesting a need for human trials that validate the glycemic response to these newly emerging”

• cites [18] Giuntini EB , Sarda FAH , de Menezes EW . The Effects of Soluble Dietary Fibers on Glycemic Response: An Overview and Futures Perspectives. Foods. 2022;11(23). sourceDisputed

  The Human Studies section (§3.6) reports that a fiber-containing snack bar and smoothie-type beverage reduced postprandial glucose responses compared with controls. General Considerations (§6) likewise says soluble fibers have generally been shown to reduce glycemic responses. The paper calls for testing different food matrices, but it does not support the broad assertion that no effect has been demonstrated for functional foods and beverages; the supplied passages do not address modern sodas specifically. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Prebiotics have the potential to improve glycemic control through gut microbiome modulation.

“Prebiotics have the potential to improve glycemic control through gut microbiome modulation, though this mechanism was not directly assessed in the present study.”

• cites [24] sourceDisputed

  The paper’s discussion of prebiotics (section labeled Abstract; no page given) reports that fructo-oligosaccharides reduced butyrate-producing bacteria and had an adverse effect on glucose metabolism after an oral glucose tolerance test. Although the paper links other microbiome changes to improved insulin response, its specific prebiotic example points in the opposite direction from the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [25] sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction (page unavailable) says prebiotics can alter gut Bifidobacterium numbers and have improved some obesity-associated metabolic alterations in animal models. The Results (page unavailable) report lower glucose in mice given B. pseudocatenulatum, but that intervention was a probiotic, not a prebiotic. The paper therefore supports the general possibility of metabolic benefits from microbiome modulation, but not the specific claim that prebiotics improve glycemic control through that mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Unhealthy dietary patterns characterized by high intakes of refined, high-glycemic load carbohydrates and low intakes of dietary fiber play a crucial role in the development of obesity.

“Unhealthy dietary patterns, characterized by high intakes of refined, high-glycemic load carbohydrates and low intakes of dietary fiber, play a crucial role in the development of obesity (4).”

• cites [4] 2023, Exploring the underlying mechanisms of obesity and diabetes and the potential of Traditional Chinese Medicine: an overview of the literature, Front Endocrinol (Lausanne sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

More than half of the U.S. adult population falls short of meeting the recommendation to limit added sugars to less than 10% of total daily caloric intake.

“Despite that recommendation, more than half of the U.S. adult population falls short in meeting it (7).”

• cites [7] 2023, Meeting the Healthy People 2030 Added Sugars Target, Am J Prev Med sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Reducing intake of added sugars in the diet, including those provided through SSBs, is an important step to improving overall diet quality and cardiometabolic risk factors.

“It is clear that reducing intake of added sugars in the diet, including those provided through SSBs, is an important step to improving overall diet quality and cardiometabolic risk factors (12,13).”

• cites [12] sourcePartly supported

  The dietary-guidelines passage (indexed section labelled “6 to 12 years of age, 9 to 12 hours; and”; page unavailable) sets limits for both sugar-sweetened beverages and added sugars, supporting their reduction as part of a healthier diet. The passages found do not establish that reducing them improves cardiometabolic risk factors. (LLM, conf=0.82)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [13] sourcePartly supported

  The Conclusions and recommendations section recommends reducing added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages and links high sugar intake to adverse health outcomes, including cardiometabolic disease. The paper does not establish that reducing sugars improves overall diet quality; its discussion describes an association between beverage consumption and unhealthy dietary patterns, not the effect of reducing intake on diet quality. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

Routine prebiotic (resistant dextrin) beverage consumption (≥14 days) lowered blood glucose AUC and improved perceived satiety in the 0-2 h postprandial period compared to an isocaloric and available CHO-matched beverage in generally healthy adults with normal-to-overweight BMI.

“Moreover, routine prebiotic (resistant dextrin) beverage consumption (≥14 days) lowered blood glucose AUC and improved perceived satiety in the 0-2 h postprandial period compared to an isocaloric and available CHO-matched beverage in generally healthy adults with normal-tooverweight BMI (21).”

• cites [21] 2021, Impact of dietary supplementation with resistant dextrin (NUTRIOSE((R))) on satiety, glycaemia, and related endpoints, in healthy adults, Eur J Nutr sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Prebiotics not only increase abundance of beneficial microbes but have also been shown to reduce the abundance of potentially harmful microbes in vivo.

“Prebiotics not only increase abundance of beneficial microbes but have also been shown to reduce the abundance of potentially harmful microbes in vivo (27).”

• cites [27] 2023, Partially hydrolyzed guar gum is associated with improvement in gut health, sleep, and motivation among healthy subjects, J Clin Biochem Nutr sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Prebiotic beverage supplementation has previously been shown to improve fasting and postprandial satiety, but significant differences were only observed after ≥14 days of twice daily prebiotic beverage consumption.

“Prebiotic beverage supplementation has previously been shown to improve fasting and postprandial satiety, but significant differences were only observed after ≥14 days of twice daily prebiotic beverage consumption (21).”

• cites [21] 2021, Impact of dietary supplementation with resistant dextrin (NUTRIOSE((R))) on satiety, glycaemia, and related endpoints, in healthy adults, Eur J Nutr sourcePartly supported

  Methods > Treatments reports twice-daily resistant-dextrin beverages. Results > Satiety ratings reports higher fasting satiety at days 14 and 28, and higher satiety after the morning drink at day 28. But it also reports lower satiety after lunch and the evening meal at day 28, so the broad claim that postprandial satiety improved is not supported. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Baseline glucose CV in ITT data was higher than previous reports demonstrating strong reproducibility and concordance between devices within participants of 3.7% median CV (IQR 1.7%-7.1%).

“Review of the intent-to-treat (ITT) baseline glucose CGM data exhibited higher coefficient of variation (CV) than previous reports demonstrating a strong reproducibility and concordance between devices within participants of 3.7% median CV (IQR 1.7%-7.1%)(20).”

• cites [20] sourcePartly supported

  The Results (Concordance in glycemic responses) report a median 3.7% CV (IQR 1.7%–7.1%) for agreement between same-brand devices measuring glucose response after standardized meals. That figure is not a baseline glucose CV, and the reported within-person variability for the same meal on different days is substantially higher. The citing paper's ITT baseline comparison is its own finding, not one established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The bioactive blend of prebiotics and plant extracts incorporated in some modern soda formulations has been shown to promote Bifidobacteria growth and SCFA production in an in vitro gut fermentation model.

“The bioactive blend of prebiotics and plant extracts incorporated in some modern soda formulations has been shown to promote Bifidobacteria growth and SCFA production in an in vitro gut fermentation model (26).”

• cites [26] Deemer D VN , Goodwin B , Bron P , Lindemann S . Botanicals impact the bifidogenic effect and metabolic outputs of in vitro fiber fermentation by gut-derived microbiota in individual-specific ways. bioRxiv preprint. 2023. sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Intestinal microbe composition and corresponding byproducts [e.g., short-chain fatty acids, (SCFA)] are associated with diabetes risk in clinical observations and have been shown to improve glycemic control in pre-clinical models.

“Intestinal microbe composition and corresponding byproducts [e.g., short-chain fatty acids, (SCFA)] are associated with diabetes risk in clinical observations (24) and have been shown to improve glycemic control in pre-clinical models (25).”

• cites [24] sourceSupported
• cites [25] sourcePartly supported

  The citation (25) is attached to the pre-clinical glycemic-control claim, not the clinical-observation claim (24). In Results, “B. pseudocatenulatum CECT 7765 reduced metabolic alterations in obese mice” (page unavailable), the probiotic lowered serum glucose in high-fat-diet-fed mice, supporting that part. The paper does not establish that short-chain fatty acids or other microbial byproducts produced the improvement. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

Second meal behavior (hunger, timing, and energy intake) is significantly associated with 2-3 h glucose dip, whereby greater dips in blood glucose predicts higher hunger, shorter time until next meal, and greater energy intake in the next meal.

“Second meal behavior (hunger, timing, and energy intake) is significantly associated with 2-3 h glucose dip (19), whereby greater dips in blood glucose predicts higher hunger, shorter time until next meal, and greater energy intake in the next meal.”

• cites [19] 2021, Postprandial glycaemic dips predict appetite and energy intake in healthy individuals, Nat Metab sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

The prebiotic blend reduced mixed-meal postprandial glucose and insulin AUC compared to the non-prebiotic tea beverage control.

“The prebiotic blend reduced mixed-meal postprandial glucose and insulin AUC compared to the non-prebiotic tea beverage control.”

• cites [22] 2024, Black Tea drinks with inulin and dextrin reduced postprandial plasma glucose fluctuations in patients with type 2 diabetes: an acute, randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blind crossover study, Nutr Diabetes sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The lack of effect of prebiotics on hunger in individuals with overweight or obese BMI may be a mere consequence of dose, whereby the beneficial effects of fiber intake may be relative to body weight.

“The lack of effect of prebiotics on hunger in individuals with overweight or obese BMI, like in our cohort and others (21), may be a mere consequence of dose, whereby the beneficial effects of fiber intake may be relative to body weight.”

• cites [21] 2021, Impact of dietary supplementation with resistant dextrin (NUTRIOSE((R))) on satiety, glycaemia, and related endpoints, in healthy adults, Eur J Nutr sourcePartly supported

  The Results (Satiety ratings) report no effect on hunger and no observed satiety benefit in overweight participants. The Discussion suggests that 14 g/day of resistant dextrin may have been insufficient to alter satiety in that group. But the study did not include participants with obesity, did not establish that the effective dose scales with body weight, and also raises a possible microbiome-related explanation. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The quote only partly states this claim.

In generally healthy adults with overweight or obesity, total daily energy intake was not different between test conditions.

“Total daily energy intake was not different between test conditions (main effect p=0.55).”

May combine two claims.

Acute prebiotic soda consumption with and without a meal reduces postprandial glucose excursion, without affecting second meal behavior nor perceived hunger and alertness, compared to traditional soda.

“Overall, acute prebiotic soda consumption with and without a meal reduces postprandial glucose excursion, without affecting second meal behavior nor perceived hunger and alertness, compared to traditional soda.”

May combine two claims.

Main effect of joint conditions [beverage (PREB × SODA) × meal (alone × CHO)] in the post meal (2-3 h) period was not significant for both hunger (p=0.55) and alertness (p=0.81).

“Main effect of joint conditions [beverage (PREB × SODA) × meal (alone × CHO)] in the post meal (2-3 h) period was not significant for both hunger (p=0.55) and alertness (p=0.81).”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The test beverages are commercially available, ready-to-consume products.

“Moreover, the test beverages are commercially available, ready-to-consume products, thus consumer implementation to swap traditional soda beverage of choice for a prebiotic soda is an accessible and feasible new health strategy to adopt.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Pre-lunch (t=-30) hunger and alertness varied with a CV of 35.5% and 17.9%, respectively.

“Pre-lunch (t=-30) hunger and alertness varied with a CV of 35.5% and 17.9%, respectively.”

May combine two claims.

Postprandial (0-2 h) glucose AUC and Cmax is lower with prebiotic soda.

“Figure 4. Postprandial (0-2 h) glucose AUC and Cmax is lower with prebiotic soda”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Baseline blood glucose with participant removal after sensitivity analysis was 96.7 ± 9.9 mg/dL [CV 4.6% (1.7%, 9.5%)].

“Baseline blood glucose with participant removal after sensitivity analysis was 96.7 ± 9.9 mg/dL [CV 4.6% (1.7%, 9.5%)].”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The cohort (n=30) was middle-aged (mean ± SD 46.5 ± 10.4 y) men and women with an overweight BMI (29.5 ± 2.6 kg/m2).

“On average, our cohort (n=30) was middle-aged [mean ± standard deviation (SD) 46.5 ± 10.4 y] men and women with an overweight BMI (29.5 ± 2.6 kg/m 2 ) (Table 2).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The second meal energy intake on average ranged from approximately 300 to 430 kcal between all test conditions.

“The second meal energy intake on average ranged from approximately 300 to 430 kcal between all test conditions.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

ITT baseline blood glucose was 96.8 ± 11.3 mg/dL [CV median (min, max) 5.7% (1.7%, 25.8%)].

“ITT baseline blood glucose was 96.8 ± 11.3 mg/dL [CV median (min, max) 5.7% (1.7%, 25.8%)].”

May combine two claims.

The prebiotic soda evaluated in this study contains 28 (72%) fewer grams of total carbohydrate and 36 (77%) fewer grams of total sugars than the traditional soda.

“The prebiotic soda evaluated in this study contains 28 (72%) fewer grams of total carbohydrate and 36 (77%) fewer grams of total sugars than the traditional soda (Table 1), categorizing PREB as a reduced sugar soda.”

• cites Table 1Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The cohort was majority middle-aged white females.

“The cohort was majority middle-aged white females.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Resistant dextrin is a component in the tested prebiotic soda bioactive blend, among other prebiotic fibers and plant botanicals.

“Resistant dextrin is a component in the tested prebiotic soda bioactive blend, among other prebiotic fibers and plant botanicals.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

On average, the second meal was consumed approximately 4 h after test conditions of beverage alone and approximately 4.5 to 5 h after test conditions of beverage with meal.

“On average, the second meal was consumed approximately 4 h after test conditions of beverage alone and approximately 4.5 to 5 h after test conditions of beverage with meal.”

May combine two claims.

Prebiotic soda does not affect perceived hunger nor alertness.

“Figure 5. Prebiotic soda does not affect perceived hunger nor alertness”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The study was carried out in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with Good Clinical Practices (GCP), the applicable US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and the Declaration of Helsinki.

“This study was carried out at Biofortis, Inc. (Addison, IL) in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with Good Clinical Practices (GCP), the applicable US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and the Declaration of Helsinki.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The study protocol was approved by an Institutional Review Board (Sterling IRB, Atlanta, GA).

“The study protocol was approved by an Institutional Review Board (Sterling IRB, Atlanta, GA).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Dietary fiber and added sugars are identified as nutrients of concern due to underconsumption and overconsumption, respectively.

“While the primary focus of current dietary recommendations centers around overall dietary patterns, dietary fiber and added sugars are identified as nutrients of concern due to underconsumption and overconsumption, respectively (6).”

• cites [6] Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025: U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2020 [Available from: DietaryGuidelines.gov.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

In 2020, nearly 300,000 new type 2 diabetes cases and nearly 67,000 new cardiovascular disease cases in the U.S. were attributable to SSB consumption, representing 15.7% and 5.4% of all incident cases, respectively.

“In 2020, nearly 300,000 new type 2 diabetes cases and nearly 67,000 new cardiovascular disease cases in the U.S. were attributable to SSBs consumption, representing 15.7% and 5.4%, respectively, of all incident cases (9)(10)(11).”

• cites (9)(10)(11)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The study used a randomized controlled crossover design with 4 consecutive test days.

“In a free-living setting (i.e., at-home), participants consumed either a prebiotic soda (PREB) or a traditional soda (SODA) with or without a carbohydrate-rich meal as a daily lunch (PREB, SODA, PREB+CHO, SODA+CHO), in a randomized controlled crossover fashion for 4 consecutive test days.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06427915).

“This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT06427915).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Signed written informed consent was obtained from recruited individuals prior to participation.

“Signed written informed consent was obtained from recruited individuals prior to participation.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

A healthy dietary pattern limits added sugars to less than 10% of total daily caloric intake.

“A healthy dietary pattern limits added sugars to less than 10% of the total daily caloric intake (6).”

• cites [6] Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025: U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2020 [Available from: DietaryGuidelines.gov.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Sugar-sweetened beverages are a leading source of added sugars in the U.S. diet, with about one-half of U.S. adults consuming at least one SSB per day during 2011-2014, representing about 6.5% of total daily caloric intake from SSB.

“A leading source of added sugars in the U.S. diet are sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), with about one-half of U.S. adults consuming at least one SSB per day during 2011 -2014, representing about 6.5% of total daily caloric intake from SSB (6,8).”

• cites [6] Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025: U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2020 [Available from: DietaryGuidelines.gov.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [8] Rosinger A , Herrick K , Gahche J , Park S . Sugar-sweetened Beverage Consumption Among U.S. Adults, 2011-2014. NCHS Data Brief. 2017(270):1–8.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Test condition crossover sequence was counterbalanced following a Williams design with equal allocation to test sequence.

“Test condition crossover sequence was counterbalanced following a Williams design with equal allocation to test sequence.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

Consumer implementation to swap traditional soda beverage of choice for a prebiotic soda is an accessible and feasible new health strategy to adopt.

“thus consumer implementation to swap traditional soda beverage of choice for a prebiotic soda is an accessible and feasible new health strategy to adopt.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The prebiotic blend in PREB may serve as an additional modulator of blood glucose concentrations, in conjunction with the lower sugar content, compared to traditional soda.

“Thus, it is plausible to suspect that the prebiotic blend in PREB may serve as an additional modulator of blood glucose concentrations, in conjunction with the lower sugar content, compared to traditional soda.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Prebiotic soda remains a favorable soda choice compared to traditional sugar-sweetened beverages.

“While it is not possible to isolate potential mechanisms, like reduced sugar content, higher fiber content, or gut microbiome modulation by prebiotic content, prebiotic soda nonetheless remains a favorable soda choice compared to traditional sugar-sweetened beverages.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The products were open label.

“Aligned with our free-living model of commercially available beverages, the products were open label.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

All other outcomes were analyzed with the ITT cohort as they were not CGM-derived measurements.

“All other outcomes were analyzed with the ITT cohort as they were not CGM-derived measurements.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Our design of comparing sodas with and without a meal is translational in that the benefits of prebiotics are achieved not only as a supplement (i.e., alone), but also when incorporated into an eating pattern (i.e., within a meal).

“Likewise, our design of comparing sodas with and without a meal is also translational in that the benefits of prebiotics are achieved not only as a supplement (i.e., alone), but also when incorporated into an eating pattern (i.e., within a meal).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

'Modern' prebiotic sodas like PREB not only serve as lower sugar alternatives to SSBs, but also as naturally-sweetened (e.g., stevia), microbiome-friendly alternatives to diet beverages.

“Thus 'modern' prebiotic sodas like PREB not only serve as lower sugar alternatives to SSBs, but also as naturally-sweetened (e.g., stevia), microbiome-friendly alternatives to diet beverages.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Under the paired t-test assumption, a sample of 26 subjects provides approximately 80% power to detect an effect size of 0.50 at the two-sided 0.05 significance level.

“Under the paired t-test assumption to measure potential differences in blood glucose iAUC, a sample of 26 subjects provides approximately 80% power to detect an effect size of 0.50 at the two-sided 0.05 significance level.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Routinely choosing prebiotic soda over traditional variations may improve hunger.

“Nevertheless, it is plausible to suspect that routinely choosing prebiotic soda over traditional variations may improve hunger.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

No adjustment for multiple comparisons was planned, and each comparison was made at the 0.05 significance level maintaining the overall error rate at the 0.10.

“No adjustment for multiple comparisons was planned, and therefore, each comparison was made at the 0.05 significance level maintaining the overall error rate at the 0.10.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

A total of 30 subjects were randomized to allow for possible attrition, noncompliance, or missing data.

“A total of 30 subjects were randomized to allow for possible attrition, noncompliance, or missing data.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Adiposity may affect the modulating capacity of the gut microbiome.

“Alternatively, adiposity may affect the modulating capacity of the gut microbiome (23).”

• cites [23] sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Participants were unblinded to their glucose values.

“Accordingly, participants were unblinded to their glucose values.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

This was an open-label pilot study and therefore not blinded.

“This was an open-label pilot study and therefore not blinded.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Lack of blinding poses a potential risk of bias for patient reported outcomes like VAS scores and diet records.

“Lack of blinding poses a potential risk of bias for patient reported outcomes like VAS scores and diet records.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Six participants with baseline glucose CV >10% across test days were excluded from CGM-derived outcomes in a sensitivity analysis.

“these 6 participants were excluded from CGM-derived outcomes in a sensitivity analysis.”

• Also stated in: § Participant characteristics · plain

  “six participants were removed from postprandial (0-2 h) outcomes for a sensitivity analysis due to high variability in baseline blood glucose across test days.”

May combine two claims.

Partially hydrolyzed guar gum supplementation, an ingredient in PREB, modulates microbiota populations, increasing those inversely associated with insulin resistance like Verrucomicrobia, and decreasing those positively associated with inflammation like Dorea and Sutterella, in healthy adults.

“For example, partially hydrolyzed guar gum supplementation, an ingredient in PREB, modulates microbiota populations, increasing those inversely associated with insulin resistance like Verrucomicrobia, and decreasing those positively associated with inflammation like Dorea and Sutterella, in healthy adults (28).”

• cites [28] 2024, The Dose Response Effects of Partially Hydrolyzed Guar Gum on Gut Microbiome of Healthy Adults, Applied Microbiology sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The acute nature of this study limits conclusions about the long-term effects of prebiotic soda consumption on glycemic control or dietary behavior.

“Finally, the acute nature of this study limits conclusions about the long-term effects of prebiotic soda consumption on glycemic control or dietary behavior, warranting further research.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Our free-living model in a generally healthy and representative BMI population enhances the translational efficacy of our results.

“Our free-living model in a generally healthy and representative BMI population enhances the translational efficacy of our results.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The randomization schedule was prepared by a Biofortis statistician and uploaded to Medrio eCRF platform, with randomization number and associated sequence assigned upon eligibility confirmation.

“The randomization schedule was prepared by a Biofortis statistician and uploaded to Medrio eCRF platform (Medrio, Inc.San Francisco, CA), with randomization number and associated sequence assigned upon eligibility confirmation.”