Mastication effects on the glycaemic index: impact on variability and practical implications.

Glycaemic variability challenges the accuracy and use of the glycaemic index (GI). The purpose of the current study was to determine the role of mastication on GI. Using a randomized, controlled, crossover, non-blind design, 15 healthy young subjects returned on 5 separate days for three glucose and two rice test sessions. At the rice sessions, subjects chewed each mouthful either 15 or 30 times. Rice chewed 15 times produced a total glycaemic response (GR; 155 mmol min/l), peak GR (2.4 mmol/l) and GI (68) significantly lower than when chewed for longer (30 times) (184 mmol min/l, 2.8 mmol/l and 88, respectively). The study shows that the GI of rice is affected by the degree of mastication. Chewing 15 times compared with 30 times significantly attenuates the GI, suggesting that mastication may potentially contribute to the glycaemic variability of rice. While future work must establish the extent and limits to which mastication affects glycaemia, it could also explore the potential of using mastication to reduce the glycaemic load of rice.

Soups increase satiety through delayed gastric emptying yet increased glycaemic response.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have demonstrated the satiating properties of soups compared with solids; however, the mechanisms controlling soup-induced satiety are unknown. This study aimed to understand the physiological mechanisms causing soup to be more satiating. SUBJECTS/METHODS: A total of 12 volunteers were tested on three occasions after a solid meal, chunky soup or smooth soup test meal for gastric emptying (GE) using the sodium [1-¹³C] acetate breath test, satiety using visual analog scales (VAS) and glycaemic response (GR) using finger prick blood samples. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in GE half-time (P=0.022) and GE ascension time (P=0.018), with the longest GE times for the smooth soup and the shortest for the solid meal. The GR area under the curve was significantly different between meals (P=0.040). The smooth soup had the greatest GR (87.0 ± 49.5 mmol/l/min), followed by the chunky soup (65.4 ± 48.0 mmol/l/min), with the solid meal having the lowest GR (61.6 ± 36.8 mmol/l/min). Volunteers were fuller after the smooth soup compared with solid meal (P=0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The smooth soup induced greater fullness compared with the solid meal because of a combination of delayed GE leading to feelings of gastric distension and rapid accessibility of nutrients causing a greater glycaemic response.