TABLE 2.
Effect of different breakfasts on glycemic and insulin responses after the glucose-drink and white-bread challenges1
| Time (min) |
||||||||
| 0 | 15 | 30 | 45 | 60 | 90 | 120 | P-breakfast × time | |
| Glucose response to glucose drink (n = 20), mmol/L | 0.23 | |||||||
| HC | 5.3 ± 0.8 | 7.4 ± 0.8 | 9.1 ± 1.1 | 9.5 ± 1.5 | 9.0 ± 1.7 | 6.7 ± 1.5 | 5.0 ± 1.1 | |
| HP | 5.0 ± 0.5 | 7.0 ± 1.0 | 8.4 ± 1.0 | 8.9 ± 1.4 | 8.5 ± 1.8 | 6.7 ± 1.2 | 5.4 ± 1.0 | |
| HF | 5.1 ± 0.4 | 7.3 ± 0.8 | 9.6 ± 1.4 | 9.8 ± 1.7 | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 7.3 ± 1.5 | 5.6 ± 1.2 | |
| Glucose response to white bread (n = 20), mmol/L | <0.0001 | |||||||
| HC | 5.0 ± 0.6 | 5.0 ± 0.5 | 6.2 ± 0.9 | 7.6 ± 1.3a | 8.0 ± 1.7a | 7.6 ± 1.5 | 6.7 ± 0.8 | |
| HP | 5.2 ± 0.6 | 5.2 ± 0.5 | 5.6 ± 0.6 | 6.2 ± 0.8b | 6.8 ± 1.1b | 7.1 ± 0.9 | 6.9 ± 1.0 | |
| HF | 5.1 ± 0.5 | 5.2 ± 0.4 | 6.3 ± 1.0 | 7.7 ± 1.4a | 8.4 ± 1.2a | 8.1 ± 1.1 | 7.5 ± 1.0 | |
| Insulin response to glucose drink (n = 20), mU/L | 0.34 | |||||||
| HC | 15.1 ± 8.5 | 40.9 ± 20.8 | 62.9 ± 31.4 | 64.4 ± 24.1 | 58.4 ± 32.7 | 30.3 ± 20.7 | 19.6 ± 19.4 | |
| HP | 15.0 ± 10.4 | 42.3 ± 18.6 | 66.2 ± 30.5 | 60.7 ± 28.1 | 61.2 ± 30.6 | 36.5 ± 26.1 | 21.6 ± 17.2 | |
| HF | 12.1 ± 7.3 | 36.1 ± 17.6 | 66.6 ± 40.8 | 61.7 ± 24.6 | 57.7 ± 30.2 | 37.7 ± 26.4 | 27.5 ± 25.5 | |
| Insulin response to white bread (n = 20), mU/L | 0.0312 | |||||||
| HC | 12.9 ± 8.3 | 14.1 ± 9.6 | 27.0 ± 14.0 | 44.2 ± 21.2 | 50.0 ± 28.7 | 44.4 ± 27.6 | 32.5 ± 17.9 | |
| HP | 15.1 ± 10.0 | 17.5 ± 10.6 | 23.9 ± 12.6 | 31.6 ± 15.4 | 41.1 ± 19.3 | 38.3 ± 16.0 | 35.3 ± 20.5 | |
| HF | 14.4 ± 8.9 | 15.6 ± 10.5 | 30.5 ± 16.9 | 44.0 ± 22.6 | 50.9 ± 25.4 | 48.6 ± 27.3 | 36.9 ± 24.9 | |
All values are means ± SDs. Serum glucose and insulin concentrations at different time points are presented. The statistical analysis was performed with the use of a 2-factor mixed ANOVA with the main effects of the test breakfast and time and test breakfast × time interaction with repeated measures for the participants to determine differences in serum glucose and insulin concentrations between test breakfasts over a 2-h test period after the glucose-drink or white-bread challenge, respectively. When a test breakfast × time interaction was significant at P ≤ 0.05, multiple comparisons at each time point were carried out via the Tukey-Kramer method. Means with different superscript letters were significantly different from each other at the same blood sampling time point. Differences in means between different blood sampling time points within each test breakfast group are not shown. HC, high carbohydrate; HF, high fat; HP, high protein.