In the recent review study by Riccardi et al., the study’s notable focus on the glycaemic index (GI) to inform broad dietary guidance is troubling given GI’s demonstrable limitations as a tool for predicting health risk. In 2019, Reynolds et al.1 observed the relationship between GI and clinical outcomes was consistently graded as low to very low. Furthermore, a recent analysis demonstrated the inconsistent link between GI and hard clinical endpoints across populations that likely have divergent risk profiles (e.g. for developed vs. developing countries).2,3
As Riccardi et al.4 previously noted in an earlier publication, intervention studies on the effects of GI on cardiovascular disease outcomes are not clear, and while GI may have some utility for people with type 2 diabetes, it has not shown to be particularly useful as a standalone metric. Indeed, multiple studies have demonstrated GI’s wide intra- and inter-individual variability, suggesting it cannot be considered a reliable nor generalizable measure of glycaemic impact on health outcomes.5–9 In the most comprehensive evaluation of post-prandial glycaemic responses with controlled meals to date, Zeevi et al.10 observed a roughly five-fold interpersonal variability in glycaemic response to bread between the bottom and top 10% of participants. This degree of inter-individual variability would disqualify the use of any other biomarker of health or disease status.
Lifestyle factors, many of which are difficult to control even in lab settings, can affect one’s glycaemic response to a food (e.g. prior exercise, stress, lack of sleep, composition of previous meal(s), etc.).8 There is also significant GI variability within food categories and across geographic locations as well.11,12 Variables such as food variety, growing conditions, small changes in meal preparation, and even degree of mastication can impact GI.13–15
Furthermore, GI tables are developed based on consumption of 50 g of available carbohydrate of a food. This quantity of carbohydrate is often difficult to attain in ad lib food settings. For example, when comparing rice to beets—both classified as high GI foods—the 50 g threshold for available carbohydrate is a reasonable measure for rice (there are 53 g of carbohydrate per cup and most of it is available). However, the GI for beets is 64, which has little real-world meaning as there are only 13 g of carbohydrate per cup of beets; to reach the 50 g threshold one would need to consume more than 4 cups of beets.16
On the basis of GI alone, the authors pointedly call out potatoes as a food to limit, yet evidence indicates that potatoes in many forms (despite its GI, which varies significantly depending on variety and cooking preparation), produce different (generally more beneficial) effects on food intake, satiety, blood glucose, and insulin responses than pasta, which has a lower GI.17
All of these issues speak to the impracticality of GI as a metric for carbohydrate quality in real-world settings. A recent review by the US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics noted that the GI may be a useful tool in some contexts, but acknowledged it is ‘an imperfect system’, noting one of its major flaws is that it assesses glycaemic impact on an empty stomach and when consumed without any other foods or condiments.16
Lastly, the use of GI seems counter to the authors’ call for a ‘meal pattern’ vs. an individual nutrient approach, a perspective widely supported among health professionals and government agencies.18 Yet, GI is not a metric for assessing the healthfulness of meal patterns, but rather, analyzes carbohydrates in isolation of all other dietary factors. Recently published reviews and perspectives call into question its use as a marker of diet quality19 and strongly recommend departing from such reductionist assessment methods and have called for a more holistic approach to evaluating the quality of carbohydrate foods.20,21
Conflict of interest: M.K. serves a a consultant for the Alliance for Potato Research & Education (APRE). K.A.B is consultant for Potatoes USA.
Contributor Information
Mitch Kanter, Alliance for Potato Research and Education, Chicago, IL, USA.
Siddhartha Angadi, Department of Kinesiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Julie Miller-Jones, Department of Nutrition, St. Catherine’s University, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Katherine A Beals, Nutrition & Integrative Physiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
References
- 1. Reynolds A, Mann J, Cummings J, Winter N, Mete E, Te Morenga L. Carbohydrate quality and human health: a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet 2019;393:434–445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Jenkins DJA, Dehghan M, Mente A, Bangdiwala SI, Rangarajan S, Srichaikul K, Mohan V, Avezum A, Díaz R, Rosengren A, Lanas F, Lopez-Jaramillo P, Li W, Oguz A, Khatib R, Poirier P, Mohammadifard N, Pepe A, Alhabib KF, Chifamba J, Yusufali AH, Iqbal R, Yeates K, Yusoff K, Ismail N, Teo K, Swaminathan S, Liu X, Zatońska K, Yusuf R, Yusuf S. Glycemic index, glycemic load, and cardiovascular disease and mortality. N Engl J Med 2021;384:1312–1322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Kanter M, Angadi S, Slavin J. Glycemic index, glycemic load, and cardiovascular disease and motality. N Engl J Med 2021;385:378–379. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Riccardi G, Rivellese A, Giacco R. Role of glycemic index and glycemic load in the healthy state, in prediabetes, and in diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr 2008;87:269S–274S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Gourineni V, Stewart M, Skorge R, Wolever T. Glycemic index of slowly digestible carbohydrate alone and in powdered drink-mix. Nutrients 2019;11:1228. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Matthan NR, Ausman LM, Meng H, Tighiouart H, Lichtenstein AH. Estimating the reliability of glycemic index values and potential sources of methodological and biological variability. Am J Clin Nutr 2016;104:1004–1013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Greenwood DC, Threapleton DE, Evans CEL, Cleghorn CL, Nykjaer C, Woodhead C, Burley VJ. Glycemic index, glycemic load, carbohydrates, and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2013;36:4166–4171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Williams SM, Venn BJ, Perry T, Brown R, Wallace A, Mann JI, Green TJ. Another approach to estimating the reliability of glycaemic index. Br J Nutr 2008;100:364–372. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Wolever TM, Gibbs AL, Mehling C, Chiasson J-L, Connelly PW, Josse RG, Leiter LA, Maheux P, Rabasa-Lhoret R, Rodger NW, Ryan EA. The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates in Diabetes (CCD), a 1-y controlled trial of low-glycemic-index dietary carbohydrate in type 2 diabetes: no effect on glycated hemoglobin but reduction in C-reactive protein. Am J Clin Nutr 2008;87:114–125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Zeevi D, Korem T, Zmora N, Israeli D, Rothschild D, Weinberger A, Ben-Yacov O, Lador D, Avnit-Sagi T, Lotan-Pompan M, Suez J, Mahdi JA, Matot E, Malka G, Kosower N, Rein M, Zilberman-Schapira G, Dohnalová L, Pevsner-Fischer M, Bikovsky R, Halpern Z, Elinav E, Segal E. Personalized nutrition by prediction of glycemic responses. Cell 2015;163:1079–1094. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Atkinson FS, Brand-Miller JC, Foster-Powell K, Buyken AE, Goletzke J. International tables of glycemic index and glycemic load values 2021: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 2021;00:1–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Vega-López S, Ausman LM, Griffith JL, Lichtenstein AH. Interindividual variability and intra-individual reproducibility of glycemic index values for commercial white bread. Diabetes Care 2007;30:1412–1417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Chauhan S, Singh U. Changes in glycemic index in maize based flour before and after processing under in vitro condition. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 2020;9:1600–1606. [Google Scholar]
- 14. Sivakamasundari SK, Moses JA, Anandharamakrishnan C. Chewing cycle during mastication influences the in vitro starch digestibility of rice. Pharma Innov J 2021;10:734–738. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Kaur B, Ranawana V, Henry J. The glycemic index of rice and rice products: a review, and table of GI values. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2016;56:215–236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Ellis E. What is Glycemic Index? Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2019. https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/dietary-guidelines-and-myplate/what-is-glycemic-index.
- 17. Akilen R, Deljoomanesh N, Al‐Dabous K, Arshad M, Smith C, Hamilton J, Anderson H. The effects of potatoes and other carbohydrate side dishes consumed with meat on food intake, glycemia and satiety response in children. FASEB J 2015;29:e195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025. 9th Edition. December 2020. DietaryGuidelines.gov.
- 19. Gaesser G, Miller Jones J, Angadi S. Perspective: does glycemic index matter for weight loss and obesity prevention? Examination of the evidence on “fast” compared with “slow” carbs. Adv Nutr 2021:nmab093.doi: 10:1093/advances/nmab093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Schulz R, Slavin J. Perspective: defining carbohydrate quality for human health and environmental sustainability. Adv Nutr 2021;12:1108–1121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Comerford KB, Papanikolaou Y, Jones JM, Rodriguez J, Slavin J, Angadi S, Drewnowski A. Toward an evidence-based definition and classification of carbohydrate food quality: an expert panel report. Nutrients 2021;13:2667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]