4.5 Article

Bean and rice meals reduce postprandial glycemic response in adults with type 2 diabetes: a cross-over study

期刊

NUTRITION JOURNAL
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2891-11-23

关键词

Beans; Type 2 diabetes; Traditional diets; Glycemic response

资金

  1. United States Dry Bean Council
  2. Arizona State University Graduate & Professional Student Association Research Support Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Around the world, beans and rice are commonly consumed together as a meal. With type 2 diabetes increasing, the effect of this traditional diet pattern on glycemic response has not been studied fully. Methods: We evaluated the glycemic response of bean and rice traditional meals compared to rice alone in adults with type 2 diabetes. Seventeen men and women with type 2 diabetes controlled by metformin (n = 14) or diet/exercise (n=3) aged 35-70 years participated in the randomized 4 x 4 crossover trial. The white long grain rice control, pinto beans/rice, black beans/rice, red kidney beans/rice test meals, matched for 50 grams of available carbohydrate, were consumed at breakfast after a 12 hour fast. Capillary blood glucose concentrations at baseline and at 30 minute intervals up to 180 minutes postprandial were collected. MANOVA for repeated measures established glucose differences between treatments. Paired t tests identified differences between bean types and the rice control following a significant MANOVA. Results: Postprandial net glucose values were significantly lower for the three bean/rice treatments in contrast to the rice control at 90, 120 and 150 minutes. Incremental area under the curve values were significantly lower for the pinto and black bean/rice meals compared to rice alone, but not for kidney beans. Conclusions: Pinto, dark red kidney and black beans with rice attenuate the glycemic response compared to rice alone. Promotion of traditional foods may provide non-pharmaceutical management of type 2 diabetes and improve dietary adherence with cultural groups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据