Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:31:20.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guar bread: acceptability and efficacy combined. Studies on blood glucose, serum insulin and satiety in normal subjects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

P. R. Ellis ,
E. C. Apling ,
A. R. Leeds  and
N. R. Bolster
P. R. Ellis
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, University of Reading, London Road, Reading, Berks. RG1 5AQ
E. C. Apling
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, University of Reading, London Road, Reading, Berks. RG1 5AQ
A. R. Leeds
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Queen Elizabeth College, University of London, Campden Hill Road, Kensington, London W8 7 AH
N. R. Bolster
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Queen Elizabeth College, University of London, Campden Hill Road, Kensington, London W8 7 AH
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Bread alone and supplemented with guar gum at three levels (50, 100 and 150 g/kg) was given to eleven non-diabetic subjects, and blood glucose and serum insulin were determined preprandialy, and at 30 min and 60 min after commencement of the meal. The satiating effect, up to 120 min, of the guar bread and its acceptability to the same group of normal volunteers was also studied.

2. No significant differences in blood glucose were observed between control and guar breads at 30 min and 60 min, apart from 100 g guar/kg bread at 30 min (P < 0·05). A significant difference in serum insulin was indicated between: control and 50 (P < 0·02) and 150 (P < 0·02) guar/kg breads at 30 min; control and 50 (P < 0·05), 100 (P < 0·001) and 150 (P < 0·05) guar/ke breads at 60 min.

3. There were no significant differences in the satiety scores for control and guar breads. Significant increases in satiety attributed to 150 g guar/kg bread were found when compared to: 50 g guar/kg bread immediately after eating (P < 0·05), 100 g guar/kg bread at 60 min (P < 0·02) and 50 and 100 g guar/kg breads at 120min (both P < 0·05).

4. There was a positive correlation between hedonic score and relative replacement of guar (r 0·62, P < 0·001, n 44) and from the regression line it was found that 50 and 100 g guar/kg breads produced hedonic scores close to a neutral response of 5, whereas 150 g guar/kg bread at a predictive score of 6·3 appeared to be unacceptable to our subjects.

5. Guar bread at the 100 g/kg level (59 g guar/kg bread) reduced the serum insulin by 48% at 60 min and is found to be an acceptable food product at this level of incorporation. However, more information is required to demonstrate the possible satiating potential of guar bread.

Type
Papers of direct reference to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , September 1981 , pp. 267 - 276
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1981

References

Apling, E. C., Khan, P. & Ellis, P. R. (1978). Cereal Fd Wld 23, 640.Google Scholar
Apling, E. C., Leeds, A. R., Wolever, T. M. S. & Jenkins, D. J. A. (1977). Lancet ii, 975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axford, D. W. E., Chamberlain, N., Collins, T. H. & Elton, G. A. H. (1963). Cereal Sci. Today 8, 265.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, N., Collins, T. H. & Elton, G. A. H. (1962). Bakers' Dig. 36, 52.Google Scholar
Chapman, L. D. & Wigfield, R. (1970). Fd. Mf. 45, 59.Google Scholar
Crapo, P. A., Reaven, G. & Olefsky, J. (1976). Diabetes 25, 741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crapo, P. A., Reaven, G. & Olefsky, J. (1977). Diabetes 26, 1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diem, K. & Lentner, C. (1972). Documenta Geigy: Scientific Tables. Basle, Switzerland: J. R. Geigy.Google Scholar
Goldstein, A. M., Alter, E. N. & Seaman, J. K. (1973). In Industrial Gums, p. 303 [Whistler, R. L. & Bemiller, J. N., editors]. London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haber, G. B., Heaton, K. W., Murphy, D. & Burroughs, L. F. (1977). Lancet ii, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, R. (1979). In Preference Behaviour and Chemoreception, p. 123 [Kroeze, J. H. A., editor]. New York: Information Retrieval Inc.Google Scholar
Hill, M. A. & Leeds, A. R. (1979). J. hum. Nutr. 33, 253.Google Scholar
Holt, S., Heading, R. C., Carter, D. C., Prescott, L. F. & Tothill, P. (1979). Lancet i, 636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A. (1980). Proc. Inst. Fd Sci. Technol. 13, 51.Google Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Bloom, S. R., Albuquerque, R. H., Leeds, A. R., Sarson, D. L., Metz, G. L. & Alberti, K. G. M. M. (1980 a). Gut 21, 574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Leeds, A. R., Gassull, M. A., Cochet, B. & Alberti, K. G. M. M. (1977) Ann. int. Med. 86, 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Leeds, A. R., Gassull, M. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Goff, D. V., Alberti, K. G. M. M. & Hockaday, T. D. R. (1976). Lancet ii, 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Hockaday, T. D. R., Leeds, A. R., Howarth, R., Bacon, S., Apling, E. C. & Dilawari, J. (1977). Lancet ii, 779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Leeds, A. R., Gassull, M. A., Haisman, P., Dilawari, J. B., Goff, D. V., Metz, G. L. & Alberti, K. G. M. M. (1978). Br. med. J. i, 1392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Nineham, R., Taylor, R. H., Metz, G. L., Bacon, S. & Hockaday, T. D. R. (1978). Br. med. J. ii, 1744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Taylor, R. H., Ghafari, H., Jenkins, A. L., Barker, H. & Jenkins, M. J. A. (1980). Br. med. J. ii, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D. J. A., Wolever, T. M. S., Taylor, R. H., Reynolds, D., Nineham, R. & Hockaday, T. D. R. (1980). Br. med. J. 280, 1353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeds, A. R., Bolster, N. R., Andrews, R. & Truswell, A. S. (1979). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 38, 44A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, A. A. & Southgate, D. A. T. (1978). Spec Rep. med. Res Counc. no. 297.Google Scholar
Rivellese, A., Riccardi, G., Giacco, A., Pacioni, D., Genovese, S., Mattioli, P. L. & Mancini, M. (1980). Lancet ii, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soeldner, J. S. & Slone, D. (1965). Diabetes 14, 771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tredger, J. & Ransley, J. (1978). J. hum. Nutr. 32, 427.Google Scholar
Werner, W., Rey, H. G. & Wielinger, H. (1970). Z. analyt. Chem. 252, 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolever, T. M. S., Jenkins, D. J. A., Nineham, R. & Alberti, K. G. M. M. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar