Background: Many laboratories offer glycemic index (GI) services. Objective: We assessed the performance of the method used to measure GI. Design: The GI of cheese-puffs and fruit-leather (centrally provided) was measured in 28 laboratories (n = 311 subjects) by using the FAO/WHO method. The laboratories reported the results of their calculations and sent the raw data for recalculation centrally. Results: Values for the incremental area under the curve (AUC) reported by 54% of the laboratories differed from central calculations. Because of this and other differences in data analysis, 19% of reported food GI values differed by >5 units from those calculated centrally. GI values in individual subjects were unrelated to age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, or AUC but were negatively related to within-individual variation (P = 0.033) expressed as the CV of the AUC for repeated reference food tests (refCV). The between-laboratory GI values (mean ± SD) for cheese-puffs and fruit-leather were 74.3 ± 10.5 and 33.2 ± 7.2, respectively. The mean laboratory GI was related to refCV (P = 0.003) and the type of restrictions on alcohol consumption before the test (P = 0.006, r² = 0.509 for model). The within-laboratory SD of GI was related to refCV (P < 0.001), the glucose analysis method (P = 0.010), whether glucose measures were duplicated (P = 0.008), and restrictions on dinner the night before (P = 0.013, r² = 0.810 for model). Conclusions: The between-laboratory SD of the GI values is ≈9. Standardized data analysis and low within-subject variation (refCV < 30%) are required for accuracy. The results suggest that common misconceptions exist about which factors do and do not need to be controlled to improve precision. Controlled studies and cost-benefit analyses are needed to optimize GI methodology. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00260858.

Background: Glycemic index (GI) testing is normally based on individual foods, whereas GIs for meals or diets are based on a formula using a weighted sum of the constituents. The accuracy with which the formula can predict a meal or diet GI is questionable.

Purpose: This study investigated the effect of ingesting 0.3 g/kg body weight (BW) of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO₃) on physiological responses, gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability, and sprint performance in elite rugby union players.Methods: Twenty-five male rugby players, age 21.6 (2.6) yr, participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial. Sixty-five minutes after consuming 0.3 g/kg BW of either NaHCO₃ or placebo, participants completed a 25-min warm-up followed by 9 min of high-intensity rugby-specific training followed by a rugby-specific repeated-sprint test (RSRST). Whole-blood samples were collected to determine lactate and bicarbonate concentrations and pH at baseline, after supplement ingestion, and immediately after the RSRST. Acute GI discomfort was assessed by questionnaire throughout the trials, and chronic GI discomfort was assessed during the 24 hr postingestion.Results: After supplement ingestion and immediately after the RSRST, blood HCO₃ ⁻ concentration and pH were higher for the NaHCO₃ condition than for the placebo condition (p < .001). After the RSRST, blood lactate concentrations were significantly higher for the NaHCO₃ than for the placebo condition (p < .001). There was no difference in performance on the RSRST between the 2 conditions. The incidence of belching, stomachache, diarrhea, stomach bloating, and nausea was higher after ingestion of NaHCO₃ than with placebo (all p < .050). The severity of stomach cramps, belching, stomachache, bowel urgency, diarrhea, vomiting, stomach bloating, and flatulence was rated worse after ingestion of NaHCO₃ than with placebo (p < .050).Conclusions: NaHCO₃ supplementation increased blood HCO₃ ⁻ concentration and attenuated the decline in blood pH compared with placebo during high-intensity exercise in well-trained rugby players but did not significantly improve exercise performance. The higher incidence and greater severity of GI symptoms after ingestion of NaHCO₃ may negatively affect physical performance, and the authors strongly recommend testing this supplement during training before use in competitive situations.

Previous studies have reported that regular nut consumption reduces cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and does not promote weight gain despite the fact that nuts are energy-dense. However, no studies have investigated the body composition of those regularly consuming nuts compared to similar intakes of other snacks of equal energy density. This parallel study (n= 118) examined the effects of providing daily portions (~1100 kJ/d) of hazelnuts, chocolate, or potato crisps compared to a control group receiving no snacks for twelve weeks. Effects on body weight and composition, blood lipids and lipoproteins, resting metabolic rate (RMR), appetite indices, and dietary quality were compared. At week 12, there was no significant difference in any of the outcome measurements between the groups except for dietary quality, which improved significantly in the nut group. Nuts can be incorporated into the diet without adversely affecting body weight and can improve diet quality.

Regular nut consumption may improve markers of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction. The quantity of nuts required to achieve these health benefi