Carbohydrate substitution for fat or protein and risk of type 2 diabetes in male smokers.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: We examined the associations between carbohydrate substitutions (total; low-, medium-, high-glycemic index (GI) carbohydrates) for fat or protein and risk of type 2 diabetes. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The cohort comprised 25,943 male smokers among whom 1098 diabetes cases were identified from a national register during a 12-year follow-up. Diet was assessed by a validated food frequency questionnaire. The relative risks (RR) and confidence intervals (CI) for diabetes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard modeling, and multivariate nutrient density models were applied to examine the associations between substitutions of macronutrients and diabetes risk. RESULTS: The risk of diabetes was lower when fat or protein was replaced with an isoenergetic amount (2% of energy intake) of carbohydrates, the multivariate RRs were 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94, 0.99) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.90), respectively. The lower risks were due to replacing saturated plus trans fatty acids, and meat, milk or plant protein with carbohydrates, respectively. Low-, medium- or high-GI carbohydrates did not associate with lower diabetes risk when replacing fat or fatty acids, except when total fat was replaced with medium-GI carbohydrates. Low-, medium- and high-GI carbohydrates had similar inverse associations with diabetes risk when they replaced total, meat or milk protein. CONCLUSION: Higher carbohydrate intake at the expense of fat, attributable to trans and saturated fatty acids, or protein was associated with decreased diabetes risk. Replacing fat or protein with lower-GI carbohydrates was not more beneficial than replacing it with higher-GI carbohydrates.

Glycaemic index values in the Finnish food composition database: an approach to standardised value documentation.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The glycaemic index (GI) is used to describe the blood glucose-raising potential of carbohydrate-containing foods. Only a few descriptions of the addition of GI values to national food composition databases (FCDBs) exist. We tested whether the value documentation framework established within the European Food Information Resource (EuroFIR) Network could be used for GI values when adding them to the Finnish FCDB. METHODS: The list of foods requiring GI values was based on the National FINDIET 2007 Survey data and extended with foods encoded in a food-frequency questionnaire used in other nationally representative studies. The minimum quality of GI measurements was verified when gathering values from various sources, using earlier defined criteria. If a measured GI value for a food was directly available, or could be imputed or estimated, the value was added to the Finnish FCDB and documented using core standard vocabularies of EuroFIR. The GI values of composite foods were calculated using recipe calculation software. RESULTS: A total of 2210 foods required a GI value. GI values for 1322 foods were available and added to the FCDB. The remaining 888 foods were composite foods and received a GI value through recipe calculation. The standard vocabularies describing the origin of the GI values, the methods used in their derivation and their qualitative characteristics were suitable for GI values. CONCLUSIONS: GI values can be added to FCDBs and documented using terms similar to those used for traditional food composition data. Standardised value documentation may provide transparency for GI database compilation processes.