Reduction Of Post-prandial Glycaemic Responses Research Articles

Effect of baking conditions on resistant starch: Model systems and cake formulations

Five ingredients rich in RS (resistant starch) were assessed in a model system simulating baking process (water addition 30–50%, 180 °C/35 min) and in reformulated cakes (50% replacement of wheat flour). Moreover, two enzymatic methods used for RS determination (official and rapid) were compared. The combined effect of heating and water addition (50%) significantly decreased the RS content in all ingredients. Reformulated vegan cakes presented significantly lower RS values than those theoretically expected, according to the RS value of raw ingredients. The highest RS amount was observed for Hi Maize, which kept 84% and 72% of the initial RS content in the model systems and cake, respectively. Only the cakes made with Hi Maize reached the criteria for the health claim related to the reduction of post-prandial glycemic response (European Union regulation). Finally, differences between the official and rapid methods were less significant in the cakes than in the model systems.

Association of Slowly Digestible Starch Intake with Reduction of Postprandial Glycemic Response: An Update Meta-Analysis.

Slowly digestible starch (SDS) has been shown to digest slowly throughout the entire small intestine, generating slow and prolonged release of glucose, according to the in vitro Englyst assay. The aim of this work was to conduct a meta-analysis of up-to-date evidence to evaluate the association between SDS consumption and a reduction in the postprandial glycemic response, including extended glycemic index (EGI) or glycemic profile (GP) parameters, during in vivo digestion. We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Europe PMC, Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify related articles published up to September 2022. Human trials investigating the effect of the SDS amount on the postprandial glucose profile were estimated at the standard mean difference (SMD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI), using random effect models. The review followed the systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The meta-analysis included a total of 65 participants. The results revealed that the EGI experienced a greater increase (SMD = 24.61, I2 = 79.2%, p < 0.01) after SDS intake, while the GP exhibited similar trends (SMD = 29.18, I2 = 73.3%, p < 0.01). High heterogeneity vanished in the subgroup and sensitivity analysis (EGI: I2 = 14.6%, p = 0.31; GP: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.97). There was no evidence of publication bias for EGI (p = 0.41) or GP (p = 0.99).The present meta-analysis provides evidence that SDS intake is positively correlated with EGI and GP levels. The quantitative relationship of the reduction in the postprandial glycemic response and SDS consumption was used to quantify the slow digestion property on an extended time scale, and supplement the in vitro concept of SDS.

Response to comments on the Scientific Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to beta‐glucans from oats and/or barley in a ready‐to‐eat cereal manufactured via pressure cooking and reduction of blood‐glucose rise after consumption pursuant to Article 13.5 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to review the scientific comments received on the Scientific Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to beta-glucans from oats and/or barley in a ready-to-eat cereal manufactured via pressure cooking and reduction of blood-glucose rise after consumption pursuant to Article 13.5 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. Comments originating from the applicant (Nestlé S.A.) were submitted to EFSA via the European Commission Services. EFSA has reviewed the comments with the contribution of the chair of the NDA Working Group on Claims and the chair of the NDA Panel. In its opinion adopted on 25 February 2021 the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) concluded that the effect of beta-glucans in reducing post-prandial blood glucose responses is well established. However, the evidence provided is insufficient to establish an effect on reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses at doses of 1.3 g beta-glucans per 25 g of available carbohydrate incorporated into ready-to-eat breakfast cereals manufactured by pressure cooking (i.e. either batch cooking or extrusion), as requested by the applicant. The comments received do not require any change in the conclusions of the NDA Panel.

Positive effects of bread enriched with a-cyclodextrin or a compound of hydroxytyrosol encapsulated in a-cyclodextrin on postprandial glucose, insulin and appetite responses of healthy subjects.

Rationale: Attenuation of postprandial blood glucose and insulin levels is a beneficial health effect. Alpha-cyclodextrin (a-CD) is a dietary fiber known for its beneficial effects on the reduction of postprandial glycaemic responses. Hydroxytyrosol (HT) is a phenolic compound with antioxidant and antidiabetic effects. Enrichment of bread with a-CD or a compound of HT encapsulated in a-CD was performed to examine potential postprandial benefits.

Beta‐glucans from oats and/or barley in a ready‐to‐eat cereal manufactured via pressure cooking and reduction of blood‐glucose rise after consumption: evaluation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Nestlé S.A. submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Belgium, the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to beta‐glucans from oats and/or barley in a ready‐to‐eat cereal manufactured via pressure cooking and reduction of blood glucose rise after consumption. The scope of the application was proposed to fall under a health claim based on newly developed scientific evidence. The food proposed is ‘beta‐glucans from oats and/or barley incorporated into ready‐to‐eat breakfast cereals manufactured via pressure cooking’. The applicant proposed that at least 1.3 g of beta‐glucans/25 g of available carbohydrates in ready‐to‐eat breakfast cereals manufactured via pressure cooking should be consumed. Beta‐glucans from oats, barley or any combination thereof incorporated into ready‐to‐eat cereals manufactured by pressure cooking, are sufficiently characterised. The claimed effect proposed is ‘reduction of the blood glucose rise after the meal’. The reduction of post‐prandial glycaemic responses (as long as post‐prandial insulinaemic responses are not disproportionally increased) may be a beneficial physiological effect. One human intervention study showed an effect of beta‐glucans from oats and/or barley, incorporated into breakfast cereals manufactured via pressure cooking at a level of at least 1.2 g/25 g available carbohydrates, on decreasing post‐prandial glycaemic responses without disproportionally increasing insulinaemic responses. Dose–response relationships were not tested, and no evidence has been provided that beta‐glucans incorporated into cereals processed using pressure cooking would exert a higher effect on post‐prandial glucose responses than beta‐glucans added to other carbohydrate containing foods. Whereas the effect of beta‐glucans in reducing post‐prandial blood glucose responses is well established, the evidence provided is insufficient to establish such an effect at doses of 1.3 g beta‐glucans per 25 g of available carbohydrate incorporated into ready‐to‐eat breakfast cereals manufactured via pressure cooking (i.e. either batch cooking or extrusion).

In vitro digestion of beta-glucan rich cereal products results in extracts with physicochemical and rheological behavior like pure beta-glucan solutions – A basis for increased understanding of in vivo effects.

Cereal beta-glucans may reduce fasting LDL-cholesterol and post-prandial blood glucose rise in humans. Several studies have shown that physicochemical properties of beta-glucan such as molecular weight (M) and solubility/extractability as well as the viscosity of food products after in vitro digestion are important for this physiological effect. In this study, we directly compare beta-glucan physicochemical properties and flow behavior of different cereal products after analytical (thermostable alpha-amylase) and physiological (in vitro digestion) extractions. The beta-glucan weight average molecular weights (Mw) were similar for both types of extractions, while differences in beta-glucan solubility between the food products were only evident after in vitro digestion. The extracts after in vitro digestion behaved essentially as pure beta-glucan solutions. Viscosity dropped to 0.8–1.2 mPa after incubation with a beta-glucanase for all extracts, but was not influenced by xylanase addition. The relationship of beta-glucan Mw (or intrinsic viscosity calculated from Mw), concentration and zero shear viscosity measured in the extracts closely resembled the general relationship reported for “random coil” polysaccharides with two distinct regions, below and above the occurrence of coil overlap. A standardized presentation of previously published in vivo data on blood glucose response showed a distinct grouping of samples with significant effect in the range of coil overlap. This points towards an important role of coil overlap for the reduction of post-prandial glycemic response by beta-glucan rich foods and demonstrates the potential of such a general comparison of different studies to increase the understanding of beta-glucan rich food products in vivo effects.

A Critical Look at Prebiotics Within the Dietary Fiber Concept.

This article reviews the current knowledge of the health effects of dietary fiber and prebiotics and establishes the position of prebiotics within the broader context of dietary fiber. Although the positive health effects of specific fibers on defecation, reduction of postprandial glycemic response, and maintenance of normal blood cholesterol levels are generally accepted, other presumed health benefits of dietary fibers are still debated. There is evidence that specific dietary fibers improve the integrity of the epithelial layer of the intestines, increase the resistance against pathogenic colonization, reduce the risk of developing colorectal cancer, increase mineral absorption, and have a positive impact on the immune system, but these effects are neither generally acknowledged nor completely understood. Many of the latter effects are thought to be particularly elicited by prebiotics. Although the prebiotic concept evolved significantly during the past two decades, the line between prebiotics and nonprebiotic dietary fiber remains vague. Nevertheless, scientific evidence demonstrating the health-promoting potential of prebiotics continues to accumulate and suggests that prebiotic fibers have their rightful place in a healthy diet.

Outcome of a public consultation on the draft guidance of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) on the scientific requirements for health claims related to the immune system, the gastrointestinal tract and defence against pathogenic microorganisms

Outcome of a public consultation on the draft guidance of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) on the scientific requirements for health claims related to the immune system, the gastrointestinal tract and defence against pathogenic microorganisms

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to FRUIT UP® and a reduction of post‐prandial blood glucose responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from WILD-Valencia SAU, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Spain, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to FRUIT UP® and a reduction of post-prandial blood glucose responses. The Panel considers that the food, FRUIT UP®, and the food (i.e. glucose, sucrose) that FRUIT UP® should replace in foods or beverages are both sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. A reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (as long as post-prandial insulinaemic responses are not disproportionally increased) is a beneficial physiological effect. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that in the human intervention studies, from which conclusions could be drawn, FRUIT UP® decreased post-prandial blood glucose responses compared with glucose but not compared with sucrose, and that this effect may be explained by the partial replacement of glucose by fructose. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of FRUIT UP® and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses over and above the well-established effect of fructose on reducing post-prandial glycaemic responses when replacing glucose in foods.

Response to comments on the Scientific Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to “high fibre sourdough rye bread” and reduction of post‐prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

EFSA Supporting PublicationsVolume 12, Issue 4 796E Technical reportOpen Access Response to comments on the Scientific Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to “high fibre sourdough rye bread” and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)Search for more papers by this author European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)Search for more papers by this author First published: 17 April 2015 https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2015.EN-796 Published date: 17 April 2015 Question number: EFSA-Q-2015-00014 AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References Atkinson FS, Foster-Powell K and Brand-Miller JC, 2008. International tables of glycemic index and glycemic load values: 2008. Diabetes Care, 31, 2281– 2283. EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2011a. General guidance for stakeholders on the evaluation of Article 13.1, 13.5 and 14 health claims. EFSA Journal 2011; 9(4):2135, 24 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2135 EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2011b. Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to arabinoxylan produced from wheat endosperm and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (ID 830) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 2011; 9(6):2205, 15 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2205 EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2011c. Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to beta-glucans from oats and barley and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations (ID 1236, 1299), increase in satiety leading to a reduction in energy intake (ID 851, 852), reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (ID 821, 824), and “digestive function” (ID 850) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 2011; 9(6):2207, 21 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2207 EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2012a. Guidance on the scientific requirements for health claims related to appetite ratings, weight management, and blood glucose concentrations. EFSA Journal 2012; 10(3):2604, 11 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2604 EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2012b. Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to alpha-cyclodextrin and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (ID 2926, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 2012; 10(6):2713, 17 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2713 EFSA NDA Panel (EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies), 2014. Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to high-fibre sourdough rye bread and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 2014; 12(10):3837, 11 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3837 Volume12, Issue4April 2015796E ReferencesRelatedInformation

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to Teestar™, a fenugreek seed extract standardised by its content of galactomannan, and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 192

Following an application from Avesthagen Limited, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of France, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to Teestar™ and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The Panel considers that the food, Teestar™, a fenugreek seed extract standardised by its content of galactomannan, is sufficiently characterised. A reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses might be a beneficial physiological effect. The applicant submitted one unpublished and eight published human studies as being pertinent to the health claim. No conclusions can be drawn from the eight published studies, as they were not carried out with Teestar™ or any other fenugreek seed extract which complied with the specifications of the food which is the subject of the claim. In one unpublished study, the consumption of Teestar™ did not lead to a reduction in mean peak post-prandial blood glucose concentrations, which was the primary endpoint of the study. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of Teestar™, a fenugreek seed extract standardised by its content of galactomannan, and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to Nutriose®06 and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Roquette Italia S.P.A., submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Italy, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to Nutriose®06 and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. Non-digestible carbohydrates, including resistant dextrin in Nutriose®06, are resistant to hydrolysis and absorption in the small intestine and therefore do not contribute to post-prandial glycaemia. This opinion applies to non-digestible carbohydrates (e.g. non-starch polysaccharides, resistant oligosaccharides and resistant starch), which should replace glycaemic carbohydrates in foods or beverages in order to obtain the claimed effect. The Panel considers that the food constituent, non-digestible carbohydrates, which is the subject of the health claim, and the food constituent (i.e. glycaemic carbohydrates) that non-digestible carbohydrates should replace in foods or beverages are both sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. The Panel considers that a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses might be a beneficial physiological effect. A claim on non-digestible carbohydrates and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses has already been assessed by the Panel with a favourable outcome. The previous evaluation, including the proposed wording and the conditions of use, also applies to this application. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of foods/beverages containing non-digestible carbohydrates and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses as compared with foods/beverages containing glycaemic carbohydrates.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to high fibre sourdough rye bread and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Oy Karl Fazer AB, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Finland, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to high-fibre sourdough rye bread and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The Panel considers that the food, high-fibre sourdough rye bread, and its “comparator”, glucose, are sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. A reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses might be a beneficial physiological effect. The Panel notes that in the four human intervention studies submitted as pertinent to the health claim the consumption of high-fibre sourdough rye bread induced a significant reduction of post-prandial blood glucose responses when compared with glucose. The Panel also notes that, when comparable amounts of available carbohydrates from different carbohydrate-containing foods are tested, almost any carbohydrate-containing food would induce a reduction of post-prandial blood glucose responses compared with glucose. In addition, foods containing low amounts of, or no available carbohydrates, will also induce lower post-prandial blood glucose responses when compared with glucose. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of almost any food and a reduction of post-prandial blood glucose responses as compared with glucose. However, the Panel considers that solid foods, including high-fibre sourdough rye bread, are generally not considered as an alternative to glucose solutions. In this context, conditions of use cannot be established for this health claim.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to AlphaGOS® and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to AlphaGOS® and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to a combination of L-threonine, L-valine, L-leucine, L-isoleucine, L-lysine plus chromium picolinate and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regula

Following an application from DoubleGood AB, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Sweden, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to a combination of L-threonine, L-valine, L-leucine, L-isoleucine, L-lysine plus chromium picolinate and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The Panel considers that the food is sufficiently characterised. The target population proposed by the applicant is “adults in the general population wishing to reduce their post-prandial blood glucose responses”. The mechanism proposed by the applicant for the claimed effect is “stimulating insulin release via the insulinogenic properties of the amino acids in the food”. The Panel notes that the evidence provided by the applicant does not establish that a reduction in post-prandial glycaemic responses achieved by an increase in insulin secretion is a beneficial physiological effect for the target population in the context of this application. The Panel considers that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of the food, a combination of L-threonine, L-valine, L-leucine, L-isoleucine, L-lysine plus chromium picolinate, and a beneficial physiological effect for the target population.

Effect of gum arabic on glucose levels and microbial short-chain fatty acid production in white rice porridge model and mixed grain porridge model.

White rice porridge and mixed grain porridge, which are often consumed in many countries, were used as two models to evaluate the effects of gum arabic on glucose levels and microbial short-chain fatty acids (SCFA). Gum arabic was incorporated into the two porridges individually. Apparent viscosity of the two porridges was significantly increased, and their glucose productions during gastrointestinal digestion were notably lowered (p < 0.05). Diffused glucose amount was significantly decreased after gum arabic addition (p < 0.05). Furthermore, blood glucose rise after oral administration of porridges in mice was considerably lowered after fortified with gum arabic (p < 0.05). Microbial SCFA production during in vitro fermentation of porridges was significantly increased after gum arabic addition, which may also have beneficial effects on reducing postprandial glycemic response. Therefore, gum arabic may be a helpful ingredient, which could be added in porridges to have benefits for the reduction of postprandial glycemic response.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to non digestible carbohydrates and a reduction of post prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Beneo-Orafti SA, Sensus BV and Cosucra-Groupe Warcoing SA, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Belgium, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS) from inulin and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. Non-digestible carbohydrates including FOS are resistant to hydrolysis and absorption in the small intestine and do not contribute to post-prandial glycaemia. This opinion applies to non-digestible carbohydrates (e.g. non-starch polysaccharides, resistant oligosaccharides and resistant starch) which should replace sugars in foods or beverages in order to obtain the claimed effect. The Panel considers that the food constituent, non-digestible carbohydrates, which is the subject of the health claim, and the food constituent (i.e. sugars) that non-digestible carbohydrates should replace in foods or beverages, are both sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. The Panel considers that a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses might be a beneficial physiological effect. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that consumption of non-digestible carbohydrates results in reduced post-prandial blood glucose (and insulinaemic) responses compared with the consumption of sugars on a weight-by-weight basis owing to the non-digestibility in the small intestine and to a decrease in the amount of available carbohydrates, and that the consumption of foods/drinks in which non-digestible carbohydrates replaced sugars induced lower post-prandial glycaemic and insulinaemic responses than sugar-containing foods/drinks. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of foods/beverages containing non-digestible carbohydrates instead of sugar and a reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses as compared to sugar-containing foods/beverages.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to alpha cyclodextrin and reduction of post prandial glycaemic responses (ID 2926, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a health claim pursuant to Article 13.1 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 in the framework of further assessment related to alpha-cyclodextrin and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The food constituent that is the subject of the claim, alpha-cyclodextrin, is sufficiently characterised. The claimed effect, reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (as long as post-prandial insulinaemic responses are not disproportionally increased), may be a beneficial physiological effect. The proposed target population is individuals who wish to reduce their post-prandial glycaemic responses. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that two intervention studies showed a significant effect of alpha-cyclodextrin added to starch on post-prandial glycaemic responses without disproportionally increasing post prandial insulinaemic responses, that one study on alpha-cyclodextrin added to sucrose did not show an effect on post-prandial glycaemic responses, and that there is some evidence in support of a plausible mechanism by which alpha-cyclodextrin could exert the claimed effect. On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of alpha-cyclodextrin with starch containing meals and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The Panel considers that in order to obtain the claimed effect, at least 5 g of alpha-cyclodextrin per 50 g of starch should be consumed. The target population is adults who wish to reduce their post-prandial glycaemic responses.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to “Appl”In® polyphenolic apple extract powder (Malus domestica)” and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Diana Naturals pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of France, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to “Appl”In® polyphenolic apple extract powder (Malus domestica)” and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The food constituent, Appl'In® polyphenolic apple extract powder (Malus domestica Borkh.) containing at least 5 % phloridzin, is considered to be sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. The Panel considers that reduction of post prandial glycaemic responses (as long as post-prandial insulinaemic responses are not disproportionally increased) may be a beneficial physiological effect. The applicant provided one published and two unpublished human studies, three animal studies and two in vitro studies as pertinent to the claim. The Panel notes that the food used in one human study did not comply with the specifications of the food which is the subject of the claim and considers that no conclusion can be drawn from this study for the scientific substantiation of the claim. In two other human studies, post-prandial blood glucose concentrations were measured but not insulin responses. The Panel considers that no conclusions can be drawn from these studies for the scientific substantiation of the claim. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of Appl'In® and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses.

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to “slowly digestible starch in starch‐containing foods” and “reduction of post‐prandial glycaemic responses” pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Kraft Foods Europe, submitted pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Belgium, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to “slowly digestible starch in starch-containing foods” and “reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses”. The food constituent, “slowly digestible starch (SDS)”, as defined by the applicant in applying an appropriate method (such as the method developed by Englyst et al. (1996; 1999)), which is the subject of the health claim, and the comparator food constituent, “rapidly digestible starch (RDS)”, as defined by the applicant, are sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. The claimed effect, reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (as long as post-prandial insulinaemic responses are not disproportionally increased), may be a beneficial physiological effect. The studies provided consistently showed that consumption of 40–50 % of digestible starch as “SDS” in cereal products containing about 55–70 % of available carbohydrates as starch and 30–45 % as sugars in the context of a meal providing at least 60 E% of available carbohydrates induced significantly lower post-prandial glycaemic responses (without leading to disproportionally increased post-prandial insulinaemic responses) than the consumption of all digestible starch as “RDS” in cereal products with a similar content of available carbohydrates, starch and sugars. Cereal products, however, providing around 30 % of digestible starch as “SDS” and containing around 70 % of available carbohydrates as starch and 30 % as sugars did not show such an effect. A cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of “SDS”, as compared to the consumption of “RDS”, in cereal products and reduced post-prandial glycaemic responses (without disproportionally increased post-prandial insulinaemic responses).