Intake of total dietary sugar and fibre is associated with insulin resistance among Danish 8-10- and 14-16-year-old girls but not boys. European Youth Heart Studies i and II

22Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective To examine the dietary intake of total sugar, added sugar, non-added sugar and starch as well as dietary fibre and glycaemic index (GI) and their respective associations with insulin resistance.Design Mixed linear models were used to study both cross-sectional and prospective associations between carbohydrate components and insulin resistance separately in girls and boys. Diet was assessed by a single 24 h recall interview and insulin resistance was calculated using the homoestasis model assessment (HOMA).Setting The Danish part of the European Youth Heart Studies (EYHS) I and II.Subjects Girls and boys at 8-10 and 14-16 years from EYHS I (n 651) and 8-10-year-olds from baseline followed up 6 years later in EYHS II (n 233).Results Among girls, a difference in dietary total sugar of 43 g/MJ was associated with a 1 sd difference of HOMA and a difference in dietary fibre of 8 g/MJ was associated with a 1 sd difference of HOMA, independent of age, maturity and other confounders (both P = 003). No baseline associations were found among boys and no prospective associations were found in either sex.Conclusions Dietary intake of total sugar may play an adverse role and fibre may play a beneficial role in concurrent insulin resistance among girls but not boys. Sex differences may be due to differences in maturity, physical activity, food patterns and selective reporting behaviours. © 2010 The Authors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kynde, I., Johnsen, N. F., Wedderkopp, N., Bygbjerg, I. C., Helge, J. W., & Heitmann, B. L. (2010). Intake of total dietary sugar and fibre is associated with insulin resistance among Danish 8-10- and 14-16-year-old girls but not boys. European Youth Heart Studies i and II. Public Health Nutrition, 13(10), 1669–1674. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980010000285

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free