Search

Background/Objectives:: Flax and Salba-chia seeds have risen in popularity owing to their favorable nutrient composition, including a high fiber content. Despite having comparable nutritional profiles, preliminary observations suggest differences in gelling properties, an attribute that may alter the kinetics of food digestion. Thus, we compared the effect of two seeds on postprandial glycemia and satiety scores. Subjects/Methods:: Fifteen healthy participants (M/F: 5/10; age: 23.9±3 years; BMI: 22.2±0.8 kg/m2) were randomized to receive a 50 g glucose challenge, alone or supplemented with either 25 g ground Salba-chia or 31.5 g flax, on three separate occasions. Blood glucose samples and satiety ratings were collected at fasting and over 2-h postprandially. In addition, in vitroviscosity of the beverages was assessed utilizing standard rheological methodology. Results:: Both Salba-chia and flax reduced blood glucose area under the curve over 120 min by 82.5±19.7 mmol/l (P<0.001) and 60.0±19.7 mmol/l (P=0.014), respectively, relative to a glucose control. Salba-chia reduced peak glucose (−0.64±0.24 mmol/l; P=0.030) and increased time to peak (11.3±3.8 min; P=0.015) compared with flax. Salba-chia significantly reduced the mean ratings of desire to eat (−7±2 mm; P=0.005), prospective consumption (−7±2 mm; P=0.010) and overall appetite score (−6±2 mm; P=0.012), when compared with flax. The viscosity of Salba-chia, flax and control was 49.9, 2.5, and 0.002 Pa·s, respectively. Conclusions:: Despite the similarities in nutritional composition, Salba-chia appears to have the ability to convert glucose into a slow-release carbohydrate and affect satiety to a greater extent than flax, possibly due to the higher fiber viscosity. Incorporation of either flax or Salba-chia into the diet may be beneficial, although use of Salba-chia may confer additional benefit.

Background/Objectives:: There has been recent interest in barley as a therapeutic food owing to its high content of beta-glucan (β-glucan), a viscous soluble fiber recognized for its cholesterol-lowering properties. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the cholesterol-lowering potential of barley β-glucan on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction. Methods:: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane CENTRAL were searched. We included RCTs of ⩾3-week duration assessing the effect of diets enriched with barley β-glucan compared with controlled diets on LDL-C, non-HDL-C or apoB. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed study quality and risk of bias. Data were pooled using the generic inverse-variance method with random effects models and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q-statistic and quantified by the I2statistic. Results:: Fourteen trials (N=615) were included in the final analysis. A median dose of 6.5 and 6.9 g/day of barley β-glucan for a median duration of 4 weeks significantly reduced LDL-C (MD=−0.25 mmol/l (95% CI: −0.30, −0.20)) and non-HDL-C (MD=−0.31 mmol/l (95% CI: −0.39, −0.23)), respectively, with no significant changes to apoB levels, compared with control diets. There was evidence of considerable unexplained heterogeneity in the analysis of non-HDL-C (I2=98%). Conclusions:: Pooled analyses show that barley β-glucan has a lowering effect on LDL-C and non-HDL-C. Inclusion of barley-containing foods may be a strategy for achieving targets in CVD risk reduction.

Pre-clinical evidence indicates the potential for ginseng to reduce cardiovascular disease risk and acutely aid in blood pressure (BP) control. Clinical evidence evaluating repeated ginseng exposure, however, is controversial, triggering consumer and clinician concern. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess whether ginseng has an effect on BP. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and CINAHL were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials ⩾4 weeks that compared the effect of ginseng on systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP) and/or mean arterial (MAP) BPs to control. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. Data were pooled using random-effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed and quantified. Seventeen studies satisfied eligibility criteria (n=1381). No significant effect of ginseng on SBP, DBP and MAP was found. Stratified analysis, although not significant, appears to favour systolic BP improvement in diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity (MD=−2.76 mm Hg (95% CI=−6.40, 0.87); P=0.14). A priorisubgroup analyses revealed significant association between body mass index and treatment differences (β=−0.95 mm Hg (95% CI=−1.56, −0.34); P=0.007). Ginseng appears to have neutral vascular affects; therefore, should not be discouraged for concern of increased BP. More high-quality, randomized, controlled trials assessing BP as a primary end point, and use of standardized ginseng root or extracts are warranted to limit evidence of heterogeneity in ginseng research and to better understand its cardiovascular health potential.

Correction to: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication 8 June 2016; doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2016.89 Since the publication of this article, the authors have noticed that the author S Blanco Mejia’s name was displayed incorrectly. The article PDF and html versions have been corrected.