The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
even for observational studies the relationship between glycemic index and glycemic load and disease outcomes is limited the strongest intervention studies typically find little relationship between gi and glycemic load and physiological measures of disease risk
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
what you find is that the strongest intervention studies typically find little relationship between gi and gr gr being glycemic response essentially glycemic load and physiological measures of disease risk even for observational studies i'm quoting from the abstract the relationship between glycemic index and glycemic load and disease outcomes is limited right thus the abstract i'm reading it is unlikely that the gi of a food or diet is linked to disease risk or health outcomes