International Tables of Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Values: 2008 (2023)

Skip Nav Destination

Article navigation

Volume 31, Issue 12

December 2008

  • Previous Article
  • Next Article
  • RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—

  • RESULTS—

  • CONCLUSIONS—

  • References

Clinical Care / Education / Nutrition / Psychosocial Research| December 01 2008

Fiona S. Atkinson, RD;

Fiona S. Atkinson, RD

From the Institute of Obesity, Nutrition and Exercise, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Search for other works by this author on:

This Site

Kaye Foster-Powell, RD;

Kaye Foster-Powell, RD

From the Institute of Obesity, Nutrition and Exercise, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Search for other works by this author on:

This Site

Jennie C. Brand-Miller, PHD

(Video) Your Questions Answered – Glycemic Index, Maltodextrin, and Critical Research

Jennie C. Brand-Miller, PHD

From the Institute of Obesity, Nutrition and Exercise, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Search for other works by this author on:

This Site

Diabetes Care 2008;31(12):2281–2283

Article history

Received:

July 08 2008

Accepted:

September 13 2008

  • Split-Screen
  • Views Icon Views
    • Article contents
    • Figures & tables
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Supplementary Data
    • Peer Review
  • PDF
  • Cite Icon Cite

Citation

Fiona S. Atkinson, Kaye Foster-Powell, Jennie C. Brand-Miller; International Tables of Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Values: 2008. Diabetes Care 1 December 2008; 31 (12): 2281–2283. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc08-1239

Download citation file:

  • Ris (Zotero)
  • Reference Manager
  • EasyBib
  • Bookends
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • EndNote
  • RefWorks
  • BibTex
toolbar search

Search Dropdown Menu

Advanced Search

OBJECTIVE—To systematically tabulate published and unpublished sources of reliable glycemic index (GI) values.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A literature search identified 205 articles published between 1981 and 2007. Unpublished data were also included where the data quality could be verified. The data were separated into two lists: the first representing more precise data derived from testing healthy subjects and the second primarily from individuals with impaired glucose metabolism.

RESULTS—The tables, which are available in the online-only appendix, list the GI of over 2,480 individual food items. Dairy products, legumes, and fruits were found to have a low GI. Breads, breakfast cereals, and rice, including whole grain, were available in both high and low GI versions. The correlation coefficient for 20 staple foods tested in both healthy and diabetic subjects was r = 0.94 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS—These tables improve the quality and quantity of GI data available for research and clinical practice.

The relevance of dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) is debated. While the World Health Organization (1), the American Diabetes Association (2), Diabetes UK (3), and the Canadian Diabetes Association (4) give qualified support for the concept, many health professionals still consider GI and GL complex and too variable for use in clinical practice (5). The availability of reliable tables of GI is critical for continuing research and resolution of the controversy. New data have become available since previous tables were published in 2002 (6). Our aim was to systematically tabulate published and unpublished sources of reliable GI values, with derivation of the GL.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—

We conducted a literature search of MEDLINE from January 1981 through December 2007 using the terms “glyc(a)emic index” and “glyc(a)emic load.” We restricted the search to human studies published in English using standardized methodology. We performed a manual search of relevant citations and contacted experts in the field. Unpublished values from our laboratory and elsewhere were included. Values listed in previous tables (6,7) were not automatically entered but reviewed first. Final data were divided into two lists. Values derived from groups of eight or more healthy subjects were included in the first list. Data derived from testing individuals with diabetes or impaired glucose metabolism, from studies using too few subjects (n ≤ 5), or showing wide variability (SEM > 15) were included in the second list. Some foods were tested in only six or seven normal subjects but otherwise appeared reliable and were included in the first list. Two columns of GI values were created because both glucose and white bread continue to be used as reference foods. The conversion factor 100/70 or 70/100 was used to convert from one scale to the other. In instances where other reference foods (e.g., rice) were used, this was accepted provided the conversion factor to the glucose scale had been established. To avoid confusion, the glucose scale is recommended for final reporting. GL values were calculated as the product of the amount of available carbohydrate in a specified serving size and the GI value (using glucose as the reference food), divided by 100. Carbohydrate content was obtained from the reference paper or food composition tables (8). The relationship between GI values determined in normal subjects versus diabetic subjects was tested by linear regression. Common foods (n = 20), including white bread, cornflakes, rice, oranges, corn, apple juice, sucrose, and milk were used for this analysis.

RESULTS—

Tables A1 and A2 (available in an online appendix at http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc08-1239) list 2,487 separate entries, citing 205 separate studies. Table A1, representing reliable data derived from subjects with normal glucose tolerance, contains 1,879 individual entries (75% of the total). Table A2 contains 608 entries, of which 491 values were determined in individuals with diabetes or impaired glucose metabolism (20% of the total). The correlation coefficient for 20 foods tested in both normal and diabetic subjects was r = 0.94 (P < 0.001; line of best fit y = 0.9x + 9.7 where x is the value in normal subjects). Table A2 also lists 60 values derived from groups of five or fewer subjects and 57 values displaying wide variability (SEM >15). A summary table (Table 1) comprising values for 62 common foods appears below. More reliable values are available for many foods, including carrots (GI = 39) and bananas (GI = 51).

CONCLUSIONS—

The 2008 edition of tables of GI and GL has doubled the amount of data available for research and other applications. Most varieties of legumes, pasta, fruits, and dairy products are still classified as low-GI foods (55 or less on the glucose reference scale). Breads, breakfast cereals, rice, and snack products, including whole-grain versions, are available in both high- (70 or greater) and low-GI forms. Most varieties of potato and rice are high GI, but lower GI cultivars were identified. Many confectionary items, such as chocolate, have a low GI, but their high saturated fat content reduces their nutritional value. The GI should not be used in isolation; the energy density and macronutrient profile of foods should also be considered (1). The high correlation coefficient (r = 0.94) between values derived from testing the same foods in normal and diabetic subjects indicates that GI values in Table A1 are relevant to dietary interventions in people with diabetes.

Although data quality has been improved, many foods have been tested only once in 10 or fewer subjects, and caution is needed. Repeated testing of certain products indicates that white and wholemeal bread have remained remarkably consistent over the past 25 years, but other products appear to be increasing in GI. This secular change may arise because of efforts on the part of the food industry to make food preparation more convenient and faster cooking. Some foods, such as porridge oats, show variable results, which may reflect true differences in refining and processing that affect the degree of starch gelatinization (9). Users should note that manufacturers sometimes give the same product different names in different countries, and in some cases, the same name for different items. Kellogg's Special K and All-Bran, for example, are different formulations in North America, Europe, and Australia.

Assignment of GI values to foods requires knowledge of local foods. Ideally, branded product information is available because manufacturers prepare and process foods, particularly cereal products, in different ways. This variability is not unique to the GI but true of many nutrients, including saturated fat and fiber. In the absence of specific product GI information, these tables provide the basis for extrapolation. In the case of low-carbohydrate products, a GI value of 40 for vegetables, 70 for flour products, and 30 for dairy foods could be assigned.

(Video) Glycemic Index Testing International Protocol

In summary, the 2008 edition of the international tables of GI improves the quality and quantity of reliable data available for research and clinical practice. The data in Table A1 should be preferred for research and coding of food databases. The values listed in Table A2 may be helpful in the absence of other data.

Table 1—

The average GI of 62 common foods derived from multiple studies by different laboratories

High-carbohydrate foodsBreakfast cerealsFruit and fruit productsVegetables
White wheat bread*75 ± 2Cornflakes81 ± 6Apple, raw36 ± 2Potato, boiled78 ± 4
Whole wheat/whole meal bread74 ± 2Wheat flake biscuits69 ± 2Orange, raw43 ± 3Potato, instant mash87 ± 3
Specialty grain bread53 ± 2Porridge, rolled oats55 ± 2Banana, raw51 ± 3Potato, french fries63 ± 5
Unleavened wheat bread70 ± 5Instant oat porridge79 ± 3Pineapple, raw59 ± 8Carrots, boiled39 ± 4
Wheat roti62 ± 3Rice porridge/congee78 ± 9Mango, raw51 ± 5Sweet potato, boiled63 ± 6
Chapatti52 ± 4Millet porridge67 ± 5Watermelon, raw76 ± 4Pumpkin, boiled64 ± 7
Corn tortilla46 ± 4Muesli57 ± 2Dates, raw42 ± 4Plantain/green banana55 ± 6
White rice, boiled*73 ± 4Peaches, canned43 ± 5Taro, boiled53 ± 2
Brown rice, boiled68 ± 4Strawberry jam/jelly49 ± 3Vegetable soup48 ± 5
Barley28 ± 2Apple juice41 ± 2
Sweet corn52 ± 5Orange juice50 ± 2
Spaghetti, white49 ± 2
Spaghetti, whole meal48 ± 5
Rice noodles53 ± 7
Udon noodles55 ± 7
Couscous65 ± 4
High-carbohydrate foodsBreakfast cerealsFruit and fruit productsVegetables
White wheat bread*75 ± 2Cornflakes81 ± 6Apple, raw36 ± 2Potato, boiled78 ± 4
Whole wheat/whole meal bread74 ± 2Wheat flake biscuits69 ± 2Orange, raw43 ± 3Potato, instant mash87 ± 3
Specialty grain bread53 ± 2Porridge, rolled oats55 ± 2Banana, raw51 ± 3Potato, french fries63 ± 5
Unleavened wheat bread70 ± 5Instant oat porridge79 ± 3Pineapple, raw59 ± 8Carrots, boiled39 ± 4
Wheat roti62 ± 3Rice porridge/congee78 ± 9Mango, raw51 ± 5Sweet potato, boiled63 ± 6
Chapatti52 ± 4Millet porridge67 ± 5Watermelon, raw76 ± 4Pumpkin, boiled64 ± 7
Corn tortilla46 ± 4Muesli57 ± 2Dates, raw42 ± 4Plantain/green banana55 ± 6
White rice, boiled*73 ± 4Peaches, canned43 ± 5Taro, boiled53 ± 2
Brown rice, boiled68 ± 4Strawberry jam/jelly49 ± 3Vegetable soup48 ± 5
Barley28 ± 2Apple juice41 ± 2
Sweet corn52 ± 5Orange juice50 ± 2
Spaghetti, white49 ± 2
Spaghetti, whole meal48 ± 5
Rice noodles53 ± 7
Udon noodles55 ± 7
Couscous65 ± 4
Dairy products and alternativesLegumesSnack productsSugars
Milk, full fat39 ± 3Chickpeas28 ± 9Chocolate40 ± 3Fructose15 ± 4
Milk, skim37 ± 4Kidney beans24 ± 4Popcorn65 ± 5Sucrose65 ± 4
Ice cream51 ± 3Lentils32 ± 5Potato crisps56 ± 3Glucose103 ± 3
Yogurt, fruit41 ± 2Soya beans16 ± 1Soft drink/soda59 ± 3Honey61 ± 3
Soy milk34 ± 4Rice crackers/crisps87 ± 2
Rice milk86 ± 7
Dairy products and alternativesLegumesSnack productsSugars
Milk, full fat39 ± 3Chickpeas28 ± 9Chocolate40 ± 3Fructose15 ± 4
Milk, skim37 ± 4Kidney beans24 ± 4Popcorn65 ± 5Sucrose65 ± 4
Ice cream51 ± 3Lentils32 ± 5Potato crisps56 ± 3Glucose103 ± 3
Yogurt, fruit41 ± 2Soya beans16 ± 1Soft drink/soda59 ± 3Honey61 ± 3
Soy milk34 ± 4Rice crackers/crisps87 ± 2
Rice milk86 ± 7

Data are means ± SEM.

*

Low-GI varieties were also identified.

Average of all available data.

View Large

References

1.

Mann J, Cummings J, Englyst H, Key T, Liu S, Riccardi G, Summerbell C, Uauy R, van Dam R, Venn B, Vorster H, Wiseman M: FAO/WHO Scientific Update on carbohydrates in human nutrition: conclusions.

Eur J Clin Nutr

61

:

S132

–S137,

2007

2.

Sheard N, Clark N, Brand-Miller J, Franz M, Pi-Sunyer FX, Mayer-Davis E, Kulkarni K, Geil P: Dietary carbohydrate (amount and type) in the prevention and management of diabetes.

Diabetes Care

27

:

2266

–2271,

2004

3.

Nutrition Subcommittee of the Diabetes Care Advisory Committee of Diabetes UK: The implementation of nutritional advice for people with diabetes.

Diabet Med

20

:

786

–807,

2003

4.

Canadian Diabetes Association: Guidelines for the nutritional management of diabetes mellitus in the new millennium. A position statement by the Canadian Diabetes Association.

Can J Diabetes Care

23

:

56

–69,

2000

5.

Franz M: The glycemic index: not the most effective nutrition therapy intervention.

Diabetes Care

26

:

2466

–2468,

2003

(Video) Carbohydrate Loading + Pre Comp Meal

6.

Foster-Powell K, Holt SH, Brand-Miller JC: International table of glycemic index and glycemic load values:

2002

.

Am J Clin Nutr

76

:

5

–56,

2002

7.

Foster-Powell K, Miller J: International tables of glycemic index.

Am J Clin Nutr

62

:

S871

–S90,

1995

8.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service: USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference [article online], 2007. Release 20. Available at http://www.ars.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl. Accessed 20 May

2008

9.

Bjorck I, Granfeldt Y, Liljeberg H, Tovar J, Asp N-G: Food properties affecting the digestion and absorption of carbohydrates.

Am J Clin Nutr

59

:

S699

–S705,

1994

Published ahead of print at http://care.diabetesjournals.org on 3 October 2008.

J.B.M. is the director of a not-for-profit GI-based food endorsement program in Australia. F.S.A. is employed to manage the University of Sydney GI testing service.

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

DIABETES CARE

2008

Supplementary data

Supplemental Table- pdf file

Supplemental Table- pdf file

74,334 Views

1,027 Citations

View Metrics

×

Email alerts

Article Activity Alert

Online Ahead of Print Alert

Latest Issue Alert

  • Most Read
  • Most Cited

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022

Introduction: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022

6. Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

(Video) Reaction: "Gefährliche Kohlenhydrate? Erhöhtes Herzinfarkt-Risiko!"
(Video) Carbohydrate Fundamentals

FAQs

What is the recommended glycemic load? ›

For optimal health, the Glycemic Index Foundation recommends keeping your daily glycemic load under 100.

What is the glycemic index and glycemic load of dates? ›

From international tables, the mean GI ± SEM for dates is 42 ± 4 [35]. In summary, the reported GI for dates classifies them as low to medium food items (mostly low GI food items). The low GI of dates can be attributed to their high fructose and dietary fiber content.

Is there a glycemic index chart? ›

The answers are below. The Glycemic Index (GI) chart shows how much and how quickly a carbohydrate-containing food raises your blood-sugar levels. The lower a food is on the GI, the lower the effect on your blood sugar. The standardized Glycemic Index ranges from 0 to 100.

How do you calculate glycemic load and glycemic index? ›

Glycemic load is based on the glycemic index (GI), and is calculated by multiplying the grams of available carbohydrate in the food by the food's glycemic index, and then dividing by 100.

What is the difference between glycemic index GI and glycemic load GL? ›

Glycemic index explains how carbohydrates may affect blood glucose levels, whereas glycemic load takes into consideration every component of the food as a whole, giving a more real-life picture of a food's impact on your blood glucose levels. Both of these tools are valuable in blood sugar management and diet planning.

Which is better glycemic load or index? ›

The glycemic load is actually more reliable than the glycemic index. As the video above explains, watermelon is a great example of this. The glycemic index of watermelon is 72, which is very high—meaning that is causing your body's blood sugar levels to rise rapidly. However, watermelon is just that, mostly water.

What is the glycemic load of date sugar? ›

Dates are equal parts glucose and fructose with a low GI of 42 which means they are less likely to spike your blood sugar levels, making them a safer choice for people concerned about sugar intake.

Which dates are best for diabetics? ›

Dates Glycemic Index

Dates (Khajur) have a low glycemic index (GI) ranging from 35 to 55 so dates are good for diabetes, as they're less likely to cause a spike in your blood sugar levels.

What is the glycemic load of rice? ›

Rice has an average glycemic index of 73 and, therefore, is categorized as a high glycemic food source.

What is the formula to calculate glycemic load? ›

How is Glycemic load worked out? The Glycemic load (GL) isworked out by the following formula: GL = GI x carbohydrate / 100.

What is the formula for glycemic index? ›

INTRODUCTION. The glycemic index (GI) is a concept that ranks the glycemic potency of foods (1). It is calculated as the incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose after consumption of a test food divided by the iAUC of a reference food containing the same amount of carbohydrate.

How do you find the glycemic load of a recipe? ›

Divide the number of carbs in each item by the total number of carbs in the meal. Example: To figure out the percentage of carbs the oatmeal contributes take 22 (the oatmeal) and divide it by 46 (total carbs in the meal) to get 0.48. (Rounded to keep the math simple)

What is the glycemic load of a banana? ›

According to the International Glycemic Index Database, ripe bananas have a low GI of 51, with slightly under-ripe bananas even lower at 42; they have a moderate GL of 13 and 11, respectively.

How do you reduce glycemic load? ›

Limit concentrated sweets—including high-calorie foods with a low glycemic index, such as ice cream—to occasional treats. Reduce fruit juice to no more than one-half cup a day. Completely eliminate sugar-sweetened drinks. Eat a healthful type of protein, such as beans, fish, or skinless chicken, at most meals.

What is the glycemic load of sugar? ›

Sugar and the glycemic index

Sucrose or table sugar has a medium GI of 65.

What are low glycemic load foods? ›

Low GI : Green vegetables, most fruits, raw carrots, kidney beans, chickpeas, lentils and bran breakfast cereals. Medium GI : Sweet corn, bananas, raw pineapple, raisins, oat breakfast cereals, and multigrain, oat bran or rye bread. High GI : White rice, white bread and potatoes.

Videos

1. Do all carbs can make me fat ?
(MyHealthSolution)
2. SCIENCE-BASED ANTI-AGING 101: HOW TO STAY YOUNG LONGER AND LIVE LONGER
(AntiAging4Everyone with Elena A Kozyreva)
3. Glycemic index
(Audiopedia)
4. Learnings from observational and intervention studies
(ILSI Europe)
5. Qual é melhor: Macarrão X Batata? 😱
(Rodrigo Moreira)
6. 3 loại thức ăn thay thế cơm dành cho người tiểu đường
(Tim Mạch Khoẻ)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Manual Maggio

Last Updated: 12/22/2022

Views: 6165

Rating: 4.9 / 5 (69 voted)

Reviews: 84% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Manual Maggio

Birthday: 1998-01-20

Address: 359 Kelvin Stream, Lake Eldonview, MT 33517-1242

Phone: +577037762465

Job: Product Hospitality Supervisor

Hobby: Gardening, Web surfing, Video gaming, Amateur radio, Flag Football, Reading, Table tennis

Introduction: My name is Manual Maggio, I am a thankful, tender, adventurous, delightful, fantastic, proud, graceful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.