AJCN Cancer Health Disparities Conference
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hollenbeck, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Reaven, G. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hollenbeck, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Reaven, G. M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hollenbeck, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Reaven, G. M.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 38, 498-503, Copyright © 1983 by The American Society for Clinical Nutrition, Inc


ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

Effects of a commercial starch blocker preparation on carbohydrate digestion and absorption: in vivo and in vitro studies

CB Hollenbeck, AM Coulston, R Quan, TR Becker, HJ Vreman, DK Stevenson and GM Reaven

We have tested the effectiveness of a commercial starch blocker on the digestion and absorption of dietary carbohydrates in six normal, healthy volunteers. The effectiveness of the starch blocker to attenuate or block the digestion of carbohydrate was assessed against a placebo by the measurement of end tidal breath hydrogen, plasma glucose, and insulin responses to a constant test meal. There were no significant differences in breath hydrogen, or plasma glucose and insulin responses. In vitro enzyme inhibition studies assessed the ability of the brush border enzyme maltase/glucoamylase to degrade starch in the presence of the starch blockers. A highly purified solution of rat and human maltase/glucoamylase was capable of degrading a starch solution, while 40 mM Tris-HCl (a known maltase/glucoamylase inhibitor) completely abolished the enzyme activity. These data challenge the claims that starch blocker preparations are effective in reducing or attenuating the absorption of carbohydrates or calories from a mixed meal. The ineffectiveness in vivo could be explained, in part, by the ability of the brush border enzyme maltase/glucoamylase to hydrolyze starch in the presence of starch blockers.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1983 by The American Society for Nutrition