Premium
Effects of nopales intake on cardiometabolic disease risk factors among moderately hypercholesterolemic adults (642.4)
Author(s) -
Pereira Pignotti Giselle,
Hook Ginger,
Ghan Emily,
VegaLópez Sonia
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.28.1_supplement.642.4
Subject(s) - glycemic , medicine , crossover study , cholesterol , endocrinology , insulin , apolipoprotein b , chemistry , zoology , placebo , biology , alternative medicine , pathology
Nopales (prickly pear cactus pads) are commonly regarded as a medicinal plant for glycemic and cholesterol control. The efficacy of a 2‐wk intervention with 2 cups/d of nopales or cucumber (control) on lipoprotein profile, fasting glucose (FG) and insulin was assessed in a randomized crossover trial among 16 adults (5 male; 46±14 y; BMI=31.4±5.7 kg/m 2 ) with moderate hypercholesterolemia (LDL‐C=137±21 mg/dL), but otherwise healthy. There were no significant differences in energy intake between cucumber and nopales phases (1657±610 kcal vs.1645±508 kcal, respectively). There were no differences in macronutrient intake (data not shown), although soluble fiber tended to be greater in the nopales phase (6.6±1.6 g) than the cucumber phase (5.8±1.9 g; p =0.097). No significant differences were observed for total cholesterol (201±32 mg/dL vs. 197±27 mg/dL; p =0.227), LDL‐C (137±29 mg/dL vs. 132±20 mg/dL; p =0.358), HDL‐C (46±16 mg/dL vs. 44±15 mg/dL; p =0.351), triglycerides (173±108 mg/dL vs.190±117 mg/dL; p =0.210), glucose (99±8 mg/dL vs. 98±11 mg/dL; p =0.193), or insulin (21±10 mg/dL vs. 20±9 mg/dL; p =0.380) between cucumber and nopales phases, respectively. LDL peak diameter and cholesterol distribution in LDL and HDL subfractions were not different between phases (data not shown). These data does not support the purported benefits of nopales at doses of 2 cups/d for 2‐wk on markers of cardiometabolic risk. Grant Funding Source : Supported by Arizona Board of Regents and ASU Graduate Research Support Program