Glucose Goddess – Health Messiah or False Deity?
Dr Sean Wheatley, MSc, PhD. Science and Research Lead, X-PERT Health.
Sean.Wheatley@xperthealth.org.uk
When it comes to health and wellbeing, there is a lot of information out there. Some is good, some not so much. This makes it difficult to know what to believe.
What increases the problem is that there are some very popular sources of information that are not always accurate, an issue that is amplified in the age of the influencer. For many, getting clicks and likes is more important than being right. That doesn’t mean all “influencers” are bad, but it does mean that we need to be careful when deciding what to believe.
One of the most popular influencers in the health and wellbeing sphere is Glucose Goddess, who has millions of followers across a range of social media platforms and has appeared on a host of popular podcasts, radio and TV shows. This month’s blog looks a little closer at their recommendations, and whether they can be trusted.
Who is the Glucose Goddess?
Although the term is now used to refer to the company/platform as a whole, “the” Glucose Goddess is Jessie Inchauspé, a French biochemist. It is worth noting that although she has a Master’s degree in biochemistry she does not have a background in nutrition or medicine.
What do they promote?
The central Glucose Goddess advice is presented as 10 “Glucose Hacks” (well, there are 11 really). These can be seen here. The general aim of these hacks is to reduce spikes in glucose, mostly by reducing the rate at which carbohydrate-containing foods are digested.
Is their advice any good?
Generally speaking, most of the actual recommendations are not bad.
Although I dislike the use of the word “hacks” (but perhaps that’s just me?), the majority of the advice include in them is reasonable. If followed, these “hacks” would likely help people improve their blood glucose control. Importantly, there is nothing in them that is likely to be unsafe, something which is not always true when it comes to the advice given by “influencers”.
N.B. This conclusion only applies to the Glucose Goddess glucose hacks, I did NOT look into any of the other recommendations on their website.
But…
That being said, there are some caveats:
– The “Glucose Goddess Method” is said to be based on “cutting-edge science”, centring around the “startling discovery about the essential role of blood sugar in our lives, and the surprising hacks to optimise it”. Call me miserable, but I don’t think there’s anything “cutting-edge”, “startling” or “surprising” about any of this! Not that that this makes any of the advice wrong, I just wanted to whinge about it.
– Although it’s beyond the scope of what I want to get into, the general focus on glucose spikes is a little contentious, particularly for people without diabetes. Fluctuations in blood glucose within certain levels is normal, and so the focus on “spikes” as negative (without any further discussion, nuance or context) risks giving the impression that any excursions from a flat glucose profile are bad.
– The Glucose Goddess method is an approach that could work, but it is not the only one. Other potentially effective options include choosing slower releasing carbs (i.e., foods with a lower glycaemic index), reducing overall carbohydrate intake (e.g., by following a low carbohydrate dietary approach), and intermittent fasting. I know there is no obligation for them to promote alternative options, but I still thought it was worth emphasising it here!
– “Hack” number 11 is to take the Glucose Goddess Anti-Spike Formula supplement. Once someone starts selling supplements that are tied to the advice they are promoting it makes it difficult for them to be objective about the relevant evidence. Having a financial conflict of interest does not automatically make someone wrong, but it is often a red flag. I also don’t think there is any actual evidence that this supplement works, or any reason to think it is needed.
Digging Deeper – The Rationale
As a result of some of these concerns, combined with a healthy natural scepticism, I did think it would be prudent to dive a little further into some of the Glucose Goddess content (and the evidence used to support it).
Glucose Goddess claims to be evidence based, and does a good job of appearing to be so. Appearances can be deceiving though, so sometimes it is even more important to peek behind the curtain when what we can see from the outside seems credible.
Digging Deeper – The Method
The claim I decided to look further into was hack number 7, to take 1 tablespoon of vinegar up to 20 minutes before a meal to reduce the glucose spike from the meal. The thinking behind this is that an acidic “preload” may help to slow the speed at which food passes through the stomach. Slowing digestion (at any stage) will reduce the rate at which the carbohydrate content of a food/meal is broken down and absorbed, which will subsequently reduce peaks in blood glucose.
I did not choose this hack at random. I chose it because it was the claim I was most sceptical about. To be clear, I wasn’t sceptical about the mechanism, I was sceptical about whether the real-world impact on blood glucose levels was enough to justify this being promoted as a “hack”.
To assess this claim, I looked into the references used by Glucose Goddess to support it. Including links to journal articles adds another layer of credibility. It makes everything feel more “science-y” and legitimate. Most people do not check the references though. This makes it easy for people to misuse journal articles to promote unsupported claims, should they wish to do so.
Digging Deeper – The Findings
The references used by Glucose Goddess can be found here. A summary of what I found when looking at the articles cited in the “Incorporate vinegar into your routine” section is included below:
– One of the references was included twice. This doesn’t automatically mean any of the claims made are wrong, but this did not fill me with confidence as to the overall rigour of their evidence appraisal!
– Most of the studies were small, with less than 10 participants. Generally speaking, we can usually be less confident that the findings of smaller studies are “true”.
– Most of the studies were short, often assessing a single meal or food. Short studies do not usually (again, generally speaking) give us as much information about the real-world impact of what is being tested as longer studies do.
– Some of the studies did not even look at blood glucose levels. They cannot therefore tell us anything about whether an acid preload (e.g., having vinegar before a meal) leads to a reduction in post-meal glucose spikes. They do not therefore provide any evidence that is relevant to the claims being made by Glucose Goddess.
– Where blood glucose was tested, several of the studies found no differences between the people who had the acid preload and the people who did not. Where there were differences they were generally small, which raises questions as to whether they were meaningful.
– In several of the studies, vinegar was not the only thing being tested/changed. For example, in some studies the vinegar was combined with other ingredients, and in some energy (calorie) intake was also reduced as part of the intervention. This means that, even where differences were observed between the groups, we cannot be certain that they were because of the vinegar rather than being due to one of the other things that was changed.
– In some of the studies the vinegar was not consumed before the meal, and so a preload (in line with what the Glucose Goddess “hack” recommends) was not even tested.
– Several of the studies were with “healthy” participants or in people with specific other conditions (e.g., PCOS). Some specifically excluded people with diabetes. The findings may therefore not be relevant to everyone, including to some of the populations these recommendations might generally be considered most useful for.
– The methods of several studies were not consistent with “normal” eating behaviour. For example, one study involved soaking bread in vinegar for the test “meal”! These studies, again, therefore have limited relevance in relation to the “hack” that is being suggested by Glucose Goddess.
Digging Deeper- The Conclusion
Ultimately the evidence presented is very limited and does not (in my opinion) provide good support for the recommendations made by Glucose Goddess. Whether these limitations were due to carelessness or a deliberate attempt to mislead, I do not think this reflects well on a site that is claiming to be evidence-based.
That is not to say that an acid preload cannot have a positive effect. It does however raise some questions as to the overall quality of the information being provided, and over the scientific rigour of Glucose Goddess more broadly.
What is the bottom line?
Although the advice provided by Glucose Goddess is generally reasonable, and following it may well have some benefits, some of the claims are overblown. Importantly, the research used to support at least one of their “glucose hacks” is limited (at best), which raises questions as to the overall quality of the Glucose Goddess site and resources.
