Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Not just a health kick: time to re-evaluate the role of smoothies in glycaemic response and healthy eating

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 79, pages 805–808 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

In recent years, there has been a rise in popularity and subsequent consumption of both commercial and home-prepared smoothies due to the perceived health benefits of increasing fruit and vegetable intake in this way [1]. Under current public health guidance in the UK and Europe, smoothies are considered as fruit juices and should be limited to <150 ml/day and can only count towards one portion of fruit and vegetables. The current advice is largely based on the perceived ability of juiced fruits to increase the bioaccessibility of free sugars in the gut, resulting in faster uptake into the blood compared to whole foods and causing an elevated post prandial glycaemic response. However, there is a key difference between juiced fruits, such as orange juice, where the pulp of the fruit is removed, and smoothies, where the whole fruit is blended and consumed. The logic here is that by ingesting whole fruit, the digestive processes to break this down and release the equivalent free sugars is slower and results in a smaller glycaemic response. The issue is that recurrent elevated glycaemic response is a key risk factor for declining metabolic health, leading to conditions such as type 2 diabetes [2]. However, recent studies have suggested that consuming fruits in their blended form, such as smoothies, may not be detrimental for glycaemic control, and in some cases, may improve it by up to 57% [3, 4]. As adults in the UK do not currently eat enough fruit and vegetables, with only 33% of adults meeting the 5 a day recommendation [5], the potential for smoothies to increase fruit consumption whilst not adversely affecting metabolic health will require a change in public health advice.

There are now several key pieces of evidence demonstrating that ingesting blended fruit forms (compared to whole fruit) do not have an adverse effect on glycaemic response, and that this response can change depending on type and number of fruits ingested (Table 1). For instance, in healthy individuals, mango consumed whole or blended results in no change in glycaemic index (GI); [4]. However, the same study showed a blended mixture of mango, banana, passionfruit, pineapple, kiwi, and raspberries elicit a more favourable (lower) response than the same fruit consumed whole (GI 32.7 ± 8.5 vs 66.2 ± 8.2, p < 0.05). The latter mixed treatment was more reflective of smoothies that are commercially prepared and bought [4] and highlights the physiological response is the same or lower than consuming whole fruit (i.e., no negative effects). This has also been observed in data from another group that assessed apples (seeds removed) and blackberries, showing the incremental area under the curve (IAUC) was lower for the blended fruit compared to the whole fruit (850 ± 109 vs. 1269 ± 124, p = 0.005; [3]). Moreover, this trend has also been demonstrated in individuals with obesity and who are susceptible to glucose intolerance [6] In this latter study, individuals were given either whole or blended mango and raspberries or mango and passionfruit. Both blended fruit treatments showed a reduction in GI for individuals with a healthy BMI and those with obesity by 20–50% [6]. Although relatively few in number, and conducted in small groups of volunteers, these studies are all adequately powered to detect differences between treatments.

Table 1 Summary of studies examining gycemic response to blended vs whole fruit.
Full size table

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Proposed mechanisms of impact on blood glucose responses to fruit in it's different forms.
Fig. 2: Incremental changes in blood glucose concentrations over time following consumption of test fruits.

References

  1. Mccartney D, Rattray M, Desbrow B, Khalesi S, Irwin C. Smoothies: exploring the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of consumers and non-consumers. Curr Res Nutr Food Sci J. 2018;6:425–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Greenwood DC, Threapleton DE, Evans CEL, Cleghorn CL, Nykjaer C, Woodhead C, et al. Association between sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened soft drinks and type 2 diabetes: systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Br J Nutr. 2014;112:725–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Crummett LT, Grosso RJ. Postprandial glycemic response to whole fruit versus blended fruit in healthy, young adults. Nutrients. 2022; 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14214565.

  4. Redfern KM, Cammack VL, Sweet N, Preston LA, Jarvis MA, Rees GA. Nutrient-extraction blender preparation reduces postprandial glucose responses from fruit juice consumption. Nutr Diabetes. 2017;7:e288.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Public Health England. National Diet and Nutrition Survey. Years 1-9 of the Rolling Programme (2008/2009 - 2016/2017): Time trend and income analyses. 2019. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/772434/NDNS_UK_Y1-9_report.pdf (accessed 13 Feb2020).

  6. Alkutbe R, Redfern K, Jarvis M, Rees G. Nutrient extraction lowers postprandial glucose response of fruit in adults with obesity as well as healthy weight adults. Nutrients. 2020; 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12030766.

  7. Peyrot des Gachons C, Breslin PAS. Salivary amylase: digestion and metabolic syndrome. Curr Diab Rep. 2016;16:102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jenkins DJ, Wolever TM, Leeds AR, Gassull MA, Haisman P, Dilawari J, et al. Dietary fibres, fibre analogues, and glucose tolerance: importance of viscosity. Br Med J. 1978;1:1392 LP–1394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Yu K, Ke M-Y, Li W-H, Zhang S-Q, Fang X-C. The impact of soluble dietary fibre on gastric emptying, postprandial blood glucose and insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2014;23:210–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tsitsou S, Athanasaki C, Dimitriadis G, Papakonstantinou E. Acute effects of dietary fiber in starchy foods on glycemic and insulinemic responses: a systematic review of randomized controlled crossover trials. Nutrients. 2023; 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15102383.

  11. Almiron-Roig E, Palla L, Guest K, Ricchiuti C, Vint N, Jebb SA, et al. Factors that determine energy compensation: a systematic review of preload studies. Nutr Rev. 2013;71:458–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kahn SE. The relative contributions of insulin resistance and beta-cell dysfunction to the pathophysiology of Type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2003;46:3–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A special thank you to the BSc. (Hons) Nutrition, Exercise and Health dissertation students, Jasmin Pearn and Ethan Powell, who helped collect some of the in vivo data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Plymouth, PL4 8AA, Plymouth, UK

    Kathy M. Redfern, Thomas H. Walter, Gail A. Rees & Nathaniel J. Clark

  2. School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, PL4 8AA, Plymouth, UK

    Nathaniel J. Clark

Authors
  1. Kathy M. Redfern
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas H. Walter
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gail A. Rees
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nathaniel J. Clark
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualizations: KR and NC. Data acquisition and curation: KR and TW. Writing original draft: NC and KR. Writing, reviewing and approval of final draft: all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathy M. Redfern.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Redfern, K.M., Walter, T.H., Rees, G.A. et al. Not just a health kick: time to re-evaluate the role of smoothies in glycaemic response and healthy eating. Eur J Clin Nutr 79, 805–808 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-025-01599-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-025-01599-w

Search

Advanced search

Quick links