IBS Relief: Reducing Sugar and Starch as Effective as FODMAP Diet

A recent study involving 155 patients revealed that both a starch and sucrose-reduced diet (SSRD) and the Low FODMAP diet significantly alleviated IBS symptoms. However, the SSRD led to more weight loss and was easier to follow, making it a promising alternative.

Bodil Ohlsson, a professor at Lund University and consultant at Skåne University Hospital, initiated the research after a geneticist found a variation common among IBS patients that affects sugar and starch digestion. This discovery prompted the idea: “Let’s try giving these patients less sugar and starch,” Ohlsson explained.

A few years prior, Ohlsson conducted a study on 105 IBS patients who followed the SSRD for four weeks, which involved avoiding sugars, starches, and processed foods. The results showed a significant reduction in IBS symptoms, such as abdominal pain, constipation, and diarrhea.

The new study, published in Nutrients, compared the SSRD with the Low FODMAP diet, the current standard treatment for IBS, which restricts certain carbohydrates, gluten, and lactose. Patients were randomly assigned to follow either SSRD or Low FODMAP for four weeks. Both diets improved IBS symptoms in 75-80% of participants. Remarkably, the SSRD group experienced greater weight loss and reduced sugar cravings, a notable outcome since IBS patients often have a higher average body weight than healthy individuals.

Ohlsson highlights that the SSRD isn’t as restrictive as Low FODMAP and is easier to maintain, noting, “We wouldn’t really even call SSRD a diet. It’s how everyone should eat, not just those with IBS.” Unlike the Low FODMAP regimen, which requires strict adherence to food lists, SSRD allows more flexibility, making it a practical option for long-term IBS management.

Reference: Roth, B., Nseir, M., Jeppsson, H., D’Amato, M., Sundquist, K., & Ohlsson, B. (2024). “A Starch- and Sucrose-Reduced Diet Has Similar Efficiency as Low FODMAP in IBS—A Randomized Non-Inferiority Study.” Nutrients. DOI: 10.3390/nu16173039.