GI/GL - A Hopefully Constructive Discussion
Options
Replies
-
wombat has a nice app that will tell you the glycemic load for the day with all of the foods that you have on your food plan. It has both GI and GL. The app's name is Low GI0
-
i have not looked at this in a while,but i will throw it out there:
It is about insulins bad reputation, interesting read:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319
i find if amusing that people want to talk about carbs spiking insulin but totally leave out that protein does as well.0 -
Yes - for instance, if you eat white rice on its own - then you are subjecting yourself to the load of the white rice. If you eat white rice with a protein and a vegetable, then it's all based upon the weighted average of the foods. It's always based upon the weighted average of all the foods - with variance but it's never just "the rice" if consumed with other foods of lower GI.0
-
I never got to grips with GI
marking my place so I can read through when I have time0 -
i have not looked at this in a while,but i will throw it out there:
It is about insulins bad reputation, interesting read:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319
i find if amusing that people want to talk about carbs spiking insulin but totally leave out that protein does as well.
This was desperately needed on another thread yesterday. I'm going to save it and just post it without comment every time someone wrongly blames insulin.
Thank you!
0 -
Hollwood_Porky wrote: »Yes - for instance, if you eat white rice on its own - then you are subjecting yourself to the load of the white rice. If you eat white rice with a protein and a vegetable, then it's all based upon the weighted average of the foods. It's always based upon the weighted average of all the foods - with variance but it's never just "the rice" if consumed with other foods of lower GI.
See my post above about the study done where the finding on healthy individuals wasn't the weighted average though... it was significantly LESS than expected. Very intriguing.
0 -
i find if amusing that people want to talk about carbs spiking insulin but totally leave out that protein does as well.
Not sure anyone was talking about insulin, but protein a) doesn't add to the carbohydrate load so no blood glucose from that and b) also stimulates a glucagon response that results in *fanfare* no net change in blood glucose.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »See my post above about the study done where the finding on healthy individuals wasn't the weighted average though... it was significantly LESS than expected. Very intriguing.
If you add protein to a carbohydrate you get more insulin response which ought to pull down the glucose faster in healthy people. This is where combining foods for diabetics comes from too.
There was a recent study where something odd happened like the high carb low GI diet had worse outcomes, will go look for that. After all, it's outcomes that matter more than BG responses.
Edit: Here it is "In this 5-week controlled feeding study, diets with low glycemic index of dietary carbohydrate, compared with high glycemic index of dietary carbohydrate, did not result in improvements in insulin sensitivity, lipid levels, or systolic blood pressure. In the context of an overall DASH-type diet, using glycemic index to select specific foods may not improve cardiovascular risk factors or insulin resistance."
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »See my post above about the study done where the finding on healthy individuals wasn't the weighted average though... it was significantly LESS than expected. Very intriguing.
If you add protein to a carbohydrate you get more insulin response which ought to pull down the glucose faster in healthy people. This is where combining foods for diabetics comes from too.
There was a recent study where something odd happened like the high carb low GI diet had worse outcomes, will go look for that. After all, it's outcomes that matter more than BG responses.
Edit: Here it is "In this 5-week controlled feeding study, diets with low glycemic index of dietary carbohydrate, compared with high glycemic index of dietary carbohydrate, did not result in improvements in insulin sensitivity, lipid levels, or systolic blood pressure. In the context of an overall DASH-type diet, using glycemic index to select specific foods may not improve cardiovascular risk factors or insulin resistance."
Now that is a very interesting finding. They said something in there about other factors like potassium (and some other stuff) affecting the whole thing, I wonder what part that had to play.
What I'm gathering from a lot of what you've posted is that most of the stuff that makes it to the media (and hence the boards) on this is nonsense.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »I learned more about how the studies had been done to find out the GI/GL of foods, and well, I wasn't just sitting down and eating a potato. I was eating it on top of my lentil shepherd's pie, or under some lentil chili or twice baked with some cottage cheese.
Have any studies EVER been done on the impact of any of the high GI/GL foods when eaten in combination with other foods?
I'd love to see some more actual science on how people REALLY eat.
I 100% share your frustration with this way of approaching food, which seems to really distort everything because it ignores how people eat (and sometimes focuses on GI when GL is what matters, if it does, even for foods eaten alone).
Maybe some people eat potatoes alone, but I've never run into anyone who does. Personally, I always eat them with protein and fat, as part of a meal, so have never found them (or rice, for that matter) to be unsatisfying. Quite the opposite.
On the whole, I think I dislike the GI/GL approach for individual dieters, since it seems to invite people to think they SHOULD have certain reactions to certain foods (and I do think a lot of dieting is psychological) and to ignore when they don't. Now, I do think that some foods can be non satiating, of course, and that learning what fills you up and what doesn't is a smart thing to do, but I think that's something people can figure out for themselves better, rather than reading a list and deciding that, say, apples will make them hungry (likely based on a misunderstanding of GI for GL).
Personally, once I thought about it I realized that my habit of eating a plain bagel for breakfast was why I got hungry an hour later (and felt like I needed an energy pick me up). Eating it plain (which I'd thought was better) was counterproductive (and it was easily replaced with a more balanced and more tasty breakfast).
Similarly, just oatmeal and fruit (despite it being minimally processed) doesn't work well for me, I need fat and protein in greater amounts.
On the other hand, I'm not sure the reason we find lots of snack foods not satiating/easy to over eat in certain contexts has much to do with the GI at all, and in some cases they may not even have especially high GIs, if lots of fat are in them. I think that's more about taste and the way we eat them and psychological factors, and is another reason why I think focusing on GI is misleading.
Personally, I think it comes down to environment. If we ate a huge amount of higher GI foods, like bread (even whole grain bread doesn't score that well) or white rice or potatoes, in an environment where we were active, food was either scarce or culturally regulated, and lots of other higher fiber plant-based foods were consumed, we'd have no issue, regardless of the GI of our diets.
But if you did nothing to the current environment but mess with the snack food and rice and such to artificially increase GI, I don't think it would do a thing to decrease obesity. It's a much broader issue.0 -
I found GI to be absolutely worthless for me. Steel-cut oatmeal is supposed to be low-GI (55), but it spikes my blood sugar much worse than higher-GI foods. I can't eat plain steel-cut oatmeal without experiencing BG excursions into the 250's, while most other foods only cause me to go up into the 160's.
This is what makes nutrition an art form almost!
I have a glucose tester from my old diabetic days. I still test once a week or after a new food just to see how it hits me.
I love steel cut oatmeal. It is very easy on my glucose level
Add Splenda and it goes up. I respond to that artificial sweetener and some don't.
Funny how some of this is very specific to the individual.
I completely relate to how different it can be from one person to the next.
0 -
@lemurcat12 great points. Read the paper yarwell posted on satiety. There was some very interesting information about the expectation of response to food. While this was in regards to satiety, I do have to wonder if it applies to other types of responses as well. The expectation even affected physiological response.
In regards to some snacks not being satiating even if they're calorie dense, there were some points in the piece which might address that issue as well.0 -
I agree--great papers that yarwell linked.
I noticed that the first one referenced Brian Wansink's work, and I've found that interesting and to some degree true for me, even though it's the kind of thing that often gets poo-poo'd around here.0 -
I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index0 -
I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
0 -
Protein increases glucose but to a much lesser extent than carbs. of course it also depends on the volume of the macro also. Anyone here a diabetic. If yes, you would see how your glucose is affected by the macro you eat. I mentioned this before, a great study was done on 15,000 people and it was found that hyperinsulinemia (insulin resistance) comes way before irregular glucose as seen by the fasting blood glucose test.0
-
ihatetodietalways wrote: »Protein increases glucose but to a much lesser extent than carbs. of course it also depends on the volume of the macro also. Anyone here a diabetic. If yes, you would see how your glucose is affected by the macro you eat. I mentioned this before, a great study was done on 15,000 people and it was found that hyperinsulinemia (insulin resistance) comes way before irregular glucose as seen by the fasting blood glucose test.
How is that germane to the topic of this thread?
0 -
A fundamentalist I suppose.mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »ihatetodietalways wrote: »Protein increases glucose but to a much lesser extent than carbs. of course it also depends on the volume of the macro also. Anyone here a diabetic. If yes, you would see how your glucose is affected by the macro you eat. I mentioned this before, a great study was done on 15,000 people and it was found that hyperinsulinemia (insulin resistance) comes way before irregular glucose as seen by the fasting blood glucose test.
How is that germane to the topic of this thread?
I was answering a post above and neglected to put in the quote. Plus, the insulin response may be the key even though your glucose may not be affected. However, you guys, I guess don't have a glucose meter.0 -
Oops. Got my crazies mixed up. I guess it's still relevant though. Doesn't Lustig corner studies to fit his ideas, too?mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
0 -
Oops. Got my crazies mixed up. I guess it's still relevant though. Doesn't Lustig corner studies to fit his ideas, too?mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
Yup.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
I eat what makes me not hungry as well. I'd imagine most successful folks do. Why fight your body/brain. :drinker: cheers.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
What's evidence is there that Robert Lustig is not credible, out of interest? He treats one of my friends' children for a pituitary tumour and she can't praise him highly enough. He's one of the few endos in the world who is actively seeking an answer for hypothalamic obesity.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
What's evidence is there that Robert Lustig is not credible, out of interest? He treats one of my friends' children for a pituitary tumour and she can't praise him highly enough. He's one of the few endos in the world who is actively seeking an answer for hypothalamic obesity.
He might be a fine endocrinologist in some respects, but other people have posted Alan Aragon's refutation of The Bitter Truth enough for you to know he's not sciencing properly.
And that will be the last word on that. This is not turning into a sugar debate.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
What's evidence is there that Robert Lustig is not credible, out of interest? He treats one of my friends' children for a pituitary tumour and she can't praise him highly enough. He's one of the few endos in the world who is actively seeking an answer for hypothalamic obesity.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/988127/scientific-review-of-lolstigs-fat-chance/p1
0 -
He might be an expert and knowledgeable in his treatment. Heck, Linus Pauling was one of history's greatest physicists, but he also advocated magic woo energy of vitamin C curing all the things.Chrysalid2014 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I'll throw one of my prefered sources of nutrition information into the list, Alan Aragon's take on Glycemic Index:
alanaragon.com/glycemic-index
Beautiful. A lot of what people post to support their stance on the forums seems to come from Ludwig and his colleagues. It's good to see so much research from other sources on the subject. What do you call a scientist who designs experiments to get results that will confirm his own bias?
Apologies for not having anything other than a picture to contribute. I don't bother with GI/GL. I just eat what makes me not hungry and do my best to hit my protein goal.
Isn't that Lustig? :::shudder::::
Ludwig is another dude. Here's his picture. For reasons. LOL.
Coincidentally, they are both pediatric endocrinologists.
What's evidence is there that Robert Lustig is not credible, out of interest? He treats one of my friends' children for a pituitary tumour and she can't praise him highly enough. He's one of the few endos in the world who is actively seeking an answer for hypothalamic obesity.
I think Lustig has succumb to the golden hammer problem: when all you have is a hammer, a lot of problems look like nails.
0 -
Also, at the risk of derailing my own thread, following on what senecarr said about the golden hammer problem, I could not find one other source which explains the cause of hypothalamic obesity in the way in which Lustig does. He almost seems to claim as if sufferers are storing fat in a calorie deficit, while all other sources seem to cite pituitary disregulation to the point of slowing down metabolism colliding with a large increase in appetite.0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »Also, at the risk of derailing my own thread, following on what senecarr said about the golden hammer problem, I could not find one other source which explains the cause of hypothalamic obesity in the way in which Lustig does. He almost seems to claim as if sufferers are storing fat in a calorie deficit, while all other sources seem to cite pituitary disregulation to the point of slowing down metabolism colliding with a large increase in appetite.
I think you're allowed to derail your own thread!
Thanks for starting this one - I have been trying to figure out exactly what the GI/GL meant (or if it meant anything) and this has been excellent information.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396.8K Introduce Yourself
- 44.2K Getting Started
- 260.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 451 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.7K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.3K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.5K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3.1K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions