Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Hey Harry, And did you know that using the glycemic index and load, that baby potatoes are better for you than the big ones? It is because the baby potatoes have not had as much of a chance to develop as much starch in them. This is for all you potato lovers out there. Ruth GLYCEMIC LOAD GLYCEMIC LOAD Gabe Mirkin, M.D. Many popular books such as Sugar Busters and The Zone give you a list of foods based on Glycemic index, and they recommend avoiding all foods that have a high glycemic index.When you eat a food, your blood sugar level rises. The food that raises blood sugar the highest is pure table sugar. So glycemic index is a ratio of how high that food raises blood sugar in comparison to how high table sugar raises blood sugar levels. Foods whose carbohydrates break down slowly release glucose into the bloodstream slowly, so blood sugar levels do not rise high and therefore these foods have low glycemic index scores. Those that break down quickly cause a high rise in blood sugar and have a high glycemic index. Most beans, whole grains and non-starchy vegetables have low glycemic index; while sugars, refined grains made from flour, fruits and root vegetables have a high glycemic index. If you look at tables of glycemic index, you will see things that should bother an intelligent person. A carrot has almost the same glycemic index as sugar does. That is ridiculous. You know that a carrot is far safer for diabetics than table sugar. So scientists developed a new measure to rank foods called glycemic load. It tells you how much sugar is in the food, rather than just how high it raises blood sugar levels. To calculate glycemic load, you multiply the grams of carbohydrate in a serving of food by that food's glycemic index. Carrots and potatoes both have a high glycemic index, but using the new glycemic load (GL), carrots dropped from high GI of 131 to a GL of 10. Potatoes fall from a GI of 121 to a GL of 45. Air-popped popcorn, with a glycemic index of 79, has a GL of 4. Foods that are mostly water or air will not cause a steep rise in your blood sugar even if their glycemic index is high. That's why the new measure, Glycemic Load, is more useful. However, all of these tools should be used for research and not for your daily selection of foods. Use your own common sense and eat plenty of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans and other seeds. If you are diabetic, you can eat root vegetables and fruits with other foods to slow the rise in blood sugar they may cause. Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating (Simon & Schuster, June 2001), by Harvard School of Public Health professor and researcher Walter Willett, M.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Thanks to you I know it now. However I rarely eat potatoes of any kind except sweet potatoes, which have a lower glycemic index. GLYCEMIC LOAD > > GLYCEMIC LOAD > > Gabe Mirkin, M.D. > > Many popular books such as Sugar Busters and The Zone give you a list of > foods based on Glycemic index, and they recommend avoiding all foods that > have a high glycemic index.When you eat a food, your blood sugar level > rises. The food that raises blood sugar the highest is pure table sugar. > So > glycemic index is a ratio of how high that food raises blood sugar in > comparison to how high table sugar raises blood sugar levels. Foods whose > carbohydrates break down slowly release glucose into the bloodstream > slowly, > so blood sugar levels do not rise high and therefore these foods have low > glycemic index scores. Those that break down quickly cause a high rise in > blood sugar and have a high glycemic index. > > Most beans, whole grains and non-starchy vegetables have low glycemic > index; > while sugars, refined grains made from flour, fruits and root vegetables > have a high glycemic index. > > If you look at tables of glycemic index, you will see things that should > bother an intelligent person. A carrot has almost the same glycemic index > as > sugar does. That is ridiculous. You know that a carrot is far safer for > diabetics than table sugar. So scientists developed a new measure to rank > foods called glycemic load. It tells you how much sugar is in the food, > rather than just how high it raises blood sugar levels. To calculate > glycemic load, you multiply the grams of carbohydrate in a serving of food > by that food's glycemic index. > > Carrots and potatoes both have a high glycemic index, but using the new > glycemic load (GL), carrots dropped from high GI of 131 to a GL of 10. > Potatoes fall from a GI of 121 to a GL of 45. Air-popped popcorn, with a > glycemic index of 79, has a GL of 4. > > Foods that are mostly water or air will not cause a steep rise in your > blood > sugar even if their glycemic index is high. That's why the new measure, > Glycemic Load, is more useful. However, all of these tools should be used > for research and not for your daily selection of foods. Use your own > common > sense and eat plenty of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans and other > seeds. If you are diabetic, you can eat root vegetables and fruits with > other foods to slow the rise in blood sugar they may cause. > > Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy > Eating (Simon & Schuster, June 2001), by Harvard School of Public Health > professor and researcher Walter Willett, M.D. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Ruth, I wonder if something similar occurs with bananas. I mean, the riper they are the more sugar they contain. I did read something like just ripe bananas have 80 to 90% starch, but they didn't talk about very ripe ones. Yesterday, I had a nearly no-carb breakfast and before that had a reading of 119 (American). Two and a half hours later, I walked on the treadmill and ate a small, very ripe banana. An hour and a half after that, my reading was 282. Immediate retest was 212. I had lunch of Romaine lettuce, grape tomatoes, cucumber and cooked chicken with two fig Newtons and two hours later my reading was 182. But, by dinner, it was back nearly to normal. I did use the control solution on the meter and it read okay. It is hard to figure why the spike in reading. Plus, 282 to 212 in quick proximity is a little suspicious. I would wonder about something maybe bing on my hands, despite using an alcohol swab, but then how does that explain the 182 later, which is still much higher than I am when I am high even. It is beginning to seem a little like voodoo. Or just all a bad joke. Well, I'll get them; I'll just test using the control solution all the time... SMILE SS -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release Date: 10/27/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 , Now you know why eating fruit is not recommended for any diabetic. A banana depending on size contains between 20-30 grams of carbohydrates. One gram of carb raises my bs around 7.5 points. The average banana of 25 grams of carbs would raise my bs around 180 points. Try eating the average size apple, which contains round 25-30 grams of carbs. How about that big apple, which contains around 35-50 grams of carbs? Do not be ignorant. For your sake learn how many points 1 gram of carb will raise your bs. It is easy to do. I recommend using a set number of grams of carbs to determine what the measure would be. In other words I recommend using glucose tablets, which typically contain four grams of carbs. Buy some and conduct the experiment on yourself. Each tablet contains exactly 4 grams of carbs, and this is why they are used in this experiment, since the results will then be measurable. First, take a bs reading. Immediately afterwards consume three or four glucose tablets. Finally, take a series of bs measurements every 30 minutes to see how fast your bs rises and what the results of taking these glucose tablets would be. The experiment can be terminated after an hour and a half, since most folks reach their peak in 72 minutes plus or minus 25 minutes. To confirm this finding just keep on testing. Once you have your starting bs level and your final bs level just subtract to find the difference. Now divide this difference by the total number of grams of carbs you consumed. Do this experiment several times say three or four and average all of them. Now you are no longer ignorant about how many bs points will be raised by 1 gram of carb. RE: GLYCEMIC LOAD > Ruth, I wonder if something similar occurs with bananas. I > mean, the riper they are the more sugar they contain. I did > read something like just ripe bananas have 80 to 90% starch, > but they didn't talk about very ripe ones. > > Yesterday, I had a nearly no-carb breakfast and before that > had a reading of 119 (American). Two and a half hours > later, I walked on the treadmill and ate a small, very ripe > banana. An hour and a half after that, my reading was 282. > Immediate retest was 212. I had lunch of Romaine lettuce, > grape tomatoes, cucumber and cooked chicken with two fig > Newtons and two hours later my reading was 182. But, by > dinner, it was back nearly to normal. I did use the control > solution on the meter and it read okay. > > It is hard to figure why the spike in reading. Plus, 282 to > 212 in quick proximity is a little suspicious. I would > wonder about something maybe bing on my hands, despite using > an alcohol swab, but then how does that explain the 182 > later, which is still much higher than I am when I am high > even. > > It is beginning to seem a little like voodoo. Or just all a > bad joke. Well, I'll get them; I'll just test using the > control solution all the time... SMILE > > SS > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release > Date: 10/27/2006 > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Harry, thanks for the idea of testing how carbs effect my BS. I will give that a shot. But, is it true that that is not a fixed number? It seems in reading people claim they eat the same things and get different effects. I don't know if that is true with all diabetics, but if so, I can understand why it seems keeping things in consistent control is so tough. Again, thanks for the idea. I will get the tabs and try it. SS -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release Date: 10/27/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 No it is not true that it is not a fixed number. The number may vary slightly, but it is pretty much the same over 90% of the time for each individual. It will vary according to your amount of insulin resistance, which I have lots of, and slightly to the kind of carbs consumed. Always remember to read the total amount of carbs on the package item. Insulin only works on carbohydrates, not protein or fat. No matter how many carbs you consume, insulin finally gets around to working on all of them. Now how many carbs are in a single fig newton? Now I would conjecture that most people's bs points would rise within three tenths of a point average for 1 gram of carb, probably less. After you get several measurements at different times of the day and average all of them, I would bet practically all of them would be within two tenths of a point from the mean average, maybe less. So tell us. How many bs points does your bs level rise after consuming a gram of carb? For those who have little insulin resistance, it raises around 5 points per gram of carb consumed. I would imagine yours would vary and be higher. After all you are a type2 and if you are overweight, you have more insulin resistance, unless you were like me a skinny sugar addict. RE: GLYCEMIC LOAD > Harry, thanks for the idea of testing how carbs effect my > BS. I will give that a shot. > > But, is it true that that is not a fixed number? It seems > in reading people claim they eat the same things and get > different effects. I don't know if that is true with all > diabetics, but if so, I can understand why it seems keeping > things in consistent control is so tough. > > Again, thanks for the idea. I will get the tabs and try it. > > SS > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release > Date: 10/27/2006 > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Hi , No need to use the control solution all the time. As far as I know, no such thing applies to bananas. When you do eat bananas, you are supposed to only eat only half of one. I generally don't eat them because of this. As for the alcohol swab on your fingers first before testing, it is not really helping. Only washing your hands is the way to do it. Alcohol will not remove any residue on your fingers. Keep up the good work! Ruth RE: GLYCEMIC LOAD Ruth, I wonder if something similar occurs with bananas. I mean, the riper they are the more sugar they contain. I did read something like just ripe bananas have 80 to 90% starch, but they didn't talk about very ripe ones. Yesterday, I had a nearly no-carb breakfast and before that had a reading of 119 (American). Two and a half hours later, I walked on the treadmill and ate a small, very ripe banana. An hour and a half after that, my reading was 282. Immediate retest was 212. I had lunch of Romaine lettuce, grape tomatoes, cucumber and cooked chicken with two fig Newtons and two hours later my reading was 182. But, by dinner, it was back nearly to normal. I did use the control solution on the meter and it read okay. It is hard to figure why the spike in reading. Plus, 282 to 212 in quick proximity is a little suspicious. I would wonder about something maybe bing on my hands, despite using an alcohol swab, but then how does that explain the 182 later, which is still much higher than I am when I am high even. It is beginning to seem a little like voodoo. Or just all a bad joke. Well, I'll get them; I'll just test using the control solution all the time... SMILE SS -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release Date: 10/27/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2006 Report Share Posted November 3, 2006 This experiment is very useful to do. But make sure you check whichever brand of glucose tablets you buy to make sure they have 4 grams of carbs. Some brands, such as BD brand glucose tablets, have 5 grams per package. Dextrose brand have 3 grams per tablet. All glucose tablets have a set number of grams per tablet which is usually listed on the package, just make sure you know it before starting. Jen RE: GLYCEMIC LOAD > > >> Ruth, I wonder if something similar occurs with bananas. I >> mean, the riper they are the more sugar they contain. I did >> read something like just ripe bananas have 80 to 90% starch, >> but they didn't talk about very ripe ones. >> >> Yesterday, I had a nearly no-carb breakfast and before that >> had a reading of 119 (American). Two and a half hours >> later, I walked on the treadmill and ate a small, very ripe >> banana. An hour and a half after that, my reading was 282. >> Immediate retest was 212. I had lunch of Romaine lettuce, >> grape tomatoes, cucumber and cooked chicken with two fig >> Newtons and two hours later my reading was 182. But, by >> dinner, it was back nearly to normal. I did use the control >> solution on the meter and it read okay. >> >> It is hard to figure why the spike in reading. Plus, 282 to >> 212 in quick proximity is a little suspicious. I would >> wonder about something maybe bing on my hands, despite using >> an alcohol swab, but then how does that explain the 182 >> later, which is still much higher than I am when I am high >> even. >> >> It is beginning to seem a little like voodoo. Or just all a >> bad joke. Well, I'll get them; I'll just test using the >> control solution all the time... SMILE >> >> SS >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release >> Date: 10/27/2006 >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.