Re: ALA, Biotin and wild rice

[Guest guest]

At 09:43 AM 11/5/04, mdorothy wrote:

>Per the University of Sydney GI website the GI of wild rice is 57 and the GL

>is 16.6.

>http://www.glycemicindex.com/

I'm not used to using a GI for foods. I've been using the carb-count book I

have and I don't eat grains, so they've never been a concern.

I tried to find sugar snap peas on the site you mention above but it

apparently just wants simple words. With " peas " I got 4 listings. Two of

them, Marrowfat peas (never heard of 'em) dried, boiled, had a GI of 31

(US) and 47 (Canada) but the GL for each didn't show anything. Does this

mean they just haven't figured it out?

All four listed were dried peas. How do you find out about fresh stuff?

I just looked up strawberries. It shows a GI of 40 per 120 grams. The GL is

1.3 So is that good or bad? I need to learn more about this entire GI /

GL thing.

sky

Type 2 diabetes dx'd 9/04. Low carb diet.

Finds any excuse not to exercise.

[Guest guest]

Looking further at the GI and GL idea, it seems that the thinking behind

this is that if a carb is digested slowly it's better. I'm sure it is, in

one respect...no sudden blood sugar hits...but on the other hand, this

smacks of the " complex carbs are good carbs " thinking. Again, if a person's

main concern is that they're not hit with sugar surges, it makes sense. But

if a person's concern is just not eating lots of carbs regardless of how

slowly they turn into sugar, then it's not.

sky

[Guest guest]

The trick, I've found, is to combine *BOTH* of these ways of thoughts.

Eat less carbs, and make sure the carbs I eat are lower-GI carbs.

I can get my 20g of carbs per meal from sugar -- which will send me through the

roof! --

or I can get my 20g of carbs per meal from a whole-grain dense rye bread and

veggies,

which won't spike me. Not to mention, the bread is more filling and satisfying

than the

sugar!

SulaBlue

>

> Looking further at the GI and GL idea, it seems that the thinking behind

> this is that if a carb is digested slowly it's better. I'm sure it is, in

> one respect...no sudden blood sugar hits...but on the other hand, this

> smacks of the " complex carbs are good carbs " thinking. Again, if a person's

> main concern is that they're not hit with sugar surges, it makes sense. But

> if a person's concern is just not eating lots of carbs regardless of how

> slowly they turn into sugar, then it's not.

>

> sky