The GI - Useless? I think so...

[LG Sciences]

I just read an article that baically debunked the Glycemic Index as being not a good marker of insulin release which makes total sense. I always wondered why things that had a low GI like Honey could still make you fat as hell... It just doesn't add up at all. I never use MaltoDextrin in our products since it tastes like **** and I feel has zero benefit over sugar.

 

[ironman0370]

Got a link or could you post the article?

Thanks.

 

[terminator]

Yep. The Insulin Index is the best way to show how food intake correlates with insulin blood levels rather than relying on blood glucose levels like the glycemic index does.

 

[LG Sciences]

That's what the article said. Do you have a link to the insulin index? The article was print...sorry!

 

[Ziricote]

It's interesting, I'm going to have to do a bit of reading on this. A link - http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/66/5/1264.pdf

 

[terminator]

Insulin Index

Here is one from the Journal of Clinical Nutrition

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/66/5/1264.pdf

The Glycemic Index (GI) is a classification scheme based on the blood glucose rise after consuming a carbohydrate food. This measure is based on the absorption profile of the food and was originally considered an indirect, but adequate measure of the insulin response to food. The assumption was that the insulin rise would be proportional to the glucose rise. However, recent research has demonstrated a dissociation of the glycemic response and the insulin response to the food. Therefore the insulin index was created.

The Insulin Index (II) is an index of the magnitude of insulin secretion as a result of food ingestion. Of course, this is the direct measure that the glycemic index could only approximate.

 

[terminator]

Double post

 

[EasyEJL]

if this shows that a banana has less effect than 1 slice of white bread, i'll believe it

hmm but bananas show a greater insulin response than donuts or croissants? I'm not so sure

 

[nelix]

if this shows that a banana has less effect than 1 slice of white bread, i'll believe it

hmm but bananas show a greater insulin response than donuts or croissants? I'm not so sure

Fat will reduce the insulin response of anything, and they have a lot of fat...

 

[kitchenstud]

Honey will make you fat because its fructose. Fructose in large quantities is terrible for you. Instead of being released into your blood to be broken down by insulin, it goes to your liver. In too large of quantities, your liver has to convert it into triglycerides, thus making you fat.

Fructose is the devil.

 

[asianbabe]

Fat will reduce the insulin response of anything, and they have a lot of fat...

Nah, not necessarily. Although C+F taken together will likely lower the GI, it does not always lead to a reduction in insulin response.

The effect of fat and carbohydrate on plasma gluco...[J Am Coll Nutr. 1993] - PubMed Result

The study above seems to indicate that the addition of saturated fats to carbs correspond with a higher insulin response.

Another interesting one:
Effect of added fat on the plasma glucose and insu...[Diabetes Care. 1994] - PubMed Result

So perhaps it is better to choose an unsaturated fat to combine with your carb source -
from this study it seems like PUFA > MUFA in controlling GI and II
How the degree of unsaturation of dietary fatty ac...[Am J Clin Nutr. 1997] - PubMed Result

Honey will make you fat because its fructose. Fructose in large quantities is terrible for you. Instead of being released into your blood to be broken down by insulin, it goes to your liver. In too large of quantities, your liver has to convert it into triglycerides, thus making you fat.

Fructose is the devil.

So if you moderate your intake and don't eat fruit/honey in too large of a quantity and you will likely be fine. I don't know who is advocating to take massive quantities of these?

 

[asianbabe]

Although the Glycemic index does not give the answers to everything, it provides some important information when making food choices. The others such as insulin index, glycemic load and satiety index also have their drawbacks.

I think it would be naive to completely dismiss such a large body of research as useless when all of this information could be integrated, and I'll give you an example.

A white potato has a relatively high Glycemic Index and Insulin Index, however, it was also found on one study to have the highest satiety index (of 323). Satiety Index

What can we obtain from all this? We know that to reduce the glycemic load we can add in a fat source. To reduce the insulin index, it may be beneficial to add in fat from a relatively unsaturated source.

Piecing this information together (and the PUFA/MUFA study posted above)- you might choose to have baked potato and salmon (high in PUFA and a of course a source of protein) - this takes advantage of the feeling of fullness given by the white potatoes, and the reduction in GI and II to maintain stable sugar levels and keep insulin release in check.






Nothing ticks me off more than people who simple and even close-mindedly dismiss huge slabs of research simply because there are certain aspects which they do not agree with or find useful without thinking how it could be used IN CONJUNCTION with other pieces of information.. you realise that IS possible? Sure, the GI has received a lot of attention and exposure, and emphasis upon it by the media/industry etc may have been a bit more than it deserves.

But please, the blanket statement of the GI - useless? I think not.

 

[nelix]

Thanks AB, my use of absolutes was a little premature.
Good posting.

Nah, not necessarily. Although C+F taken together will likely lower the GI, it does not always lead to a reduction in insulin response.

The effect of fat and carbohydrate on plasma gluco...[J Am Coll Nutr. 1993] - PubMed Result

The study above seems to indicate that the addition of saturated fats to carbs correspond with a higher insulin response.

Another interesting one:
Effect of added fat on the plasma glucose and insu...[Diabetes Care. 1994] - PubMed Result

So perhaps it is better to choose an unsaturated fat to combine with your carb source -
from this study it seems like PUFA > MUFA in controlling GI and II
How the degree of unsaturation of dietary fatty ac...[Am J Clin Nutr. 1997] - PubMed Result



So if you moderate your intake and don't eat fruit/honey in too large of a quantity and you will likely be fine. I don't know who is advocating to take massive quantities of these?

 

[LG Sciences]

Good post! If you noticed I had a question mark on the end, which implies that I am not an expert on the subject and I am loking for input. My concern is that so much focus is put on the GI that people are making bad choices because of it. FOr example so many companies use Maltodextrin in their foods which not only tastes lousy but isn't that good for you...

 

[EasyEJL]

I wish I could find protein bars that are low carb by using aspartame as a sweetener. I don't want the sugar alchohols either.

 

[RoidRageX10]

I wish I could find protein bars that are low carb by using aspartame as a sweetener. I don't want the sugar alchohols either.

Personally, I would rather take something natural, like a protein bar with real sugar, then fake sweeteners with man-made crap in them.

 

[EasyEJL]

Personally, I would rather take something natural, like a protein bar with real sugar, then fake sweeteners with man-made crap in them.

true, but most of the ones that are like that are 20g protein to 40g of sugar and 15g of fat, and I never take in that much sugar at once. if there was something decent that at least had more protein than sugar, I'd go for that.

 

[RoidRageX10]

true, but most of the ones that are like that are 20g protein to 40g of sugar and 15g of fat, and I never take in that much sugar at once. if there was something decent that at least had more protein than sugar, I'd go for that.

Heck 15g of fat isn't good either. I doubt its polyunsatuarted or any healthy fats. Satuarted and proccesed.

I have some recipes for homemade protein bars. I may eventually make some of those for during school.

 

[ironman0370]

Although the Glycemic index does not give the answers to everything, it provides some important information when making food choices. The others such as insulin index, glycemic load and satiety index also have their drawbacks.

I think it would be naive to completely dismiss such a large body of research as useless when all of this information could be integrated, and I'll give you an example.

A white potato has a relatively high Glycemic Index and Insulin Index, however, it was also found on one study to have the highest satiety index (of 323). Satiety Index

What can we obtain from all this? We know that to reduce the glycemic load we can add in a fat source. To reduce the insulin index, it may be beneficial to add in fat from a relatively unsaturated source.

Piecing this information together (and the PUFA/MUFA study posted above)- you might choose to have baked potato and salmon (high in PUFA and a of course a source of protein) - this takes advantage of the feeling of fullness given by the white potatoes, and the reduction in GI and II to maintain stable sugar levels and keep insulin release in check.






Nothing ticks me off more than people who simple and even close-mindedly dismiss huge slabs of research simply because there are certain aspects which they do not agree with or find useful without thinking how it could be used IN CONJUNCTION with other pieces of information.. you realise that IS possible? Sure, the GI has received a lot of attention and exposure, and emphasis upon it by the media/industry etc may have been a bit more than it deserves.

But please, the blanket statement of the GI - useless? I think not.

AB, that was a great post. Thank you.

jst

 

[EasyEJL]

Heck 15g of fat isn't good either. I doubt its polyunsatuarted or any healthy fats. Satuarted and proccesed.

I have some recipes for homemade protein bars. I may eventually make some of those for during school.

thats probably my most sensible course, to home make some. I guess i'll hunt around for some recipes

 

[RoidRageX10]

thats probably my most sensible course, to home make some. I guess i'll hunt around for some recipes

Here's One:

300g Raw Bannana
1tsp Ground Cinammon
1bsp unsweetened Cocca Powder
3 Large Chicken Egg Whites Raw
4oz Non-Fat Milk
200g Oats
1/3 Cup Splenda (or sugar)
1 tbsp Udo's Choice Oil blend
60g Designer Whey Chocolate (or = brand)

Mix ingridents in Large Bowl. Pour In non-stick cake pan. Bake at 300 for 25 min. or until firm. Cut once cooled. Cut into 8 bars.

Calories - 190
Protein - 11.5
Carbs - 28
Fat - 4.5

57-22-21 (p-c-f)

 

[B5150]

Calories - 190
Protein - 11.5
Carbs - 28
Fat - 4.5

57-22-21 (p-c-f)

p - 11.5
c - 28
f - 4.5

cal = 198.5

p = 23.2%
c = 56.4%
f = 20.4%

 

[RoidRageX10]

p - 11.5
c - 28
f - 4.5

cal = 198.5

p = 23.2%
c = 56.4%
f = 20.4%

Let me rewrite what I saw

Protein - 11.05g
Carbs - 27.94
Fat- 4.56

Total Calories- 188.32

C-P-F
57-22-21

Those numbers are off a bit too. Its in an e-book full of recipes.

 

[Link24]

Good post!!!

That was a great read......Have u guys ever tried Zero Impacts bars by VPX? Those are the best bars made Imo and as far as im concerned they have a good nutrient breakdown at 440 calories

 

[nelix]

That was a great read......Have u guys ever tried Zero Impacts bars by VPX? Those are the best bars made Imo and as far as im concerned they have a good nutrient breakdown at 440 calories

More calories than most protein bars, although the content of those cals seems great, and pumpkin seems like an awesome idea.

I am using Detour Oat thingies... I forget the name.

 

[eatingisfun]

I think glycemic load is more important than GI. I saw a graph somewhere a long time ago that showed how fat does not really reduce the GL of any food, it only delays the insulin spike. This makes complete sense because the food will stay in your stomach all mixed together for a longer time when you add fat to the meal. But once it exits the stomach you still have the same amount of carbs and then the same amount of insulin released.

 

[terminator]

Nothing ticks me off more than people who simple and even close-mindedly dismiss huge slabs of research simply because there are certain aspects which they do not agree with or find useful without thinking how it could be used IN CONJUNCTION with other pieces of information.. you realise that IS possible? Sure, the GI has received a lot of attention and exposure, and emphasis upon it by the media/industry etc may have been a bit more than it deserves.

But please, the blanket statement of the GI - useless? I think not.

I don't think anyone is claiming the GI is all together useless, but there are much more accurate ways of measuring the relationship of food ingested and insulin secretion like the insulin index vs the glycemic index.

I think the glycemic index is useful for people with hypoglycemia.

It wasn't too long ago when we used the Protein Biological Value (BV) which was based on the measure of the proportion of absorbed nitrogen that is retained by the body. This was good to measure nitrogen retention, but not necessarily for measuring the quality of protein, now the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score is used.

 

[LG Sciences]

To me it is just that the GI is so heavily pushed as the end all be all and quite honestly for the desired effect the insulin response is much more accurate.