GLYCEMIC INDEX- why it does not worK ?

Please read by pressing more-
Avoid videos posted by VEGANS- these people are very dangerous to diabetics as they promote diets very high in carbohydrates .eg
http://au.youtube.com/user/headveg

Glycemic Index sounds real scientific- but is it ?
A retired Industrial chemist indicates the chemical flaws used by the researchers in their calculation of GI.

Links are-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Glycemic_index
http://www.diabetes-book.com/
http://www.glycemicindex.com/

Also see-
http://www.up.ac.za/saafecs/vol33/vosloo.pdf
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/49/4/658
http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=105576&catId=100289&tid=100008&p=1&title=Foods+that+make+kids+fatter+faster

Glycemic Load is the only scientific way of reporting glycemic response of foods.
Glycemic Load is based on DIRECT measurement of the glycemic response to a known weight of test food. No calculation or estimation of GI from apparent weight of contained CARBOHYDRATE is needed. Although the GI Researchers can’t or don’t want to understand this, it is a fact.

Latest studies may be of interest-
Weight Loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet
The New England Journal of Medicine
Volume 359:229-241 July 17, 2008 Number 3
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/3/229?query=TOC

Duration : 0:2:15


Tags: blood, carbohydrates, diabetes, diet, glycemic, index, sugar, vegans

25 Comments »

admin on September 16th 2009 in Diabetes and Glycemic Index

25 Responses to “GLYCEMIC INDEX- why it does not worK ?”

  1. debwa1wok responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    I have NO idea what …
    I have NO idea what that even is. I rarely view youtube, Your video flagged offf something else I was looking at. Then you got all nasty about my comment of it being a poor “work of art”. You don’t have to explain it to me…I DON”T CARE.

  2. ERNIEMAC2 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Did you watch it in …
    Did you watch it in HQ ?

  3. debwa1wok responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    nice guy!!!!!!! I …
    nice guy!!!!!!! I didn’t wish anything bad on you. I still think you could have done a much better video to get your point across. I’ve watched it again and still couldn’t read places where you changed screens to quickly. I wasn’t commenting on the content of the video. I don’t really care what your opinion is on GI. I was commenting on how poor you made the video. So you can have all your bad wishes back.

  4. ERNIEMAC2 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    If you are at all …
    If you are at all interested, then read the references.
    If you can’t understand it, bad luck !

  5. debwa1wok responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    I think the video …
    I think the video was worse then the message. Probably because you couldn’t read 1/2 of it.

  6. miaangel247 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    No they do not you …
    No they do not you idiot, im not even a vegan and i see many healthy looking Vegans..Most vegans are slim but NOT all of them are!

  7. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    High sugar, high …
    High sugar, high carbohydrate diets are the basis for sugar addition. High carbohydrate diets are a definite “no go” for diabetics, so must be considered a risk factor in causing diabetes. See Dr, Bernstein’s site for proof
    diabetes-book(dot)com/

  8. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    think she lacks …
    think she lacks enough formal education to qualify to be an “expert”. on diets. Just being able to write is completely unsatisfactory when dealing with other people’s health.
    Just a repost to negate down thumb nonsense !

  9. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    The BIG problem is …
    The BIG problem is very few people are suited to this high sugar, high carbohydrate diet. Essentiall,y it is dangerous to most people to go on.
    High sugar, high carbohydrate diets are the basis for sugar addition. High carbohydrate diets are a definite “no go” for diabetics, so must be considered a risk factor in causing diabetes. See Dr, Bernstein’s site for proof
    diabetes-book(dot)com/

  10. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Intake of sugared …
    Intake of sugared beverages? is associated with increased body weight, poor nutrition, increasing consumption increases risk for obesity and diabetes; the strongest effects are seen in studies with the best methods and interventional studies show that reduced intake of soft drinks improves health.1 Studies that do not support a relationship between consumption of sugared beverages and health outcomes tend to be conducted by authors supported by the beverage industry.

  11. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    April 8, 2009 ( …
    April 8, 2009 (10.1056/NEJMp0902392)
    Ounces of Prevention — The Public Policy Case for Taxes on Sugared Beverages
    Kelly D. Brownell, Ph.D., and Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H.

    Sugar-sweetened beverages (soda sweetened with sugar, corn syrup, or other caloric sweeteners and? other carbonated and uncarbonated drinks, such as sports and energy drinks) may be the single largest driver of the obesity epidemic.

  12. AfroSchmuck responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Vegans are sick, …
    Vegans are sick, and unhealthy people. I see them shaking as they stumble into the health food stores, or there are jumpy, cranky, or paranoid. Probably orm an insulin overload. Oh, and females tend to be heavy, and the males skinny.

  13. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    A FEAR report may …
    A FEAR report may do the trick-
    A HIGH CARBOHYDRATE DIET DOES THIS-

    High Insulin Levels Increase Breast Cancer Risk
    Postmenopausal women with hyperinsulinemia were at least two times more likely to develop breast cancer compared with women with the lowest insulin levels. Interventions that target insulin and its signaling pathways may decrease breast cancer risk in these women.
    Researchers with the multiyear WHI followed health outcomes in 93,676 postmenopausal women

  14. ernietube1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    n 2004, they …
    n 2004, they selected a subset of more than 1,600 women without diabetes: 835 had incident breast cancer. They assessed fasting insulin levels, naturally occurring estradiol levels and BMI.

    There was a positive association between insulin levels and risk for breast cancer (HR=1.46; 95% CI, 1.00-2.13 for the highest vs. lowest quartile of insulin level). Most of this effect was observed in the large subset of women from the WHI study who did not receive hormone therapy.

  15. ERNIEMAC2 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Very similar to …
    Very similar to Supersize Me.
    The message has been broadcast many times before- Its impact will be similar- little if any.
    We need a far better education campaign starting with kids at school. I think it is far too late for the “baby boomers” and the Y generation. These people will only change when they develop serious health problems like diabetes. Similar things are happening with smoking.

  16. ERNIEMAC2 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    It looks too …
    It looks too simplistic to me !
    Humans have been “processing” food for a long time. Simple cooking is processing.
    A lot of processing is used just to preserve and stop food from spoilage. Most of us live in a big city where we have to rely on “processed” food. Milk needs to be sterilized is an example. Sure we can go way out and become VEGAN or RAW relying on vegetation (even RAW) and fruit. doing this we run the risk of becoming sugar dependent

  17. MostlyMagicTV responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Hm, I think you …
    Hm, I think you should watch the film Processed People at processedpeople daht com.

  18. PROFLOP1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    If you are a VEGAN …
    If you are a VEGAN nut, please refrain from commenting on this video. You will be blocked as being irrelevant and trivial.
    Sorry about that. This is a very serious matter and VEGANS with their high sugary, high carbohydrate diet are of no use to a diabetic.

  19. PROFLOP1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    OF course sugars …
    OF course sugars are not the only problem food. ALL carbohydrates “spike” blood glucose levels some 45 to 60 minutes after eating. This is irrespective of the type of carbohydrate. This is why a low carbohydrate diet is coming into vogue.
    Please read my references properly and stop putting your uninformed opinions in this video.
    REFERENCES ARE REQUIRED !!

  20. Chrisisms responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    “Fructose, no …
    “Fructose, no matter what source”
    The source DOES matter, ESPECIALLY as u try to isolate whole/natural food components without fiber.
    “has a very wide band of glycemic response” So it is easier to throw all the fruit out with the refined food instead of accessing tables of specific index/load #s?
    “glycemic index can vary”
    Especially since the “concurent” sugars have HIGHER GI! That was my point. While you’re at it consider impaired insulin response from “foods” containing no fructose.

  21. PROFLOP1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Did you read my …
    Did you read my references in INFO column on right ?
    Explanation in-
    Wikipedpa
    Talk: Glycemic Index
    Fructose, no matter what source has a very wide band of glycemic response. The apparent “glycemic index ” can vary from the quoted under 20 to 75 depending on subject and nature of other sugars consumed concurrently.
    This means that fructose- any source, cannot be recommended as a “safe” sweetener for diabetics.

  22. Chrisisms responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Honey has 17% water …
    Honey has 17% water & no fiber but fruit is mostly water & optimal fiber to modulate absorption/insulin spike & crash. Honey, an oligosaccharides contains glucose, maltose & sucrose (all have higher GI than fructose). Fructose is gradually split into glucose delaying absorption.
    Apple Glycemic load= 3
    Honey Glycemic load= 169 USDA
    “no difference”? Bring #s
    HFCS is GMOs/contains high glucose, largely unbound to nutrients. HFCS does not suppress the production of ghrelin, so increases hunger.

  23. PROFLOP1 responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Sorry, you don’t or …
    Sorry, you don’t or can’t understand there is NO difference between fructose in fruit and honey and that in HFCS. Fructose is fructose no matter what the source is !

  24. Chrisisms responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Insulin response is …
    Insulin response is based on glucose levels. Fructose is converted partly to glucose in a controlled/regulated/gradual manner. The glycemic index shouldn’t be altered to account for high fructose corn syrup, people should recognize that’s not real food anyway. Real fructose in fruit/peel and all, is healthy.

  25. Chrisisms responded on 16 Sep 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Another video …
    Another video failing to differentiate between fructose & high fructose corn syrup… There is nothing wrong w/fructose eaten with the whole food/skin and all.

    While it is true GI is not the only measure- glycemic load & insulin response are other measurements of diabetes risk.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply