Comments on: Glycaemic Index Effects on Fuel Partitioning in Humans – Research Review

By: Trinkwasser

Trinkwasser — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:43:02 +0000

As a Type 2 with virtually no Phase 1 insulin response but still quite effective levels of Phase 2, GI serves to indicate things I really need to avoid. I can only glance briefly at a banana the other side of the room. Yet other Type 2s, presumably with a good Phase 1 and a reduced Phase 2, can get away with them, and other high GI foods in sufficiently small quantities, whereas a load of low GI carbs will be more deleterious for them.

Another potential factor might be digestive enzymes, a small but significant number of diabetics including some Type 1s, have an extreme glycemic response to wheat which doesn’t occur with other grains (nondiabetics too.)

Personally I do best by avoiding most overt carbs altogether, but on the occasions when I need to eat them adding fats and fibrous veggies and washing them down with red wine serves to reduce the GI enough that I can get away with more than I usually do. Then a fast walk while my insulin output is at its highest will help burn off the excess glucose, that’s another potential confounding factor – changing the rate of glucose disposal may appear to alter the GI

It’s an indicator and no more IMO, individual glycemic responses and the resulting glucose and insulin curves can vary significantly as anyone with a BG meter can attest – even time of day and changed insulin resistance levels can have an effect.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:10:51 +0000

Shane: as I clearly wrote:

“As I noted above, for many people lower GI foods tend to control hunger better and, in general, lower GI foods are typically less refined, contain more fiber and nutrients, etc. Even if there are no significant differences in how they impact on fuel utilization, health should always be a consideration.

Even if there is no significant impact on acute fuel utilization, fat oxidation or storage in the short-term for higher GI vs. lower GI foods, that doesn’t suggest that eating nothing but high GI foods is the way to automatically go.”

Almost as if what you wrote was something I made sure to explicitly address.

By: David

David — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:06:33 +0000

Working in the food industry, I’ve had the opportunity to talk to several diabetics who use the idea of GI load when eating. Some people report that at a regular meal they will simply eat the protein first — this allows them to then consume some carbs with very little insulin response.

If you watch a group of people at a meal (say dinner), inevitably they will consume a bunch of carbs (liquid or otherwise) before they jump into the protein.

Lyle, Thanks for the great articles

By: Chris D

Chris D — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:50:05 +0000

Another neuance that just cuts me up is the glycemic load deal. I laugh my head off when i see someone scarfing down 800 calories of whole wheat pasta with no problem but would crap their pants at the thought of eating a small serving of white rice or a few grapes or pineapple. We all remember the guys who wouldn’t eat a banana to save their life back in the day.

I am also surprised to see the variance of a food’s G.I. rating from one study to another. They mostly corellate modestly, but i remember a few foods changing pretty significantly.

By: Manveet

Manveet — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:34:54 +0000

Good article. Very informative.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:38:10 +0000

Thank you very much for publishing that post. You are an asset in the diet-health-fitness blogsphere.
Cheers,

By: Adrian

Adrian — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:30:14 +0000

This isn’t exactly the same question, but it sounds like glycemic index is related to partitioning in a UD2 style refeed, at least after the first few hours. Except here it’s more likely to be about glycogen storage vs use as fuel, rather than fat gain.

It reminds me of the vinegar glycogen storage thing – the same kind of effect I guess. Some diabetic people take vinegar with starches because it supposedly slows gastric emptying (lowering glycemic index).

Ever think about taking tryptophan + complex carbs + vinegar before bed for a 24hr refeed? Apparently it’s the only amino acid that slows things down, plus it puts you to sleep.

By: Shane Hoversten

Shane Hoversten — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:44:52 +0000

Perhaps GI issues produce more confounded (and consequently less readily identifiable) results on the particular metrics the paper (and you) have chosen; but there are other effects worth attending to. See e.g.

“Meta-analysis of the health effects of using the glycaemic index in meal-planning”
British Journal of Nutrition (2004), 92, 367–381

While in general I laud your inclination to seek the mean wrt nutritional hysteria, more and more the posts here seem shying away from taking any kind of substantive stand; in other words, you’re right, your head won’t explode if you eat a candy bar. But compelling reasons exist to prefer low- to high-GI all else being equal, and reading this post you wouldn’t walk away with that conclusion. That’s too bad.

By: admin

admin — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:45:04 +0000

That would be a different article then, wouldn’t it? Since it has nothing to do with what I was talking about today.

By: Martin Lopez

Martin Lopez — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:38:49 +0000

Lyle

What about the effect on insulin blood glucose fuel partioning and body composition in response to a zero carbohydrate or low carbohydrate meal?

Martin