Page Added: Is the Glycemic Index a Scam?
Added new page discussing how tables of glycemic index values are created and why they are not a good guide to nutritional value.
This page is mirrored on the What They Don't Tell You About Low Carb Diets web site.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I've always thought the GI seemed useless. Foods seem to affect people differently - like one person will say they can eat a banana and won't have problems, but another will say they are pure mushy yellow evil for their BG. I admit I'm not super familiar with it, but what I do know has led me to conclude that it's a poor standard to use (which is why I never investigated it very thoroughly). Maybe it works for some people, but I've just never seen any real value in it. Thanks for posting those links.
As an overall concept it's good to keep in mind-- that not all carbs are created equal. But it tends to only matter on the extreme edges of the scale.
Such as refried beans soaked in meat fat and butter raise blood sugar much more slowly than the same amount of plain beans.
Or... eating processed sugar will raise your blood sugar faster than an equal number of grams of cucumbers. (albeit, that's possibly because you'd have to eat a lot of cucumbers and that will just take you a while.)
Once I read through the overall idea, it's easy to predict which things will be "fast" carbs and which will be "slow." But past adjusting my insulin a little one way or the other, it didn't have a lot of impact on my regime.
And indeed, like lee ann thill said, diabetics are such a variable lot, that one can't really rely on the glycemic charts to predict what particular foods will do to you.
Post a Comment