The study relied on food diaries from more than 1,000 people over five years. Researchers looked at their self-reported intake of high- and low-glycemic foods. Blood sugar levels were tested only twice during the study period. They found no significant correlation between the glycemic index of foods and the blood-sugar levels of participants.
[D]iabetes researcher Elizabeth Mayer-Davis of the University of South Carolina says the use of the index should be ended altogether in favor of more traditional methods of losing weight and reducing the risk of diabetes--eating less and exercising more.First of all, self-reporting over five years is not likely to be very accurate. Second, testing blood sugar only twice during that time is moronic at best. Third, anyone who has been following the research already knows that glycemic index is only useful as a rough guideline and that an insulin index is what is needed to create a diabetes-prevention diet.
"The glycemic index is sufficiently flawed as an index that it is not helpful for scientists or people trying to create a healthy diet," Mayer-Davis said.
But hey, I'm just a personal trainer.
Here is what the most current research indicates:
* Carbohydrates raise insulin levels.
* Fiber reduces the digestion rate of carbohydrates and slows blood sugar release, which controls insulin secretion. This makes whole grains and vegetables the best sources of carbohydrates.
* Milk proteins are low glycemic by highly insulinemic. Diabetics and dieters should avoid milk and yogurt in the absence of fiber.
* Carbs and protein together increase insulin more than either one separately. If you are diabetic or seeking to lose bodyfat, always consume fiber with meals.
* Fat and carbs together should be avoided at all times.
* Regular exercise helps the body control insulin levels.
* Some supplements can help the body control blood sugar (and therefore, insulin): alpha lipoic acid, cinnamon, fiber, fish oil, and chromium picolinate.
When in doubt, look to sports nutrition for good information rather than the dietetic association or the diabetes association. Both groups tend to be hopelessly behind in knowing the most current research.
I generally agree. Although I would like to see links to the research supporting your assertions that carbs and protein together increase insulin, and fat and carbs together should be avoided. That seems unrealistic for about 95% of the population to adhere to.
ReplyDeleteThe challenge is always finding a balance between what we know is the ideal diet and exercise program and what we know a majority of our clients will actually do in the real world.
I'd like to see your recommendation about "no fats and carbs together" be modified, as I got sick from using this strategy. Now I eat about 1/2 cup of brown rice with meals, and everything's stable again. I would never eat a carb-heavy meal with fats, though, and I only eat a carb-heavy meal for breakfast (oatmeal, along with some good protein). My body seems to need small amounts of carbs throughout the day (all of the complex variety), but not much except for early in the day.
ReplyDeleteThanks Bill for responding and for the links. (I am the first anonymous poster who posted at 11:54) I agree with your simple advice to "clients who can be compliant".
ReplyDeleteIt is the toughest part of our work as much of our nutrition and basic exercise advice is not that complicated. Like just avoiding fast food and processed food is a HUGE step forward for most.
My clients are mainly 40 years old and above (non-athlete) and only about 25% are really MOTIVATED enough to reach their goals, (and as you stated "...is not many") and it is mostly for weight loss and not for health.
The simpler I can make "living a healthy lifestye" for them the better!
Yes it is true about the "special needs" of our clients and I find a lot of those needs are related to weight loss like arthritis (hips and knees), diabetes and feeling de-conditioned. Of course the vanity of wanting to look good does not hurt either which is why most of my clients are women too. The Baby Boomer women (age 45-65) is where the action and money is!
ReplyDeleteIt is different than what one envisions as a new trainer where you think people are going to transform their entire bodies like you see on the Biggest Loser Show and the classic "before and after" pictures where a fat 48 year old is transformed into a cut hunk! LOL! Most of the general public have no idea how hard it is to really get a body like that.
Most of time (as you correctly pointed out) it is really about improving their quality of life. The other biggest challenge in my clients is lack of time. People are so busy with work, children, church, domestic duties, etc...they really struggle to focus even 2-3 hours/week on fitness and then when they do they want to look like a super model after 3-4 weeks training when they have not exercised consistently in over 20 years.
My Name is Marty BTW. (anonymous posts at 11:54 and 3:01)
I found your site from another Integral blog. I am a fan of Ken Wilber's work.
Have a great week!