Whilst paddling the quiet water waiting for the big breaker I came across this critique of a study, haven't read the study, but there are parts in the critique which don't exactly back the lo GI diet
those being:-

Quoted Text

Yet, they chose to focus on the low-GI diet as better for a type II diabetic, despite the fact it led to

weight gain
waist circumference increase
increase in HbA1c
increase in fasting plasma glucose
a marked rise in triglycerides
and a decline in HDL

The article I came across is here Click here - careful I'm ticklish

The article is over a year old so I'm sure that it has probably been discussed here long before I joined, so apologies if I am bringing up stuff that has been chewed, digested and duly dealt with previously in the forum.

Ziggy                  

Read a lot around that subject at the time I think but not that particular blog.  Don't think it was chewed excessively here tho.

The usual problems:
1)  The low carb diet was 199g/day.
2)  The low GI diet made no effort to reduce the total carbs.
3)  Using Jennifer's protocol instead would have shown them the best approach in a week

Sigh

So the Low GI was in effect a Low Gi diet, but without carb-management too.

Do I take it that Low-Gi on its own (without cutting down on carbs) is no good for diabetes control and can lead to higher FBG, higher Triglycerides and lower HDL? I had some of those symptoms in last May's diabetes M.O.T.

The only good thing it had to say about the low GI was that there was a reduction in spikes after eating.  (which surely is the idea of low GI - to reduce spikes?, but the raised A1c, weight-gain etc. seems to be all down to carbs .

Ziggy                  

Eat to your meter has to be the gold standard really doesn't it?

I don't think I follow any particular diet, and reckon what I eat is reasonably healthy. But one area of dietary information that has fundamentally changed my dosing of insulin, and consequently my control, is the Glycemic Index of EVERYTHING I eat. It determines whether I bolus immediately or spread the dose over a number of hours, according to the relative GI level for the food in question (4 hours for pasta, 3 for pizza, 2 for rice, 1 for fatty foods). I know of T1 diabetics who have completely avoided such food types since diagnosis, because of the difficulty often experienced in dosing insulin over a period of hours without a pump.

I also understand how much more difficult the choice becomes for a T2.

I am low carbing atm well what I call low carb <70g of carbs dont really have much choice as even these amounts are creating large spikes

Hi Ziggy,

Regina is a lowcarb advocate, I've read a few of her columns before.  She is also very bright and usually asks the right questions.  The study she is referring to seems to me total hogwash, showing a complete lack of understanding of the issues.

When you eat carbs many factors influence their effects on ppBG.  The more carbs (of the same type) you eat, the higher pp BG.  For a given number of carbs higher GI increases ppBG.  A number of other factors decrease ppBG, for example, protein, fat & fibre eaten simultaneously and exercise. There are other factors: how fast you eat, the time between meals, what you drink  etc. Therefore when one says a low GI diet, what does that mean? In reality it could mean anything.  The study design was not cross-over, therefore factors such as different foods having different effects on people was just not considered. Also the study did not say if it was isocalorific (but it must have been). But nevertheless, as far as I am concerned, the study design was flawed from day 1.

At the individual level, the meter reveals all.  Studies like this are just confusing.  But one point: one should measure the effect of "meals" (ie combined food) rather than foods individually, but on an individual person.  One can then use the considerations above to reduce ppBG of a meal (eg add more portein/fat, reduce carbs or alter carbs).

Yes Lozzark I take you point. It is becoming more and more apparent to me what a personal critter Diabetes is.

Me and me meter against the world (chorus - please don't take my strips away)

Ziggy                

Quoted from Ziggy

(chorus - please don't take my strips away)

Is that from the famous song - something to do with a guy and his Accuchek F14 "Tomcat" meter?

Watching every rise
In my low-carb eating game
Making endless tries
So  at two hours it's the same
Turning and returning
To get a diet that will work
Watch in trepidation
As I test my blood and say

Don't take my strips away
Don't take my strips away  

Watching I keep waiting
Still anticipating highs
Never hesitating
To be one of the well-managed ones
Turning and returning
To get a diet that will work
Watch in trepidaion
As I test my blood and say

Don't take my strips away  
Don't take my strips away

Through the bg spikes I saw you
In time they slipped away
When the numbers crashed I thanked you
And turned to hear you say
It's only for today
I am unafraid

Don't take my strips away  
Don't take my strips away  

You'll be making Moby nervous on his DSF Bard Podium Terry.

Ziggy                  

Love the song Terry. Think I'll print it and keep it next to my meter

Anne

I think it's to the tune of 'Take My Breath Away' - but I just might be wrong, LOL

Great!

Quoted from Ziggy

So the Low GI was in effect a Low Gi diet, but without carb-management too.

Do I take it that Low-Gi on its own (without cutting down on carbs) is no good for diabetes control and can lead to higher FBG, higher Triglycerides and lower HDL? I had some of those symptoms in last May's diabetes M.O.T.

The only good thing it had to say about the low GI was that there was a reduction in spikes after eating.  (which surely is the idea of low GI - to reduce spikes?, but the raised A1c, weight-gain etc. seems to be all down to carbs .

Ziggy                  

Low-GI has some benefits for health, in my opinion, over high-GI but has only trivial effects on blood glucose levels. That can be a danger for those diabetics who think it does and consequently scoff their low-GI carbs with minimal restraint.

I spike almost as high after 20gms of supposedly low-GI cereal at breakfast as I do for 20gms of high-GI cornflakes. I learned that very early using "test, test, test" which is why I eat neither these days.

It could also be down to the principal problem with GI.  GI controls the height of the peak, but GL is more of a factor in the area under the curve.

So although you might get less short term 9s, you might spend a lot more time at 7.  In some cases it does not even change the A1c, but the damage from AGEs can still be done at that level.

And thats where it all falls down of course.  Low GI does not mean low GL and it certainly does not mean low carbs.  Its just an excuse to continue eating carbs because of the myth that fat is evil.

But of course if their idea of low carb is 199g/day, what is their idea of low GI?  Moby was told on his xpert course that choc cake was low GI, I think.  Wholemeal bread is supposedly low GI (68 to 72) while white sugar is the devil (GI 65)

All very nebulous and while they look for simple answers which make nice soundbites, they miss the point unfortunately.