What are folks thoughts on Glycemic Load. I raised a bit of a stir when I mentioned my low carb breakfast the other day included a slice of rye bread. According to nutritiondata.com, the GL of Rye Bread is 8. a value 10 or less is considered to have a low Glycemic Load.

If a calorie isn't a caolorie....is a carb necessarily a carb?

Lee

Yes, I saw the thread where you 'accidentally' 'raised a bit of a stir'. If you want bread, honey, it's your journey.

Anyway, I'm not sure what your specific question is, but, if your plan is to be in ketosis, then it doesn't matter if the carbs have a high GL or not. Too many and your body will no longer be in ketosis. Does that answer your question?

As far as I know, glycemic load doesn't matter if you are low carbing. What matters is the number of carbs...and in some cases, the number of calories. Grain and other starches, and sugars, are not allowed in the early phases, low glycemic load or not. You can get an overview of the Atkins plan here: http://www.atkins.com/Program/Phase-1.aspx

That is, if you are going to follow Atkins. It's the only one I am familiar with.

To me, LCHF has become the name of low carb as popularized in Sweden, outlined here by Dr. Eenfeldt. http://www.dietdoctor.com/lchf
That means no grains, and rye is a gluten containing grain. If by "your way" you mean you intend to add them, so be it.

There is another issue with glycemic load in that some products like dairy may have a low glycemic number but a high insulin response. You will have to determine how your body responds.

JEY100 comment is spot-on. And I think many LC folks miss the fact that controlling INSULIN is our main-goal. More so than controlling carbs per-se.

Excess dairy proteins and LEAN meats can be quite insulinogenic. Fatty meats not so.

Regarding GI. It's not useless, but highly, highly overrated IMO. Those flatulence producing low-GI foods still pump x-amount of glucose into ya...just with less spikes. And many low GI foods such as beans, sprouted grain breads, etc pose other problems apart from the glucose in them. Ask someone with gluten intolerance or IBS how their body reacts to those "heart friendly" hard to digest foods.

And parenthetically, why do vegetarians have HIGHER rates of colon cancer, in spite of all that wonderful fiber they inhale? Even though vegetarians almost by definition tend to be much more "health conscious" than average folks, smoke less, etc. They should have LOWER colon cancer rates for those reasons alone, but I think excess "grain roughage" is very irritating to colon, which can then increase risk of cancer there.

Hey man, I used to be like you. Interested in LC, but still a bit skeptical of it. I really, really wanted the whole "low GI" thing to work best with my PT clients and myself. But it just does not. I've seen the results with my own eyes. LC (customized to the individual) works best overall. It's not a magic-bullet for all...and people with 100% normal glucose handling ability may do just as well on high-carb...but for the rest of us...particularly those of us over age 40...it clearly works best.

Coke is a "low GI" beverage. Full-fat Ice cream is "low GI" as well. Fructose is also "low GI" since it has to be metabolized in the liver, and thus doesn't cause an immediate rise in blood glucose. And yet, it is very well established that lots of fructose is MORE of a health hazard than lots of glucose. Excess fructose causes insulin resistance, and thus has a long-term effect on raising blood-sugar and insulin levels. Not to mention uric-acid levels which then can lead to gout, high blood pressure, etc. And yet, fructose is low-GI.

Glycemic LOAD is the updated version of GI and there are a couple popular books that sort of contradict each other when it comes to what to eat.

Rob Thompson's book leans toward LC then there's this other guy (can't remember the name) who leans more toward vegetarianism or plant based.

Thompson believes in the overall, daily number as being important and the other guy just goes by GL per serving....I think....I may've forgotton a lot.

Even in the LCHF European community, bread is not totally dismissed; Groves never said it even though he doesn't partake. Dalqvist states these foods should be limited.
Even Petro from hyperlid consumes some carbohydrate as well as Kwasniewski (couple of these peop believe that ketosis is hard on the bod).

And all of the above consume dairy and milk is not vilified.

I am not convinced that dairy and lean meat are insulinogenic.

AND last but not least; one does not need to be in ketosis to lose weight.

Actually excess protein of ANY kind can be quite insulinogenic. Kwasniewski and Rosedale seem to the first in the LC community to have recognized this fact. Volek, Westmann, etc. took longer to come to this realization...apparently after Rosedale set them straight on this issue.

Wish I had learned this much earlier. I can recall doing the Zone Diet back in 90's and mixing up a "Zone Smoothie" of precise 40/30/30 ratios of apple juice, whey protein and canola oil. Gave the WORST hypoglycemic attacks ever! Powdered whey protein is rather insulinogenic.

Don't those Zone bars still contain HFCS? Sears sold-out!

At this point I am not aiming to be in Ketosis. One has to be able to live on a diet, no matter how scientifically sound. I've done LC twice in the past and failed to stick with it. I _may_ get there again, but if so, it will be by making changes to my current state diet working to make reasonable substitutions and progress.

Isn't that the point of paying attention to glycemic load? Not spiking sugar and thus insulin?



The idea I'm pursuing is "making the better choice" and to eat in a way I can sustain. I already know how _I_ do on strict LC diets. I lose well until I stop following it. The "stop following it" kind of renders the rest moot.

Is glycemic load a good tool in choosing among the carbs that I am choosing to eat? Should I really forgo the benefits of eating strawberries in yogurt for a snack over Doritos with Jalepeno cheese dip just because both options have carbs?

But sure...there's the option of going strict low carb that I've failed on twice. Shouldn't the fact that I failed to stick with it twice support the notion that perhaps, for me, there's a better way?

As to gluten -- I'm not gluten intolerant -- so fore me, I could care less about the gluten in my diet.

Lee

Very interesting. I wonder why that is? Is it a fluke, or is it the example that blows away the helpfulness of GL in guiding diet....keeping in mind that I have no current intention of opting for a vlc-ketogenic diet.

Lee

I support your right to tweak to make a diet liveable for you. I've had to do that too. Any time I mention eating an Atkins bar, people come in my journal to tsk-tsk-tsk me about frankenfoods and how they will stall me. And yet, here I am, hormonal, menopausal, old lady, 68 pounds lighter than I was on January 6th, and off the diabetes drugs with normal blood sugars. Could I have done it even better, even faster? Maybe. But I'm enjoying it, not white-knuckling it, and that means a lot.

THAT SAID... I know the primary goal of most guys on a diet is to get rid of their guts and cure themselves of Dunlap disease. lol You may want to try out the book "Wheat Belly" by Dr William Davis. He will paint you a very clear picture of why you want to avoid wheat, even if NOT gluten intolerant.

Good luck on your continued journey!

leebase,

The Insulin Index is a measure used to quantify the typical insulin response to various foods. The index is similar to the Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, but rather than relying on blood glucose levels, the Insulin Index is based upon blood insulin levels. This measure can be more useful than either the Glycemic Index or the Glycemic Load because certain foods (e.g., lean meats and proteins) cause an insulin response despite there being no carbohydrates present, and some foods cause a disproportionate insulin response relative to their carbohydrate load.

For example, non-fat yogurt has a glycemic index of 24 and an insulin index of 115, higher than even white bread (100).
It is another tool to help you make the best choices for your metabolism, and at 273 pounds, your insulin resistance may be something to consider. The people given as examples of LCHF including grains and dairy are people who were never obese, and more likely to be insulin sensitive.

Thanks MizKitty.

FYI - here is, for me, a good meal. I'm at home, in control of the options...so I had a hamburger but no bun. I had grilled veggies (bell peppers, mushrooms, onions), sliced tomato, cucumbers...and a bowl of fruit (cantelope, watermelon, strawberries, blueberries, kiwi). My diet for the whole day had 18% carbs, 19% protein, and 63% fat. Oh, not in the picture, but I put a piece of cheese on each of the burgers.



The dinner filled me up...didn't even snack before bed. Probably will have just one burger next time...

I travel for a living...and can almost never get a meal as good as this in a restruant, let alone 3 meals a day, 5 days a week. I resort to portion control, "making the better choice", and buying some fruits and veggies for snacks. (if I can't stay in a Residence Inn with a kitchen, for those weeks I shop and cook).

Lee

Hi Janet,

Do you have a site similar to nutritiondata.com that reports on Insulin Index values?

I started at 309 this time...almost down to where I started on Atkins the last time (2004, 270lb to start). Like most all morbidly obese folks (yay! I'm only obese now)...it's probable that I am insulin resistant.

And yet...counting calories, portion control, moderate exercise (WW Online, then MyFitnessPal), has had me losing 3ish lbs a week for over 3 months. I don't think I ever stuck with Atkins longer than 3 months.

Working LCHF into my eating choices. Clearly, I'm losing without LC at all. However, I'm continuing to improve my diet and Gary Taubes has me reconsidering low carb, particularly LCHF.