Problems with the Glycemic Index?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Yesterday I wrote about the glycemic index (GI) and its possibilities for use as a tool in helping dieters. Instead of counting calories one could use the GI of the food. Well, upon reading further there appears to be a few problems with the GI. I ended yesterday by writing that the GI had some quirks. For example- while many sweet and sugary foods do have high GI’s, some starchy foods like potatoes or white bread score even higher than honey or table sugar! This can all be explained. It has to do with the processing of the foods and the time it will stay in the stomach. If you pick a food and process it differently you can get a different GI from it. So hold the presses. Maybe calorie counting is still a good approach.Researchers realizing the flaws in the GI have come up with the glycemic load and even another called the satiety index. The problem I see with the former is it’s based on the GI so it must carry some of the GI’s quirkiness. The satiety index is developed on how people feel i.e. if they are hungry so long after eating a particular food. This doesn’t seem too scientific to me in that it involves perceptions and emotions.
[...] Original post here [...]
While its true that potatoes and white bread score incredibly high, in regards to one of the main functions of the GI (blood sugar levels) these foods ARE worse for you than honey. For someone watching their sugar levels, a white potatoe, baked, can wreak havoc with the temporary blood sugar levels, much more than putting some honey on a whole wheat piece of bread.