Dear Mel, et al:

Is nothing sacred?  If we can't eat a high protein diet, and we can't eat a low [gylcaemic index]/high complex carbohydrate diet, are you now going to suggest that we have to moderate our caloric intact, exercise, rest, and interact with others in some for religious or quasi religious wetting in order to be healthy?--heresy, I say, pure heresy!  What are all the book publishers going to do?  What will that do to our already weakening economy?  

Herb Silver

-----Original Message-----
From: PHYSIO - for physiotherapists in education and practice
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 11:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Glycaemic Index?


The following web page of the North American Association for the Study of 
Obesity (NAASO) 2000 Annual Meeting provides some interesting information on 
the validity and value of the  "glycaemic index" which is  used by many folk 
who are attempting to control weight gain and diabetic reactions to 
carbohydrates.

<http://www.medscape.com/Medscape/CNO/2001/NAASO/NAASO-01.html>

---------------------------------------------

Obesity in the New Millennium: Highlights from NAASO 2000

M. James Lenhard, MD

The Debate Over the Glycemic Index

During the last several decades, researchers have sought to move beyond 
measuring carbohydrates as "simple" or “complex." The glycemic index (GI) has 
been used in research settings, and some have argued that it should be 
applied in clinical settings as well. Two prominent researchers debated 
whether it is important to consider the GI of foods in the diet and its role 
in body weight regulation. 

Taking the side in favor of the GI was David S. Ludwig, MD, PhD, Director of 
the Obesity Program at Children's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.[4]   Dr. 
Ludwig began his presentation by defining the GI.  It is a measure of the 
rate of carbohydrate absorption from a meal.   More formally, it is the area 
under the glycemic curve after ingestion of 50 g of carbohydrate of a test 
food divided by the area under the curve following ingestion of 50 g of a 
control food. 

For example, white bread (a "simple" carbohydrate) causes a large rise in 
glucose after consumption and would be assigned a GI score of 100.  A piece 
of processed whole grain bread does not cause as large a rise in glucose 
levels and would be assigned a much lower GI score. He reported some of the 
conclusions from more than 100 published scientific studies. Most of these 
studies found beneficial effects of a low GI diet. Studies have suggested 
that consuming a meal with a high-GI food results in less satiety and more 
postmeal eating compared with a meal with low-GI food. A 12-week crossover 
trial in humans showed significantly greater weight loss in the subjects 
consuming low-GI food. One proposed mechanism for this is the greater primary 
(postprandial) insulin release that is caused by food with a high GI, which 
may contribute to greater weight gain. 

The case against the GI was debated by F. Xavier Pi-Sunyer, MD, from the 
Obesity Research Center at St. Luke’s/Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York 
City.[5]  Although he acknowledged the potential utility of the GI in some 
research settings, he questioned its role in any type of clinical setting.  
He pointed out that there are factors that influence the GI of a food, 
besides the food itself.  For example, the method of preparation, the 
acidity, and the other foods that are served with it influence the GI. 

For example, the GI of boiled cubes of potatoes rises 25% simply by mashing 
them. Allowing a banana to ripen by only an extra day or 2 can almost double 
the GI.  Dr. Pi-Sunyer indicated that, even in carefully controlled studies, 
the variability of the GI (measured as the coefficient of variation) can be 
as high as 30%. There are also individual differences in the postprandial 
glucose rise. Using the GI only, a cola may be preferable to bread, and candy 
may be preferable to potatoes. 

Finally, he questioned the notion that high-GI foods lead to obesity. Many 
populations that eat a large quantity of high-GI foods, such as Southeast 
Asians, have significantly lower body weight than populations who consume a 
lower quantity of these carbohydrates.>

-----------------------------------

Dr Mel C Siff
Denver, USA
http://www.egroups.com/group/supertraining