Diabetics Food Recommendation

[chiang mai]

It's not been mentioned yet but I wonder if your friend has had an A1C test? It's all well and good to do home testing but there is a need to get the gold standard test done by a doctor and that's the A1C blood test that should be done every three months, it's typically from this test that an endocrinologist will determine the need to put the patient on medication. The test measures the percentage of red blood cells that have sugar attached that have existed in the body for the past ninety days, no fasting is required for the test and it's inexpensive, I've been taking one monthly for the past three months so that I can see the changes/impact of different diets and is a useful test.

[metisdead]

Trolling nonsense post has been removed.

[sustento]

www.bloodsugar101.com

[chiang mai]

www.bloodsugar101.com

Indeed, we've already posted that link at the start of this thread but it's a good reminder, it's a great site.

[Ulysses G.]

Glycemic Load is more accurate than the Glycemic Index. Just one example is pumpkin which is high on the index, but low on the GL. Pumpkin is a good food for diabetics. Watermelon is another good example. http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/foods-high-on-the-glycemic-index-but-low-on-glycem.html

Pumpkin, carrots and potatoes are not good for diabetics. They'll send BG sky high in diabetics and pre-diabetics.

You are right about potatoes, but pumpkin and carrots are low Gycemic Load.

Glycemic Load

Dr. Jonny Bowden, Ph.D., a clinical nutrition specialist and author of the book "The 150 Healthiest Foods on Earth," suggests that you should absolutely not let the glycemic index of carrots deter you from eating them, even if you are on a diet. Bowden explains that glycemic load, rather than the glycemic index, is a far more significant measuring stick for how a food affects your blood sugar and insulin levels. Dr. Bowden points out that carrots have a glycemic load of 3, which he calls "ridiculously low." Despite the low-to-moderate glycemic index rating, carrots are very unlikely to significantly affect your blood sugar. If you are a diabetic, please talk to your doctor if you have not been eating carrots and wish to add them to your diet.

Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/418408-the-glycemic-index-of-carrots/#ixzz2SqgPgb2M

[tropo]

Glycemic Load is more accurate than the Glycemic Index. Just one example is pumpkin which is high on the index, but low on the GL. Pumpkin is a good food for diabetics. Watermelon is another good example. http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/foods-high-on-the-glycemic-index-but-low-on-glycem.html

Pumpkin, carrots and potatoes are not good for diabetics. They'll send BG sky high in diabetics and pre-diabetics.

You are right about potatoes, but pumpkin and carrots are low Gycemic Load.

Glycemic Load

Dr. Jonny Bowden, Ph.D., a clinical nutrition specialist and author of the book "The 150 Healthiest Foods on Earth," suggests that you should absolutely not let the glycemic index of carrots deter you from eating them, even if you are on a diet. Bowden explains that glycemic load, rather than the glycemic index, is a far more significant measuring stick for how a food affects your blood sugar and insulin levels. Dr. Bowden points out that carrots have a glycemic load of 3, which he calls "ridiculously low." Despite the low-to-moderate glycemic index rating, carrots are very unlikely to significantly affect your blood sugar. If you are a diabetic, please talk to your doctor if you have not been eating carrots and wish to add them to your diet.

Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/418408-the-glycemic-index-of-carrots/#ixzz2SqgPgb2M

There's just so much more to it in reality. Each person will respond differently to different foods. A diabetic should not be making food choices based on a theory - they should test after foods to see the real numbers and adjust accordingly. A large serving of carrots and pumpkin will most likely shoot a diabetic blood sugar sky high.

[Sheryl]

The relative importance of glycemic index vs load are not just "theory" they are well understood science.

And indeed it is the glycemic load that is most important.

The problem with the glycemic index is that it is based on 50 gm of carbs from that particular food. Carrots are only 7% digestible carb (as opposed to fiber) so to get 50 gm you'd have to eat a pound and a half of carrots, which of course no one does. Conversely, since white bread is totally usable carbs, its glycemic index actually understates how bad it is.

The glycemic load was introduced specifically to deal with this problem; it is equal to the amount of usable carb in the average serving of the food times the GL.

It is generally recommended to avoid foods with a glycemic load of 10 or more. The GL of carrots is only 3. That of pumpkin is likewise about the same at 3-4. (white rice is a whopping 23).

Hence, carrots and pumpkin in normal serving sizes are fine for diabetics.

[chiang mai]

I admit to not fully understanding GL, must do some reading up on it.

[murph33]

i am a diabetic.. let's make this short. do not eat anything WHITE. white bread, potatoes, rice, sugar and salt. remember. carbohydrates are converted to sugar as the body metabolizes it. no beer. 2,000 per day. if you weigh 200lbs.

[tropo]

The relative importance of glycemic index vs load are not just "theory" they are well understood science.

It is indeed "theory" until it has been tested in practice by the person eating them.

Diabetics should not rely on theory, but test everything they eat.

If you've ever spent time reading on diabetic forums you'll discover that what one person can tolerate is not universally the same experience with other people eating the same food.

In practice things just aren't that simple.

Pumpkins are very sweet and can easily cause spikes. So can carrots. GL is just a complicated way of working out the amount of digestible carbs in a food serving. Some pumpkins and carrots are very sweet. Obviously that sweetness is sugar.

[Sheryl]

The relative importance of glycemic index vs load are not just "theory" they are well understood science.

It is indeed "theory" until it has been tested in practice by the person eating them.

Diabetics should not rely on theory, but test everything they eat.

If you've ever spent time reading on diabetic forums you'll discover that what one person can tolerate is not universally the same experience with other people eating the same food.

In practice things just aren't that simple.

Pumpkins are very sweet and can easily cause spikes. So can carrots. GL is just a complicated way of working out the amount of digestible carbs in a food serving. Some pumpkins and carrots are very sweet. Obviously that sweetness is sugar.

Sorry but no, it is not.

The amount of digestible carbs in a food serving has long been known and doesn't need a special index or calculation.

The GL adjusts the GI to the amount of carbs in a serving, it is a more refined version in effect of the GI and has been shown to be the single most reliable predictor of the effect a given food will have on blood sugar, as it takes into account both how much carbohydrate there is AND how rapidly that carb is metabolized.

[jrtmedic]

Sheryl, you are arguing against an "expert" --- there are so many on this forum that I wonder why we bother !

[tropo]

Sheryl, you are arguing against an "expert" --- there are so many on this forum that I wonder why we bother !

Uncalled for flame.

She's arguing against someone who has been testing himself for 8 years and spent a fortune on tests and strips and done quite a bit of study.

Of course that doesn't mean I know everything, but it certainly doesn't mean I'm clueless either.

What's your experience?

Now if you've eaten a lot of carrots and pumpkin and can give us the postprandial test results, that could be helpful.

[sustento]

I'm an "expert" too. I too test my BG every day and thus I know what (for me) is the best food to eat to keep it under control. Like tropo I also know, from reading about other diabetic's experiences in diabetic forums, that reaction to different foods is different for different people.

[chiang mai]

I don't see that Sheryl and Tropo really diasgree on much at all here, Sheryl beileves that GL is a more refined way of viewing the GI whilst Tropo believes that everyone should test after every meal, regardless of how the components of a meal were selected, those two views seem to me to be very compatable and holding one view doesn't negate the other view.

Because I support the GI I can almost certainly support the concept of GL, the fact that I don't fully understand GL in practise yet is neither here nor there. But I will almost certainly continue to test several times a day and I can't see that changing even using GL, both seem to have great value.

And yes, white (bread/pasta/potatoes) is bad for most people and as an initial starting rule that's not a bad one to use to get some fast results. But as we progress and learn more about what our respective bodies can and cannot tolerate that rule will become flexible. For example, I can eat fried new potatoes more easily than I can eat fried old potatoes (less starch I guess) and for some odd reason I can eat the periodic sausage and egg mcmuffin (a pet favorite) without any negative impact whilst a white flour wrap produces disasterous results.

Edited May 10, 2013 by chiang mai

[tropo]

The relative importance of glycemic index vs load are not just "theory" they are well understood science.

It is indeed "theory" until it has been tested in practice by the person eating them.

Diabetics should not rely on theory, but test everything they eat.

If you've ever spent time reading on diabetic forums you'll discover that what one person can tolerate is not universally the same experience with other people eating the same food.

In practice things just aren't that simple.

Pumpkins are very sweet and can easily cause spikes. So can carrots. GL is just a complicated way of working out the amount of digestible carbs in a food serving. Some pumpkins and carrots are very sweet. Obviously that sweetness is sugar.

Sorry but no, it is not.

The amount of digestible carbs in a food serving has long been known and doesn't need a special index or calculation.

The GL adjusts the GI to the amount of carbs in a serving, it is a more refined version in effect of the GI and has been shown to be the single most reliable predictor of the effect a given food will have on blood sugar, as it takes into account both how much carbohydrate there is AND how rapidly that carb is metabolized.

I disagree that it's simple.

Using GL tables to guess what foods diabetics can eat is not the best way. It is complicated. No matter what the number on the GL table, you still have to know the total carb content of what you're eating.

Most diabetics who are intent on controlling their condition by diet work out the total carb content of meals.

If you read on forums you'll find that diabetics talk about grams of carbs consumed in a meal, not GL...and they test themselves after meals.

[chiang mai]

I agree that GL is not simple to understand, or perhaps I'm just thick! Fact is that it requires more effort and thought than simply using GI alone and perhaps I'm lazy also!! But I comit to learning GL and trying the approach to see if it benefits me.

[tropo]

I don't see that Sheryl and Tropo really diasgree on much at all here, Sheryl beileves that GL is a more refined way of viewing the GI whilst Tropo believes that everyone should test after every meal, regardless of how the components of a meal were selected, those two views seem to me to be very compatable and holding one view doesn't negate the other view.

Because I support the GI I can almost certainly support the concept of GL, the fact that I don't fully understand GL in practise yet is neither here nor there. But I will almost certainly continue to test several times a day and I can't see that changing even using GL, both seem to have great value.

Which leaves us with the "problem" of working out how to use GL tables?

They maybe useful to people who don't like to test themselves and therefore guess what they can eat based on the low GL foods. They can consume an "average" meal of the foods listed and hope they are ok.

Or used as a guide for diabetics who want to increase the quantity of food they can consume by picking low GL foods.

[chiang mai]

Regardless of the value of GL I cannot see myself ever giving up testing, that doesn't mean that GL shouldn't be used also.

[tropo]

I agree that GL is not simple to understand, or perhaps I'm just thick! Fact is that it requires more effort and thought than simply using GI alone and perhaps I'm lazy also!! But I comit to learning GL and trying the approach to see if it benefits me.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds it complicated. Maybe I'm thick too.

I would be interested to hear from any diabetics or pre-diabetics about how to use them in a practical manner.

I can only see it as a guide to what foods are likely to be safer. I'm sure you're not going to replace regular testing with GL tables and guess work. I'd say by now you're pretty in tune to what foods are good and bad due to your frequent testing.

[robblok]

I'm an "expert" too. I too test my BG every day and thus I know what (for me) is the best food to eat to keep it under control. Like tropo I also know, from reading about other diabetic's experiences in diabetic forums, that reaction to different foods is different for different people.

I don't have to test it that much anymore but I too saw that people react different to the same foods and on the amount. 60 grams of oats is fine for me 100 grams is not.

Those tabels are nice to give a bit of direction but real tests beats them all because then you know how you respond.

Seems there is here a clash of book wisdom vs practical wise. The so called experts don't seem to want to believe the people who live with it and do the tests.

To add that does not mean both can't be right and Tropo is just strang in his reaction to carrots.. I can't say as I have never tested it and I am not overly fond of carrots.

Edited May 11, 2013 by robblok

[tropo]

To add that does not mean both can't be right and Tropo is just strang in his reaction to carrots.. I can't say as I have never tested it and I am not overly fond of carrots.

I don't have any strange reaction to carrots. I was talking generally about possibilities.

When I eat carrots (cooked) they are part of a meal, not the main event. As there is only a small serving it would be impossible to determine their effect on my BG readings.

I'm not a carrot lover, but I absolutely adore pumpkin.

[Ulysses G.]

Seems there is here a clash of book wisdom vs practical wise. The so called experts don't seem to want to believe the people who live with it and do the tests.

Not really. Some posters were giving advice by relying on the Glycemic Index, but for some foods the results are flawed. Glycemic load is based on testing of real people and is more exact than the Glycemic Index. The results do not apply to everyone, but that is true of the Glycemic Index as well.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Ulysses G.

[tropo]

Seems there is here a clash of book wisdom vs practical wise. The so called experts don't seem to want to believe the people who live with it and do the tests.

Not really. Some posters were giving advice by relying on the Glycemic Index, but for some foods the results are flawed. Glycemic load is based on testing of real people and is more exact than the Glycemic Index. The results do not apply to everyone, but that is true of the Glycemic Index as well.

There is a clash. It's always like this. There's always so many book "experts" (or Google experts these days) giving advice on what to eat, yet these "experts" have never drawn one drop of blood to test themselves.

I'll put money down that if a diabetic sits down to a decent plate of carrots and pumpkin he's going to get a considerable blood sugar spike. These are very sweet vegetables with loads of sugar. The problem is that these veges are usually just part of a more balanced meal and everything eaten has an effect on blood sugar so it's difficult to isolate the effect of individual foods.

I'd test myself to prove it, but right now I'm tolerating carbs so well that even a bar of chocolate doesn't raise my BG by much.

[chiang mai]

There's an aspect of self testing that the OP needs to be familiar with:

Most people test their levels of blood glucose first thing in the morning and this is refered to as the fasting level of blood glucose, unfortunately it's quite common to get false readings because of a condition known as Dawn Phenomenon so it's helpful to know why/how this happens and how to manage it. Dawn Phenomenon is a trick the body plays when it thinks it's time to wake up and that the body will need glucose for energy and starts to flood the blood stream with glucon (glucose). This can happen anywhere from about 3.0am onwards and the first most people know it's happened is when they self test and see an unusually high reading - I suffered from this for about five weeks before I figuered out what was happening and eventually came to realise that my fasting levels were not actually that high after all.

The way to manage the above for me was to eat something small such as a piece of cheese or ham or similar, wait about five minutes and test again, if it was Dawn Phenomenon the second test result will be substantially lower than the first since the intake of protein will have caused the digestive system and the metabolism to reset.

There's a partner condition to DP called the Somogyi Effect (SE) which involves a rebound of high blood sugar followed by very low blood sugar (night sweats can be a signiifcant clue to this). Apparently the work around for this one is to eat a small amount of protein before going to sleep but since I've never suffered from this you'd be best advised to do some research first - oddly, neither of the two endocrinologists I have seen here have known anything about either DP or SE!

Finally, if you think the overnight numbers are being falsely generated and are either abnormally high or low, the only real test I'm afraid is to do some self testing during the small hours to see whther your glucose level is high, low or normal..

[chiang mai]

Hey guys, I wonder if we can perhaps put the discussion on GL to one side, the OP is newly diagnosed and is looking for information in specific areas and it's probably not that helpful to her for us to engage in a debate on the pro's and cons of GL? Instead, perhaps we can all think back to our early days on this front and to try and recall what information we found subsequently that would have been really useful to know on day one?

[Issangeorge]

Testing strips can become quite expensive. Does anyone know where they can be purchased cheaply?

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 6 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[chiang mai]

Testing strips can become quite expensive. Does anyone know where they can be purchased cheaply?

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 6 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The best deal I've found is at Fascino's with a discount card but still not cheap, I reckon that the choice of tester today is driven by the cost of the strips - I use codefree. Actually, if you can buy them overseas they are much cheaper, even in the UK via Amazon they are half the price of Thailand.

[tropo]

There's a partner condition to DP called the Somogyi Effect (SE) which involves a rebound of high blood sugar followed by very low blood sugar (night sweats can be a signiifcant clue to this). Apparently the work around for this one is to eat a small amount of protein before going to sleep but since I've never suffered from this you'd be best advised to do some research first - oddly, neither of the two endocrinologists I have seen here have known anything about either DP or SE!

You're being far too kind. The fact that your highly paid endocrinologists know nothing of DP or SE is not odd - it's shocking.

At least DP is very well known amongst pro-active, self help diabetics.

I wouldn't pay them a cent more after discovering that shocking fact.

[tropo]

Hey guys, I wonder if we can perhaps put the discussion on GL to one side, the OP is newly diagnosed and is looking for information in specific areas and it's probably not that helpful to her for us to engage in a debate on the pro's and cons of GL? Instead, perhaps we can all think back to our early days on this front and to try and recall what information we found subsequently that would have been really useful to know on day one?

I think you've just provided the most useful information on this thread i.e. Don't put too much faith (and money) into endocrinologists.

Your advice to become actively involved on a diabetic forum is the second best advice so far. The US diabetes forum is a good one. I joined that one in 2007. You can read my posts under the handle Tropo.