If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
TheDaveŠ wrote:
Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
"If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are
eating that is harming you:" Just one of the obvious flaws in the two pound diet. In it good nutrition in food choices is downplayed or ignored. The two pound diet is yet again found to be trash science and does not cure diabetes as claimed. The author of the two pound diet does not keep up with the diabetic literature, willfully distorts science in pursuit of a non-scientific agenda, ignores research contrary to his claims; reason enough to ignore his advice because the truth is not in him. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
On Apr 20, 3:38 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet. There is no human disease assigned to a diet of pizza, mac, and pepsi. What? You have got to be joking! 1) Scurvy 2) Dental caries 3) Type 2 diabetes 4) Hyperlipoproteinanaemia 5) Spots 6) Insomnia ....and much more. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
On Apr 20, 10:38 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet. I am sorry to say that I have been overeating all my life. I am trying to control it now. I like the idea of living under one kilogram food. Do you follow this yourself as well? I'll try to see if I am able to control how much I eat. I'll email you of my progress There is no human disease assigned to a diet of pizza, mac, and pepsi. Still it's best not to eat it though May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love, Do pray for me to lose weight, find a wife, and a better job Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhDhttp://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be
harming him/herself? "Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet." True, in the same way sunburns are caused by sun rises. There is ample evidence to show clearly what one eats is part of the mets story, and just as important the reduced level of physical activity. This is why the two pound science is trash science because it relies on this kind of simple minded distorted consideration of the entire source of causes in mets. It ignores or grossly underplays nutrition and ignores exercise completely. The author of the two pound diet has not kept up with medical and scientific literature, distorts scientific knowledge and methods in pursuit of a non-scientific agenda, willfully ignores scientific evidence to the contrary of his agenda; all reasons to ignore him because the truth is not in him on this area. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
On Apr 20, 10:38 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet. There is no human disease assigned to a diet of pizza, mac, and pepsi. Well, yeah, there is. It's deficient. I don't see crack listed anywhere. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
On Apr 20, 10:38 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet. There is no human disease assigned to a diet of pizza, mac, and pepsi. May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhDhttp://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - In some people the overconsumtion of sugar and other simple carbohydrates that turn quickly into sugar can led to insulin resistance independant of the amount . Eating both the right amount and the right kind of food is critical to optimal health many diesease can be caused by poor diet. Most high glycemic diets contain to much sugar and to many "empty calories, vince |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss - study
neighbor bigvince wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: TheDaveŠ wrote: Note that this appears to be geared toward weight loss, and not diabetic blood glucose control, but I thought some here might find it of interest, anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070419/...ycemic_load_dc "Glycemic load" of diet has no effect on weight loss By Amy Norton 1 hour, 9 minutes ago NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - When it comes to losing weight, the number of calories you eat, rather than the type of carbohydrates, may be what matters most, according to a new study. The findings, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggest that diets low in "glycemic load" are no better at taking the pounds off than more traditional -- and more carbohydrate-friendly -- approaches to calorie-cutting. The concept of glycemic load is based on the fact that different carbohydrates have different effects on blood sugar. White bread and potatoes, for example, have a high glycemic index, which means they tend to cause a rapid surge in blood sugar. Other carbs, such as high-fiber cereals or beans, create a more gradual change and are considered to have a low glycemic index. The measurement of glycemic load takes things a step further by considering not only an individual food's glycemic index, but its total number of carbohydrates. A sweet juicy piece of fruit might have a high glycemic index, but is low in calories and grams of carbohydrate. Therefore, it can fit into a diet low in glycemic load. However, the effort of figuring out what's an allowable carb might not be worth it, if the new study is any indication. Principal investigator Dr. Susan B. Roberts, of Tufts University, Boston, and colleagues found that a reduced-calorie diet, whether glycemic load was high or low, was effective in helping 34 overweight adults shed pounds over one year. Study participants who followed a low-glycemic-load diet ended up losing roughly 8 percent of their initial weight, as did those who followed a high-glycemic-load diet. "The bottom line is that in this study we don't see one single way to eat that is better for weight loss on average," Roberts told Reuters Health. Of course, that doesn't mean "anything goes" as long as you're cutting calories." A super-sized serving of French fries won't do any dieter any good, she noted. Both diets her team used in the study were carefully controlled. For the first 6 months, participants were provided with all the food they needed, and both diets were designed to cut their calories by 30 percent while providing the recommended amount of fiber, limiting fat and encouraging healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. The comparable outcomes suggest that, among healthy diets, no single one stands out as better, according to Roberts. So the focus should be on calories, rather than specific foods to avoid or include. "Focusing on calories is something we need more of, especially when portion sizes are so absurd," Roberts said, referring to the portions served at so many U.S. restaurants. This doesn't mean, however, that there's no place for diets that focus on glycemic load, according to the researcher. Some studies, for example, have found that low-glycemic index foods might help control blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes. And in their own research, Roberts said she and her colleagues have found that low-glycemic index diets do seem more effective for overweight people who naturally secrete high levels of the hormone insulin, which regulates blood sugar. SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2007. If you are overeating, it is not what you eating but how much you are eating that is harming you: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp But Doc. Won't a person living on pizza, mac, and pepsi will be harming him/herself? Metabolic syndrome (MetS) arises from overeating and not from any one specific diet. There is no human disease assigned to a diet of pizza, mac, and pepsi In some people the overconsumtion of sugar and other simple carbohydrates that turn quickly into sugar can led to insulin resistance independant of the amount . Internally contradictory. Without visceral adipose tissue (VAT) there is no insulin resistance. VAT arises from overeating. May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
when is it "good enough"? (the obsession of weight loss) | determined | General Discussion | 20 | November 7th, 2006 02:17 AM |
Bad Headlines 101: "Weight Loss Could Signal Future Dementia In Women" | Kirk Is | General Discussion | 2 | July 17th, 2006 09:18 PM |
Claim, weight loss "cures" diabetes | [email protected] | General Discussion | 8 | June 13th, 2006 11:33 PM |
Google "Aspartame" and you get "toxic diet soda" | [email protected] | General Discussion | 0 | May 5th, 2006 08:29 PM |
Low-Glycemic Load Diet Facilitates Weight Loss in Overweight Adults with High Insulin Secretion | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 4 | December 16th, 2005 01:31 PM |