Diabetic (alt.food.diabetic) This group is for the discussion of controlled-portion eating plans for the dietary management of diabetes.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Low-glycemic diet better to control diabetes

Measure of glucose levels fell more compared to high-fiber diet

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28262223/

Nova
  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 319
Default Low-glycemic diet better to control diabetes

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:47 -0800, "Nova" <None> wrote:

>Measure of glucose levels fell more compared to high-fiber diet
>
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28262223/
>
>Nova


Repeating my answer from a.s.d:

Here is the actual study:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/300/23/2742

Read the diet details. Although the "low glycemic index"
diet was better than the "diet rich in cereal fiber" it was
definitely not a low carb diet and should not be considered
such. It was the ADA diet with an emphasis on low GI.

From http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/300/23/2742
Effect of a Low€“Glycemic Index or a High€“Cereal Fiber Diet
on Type 2 Diabetes

"Dietary Interventions

General dietary advice conformed to the National Cholesterol
Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III26 and the
American Diabetes Association27 guidelines to reduce
saturated fat and cholesterol intakes. Most of the
participants were overweight (179/210 [85.2%], with body
mass index [BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided
by height in meters squared] of 25) or obese (113/210
[53.8%], BMI 30) and wished to lose weight. They were
informed that this was not a weight-loss study but
appropriate advice was given on portion size and fat intake
to help them meet their body weight objectives. Participants
were also provided with a checklist with either low€“glycemic
index or high€“cereal fiber food options from different
categories (breakfast cereals, breads, vegetables, fruit) as
approximately 15-g carbohydrate servings. The number of
carbohydrate servings prescribed covered 42% to 43% of total
dietary calories.

In the low€“glycemic index diet, the following foods were
emphasized: low€“glycemic index breads (including
pumpernickel, rye pita, and quinoa and flaxseed) and
breakfast cereals (including Red River Cereal [hot cereal
made of bulgur and flax], large flake oatmeal, oat bran, and
Bran Buds [ready-to-eat cereal made of wheat bran and
psyllium fiber]), pasta, parboiled rice, beans, peas,
lentils, and nuts (Table 1). In the high€“cereal fiber diet,
participants were advised to take the "brown" option (whole
grain breads; whole grain breakfast cereals; brown rice;
potatoes with skins; and whole wheat bread, crackers, and
breakfast cereals) (Table 1). Six servings were prescribed
for a 1500-kcal diet, 8 servings for a 2000-kcal diet, and
10 servings for a 2500-kcal diet. Detailed advice was also
given to avoid starchy foods not directly recommended as
part of the treatment, including those foods advised in the
alternative treatment."
<snip>
"There were no treatment differences at baseline (Table 2),
with the exception of more carbohydrate and less fat
consumed before the high€“cereal fiber diet compared with the
low€“glycemic index diet (Table 3). By the end of the study,
although carbohydrate intake increased similarly on both
treatments, fiber intake increased slightly more with the
low€“glycemic index diet (18.7 g/1000 kcal at week 24) than
with the high€“cereal fiber diet (15.7 g/1000 kcal at week
24; P < .001). The glycemic index decreased with the
low€“glycemic index diet (from 80.8 to 69.6 glycemic index
units) compared with an increase in the high€“cereal fiber
diet (from 81.5 to 83.5 glycemic index units), indicating
adherence with the low€“glycemic index diet (P < .001) (Table
3)"

Now have a look at Figure 2.

There were definite improvements. But by our standards they
would hardly have led to "Snoopy happy dance" celebrations.
Just a couple of examples, using approximate numbers from
the Figure 2. For the low-GI group fasting BGS went from 140
to 130, A1c went from 7.2 to 6.6, trigs went from 129 to 125
and HDL went from 42 to 44 (with a trigs/HDL change from 3.1
to 2.8 ). Later I may get the time to find the detailed
numbers in the text.

And that underwhelming improvement occurred over six months.

Read Jenny's latest blog for a deeper examination:
http://diabetesupdate.blogspot.com/2...c-diet-in.html

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
--
d&e, metformin 2000 mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com (The Diabetes Diet Wars)
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com (Two Indian Hotels: to Sleep, Perchance...)
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Low-glycemic-load Diet (forwarded from the sci.med.nutrition andalt.support.diabetes newsgroups) Bryan Simmons General Cooking 6 12-01-2012 09:55 PM
New : Diabetes control made easy peter sponge Diabetic 1 19-08-2009 06:48 AM
Get Control over Diabetes Naturally [email protected] Diabetic 16 03-07-2008 06:24 PM
Low-Glycemic Load Diet Facilitates Weight Loss in Overweight Adultswith High Insulin Secretion Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD General Cooking 2 16-12-2005 01:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"