No such thing as bad carbs?
If you find it difficult to say no to so-called "bad' carbs like white bread, potatoes, and sweets, Dr. Glenn Gaesser has good news for you! Having analyzed hundreds of studies on the effects of carbs and weight gain, Dr. Gaesser has concluded that high-carbohydrate or high-glycemic diets don't lead to weight gain. (Read more about the glycemic index on our Gycemic Index topic page.)
According to Dr. Gaesser, author of It's the Calories, Not the Carbs, people who eat high carbohydrate diets tend to be thinner and healthier than people who don't. Furthermore, he says, high glycemic foods are not necessarily unhealthy and do not impede weight loss efforts.
Of course, this runs contrary to the current dietary dogma, which holds that excessive consumption of high glycemic carbohydrates (foods that cause a quick, sharp rise in blood sugar) can increase your risk of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Most nutritionists also advise dieters to emphasize low-glycemic (or "good") carbohydrates for better appetite control.
My take on Dr. Gaesser's contrarian view?
I agree with Dr. Gaesser that a high carbohydrate diet--even one full of high glycemic foods--can work for weight loss as long as the total calorie intake is low enough. But I still believe that a healthy diet (whether for weight loss or not) should emphasize mostly low-glycemic carbohydrates for several reasons: They tend to be higher in fiber, vitamins, minerals, and disease-fighting phytonutrients. They also keep your energy and hunger levels steadier than high gycemic foods.
Dr. Gaesser concedes that the scientific literature does show that diabetics and those who are obese are better off on a low-glycemic diet. And last I checked, that describes a large portion of Americans. So I'm not sure that "no bad carbs" is the most helpful message to be putting out. What do you think?
Do you think you would change your views or practices based on Dr. Gaesser's research?
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| Chocolate Milk: Better than Sports Drinks? | | Nutrition Data Blog | | Too much perfume? Could be a zinc deficiency. |
Posted by: JX | Nov 17, 2009 9:17:42 AM
I found some relatively high glycemic index foods such as potato, white rice or pasta quite efficient in creating satiety, even in small quantities (say 25g of carbonhydrate). I ate them together with so-called green vegetables while on diet : for instance potato with a leek soup, rice with spinach, pasta in ratatouille...
Anyway I don't believe that a healthy diet should eliminate sugar, non-whole grain, saturated fat, etc. Food is culture, not only nutrition. Any diet ignoring culture is doomed to fail. And one can't control caloric intake only through nutrition as long as disorders such as binge eating are present, without addressing causes.
Posted by: dorian | Oct 7, 2009 8:02:19 PM
In an effort to loose 5 pounds I tried eating the least amlunt of carbs that I could. Did not loose anymore than one would on a low caloric healthy diet. I agree with Dr. Gaesser, sticking to a lower calorie is what counts. Input vs. Output is about how it happens.
Posted by: Ben | Oct 5, 2009 3:17:48 PM
Folks... read "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes... this will answer all your questions. Then commit to eating a Paleo Diet in the proportions that Barry Sears suggests in his "Mastering the Zone" diet book. You'll drop to the right weight, and live healthy the rest of your life... and get all the nutrition/vitamins/minerals you need from your diet... that's right, you won't need suppliments. Doesn't that say it all?
Posted by: Alex (mtflight) | Sep 18, 2009 6:04:45 PM
Dr. Gaesser cherry picked a set of epidemiological studies (usually based on food questionnaires), then he ran his own set of calculations on the numbers.
In essence he is not a medical doctor and has likely never treated anyone for obesity.
This report is in line with most of the American Dietetic Association's nutritionists who insist "a calorie is a calorie!" and by doing so completely ignore the body's inherent biochemistry. No hormones involved, just calories. This fails to explain obese people who consume fewer calories than non obese people, and other phenomena.
Credit for why we came to believe calories and exercise regulate weight, goes to Jean Mayer, allegedly the most influential nutritionist in the country. His predecessors were actual physicians who worked closely with obese patients, but his expertise was in physiological chemistry and dissertation involved vitamin status of rats.
Among hundreds of papers published many were hypotheses about how we get fat, yet he never had to reduce obese patients in clinical setting. It was all hypothetical, without any practice.
By 1959, the New York Times credited him with having “debunked popular theories” that exercise played little role in weight control. In clinical practice exercise (And calorie restriction did not successfully ever regulate weight. Dr. Mayer died of a heart attack, at age 72.
This guy, basically has no idea and no practice. He is "book smart," with the exception of the fact that epidemiological studies are not conclusive evidence of ANYTHING. They merely help us decide where to look further, and use the gold standard of studies to find out if one thing is true or not in real life. "randomized control studies" double blind etc.
My $0.02 let's debate and not argue.
Cheers and to good health!
Alex
Posted by: Matt | Sep 7, 2009 2:07:42 PM
Is there such a thing as bad carbs? yeah, but I found eating some carbs really helps lose weight. Rather than restricting calories or carbs, eating nutritious carbs (not necessairly low GI) at breakfast will keep you full for hours. I drain homemade pineapple juice with ginger and am rapidly losing weight. I have no objection to fruits or vegetables, and I have completely replaced whole grains with legumes. The only reason is I slightly disagree with diets like atkins or south beach is most meals dont reach the standard nutrition daily values. Im a 15 year old kid, eat 2,000 calories a day, and usually pack in around 200% of about everything on a 45-25-30 diet. and its worked brilliantly, as I have lost 23 pounds on it. Eat your carbs, just the right ones.
Posted by: Khendra | Aug 31, 2009 2:30:00 AM
Reducing carbs or fats had no impact on my weight, but reducing calories had a HUGE impact on it. However, I did find that carbs and fats matter for exercise: I CANNOT run for long without 80+ complex carbs one hour prior to exercise (rice works the best for me), and I CANNOT lift weights or build muscle as efficiently if I don't include mono- and poly-unsaturated fats with good protein beforehand.
Posted by: Anne | Aug 25, 2009 3:12:23 PM
Reducing "bad" carbs has done miracles for me. I followed the S. Beach diet and even cheated a bit. Basically, I eliminated flours and refined sugar from my daily diet and it has virtually eliminated a powerful sweet tooth that plagued me for 48 years! It also focused me on great snack foods like all sorts of nuts, low fat cheese, dips, salsa, avocados, sweet peppers...now I crave these instead! I also think that meats and cheeses, foods with fat, definitely satiate my hunger for many more hours than anything with grains or sugar. I have lost 28 lbs having never been hungry once and never counting a single calorie or carb, for that matter. I am sold!
Posted by: Angela | Jul 26, 2009 12:48:37 PM
Its hilarious how the "experts" keep reporting that carbs have no effect on weight loss and health, however, personal experience for a wide range of people shows proof time and again of the opposite. I was a vegan for a decade and would have dropped the carbs from my diet had I not found out I had SIBO, which makes it nearly impossible to digest sugars and fibers. Now on low carb I feel fantastic and I've lost 30 lbs. I can never go back to a carb-laden diet of grains and sugars and I don't want to.
Posted by: Paul | Jun 11, 2009 12:46:38 AM
He's right that calories matter most -- and I'm not a big fan of GI, but I am of high-fibre carbohydrates because of the nutrient density implied. However, the more you exercise, the more you can get away with refined carbs and sugars.
Posted by: virginia | Jun 8, 2009 12:40:25 PM
I am definitely a low glycemic carb gal. I have lost 55 pounds on a very healthy diet- basically no processed foods and staying away from sugar, white flour, and starchy veggies. I am almost 50 and have never looked younger nor felt better! I eat all kinds of fruits and vegetables. My favorite greens are broccoli rabe steamed with a bit of salt and olive oil. They are almost the perfect food.
Posted by: mztiny | May 7, 2009 8:54:30 AM
All I know is that since I became conscious of the glycemic issue and limited my carbs to low index foods I have maintained my exact weight to the pound for 3 years without the slightest effort at "dieting," and without any increase in exercise. Once you get off the sugar habit you never miss it.
Posted by: Cindy | May 2, 2009 11:06:29 PM
I find eating the South Beach diet way is best for my body. I eat lean meats, lowfat dairy, tons of veggies (non-starchy), most fruits and whole grains. I have lost weight easily with this way of eating but had to starve myself previously on a lowfat/high carb diet to get down to the same weight I am now.
Posted by: Marc Thibault | Apr 8, 2009 4:17:29 PM
Sausages and butter-poached eggs, meat balls covered with melted gruyere, hot pepper tournedos, smoked salmon smeared with herbs and cream cheese, steamed sole in a butter-garlic sauce...need I go on?
Zero carbs. I eat really well, as much as I like, and I don't eat what food eats except as a garnish. I'm 66 years old and, according to my doctor, I'm doing well for 50; all levels nominal except my blood pressure is a shade below norms and I'm twenty pounds over ideal.
I get a good six hours sleep a night, haven't had a cold in a very long time, brain is clear and I have more energy than any of my friends.
Granted, an anecdote is only a sample of one but I started this only after hypoglycemia drove me to researching the research. The biochemistry supporting the low-carb hypothesis was much more convincing than the statistics supporting the low-fat hypothesis.
You haven't really tested the low-carb hypothesis unless you've gone on animal products only, 85% fat, lots of fish, for at least a month.
Posted by: ForexTeacher | Mar 28, 2009 7:53:42 AM
Great job with the info. How did you find it? Please let me know.
Posted by: Mis | Mar 26, 2009 7:35:00 AM
I agree that you should have carbs in your diet and should NEVER omit them. I don't agree with the whole carbs don't effect your weight if that is the case why do alot of body builders have to avoid refined carbs? Being in a few competitions myself. Not to mention the health problems they can contribute to if over eaten. I agree with ya3gouB everything needs to be balanced. Eat the good fats, Low glycemic carbs, and stay away from anything processed as much as possible. If you do buy processed go for organic.
Posted by: Bev | Mar 22, 2009 11:42:06 AM
Feeling better is an important goal for most of us. I used South Beach and lost weight, putting back on only a little when I went off and back to my eating habits of mostly unprocessed foods, including plenty of whole grains. What is most interesting for me, is that I felt better when I restricted my HG carbs and grains. I found this post as I was researching the diet debate again. Regardless of what current research says, I will take it all with a grain of salt knowing that additional research will likely change the discussion again and information about the author's interests will be revealed. My primary goal is to feel my best. HG carb restriction makes a big difference in the body I've been given to care for, so I'll comply and restrict those carbs.
Posted by: Aili | Mar 18, 2009 1:18:03 PM
Being thin and a life-long carb lover, I agree that carbs are not all bad. I have, in my adult years, tried to eat Foods with moe vitamins and minerals, regardless of whether they have complex or simple carbs -- fruits, for example, are sugary. If I'm cutting calories, I cut fats. I'll have a nice stack of pancakes for breakfast, with syrup, but skip the bacon.
Posted by: Doug LaLonde | Feb 7, 2009 10:59:49 PM
It's hard to believe, in this day and age,(or any other day and age), that an educated person with common sense could actually believe what Dr. Gaesser says about Hi-glycemic carbs. He's got to be working for the Junk Food Cartel.
Posted by: insulinfactory | Feb 5, 2009 11:41:34 AM
lets put an end to this mess... check out the documentary 'Fat Head" released last tuesday, and the books "protein power" by mike eades and "Slow Burn fitness revolution" by fred hahn. Educate yourselves and pay no attention to the so-called "Food Guide" and low-fat low-cal diets.
Posted by: ya3gouB | Jan 17, 2009 3:24:14 AM
Everything matters, fat, carbs, calories, and proteins, all you need is good management. Everytime scientists come up with something negating a previous thing. The brain needs carbs, glycogen stores replenish from carbs, the heart needs healthy fats, and almost everything else needs protein. Just stick to natural sources of everything. Screw processed meats, sugar-laden products and hydrogenated oils!
Posted by: Hector DeJesus | Dec 7, 2008 6:52:24 PM
About 5 months ago i was diagnosed withh type 2 diabetes, i was always a slim person due to my high matabilism i"m 57 is there a way for me to put on good weight to gain. I"m tired of going to these diabetic websites only to see how to loose weight. i"m taking oral meds and now 10 units of insulin.I"ve heard of people through proper diet manage to get off these meds through diet and excersise witch i"m doing.
Posted by: Pat in Ohio | Nov 30, 2008 9:00:21 PM
No way would this book influence me [and I don't intend to read it], because I've found what works for me and donuts sure aren't it. I've lost 50 pounds of fat while increasing my lean body mass. Waist down 9". My weight is healthy for my height. I swim for exercise and do some weightlifting.
My total cholesterol is down to 190 from 256 and best of all the good HDL cholesterol went up to 72, while the bad LDL is down to 101, so the LDL:HDL ratio is much improved. Fasting blood glucose dropped from borderline high to below average, likewise A1c [recently 5.3].
I have organic rolled oats for breakfast almost every day. On days that I swim, I add a scrambled or hardboiled Eggland's Best egg.
I started out following the "Carbohydrate Addict's Diet", but after a couple weeks, other books I was reading convinced me I didn't need to go to that extreme [starchy carbs only once a day]. But, I don't know how anyone could keep their weight under control eating a lot of sugary, white-flour low-nutrient foods. As soon as I eat those, I crave more. Best to just say no!
The Carb Addict's Diet has eye-opening information about glutamates in food and all the ways they can be listed (hidden)on the labels. I learned to avoid those, and also partially-hydrogenated oils that contain those nasty trans-fats.
I eat mostly whole grains [using the broader definition of that, not just seeds] and usually keep those to 3 servings a day, one each meal. White flour, no more than once a day, usually none. No more than 50 or so calories from sugary stuff most of the time. Maybe once a month have cake or something at a party, the occasional pasta or piece of pizza [about 5 times last year total]. That kind of stuff doesn't taste as good to me as it used to, though.
Nuts are healthy and a good source of additional calories if needed. One study showed men losing weight, especially fat, while eating 3 ounces of almonds a day! That would be way too much for 115-pound me, but I have 1/2 ounce or so most days.
I try to stick with healthy fats, such as nuts, olive oil, canola oil, walnut oil; Smart Balance margarine occasionally in cooking or on whole wheat bread.
You don't have to increase red meat [which I take to mean beef, pork, lamb, etc.] to raise protein. Beans and rice are a complete protein source if you eat both. Brown rice, mahogany rice, wild rice, are all delicious. Chicken, turkey [not the sodium-solution "enhanced" = adulterated versions],and fish are healthier choices than red meat. Also scallops, crab, shrimp, etc. sometimes.
Did you know spinach is fairly high in protein for a vegetable? That's because of the high levels of RuBP, a photosynthesis-related enzyme which occurs in all green tissues: the darker green, the more RuBP.
I usually eat at least 6 servings of non-starchy vegetables a day, and 2 or 3 of fruit. If you do that you'd be surprised how filling those foods can be. Add herbs and spices to rev up the flavor, keep salt to a minimum. I love balsamic vinegar on cooked spinach.
I was sold on the value of veggies & fruits by this book: "The Color Code: A Revolutionary Eating Plan For Optimum Health" by James Joseph, Daniel Nadeau, and Anne Underwood. The "Volumetric Eating Plan" by Barbara Rolls has a lot of valuable information. Also, "Thin Tastes Better" by Stephen Gullo inspired me. It has a lot of pithy aphorisms to remind you of your real goals, and keep you thinking about what you're putting in your mouth, and why.
That's my plan and I'm sticking to it!
Posted by: Jim Broun | Nov 23, 2008 8:45:49 PM
It would be great if this Dr.'s study was backed up in any way by research.
Balance is the key...
JMD's post nails it, but suggests studies are incomplete.
Check out any of Dr. Barry Sears' books (In The Zone) to see that there are completed studies.
I have know a lot of soldiers who used the Atkins diet to lose a lot of weight quickly and relatively healthily. Those who went back to their old routine gained it all back. Those who went to a balanced diet (like the Zone) kept the weight off.
I personally have eaten without paying attention to what I ate for most of my life. I also work out like a fiend, which keeps me semi-trim. The week I started eating 'in the zone', my performance went through the roof when I worked out. I also was able to get my BF% down to levels I never have before - and I am now 40.
Everyone I know who has jumped on this bandwagon (everyone) has experienced the same results. Some people just do not like limiting their pastas, cereals, breads, and deserts.
Posted by: JMD | Nov 5, 2008 1:08:23 PM
"LPL activity is increased by insulin, while HSL activity is inhibited by insulin. So when insulin is high, fatty acids tend to flow into the cell, and when insulin is low, they tend to flow out."
True enough, but this is not the entire picture. Studies have shown that ingestion of a low carbohydrate meal or intravenous infusion of a pure fat load also increases the activity of LPL and decreases the activity of HSL. {Effects of an oral and intravenous fat load on adipose tissue and forearm lipid metabolism. Am J Physiol. 1999 Feb;276(2 Pt 1):E241-8}.
From the study:
~"Intracellular lipolysis, as shown by the calculated rate of HSL action, was suppressed almost completely with both oral and intravenous fat load. Insulin is a major regulator of HSL activity, yet this showed only a slight increase after the oral lipid load and a gradual decrease during and after the intravenous load. It seems that suppression of HSL activity can occur without insulin."
~"TAG extraction (a reflection of LPL action) in adipose tissue increased with both oral and intravenous lipid loads, similar to the pattern seen after a mixed meal. A marked increase in LPL activity has previously been seen with a pure fat infusion. This increase in LPL action (without an increase in insulin concentration) is in contrast to the lack of increase in LPL action in obese subjects (where there is a state of insulin resistance), implying that the lack of an increase in LPL action in obese subjects cannot be simply a lack of effective insulin action."
"To fix fatty acids as triglycerides, the fat cell must manufacture alpha glycerol phosphate (AGP) which ultimately forms the glycerol backbone of the triglyceride. The main source for manufacture of AGP is glucose..."
True when blood glucose is readily available. When it's not, a biochemical pathway called glyceroneogenesis comes into play. Glyceroneogenesis produces glycerol phosphate from non-glucose precursors such as lactate, pyruvate, and certain amino acids. It is down-regulated when insulin is high, but up-regulated when insulin is low.
I'm not saying that easily digestible carbs and very high insulin levels play no role in weight gain. However, the science presented by many low carb diet advocates (meaning those who write books on the subject, not lay people who read them) is usually incomplete. This prevents people from making informed decisions about their health. I know that many people have had great success with low carb diets and feel that their weight loss was essentially effortless, but what about those who struggle? For some, maybe even the majority, calories still matter to some degree.
Posted by: Liza Jane | Nov 1, 2008 8:29:17 PM
I limit my carbs, especially those that throw my sugar levels into high gear - "high gear" many times leaves me with very strong feelings of more, more, more, followed by major crashes if I'm not strong enough to resist. As such, I'm better off avoiding whenever possible.
Posted by: Jane Smith | Oct 25, 2008 12:57:43 PM
My father has stopped eating carbs to "lose weight" and is now telling my family that every time you eat carbs you get fat, I have known that this isnt correct and now thanks to this artical I will go and buy the book "Its not the Carbs Its Calories" and give it to him. If any one has any other ideas to help my father lose weight, with out any sugar intake-he is diabetic, than please post more blogs about weight loss. Thank You -Jane
Posted by: Sandradee | Sep 18, 2008 8:07:54 AM
All carbs are not created equal. Low glycemic load carbs break down in the body slower especially when protein is added. Eating while fluff carbs only add empty calories with no nutritional value. My question is: What white flour and white sugar study paid him off?
Posted by: Gus from California | Aug 31, 2008 3:28:17 AM
I am a Type II diabetic with a unusual problem. A large male, I need 1600 calories a day just to hold my weight. But I also have the beginnings of diabetic problems (neuropathy, irregular heart beats, etc ad nauseum.) So clearly I have to control my blood sugar. Working with a dietician to develope a routine, we have to first portion to net carbs (after subtracting fiber carbs)and stay within 200 a day. Then jack up the calories with fats and protein to get to the 1600 calories. It also pays to spread the meals over four or more a day, not two or three. That suggests a lot more red meat than most people are comfortable with. Cheeseburgers with no bun, wrapped in lettuce, like that. I eat what I want pretty much, but mostly in smaller portions. It works fine. My a1c is excellent, and my weight is holding up and even, dispite the reduced physical activity. A lot of bother at first, but you learn what to eat, and how much. Then it gets easier. At first, I had to do active full meat planning, usually for a few days ahead. MasterCook software helped with the planning using generous injections of data from the USDA database.
Posted by: Rhiannon | Aug 24, 2008 7:33:50 AM
I wonder which food processing company is paying Dr. Gaesser
Posted by: Casey | Aug 16, 2008 4:52:54 PM
I lost 30lbs by portion control, calorie watching, and recording everything I eat. I also started excercising. I did not give up pasta, rice, or potatoes, I just ate everything in moderation. It's an adjustment but to me it's worth it to be able to have a little bit of foods that I love than none at all.
Posted by: sue | Aug 1, 2008 4:44:02 AM
Dave Dixon's question is a very good one. What is the answer. Low carb isnow finally being recognised by GPs and consultants in the UK where I live. Daughter is type 23 diabetic and all controlled by Slimming World 'red' diet, or Atkins. Our GP is all for it for weight control as well. Thank goodness.
Posted by: Alli | Jul 18, 2008 3:40:16 PM
I beg to differ. I gained ten pounds on a vegan diet. My blood sugar went through the roof and I felt horrible. It did not matter if I ate low glycemic or not.
Quite simply, I got fat eating fruit and vegetables. Our bodies are composed of protein. We must eat mostly protein.
Once I added protein back and subtracted the majority of carbohydrates, everything normalized on its own.
Posted by: Dave | Jun 23, 2008 11:04:49 AM
Hi Monica. Could you possibly elucidate further on the hormonal/metabolic response? I'm very interested in learning the details of this process. Thanks!
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Jun 23, 2008 8:56:22 AM
Dave,
I think the effect of macronutrients on how the body stores excess energy is more relevant when the body is taking in enough calories to meet its metabolic needs. When you have an energy deficit, there is an entirely different hormonal/metabolic response.
Posted by: Dave Dixon | Jun 15, 2008 1:22:38 PM
Hi Monica. Maybe you can help me out. I've lost 80 lbs. on low-carb, and because of the obvious contradictions of the approach with recommendations of most health professionals, began digging in to the underlying metabolic science. At the level of hormones, molecules, and cells, the support for low-carb seems pretty solid, and I'm wondering what the corresponding evidence is for the "calories count" hypothesis.
Take, for instance, how fat gets stored in fat cells. Dietary fat is transported in the blood as triglycerides wrapped in lipoproteins. Fat inside the cell is also stored in triglyceride form. Triglycerides are too large to pass across the cell membrane of a fat cell, and so to get in or out, the constituent fatty acids must freed from the triglyceride. Outside of the cell this function is performed by the enzyme lipoprotein lipase (LPL), and inside the cell it is performed by hormone-sensitive lipase (HSL). LPL activity is increased by insulin, while HSL activity is inhibited by insulin. So when insulin is high, fatty acids tend to flow into the cell, and when insulin is low, they tend to flow out.
To fix fatty acids as triglycerides, the fat cell must manufacture alpha glycerol phosphate (AGP) which ultimately forms the glycerol backbone of the triglyceride. The main source for manufacture of AGP is glucose, which requires active transport across the cell membrane. Glucose transport is also up-regulated by insulin, and of course dietary carbohydrate provides an ample source of glucose.
Taken all together, we have a nice consistent metabolic picture of how carbs can cause excess fat storage (particularly if we consider how excess insulin usurps other regulatory mechanisms like appetite and GI motility), and also why carbohydrate restriction brings about loss of excess fat.
So my question is this: what is the corresponding metabolic explanation for caloric restriction? In other words, if "calories count" independent of macronutrient composition, the body must have some way of knowing this, converting/transporting excess calories into fat cells as controlled by hormones etc. What is the current understanding of this mechanism? Thanks.
Posted by: Lorena | Jun 8, 2008 3:38:02 PM
I am insulin-resistant, and for me, the high-carb, low-fat diets of the 80's and early 90's are what caused a huge weight gain for me. I can count calories as much as I want and never lose weight. Following a moderately low-carb diet (not anywhere near the extremes of Atkins) has worked wonders, not only regarding weight loss but with other aspects of my health. Yes, it does make a huge difference for some people!
Posted by: SkeeterN | May 29, 2008 12:17:25 PM
I have been eating low carb for 4 years. I am also very healthy and have been able to keep my weight off without having to starve myself or only eat "diet foods" I will never stop eating this way.This is not a diet for me but a life style change. Remember eating low carb is not just meat and eggs but plenty of healthy veges and low carb fruits. I just do not eat high carb items such as flour, sugar, rice, potatoes and corn. I pretty eat much of everything thing else.
Posted by: alex | May 8, 2008 11:03:40 AM
the caloric content of a food is just an illusion. The real importance is the macronutrient content. Both of these coexist together. The more macronutrients is in a particular food, the more calories its going to have. It's the bad carbohydrates that make us fat. Its not fat, and it's not protein. Looking at the macronutrients of a food is the same thing as looking at the caloric value-its just that its a more accurate and reliable way to choose your food. If calories were everything, than a high carb, low fat diet would be the best becuase you could eat the most food and not gain the weight. However, as we know now, those diets dont work at all, and we need fat to burn fat
Posted by: Essie | Apr 30, 2008 11:11:58 PM
After a recent surgery, I needed to regulate my digestive system with more fiber, so I began eating "good" carbs. I gained a little weight, which was all good because I had lost so much. BUT THEN I REALLY STARTED PACKING IT ON because I can't exercise as much as I did before the surgery (yet) and because carbs make me HUNGRY! I much prefer my high protein and vegetable diet that keeps my appetite (and thus my weight) under control. I don't think Dr. Gaesser has taken personality elements into consideration, either. The stick girls I know who eat a doughnut for breakfast, a candy bar for lunch and a pasta bowl for supper relish food not one bit.
Posted by: Joanne | Apr 28, 2008 12:26:23 PM
I have been on low calorie weight loss programs and not one of them have worked for me. I have been on low carb weight loss and have had HUGE success! For ME low carb is the only way to control my weight.
I have lost over 60 lbs and will never go back to bad carb eating.
I have been able to come off my B.P meds and I feel fabulous!
Some people will do well on low calorie programs and others will do better on low carb. EACH individual is different therefore each person needs to find what works for them and go with it!
Posted by: Tommy | Apr 14, 2008 7:43:14 PM
I have never been very concerned with what I eat. However, I do experience hypoglycemia often. As I am getting older (33) and fatter, I realize I must change something in my diet. I apprecite your comments and insights into the GI.
Posted by: imagine 050 | Apr 7, 2008 12:52:31 AM
I work daily with mental health consumers. These people care nothing about nutrition, carbs, sugars, and they don't care for whole grain products. They are all obese. Many have diabetes, and other serious health problems, but they do not care. Maybe there is something to controlling carbs and sugars, but for the mentally ill it is all about eating as much as you can as fast as you can. maybe I am simply venting, but a low carb, low sugar, low trans fat, high fiber diet has worked well for me. I am not on any medication and my LDL and HDL are both good. Diet and exercise are a lifestyle not a fad.
Posted by: jpatti | Mar 12, 2008 10:37:15 AM
Whether a diabetic should be on a low-carb diet has little to do with obesity. Elevated blood glucose causes kidney disease, heart disease, neuropathy, impotence, amputation, blindness and premature death. The risk of gaining weight pales in comparison.
Diabetics ought not eat more carbs than their blood glucose meter tells them they can, as the risks of doing so are unthinkable. In my experience, GI is much less relevant than GL - even low-GI carbs have to be limited in portion size in order to control bg.
Posted by: Jordan Hardy | Mar 4, 2008 2:21:32 PM
I think that, for your overall health, high GI foods should be avoided, but not at all eliminated. They can be quite a treat.
Of course, looking at your picture, donuts might not be the high-GI food to be promoting...
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 4, 2008 8:39:24 AM
I am type 2 Diabetic. I found High Fructose Syrup, sugar substitutes, and cholesterol medication to be the hardest factors to deal with (Blood sugar and energy wise). Eating a fat and protein with my carbs and not over eating. Eating often, and getting my fats from healthy sources and early in the day seem to be more important that what carbs I eat. I do not avoid Glucose or high glycemic foods. I use them as an opportunity to exercise or in reduced portions. I agree with the Doctor, but also agree
that many abuse high carb foods. Balance in everything to your needs is the key.
Posted by: hacote' | Feb 12, 2008 1:42:41 AM
i know from my own experience the 'empty hollow' feeling which DEMANDS that something/anything be put in to stop it, and if sweet poison is there, then that is what is reached for. But that is not a 'healthy hunger'-- it is the sensation of Early Starvation. And that is a place where many Americans reside, obese or not. We are truly a nation of 'overfed & undernourished people'.
Posted by: John Gray | Feb 7, 2008 11:20:13 PM
I think everyone with a weight problem should read, "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes. Very detailed, but it needs to be with this complex problem.
Posted by: bodyheal | Nov 18, 2007 8:52:03 AM
I really enjoy reading your comments. to me it is important to keep things in moderation. Also, have a heavy meal for breakfast or lunch, but keep dinner light. Stick to food that takes a longer time to digest and stop eating as soon as you feel full.I tend to eat slowly, so that I feel full before I actually complete my meal. I'd like to share more with you on my personal blog at www.bodyhealthadvisor.com
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Oct 31, 2007 5:50:57 PM
Daniel,
Remember that IF ratings are specific to serving size. So if 1 cup of a food has an IF Rating of -400, half as much would have an IF Rating of -200. So moderation is one big piece of the equation. Balance is the other. Grains, because of their glycemic load and high omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acid ratio, tend to be inflammatory. But that doesn't mean they can't be part of a healthy diet if you otherwise tolerate them. To avoid excess inflammation you want to eat moderate serving sizes and be sure that your diet ALSO includes plenty of anti-inflammatory nutrients, or high IF rated foods. I often use this analogy: apples can be part of a nutritious diet, but a diet of nothing but apples would be neither healthful nor balanced. Not only would a 100% apple diet have a high glycemic load but you'd be missing out on so many important nutrients (like protein and essential fatty acids). Does that help put the picture in better perspective?
Posted by: Daniel | Oct 30, 2007 4:41:43 PM
I still don't understand how it is possible to eat whole carb and still avoid inflammation.
It seems that all whole grains (barley, buckwheat, oats, spelt) are all very high inflammatory with score as negative as -400. I remember Monica claiming we should avoid any food which is more than less than -200 so I guess we just can't eat "whole grains" at all.
Any thought?
Posted by: Sigrid Junkermann | Oct 22, 2007 10:50:37 AM
I am not diabetic, but I clearly react to high glycemic index foods and drinks(they make me sleepy and/or simply uncomfortable) and feel that I can eat carbs, with impunity if I stick with the low GI ones (no discomfort). Also, if you watch "Big Sugar" the Canadian documentary, you will understand why sugar cane cutters are so slim. The film is here (lower image)
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/10/02/the-hidden-story-of-big-sugar.aspx, more about the documentary at this link: http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/bigsugar/filmmaker.html
Posted by: | Oct 15, 2007 5:28:25 AM
I have type 1 diabetes, and I check my blood glucose about 8 times a day and count how many carbs i eat for each meal, so that I know how much insulin to take for the meal. I have a total of about 200 grams of carbs per day. Carb counting and checking my blood glucose often, gives me a good picture of what a certain food will do to my blood glucose.
I find that the amount of carbs I eat for a meal has a much higher impact on my blood sugar than glycemic index. For breakfast I often have fruit, soy yogurt, crunchy muesli cereal and chocolate, so it contains both high-GI and low-GI foods, but it totals up to only 50g of carbs for a full bowl. My post-breakfast blood glucose may sometimes even be lower than when I got up, and my pre-lunch glucose may be higher than my post-breakfast glucose... so GI on its own is not a very good predictor of what actually happens to my blood glucose after a meal.
So I would agree with Dr. Gaesser that worrying about high-glycemic foods may be less important than counting calories (or carbs in my case), but I'm not sure it's clear from his study whether exercise is taken into the picture as well... I know exercise has a huge impact on my blood glucose, I know I will need much less insulin today after I ran 15km yesterday. I probably will need some high GI foods to avoid low blood glucose during the day, because my body is stocking back up on glucose it lost during the run.
Posted by: Cynthia | Oct 9, 2007 1:11:53 PM
I'm old enough to remember the argument that sugar wasn't an "evil ingredient" in food because sugar cane workers ate large amounts of sugar cane while chopping it, and all were uniformly trim and didn't suffer the ills sugar was supposed to produce in humans who consumed it. One component of that argument was that sugar provided the high energy needed for the workers to do their jobs and therefore it should not be demonized as a food. The problem, of course, for most of us is that we don't lead the lifestyle that would use up the empty "high energy" producing calories in sugar and other processed foods fast enough that the excess calories wouldn't be deposited as fat, and if we were to restrict our caloric intake sufficiently to eat only as much as we are using, there wouldn't be room in that diet for healthy nutrient rich foods. Our overall health would eventually suffer. I think our diets should change significantly over our lifetimes. I can remember inhaling many double whoppers at the golden arches in my 20's when I had toddlers. I couldn't even finish eating one now (and wouldn't want to).
Posted by: Chris | Oct 4, 2007 3:09:25 PM
I find that as soon as I eat carbs they go straight to my waistline, so I concentrate on eating a lot of fruit, veg and lean chicken and beef.
Posted by: Jackie Patti | Oct 3, 2007 8:40:09 PM
Nonstarchy vegetables and low-sugar fruits are obviously a much better carbohydrates choice than any type of grains given the higher levels of vitamins, phytochemicals, falvanoids and fiber in them for the carb calorie.
I'm diabetic so grains are a moot point for me personally. I buy and cook grains for my family though as most of them are not diabetic - and I do focus on whole grains.
The thing that bugs me is how many who say "whole grains" don't mean it! A label on a Cheerios box touts it as healthy because it is a "whole grain" food. But I doubt anyone at General Mills has ever been successful at sprouting a Cheerio!
Grains are seeds. In order for grain to be "whole," it would need to be something you could take out in your garden and plant and have something grow.
Bread, even lovingly made multigrain artisan breads, are not whole grains. Steel-cut oats are not whole grains. Sure they're less processed and therefore better than a Krispy Kreme donut, but that's hardly much of a recommendation for a food.
Those who eat grains ought to eat mostly whole grains: wheat berries, whole oats, barley, brown rice, quinoa, etc. They make lovely hot cereals cooked in a crockpot. The cold leftovers toss into salads well. You can go for any flavoring you want, add raisins, apples, coconut and cinnamon for sweet dishes or shallots, parsley, basil, sun-dried tomato for savory ones.
As for this guy's notion that the "whites" are OK... really, if you're going to eat crap like white sugar, white flour, white rice and potatoes... you might as well just mainline glucose and not bother eating at all; it's simply impossible to get the nutrition you need to function optimally when this garbage is crowding out real foods from your diet.
Posted by: Sam Hartman | Oct 2, 2007 3:50:58 PM
I do agree it's the calories that matter, not the carbs, but I try to eat whole grains instead of white processed flour and fruit sweetners instead of white sugar - both for health reasons.
Posted by: Zoe | Oct 2, 2007 9:41:23 AM
I am currently trying to pack as much nutrition as possible into every mouthful while restricting calories so that I'll lose weight slowly. That restricts the high GI carbs quite naturally although it doesn't eliminate the nourishing but higher GI fruit and vegetables. I just don't eat those as often. Better still, for me, this approach controls my appetite fairly well.
