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: Victoria | Oct 1, 2007 9:05:18 PM
The only time I eat high-GI carbs - and not every time - is after a workout with my protein shake.
The rest of the time I eat very low-carb and the carbs I do eat are low-GI.
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.
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: 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: 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: 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: | 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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!
