Did you know this? I didn't!

Still at Dr. Weil's Nutrition and Health Conference here in Phoenix. Yesterday I learned something new at a session on glycemic response presented by Dr. Louise Gagne.  Most of the lecture covered familiar territory...how refined carbohydrates like white bread and sweets cause a sharp rise in blood sugar, the negative effects of blood sugar spikes on the body, and how to choose low glycemic foods for better health. Dr. Gagne had a list of tips for reducing the glycemic load of your diet:

1. Avoid foods made with white flour and sugar.

2. Eat protein and/or fat with carbohydrates to slow the digestion.

3. Eat foods high in soluble fiber. (See also this recent post.)

4. In any given category of foods, eat the ones with a lower glycemic load. (You can find the estimated glycemic load of any food here on Nutrition Data, or search for foods by eGL using the Food Category Explorer.

But here's one I didn't know:

5. Drizzle lemon or vinegar over some part of the meal.  Apparently, these acids can significantly slow the uptake of sugars in the foods you eat them with.

More to come...

Coffee and diabetics

A recent study out of Duke University found that caffeine increases blood sugar levels in diabetics who regularly drink coffee--even though caffeine contains no sugar or calories. A related study done by Dr. Jennie Brand at the Glycemic Research Institute in Sydney, Australia, found that drinking a single cup of coffee before a high-carbohydrate meal significantly increased the post-meal increase in blood sugar.

These findings are suprising because coffee contains no calories and has a glycemic index of 0. It should not affect blood sugar--or so we always thought. But clearly there is something in caffeinated coffee that affects the body's blood sugar regulation. When you think about it, though, it makes sense. Caffeine is a stimulant that operates along the same neurochemical pathways that kick in when we are stressed or frightened (the so-called fight-or-flight response). The fight-or flight response causes a rise in blood sugar, presumably to fuel a quick get-away. Why wouldn't caffeine do the same thing?

The problem is that diabetics are not being educated to avoid caffeine or other stimulants as part of their blood-sugar control regimen. Diabetics, because of difficulty regulating blood sugar levels, are also likely to experience fatigue--and reach for that cup of java.

If you're diabetic and consume a lot of caffeine,  you may want to take this new (although still preliminary) research into consideration, especially if your blood sugar levels are not well-controlled.  As it happens, I decaffeinated last summer. Here are some tips:

1. Don't go cold-turkey.  I tapered off my caffeine consumption gradually, by mixing decaf coffee beans in with the regular ones. Each week I made the mix a little heavier on the decaf until it was 100% decaf.

2. Limit consumption of decaf.  Even though I now drink decaf coffee, I still keep it to 2 mugs a day (most days). Even decaf has a small amount of caffeine.

3. Herbal tea or green tea make a good antioxidant rich substitute when you're craving a hot beverage.

4. Replace your coffee break with an oxygen break. For a quick boost of energy, do one to two minutes of deep breathing.  Try it. It really works!

5. Move around. You can instantly increase your alertness by getting up, stretching, or walking briskly--even for one or two minutes.

Anyone else have good tips?

The Nutrition Connection: Dementia

November is (among other things) Alzheimer's Awareness Month.  As our population ages, the numbers are becoming increasingly alarming: There are currently 5 million Americans living with Alzheimer's and and a new case is diagnosed every 72 seconds. 

There is still no cure for this terrifying disease and progress towards effective treatment has been slow and frustrating. But there is encouraging news about the role of diet in protecting against age-related cognitive decline.  New research indicates that eating a diet that contains more fruits and vegetables, grains, and fish, and less saturated fat can protect your mental faculties as you age.  If you are diabetic, here's yet another motivation to eat well: Researchers have shown that a single meal high in simple carbohydrates can impair memory in diabetics.

Inflammation, not obesity, the culprit in diabetes

Getting fat doesn't necessarily promote diabetes. Rather, it appears to the inflammation associated with obesity that actually undermines the body's ability to use insulin properly.  Mice who are allowed to get fat typically develop diabetes (just like people).  But when researchers blocked the inflammatory pathways associated with obesity, they found that mice could get quite fat without ever developing diabetes. "If we can block or disarm this macrophage inflammatory pathway in humans, we could interrupt the cascade that leads to insulin resistance and diabetes," said one researcher. (Read entire story here.)

But is that really such a good idea? After all, we're talking about disabling part of the immune system.  And there are plenty of other health hazards associated with obesity.  I hope that this research and a  greater understanding into exactly how obesity, inflammation, and insulin resistance are related can ultimately lead to better therapies for diabetes.  But attaining and maintaining a healthy body weight should still be a top health priority for all of us, diabetics and non-diabetics alike.  (And choosing an anti-inflammatory diet is probably a good idea as well.)

For more information on how an anti-inflammatory diet may reduce your risk of a number of diseases, see our Inflammation page.

The links between diabetes, obesity, and inflammation

Southern California isn't the only thing that was on fire last week.  Your cells and tissues may have been smoldering as well, without you even knowing it. Chronic, low-level inflammation is often referred to as "the fire within," and is linked to a wide array of diseases, including heart disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and depression and diabetes.

There's also a definite connection between inflammation and obesity. Fat cells produce inflammatory chemicals at a far greater rate than other tissues, so youare at greater risk of inflammation and inflammation-related diseases like diabetes and heart disease if you are overweight.  Losing weight generally reduces inflammation (and risk of disease) but losing weight may not be enough to put out this particular flame.

New research posted on DiabetesHealth.com shows that even lean diabetics appear to have elevated levels of inflammatory chemicals in their blood, which increases the risk of complications from their disease. If you have diabetes, it may be worth asking your doctor to test your CRP levels to gauge your level of systemic inflammation--even if you are maintaining a healthy weight and blood sugar levels.

If your CRP  levels are high, an anti-inflammatory diet can help. In addition to regulating the glycemic load of your diet (which you are hopefully already doing ), try to get most of your daily fat allowance from foods high in omega-3 fatty acids and/or monounsaturated fats.  Spices like curry, ginger, and garlic also have natural anti-inflammatory properties. (See also our help page on Inflammation).

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?

Has your life been touched by diabetes?

I recently got a note from a spokesperson for InspiredbyDiabetes.com, a global campaign designed to bring diabetes to the world’s attention.  The site is sponsoring a Creative Expression Competition, which invites anyone who has been touched by the disease to share his or her story through some sort of artistic work. 

A $5000 contribution to charity will be made in the name of the Grand Prize winners, who will also win a trip to an Inspired by Diabetes art exhibition.  More details about the campaign and contest (which is underwritten by the pharmaceutical company, Lilly) are found here:

http://inspiredbydiabetes.com/content/how_to_enter_120.jsp.

New info on high fructose corn syrup causes me to rethink my position (slightly)

Yesterday, I posted on the supposed evils of high fructose corn syrup. Many have argued that an increase in our fructose intake is partly (or largely) to blame for the epidemic of overweight and diabetic Americans. I've been inclined to believe that much of the damage ascribed to HFCS has more to do with the fact that we simply consume too much soda than it does with the fact that soft drink manufacturers have started using HFCS in place of regular table sugar. Contrary to popular assumptions, HFCS and table sugar actually contain the same amount of fructose. 

I've suspected that the focus on HFCS was a way to shift the responsbility for our expanding waistlines from our own behavior to the food industry. But I'm prepared to rethink my position in light of new research just presented at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society. 

Although table sugar and HFCS contain roughly the same proportion of fructose and glucose, the fructose and glucose are more tightly bound together in table sugar than they are in HFCS. Researchers have demonstrated that the "unbound" sugars create harmful compounds called carbonyls in HFCS-sweetened beverages.  These unstable molecules cause damage to cells and tissues that have been linked to the development of diabetes. 

This new finding suggests that the increased use of HFCS in industrial food production could be partially responsible for increased rates of diabetes, especially among children and young adults. But I'm still convinced that our consumption habits play a far greater role.  Kids who drink two or three sodas a day (the national average) are more likely to gain weight and increase their risk of diabetes--whether those sodas are sweetened with sugar or HFCS.  People who are not obese are at low risk of diabetes--no matter what they drink.

There was one other fascinating corrollary to this study.  The presence of EGCG (the active compound in green tea) greatly diminished the amount of carbonyls in the HFCS-sweetened sodas. (Market watch: Look for a huge influx of green tea or EGCG-enhanced soft drinks soon).  Adding EGCG or green tea to sodas might make soft drinks slightly less damaging by reducing the carbonyls, but it won't make them less fattening!  If you're really concerned about your health, consider moderating your (and your children's) consumption of all sweetened drinks.

Sugar-free doesn't get you off scot-free

Last night on my way home, I drove past a billboard that showed three cans of Diet Coke on a table. The caption was: The 3-Hour Meeting. The thing is, I know people who can (and do) drink a can of diet soda per hour. But if you suggest to a diet-sodaholic that six or eight diet sodas a day might be excessive, they’re likely to argue that there’s nothing wrong with drinking that much. After all, it’s got no calories. It’s practically the same as drinking water, right?

Maybe not.  Evidence is mounting that diet sodas are anything but health-neutral.  First off, diet sodas  don’t appear to help you manage your weight, which is presumably their raison-d'etre, right? Studies show that the more diet soda you drink the more likely you are to be overweight or obese.  Now, this study doesn’t show that diet soda makes you fat. It might be that people drink diet soda because they are already overweight. But it does suggest that drinking diet soda doesn’t help you get any thinner.

And there’s other research suggesting that artificial sweeteners may disrupt your brain's ability to regulate caloric intake, leading you to overeat and gain weight.  There's also some suggestion that diet sodas increase your appetite and cravings for sweets. So instead of satisfying your sweet tooth with a “harmless” calorie-free beverage, you may actually be stoking your cravings for sugar. (I wonder if that’s why so many diet soda drinkers develop what they describe as “addictions” to the beverages?) 

Secondly, diet (and regular) sodas contain phosphates, which can leech calcium out of bones. These days, most teens and young adults are drinking copious amounts of soda during the years when they need to accumulate a lifetime store of bone mass. As a result, they are much more likely to suffer from osteoporosis, and to experience the effects of thinning bones much earlier in life.

And now, research shows that those who drink one or more soda per day (whether diet or regular) are 40% more likely to develop metabolic syndrome, a collection of risk factors that put you on the fast track to heart disease and diabetes.

A harmless indulgence? It hardly seems like it. (And I haven't even mentioned the controversy over the purported toxicity of artificial sweeteners like Splenda and Equal.)

If none of this gives you second thoughts about drinking diet soda, you’re not alone. Here’s at least one writer who feels that sodas are merely the latest victims of the “food police.” 

Personally, I think I’ve seen enough to convince me that anything more than occasional soda is just not worth it. I prefer making my own fizzy drinks with seltzer and fruit juice anyway.  In fact, I just found this cool little gizmo that you can use to make selzer water at home.  It uses a big CO2 cartridge to carbonate filtered, spring or tap water. It's a little like those old-fashioned soda siphons except that one cartridge (which is about the size of a 1 liter bottle of soda) charges about 100 bottles of water and can then be exchanged for a full one, sort of like the propane tank on your gas grill. 

I just bought one for the house and we really like it. It’s cheaper than buying even store-brand seltzer, plus we’re not putting all those plastic bottles in the recycling bin every week.  It's called a Soda-Club Home Soda Maker if you want to check it out.

Fructose sweeteners may increase appetite, arterial damage

We've been talking a lot about blood sugar issues lately, in terms of both diabetes and overall health.  If you're trying to follow a low-glycemic diet to control your diabetes, aid weight loss, or just for general health, then you might have read that fructose (the kind of sugar found in fruit) is better for you than regular table sugar (sucrose).  It probably is, but only as long as it comes packaged in its natural container, whole fruit.

Fructose has the same number of calories as sucrose but a lower glycemic index, which means that it causes a smaller increase in blood sugar levels.  A couple of years ago, agave syrup became popular as a "healthier" sweetener because it contains mostly fructose and has a low glycemic index. But there may be a cloud around that silver lining.

Check out this new research, showing that those consuming fructose-sweetened beverages had higher triglyceride and LDL cholesterol levels than those who drank glucose-sweetened beverages.  Yikes.  As our ND diabetes community knows, those with diabetes are already at increased risk of arterial damage and heart disease. How ironic that the "cure" for high blood sugar levels (in the form of fructose-sweetened alternatives) might be contributing to the problem!

I'm also waiting on the results of a very interesting clinical trial that's currently underway at the University of Washington to compare the effects of drinking beverages sweetened with fructose, glucose, or artificial sweeteners on calorie intake. The researchers are testing a theory that fructose sweeteners may cause people to consume more calories by interfering with hormone signals that tell you when you've had enough to eat.  The study is scheduled to conclude in December 2008. Stay tuned.

Meanwhile, you might want to moderate your consumption of fructose-sweetened products, especially if you've convinced yourself that its low glycemic index makes fructose an "eat as much as you want" food.  It might not be spiking your blood sugar, but there may be other more subtle health effects that make consuming large quantities undesirable.

I'm diabetic. Where do I begin?

Q. I just found your site and think it's wonderful!  As a newly diagnosed diabetic, I'm overwhelmed and extremely nervous, mainly because there are so many "yes, but.." scenarios with food.  In using your site to develop a diet to lose weight and control blood sugars, where do I begin? 

A. First of all, good for you for meeting your new challenge head-on by seeking to take control of your diet and its effects on your health. At NutritionData.com, we really believe in that old chestnut, "Knowledge is power."  Our mission is to empower you to make better choices by providing you with detailed and reliable information about the foods you eat.

But I also understand your nervousness...there's a lot of new information for you to absorb and it can be overwhelming at first.   You might want to start by reading our article on glycemic index, an indicator of how foods affect blood sugar levels.  Most diabetics find it crucial to monitor the glycemic index or glycemic load of their diets.

When you search for foods or analyze recipes on ND, you'll see the estimated glycemic load as part of the analysis.  To keep blood sugar levels steady, you'll want to choose foods and plan meals with a low to moderate glycemic load. As a general guideline, aim for a total daily eGL of less than 100, divided evenly over the course of the day's meals and snacks.

ND can help support your weight loss efforts as well. 

Ask Monica: What's a good target eGL?

Dear ND,

I wanted to send a note to thank you for this web site! I recently started using the site again and really appreciate the new additions, especially the IF Rating and eGL features.  Using the site really helps me keep my eating on track and helps me make better choices when feeding my children.  What is a good target for the total eGL for an entire day?

Karen

Dear Karen,

Welcome back and thanks for your note!  Thanks as well for the opportunity to mention a little more about the eGL, one of NutritionData's newer features.  As you may already have read on the Glycemic Index topic page, the glycemic load is a way of expressing a food or meal's effect on blood sugar levels.  People with or at risk for diabetes often monitor the glycemic load of their diets to avoid sharp spikes or dips in blood sugar.  People without diabetes also use glycemic load as a way to faciliate weight loss or just to make their diets healthier.

People who want to track the glycemic load of their diets are often frustrated by the fact that glycemic load values are available for a fairly limited number of foods.   However, NutritionData recently introduced a very exciting new tool.  Using a multivariate regression analysis of existing glycemic data, we have derived a formula that allows us to provide an estimated glycemic load (eGL) for every food in the ND database.  You can read more about this new development on our estimated Glycemic Load help page.

We've received some very enthusiastic responses to the eGL tool from nutritionists and organizations that support diabetics, as well as from ND users like you. 

As for your question about what your total for the day should be, experts vary on their recommendations.  Patrick Holford (author of The Low GL Diet), for example, recommends a total GL of 60 or lower.  Dr. Jenny Brand (author of The New Glucose Revolution), on the other hand, says that a total GL of 150 or less would be OK.

Here's my middle-of-the-road recommendation: As a general guidleline, try to keep your total eGL to less than 100 per day.  If you have diabetes or metabolic syndrome, you might want to aim even a little lower. If you are not overweight and are physically active, a little higher would be fine. (These guidelines are for diets containing roughly 2,000 calories. For your kids, simply scale the total eGL to their total calorie intake.  If they eat about 1,000 calories a day, cut the target eGL in half.)

Ideally, though, you want to spread your GL out over the course of the day. So you might aim for meals with an eGL of 20 to 30 and snack with an eGL of 5-15 (depending on how many and how big your meals are).

Good health and good eating!

Ask Monica: Where's the chromium?

Q. This is a great web site! It's one of the best for nutritional information. But why don't you include chromium in your analysis?

A.  Glad you like NutritionData! Most of the nutrition information you see displayed on NutritionData is provided by the federal government. The USDA's food composition database is one of the largest in the world, including more than 7,000 foods and about 140 nutrients. As comprehensive as it is, however, it is not exhaustive. There are many foods that the Nutrient Data Laboratory has not yet analyzed. There are also important nutrients that are not included in their analysis: chromium is  one of them.

Chromium is a micromineral, meaning that we need only very small amounts (25 to 30 micrograms a day) of this nutrient in order to be healthy. Nonetheless, it is essential to human health.  Chromium helps your body process sugar (glucose) correctly and chromium deficiency can cause problems with blood sugar regulation.

Does chromium burn fat or build muscle?

Is the low-glycemic diet a red herring?

The glycemic index, which indicates how different types of carbohydrates affect blood sugar levels, was originally developed as a tool to help diabetics manage their diets.  But the wider nutrition community quickly jumped on the bandwagon, arguing that a low-glycemic diet (one that avoided sharp spikes in blood sugar) would be healthier for everyone.  It wasn’t long before the low-glycemic diet (a variation on the low-carb diet) became a hot weight-loss trend.

The hypothesis behind the buzz is that a high-glycemic diet stimulates the conversion of dietary carbohydrates into stored fat.  By consuming a low-glycemic diet, you would theoretically reverse (or at least avoid) this effect. High-glycemic foods also tend to be calorie-dense—you can consume a lot of calories before you get full—and because they are so quickly digested, you get hungry again sooner than you would with low-glycemic foods.  Or so the theory goes.

As much logical sense as all the arguments make, the research doesn’t seem to be backing up the notion that a low-glycemic diet will lead to quicker, easier, or longer-lasting weight loss. In a carefully controlled study at the Human Nutrition Research Center at Tuft's University, dieters followed one of two calorie-restricted diets: The low-glycemic diet was a Zone-style diet (40% carbs, 30% protein, 30% fat), featuring low-glycemic foods such as bean and barley stew, low-fat cottage cheese, and pumpernickel bread. The other diet, which included things like sweet potatoes and bagels, contained 60% carbs, 20% protein, and 20% fat—more in line with the government’s dietary guidelines. Both diets cut total calories by about a third.

The two groups followed their diets for a total of six months, at which point the low-glycemic dieters were slightly ahead in terms of weight loss, with an average loss of 10.4% of their starting weight, compared with 9% in the high-glycemic group.  After a full year, however, both groups were precisely the same: Each group had maintained an 8% weight loss.

Of course, mere weight loss is not the only thing that matters. Were the dieters on the low-glycemic plan any less hungry?  Did they find it easier to stick to the diet? Interestingly, the researchers found that there were no differences in the dieters' reported hunger levels or satiety.  On the other hand, during the second six months of the study, the low-glycemic dieters did gain back more of the weight they’d lost, which suggests that the higher-carb diet may be easier to maintain long-term.

One last important point: The results I summarized above are for the whole group. However, when the researchers broke the subjects into subgroups they noted an important difference.  People who had signs of insulin resistance (a prediabetic condition in which insulin secretion increases) lost more weight on the low-glycemic diet; those with normal insulin response, on the other hand, did better on the high-glycemic diet.  Which takes us full circle:  A low-glycemic diet appears to be very beneficial for those with diabetes, borderline diabetes, or insulin resistance—a group estimated to include up to 25% of all Americans.  Dieters without insulin problems may actually have more weight-loss success on a higher-carbohydrate/lower-fat diet.

You can read more about this study here.

I should also note (because if I don’t, I know you will!) that apart from weight loss, which was the subject of this particular study, a low-glycemic diet may still have important benefits for health such as lowering the risk of diabetes, heart disease, and other inflammation-related conditions. For more information about the glycemic index, see ND’s glycemic index topic page.  For those interested in managing this aspect of their diet, ND includes the estimated glycemic index (eGL) as part of its complete nutritional analysis of every food and recipe.

Important news but lame advice

While scanning the health headlines online this morning, I came across a story on Medical News Today, entitled How to Maintain Healthy Blood Sugar Levels. The article notes a recent finding that elevated blood sugar levels are linked to a higher incidence of cancer. It's yet another good reason to pay attention to the glycemic impact of your diet, which also influences your risk of heart disease, obesity, and diabetes.

When I say "glycemic impact," I mean the effect that your food choices have on your blood sugar levels.  This important aspect of nutrition, along with the terms glycemic index and glycemic load, is explained more fully on ND's glycemic index topic page and estimated glycemic load help page.

But the Medical News Today article goes on to give some pretty lame advice.  Well, it's fine, as far as it goes....  Eat more vegetables, drink fewer sugary drinks, and maintain a healthy body weight. The doctor also advises you to choose brown rice instead of white and substitute whole wheat for regular pasta.  Not a word about portion size, however, which has a far greater impact on blood sugar levels than whether you eat brown or white rice.

According to the Glycemic Research Institute, the glycemic load (GL) of brown and white rice is virtually the same: about 23 for a three-quarter-cup serving.  For pasta, the differences are slight: A three-quarter-cup serving of white pasta has a GL of 20 vs. 17 for whole wheat pasta.  But how many people actually eat just three-quarters of a cup of pasta?

A restaurant-sized serving of pasta can easily contain three to four cups of pasta, with a glycemic load of 100 or more--well over the recommended total for an entire day!  Substituting whole wheat pasta would lower the GL to 90, which is still going to do a number on your blood sugar.

If you're trying to maintain healthy blood sugar levels, you need to pay attention both to the quality (glycemic index) and the quantity (glycemic load) of your food choices.  ND's total consumption tool can help by estimating the combined glycemic load of your meals and daily consumption. The Glycemic Research Institute recommends that you aim for a total daily glycemic load of 80 or lower, ideally spread evenly among the day's meals.

Ask ND: what fruits are good for diabetics?

Q. I am diabetic and would like to know what fruits I can eat without  consuming too many carbohydrates.  You mentioned cantaloupe was good, but how much can I eat and be safe?

A. Diabetics are often advised to watch the carbohydrates they consume in order to prevent the spike in blood sugar that can occur if you eat a large quantity of carbohydrates.  Fruits are almost entirely carbohydrates, so your concern makes sense.

But carbohydrates do not all affect blood sugar levels the same way. Some carbohydrate foods (such as raisins, white bread, orange juice, and many breakfast cereals) release their sugars more quickly, while others (such as pasta, apples, or bran cereal) are digested more slowly.  These differences are indicated by a food's glycemic index, which measures the effect of that food on blood sugar levels. (Click here to learn more about the glycemic index and glycemic load.) Many diabetic educators feel it is more helpful for diabetics to keep track of the glycemic index or glycemic load of their diet than it is to simply count total carbohydrates.

Oatmeal for cholesterol: improving on a good thing

I'm sure you've heard the news that eating oatmeal every day can help you lower cholesterol. Those folks at General Mills work hard to make sure that we never forget!  But your heart-healthy breakfast doesn't have to be bland and boring.  Adding a quarter teaspoon each of powdered ginger and cinnamon to every serving of cooked oatmeal amps up the health benefits—and the flavor—of your daily bowl.

In addition to being one of my favorite spices, ginger is a potent anti-inflammatory agent. Reducing systemic inflammation has been shown to lower your risk of heart disease andmany other illnesses.  Cinnamon is a terrific complement to ginger, in terms of both its flavor profile and its health benefits.  Cinnamon helps you maintain healthy blood sugar levels by enhancing your sensitivity to insulin.  As heart disease and diabetes often go hand in hand, cinnamon and ginger make a delicious dynamic duo for heart health.

Have you come up with interesting or unusual ways to use cinnamon and ginger in healthy recipes? Post them below!

Ask ND: Are bananas "binding"?

Q. I love bananas and have been researching them on the Web. All the info I found supported my position that bananas are a fairly healthy food, with some dietary fiber, lots of potassium and other vitamins/minerals but that they are fairly high in sugar/carbs. As a diabetic, this is naturally a concern. I'm also curious: Is there really any factual basis for bananas being considered "binding" or "constipating"?

A. Bananas do have a reputation for being constipating but I think any "binding" effect they may have has been greatly exaggerated.  Perhaps the notion stems from the fact that bananas are an effective home remedy for treating diarrhea. They contain pectin, a fiber that absorbs water in the intestinal tract. They are also high in potassium, which can be depleted by an extended bout of diarrhea.  But the fact that bananas are helpful in calming diarrhea doesn't necessarily mean that eating them will cause constipation.

However, I'm not sure bananas are the best choice for diabetics, or anyone else trying to manage their blood sugar levels.