Skip to comments.Low-glycemic may be better than low-fat diet
Posted on 06/07/2005 7:22:51 AM PDT by Nov3
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Foods with a low-glycemic index, which are digested relatively slowly and cause smaller increases in blood sugar, may protect the heart and blood vessels better than low-fat fare, according to the findings of a small study.
Researchers in Boston found that when obese people consumed as many carbohydrates with a low-glycemic index as they wanted, they lost just as much weight in 12 months as people who stuck with a conventional, calorie-restricted low-fat diet.
Carbohydrates with a low-glycemic index include foods such as nonstarchy vegetables, fruit, legumes, nuts and diary products, according to the report in theAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Dieters who watched their glycemic indices also experienced a larger decrease in fatty substances in the blood linked to heart disease and had a drop in levels of a protein that interferes with the body's ability to break down blood clots. In contrast, low-fat dieters had an increase in levels of the same protein, which may put them at higher risk of heart attack.
"Reducing (glycemic index) may be more effective than cutting back on fat over the long-term, both for weight loss and also for reducing risk of heart disease," study author Dr. David S. Ludwig told Reuters Health.
"Based on our results, and several dozen other clinical trials and epidemiological studies, I would recommend" eating foods with a low-glycemic index, added Ludwig, who is based at Children's Hospital.
The glycemic index measures how efficiently the body can metabolize carbohydrates. It ranks carbohydrates by how much a person's blood sugar rises immediately after eating, and tends to favor high-fiber foods that take longer to digest.
Ludwig and his team asked 23 obese young adults to follow either a low-fat diet or a diet in which they ate low-glycemic index foods for one year. As part of the low-glycemic index diet, people could eat as much as they wanted of foods with a low index, and got roughly 45 to 50 percent of calories from carbohydrates, and 30 to 35 percent from fat.
Low-fat dieters cut their daily intake by 250 to 500 calories, limited fat to less than 30 percent of their total calories, and got between 55 and 60 percent of calories from carbohydrates.
Ludwig noted that even though low-glycemic index dieters had no calorie limits, they likely didn't overeat because they felt less hunger after eating foods that take longer to digest.
"Numerous previous studies by our group and by others have shown that individuals feel less hunger and greater (sense of fullness) after low-glycemic index compared to high-glycemic index meals," he added.
SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, May 2005.
Imagine that!.............Who'da thunk it?........
> They just can't say low carb.
Or "balance" or "zone".
40-30-30 (percent of calories from carb/prot/fat),
plus low-gly carbs, is beginning to look ideal.
The Atkins diet book also refers to low glycemic as apposed to low carbs. Just eating "low carb" will rob you of needed vitamins and minerals.
Interesting title, but... it's Reuters.
I wouldn't believe them if they reported that I was a man.
No, they can't say low carb. Neither could I two years ago. Then I lost 40 pounds in 40 weeks, and kept it off for a year and counting. BMI went from 30 to under 24, plus my "good" cholesterol improved. Don't feel hungry and weigh what I did in high school. I would have just laughed two years ago. Now, I am laughing with them not at them.
Consider though what a scam carbs are. Pasta, bread, pastries, rice, cereals all cost pennies to produce, are marked up 1000% (no kidding) . I can see why the food industry (not the diet industry alone) are not keen to give a nod to Atkins et al.
The best part is you learn to eat less refined/processed foods, that seems to be the key.
I pay more for groceries, sure, but I'd rather pay with cash than with my health.
Some of us end up needing a low fat AND low glycemic diet...which is probably closer to the South Beach diet, although I find they are a little higher in carbs than my metabolism likes some days...
ping for later study
The New Atkins Book refers to low glycemic. His older ones didn't. He also embraces the ECC (Effective Carbohydrate Count) concept. Still when you actually put a name on the concept of their diet it is "low-carb". The diet lowers your insulin response. The next step for them is to say that early in weight loss it migh be a good idea to lower carbs to 25-50 grams.
You know 4-5 years from now they will discover that dietary ketosis will not kill you and that it has beneficial effects.
They just can't say "steak" or "bacon" either.
Having low carbed for about 8 years now, I am sure ketosis will not kill you (or I would be dead!) Gosh, I was low carb when low carb wasn't cool! And....my ratios are so good that my doctor about had a heart attack when he saw the numbers!
I lost 55 lbs on Atkins two years ago and have kept it off. My triglycerides dropped from 234 to 70, My HDL went up, with total cholesteral at 176. C-reactive protein also went down, so that my risk of heart disease dropped from 5x the normal risk to less than average risk. Also, my sleep-apnea disappeared.
I agree, the Atkins book talks about using low-glycomic carbs intead of high-glycemic. I don't think this article says anything radically different than what Atkins says.
Because it's not low carb. You can have as many carbs as you want on a low-glycemic index diet, so long as the glycemic index is low. This includes whole-grain breads, beans, and lots of other goodies. The premise is you don't restrict your fats or your carbs, but rather you choose good fats and good carbs.
And of course, on a low-fat diet, your body is producing its own cholesterol because you're not eating enough dietary fat -- unfortunately, your body produces LDL ("bad" cholesterol) when it has to synthesize its own.
I was posting Atkins articles here in 98-99 when Atkins would KILL YOU! I got flamed to death.
I've lost 160 pounds on Atkins, and am holding steady (mostly through being pretty lax lately) before making a run at the last 50-100 I want to drop.
Can you say fresh vegtables and fruits (absolutely no juice.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.