Slightly OT-Interesting readings
Question:
I’m kinda a lucky guy, I eat the same thing all the time and I really don’t mind. This is good if you’re trying to get one’s BG under control. When I was dxed 6-12-03 my wt. was 264. It’s now down to 233 and I’m shooting for 200 by March-ish. Everytime I put 10 lbs behind me I have a corresponding drop in BG. Now here comes what I consider interesting. Almost every morning my FBG is between 92-102. I have coffee, and something to wash down my Glucophage. I then have either sliced strawberries with SF Jell-O and spray whipped topping, or two chocolate rice cakes with PB, usually 60-90 minutes later. When I was in between 264 lbs. and 244 lbs. my 1 hr. for strawberries would be 130-140, and for choc rice cake-PB would be around the same. When my wt. dropped below 240 lbs. I started to notice a strange flux in my BG. My 1 hr. for strawberries was 105-120, BUT the 1 hr for choc rice cake-PB was the same! I’ve tried various combinations and I’ve discovered that any fresh fruit spike is way lower and shorter than anything that includes any kind of carb-starch. Now I can understand everything spiking less due to D&E, but just fruit? — t2_lurking geabbottATabbottandabbottDOTcom Do not mail to t2_lurking (auto-delete)
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m kinda a lucky guy, I eat the same thing all the time and I really don’t > mind. This is good if you’re trying to get one’s BG under control. > When I was dxed 6-12-03 my wt. was 264. It’s now down to 233 and I’m > shooting for 200 by March-ish. Everytime I put 10 lbs behind me I have a > corresponding drop in BG. > Now here comes what I consider interesting. Almost every morning my FBG is > between 92-102. I have coffee, and something to wash down my Glucophage. I > then have either sliced strawberries with SF Jell-O and spray whipped > topping, or two chocolate rice cakes with PB, usually 60-90 minutes later. > When I was in between 264 lbs. and 244 lbs. my 1 hr. for strawberries would > be 130-140, and for choc rice cake-PB would be around the same. When my wt. > dropped below 240 lbs. I started to notice a strange flux in my BG. My 1 hr. > for strawberries was 105-120, BUT the 1 hr for choc rice cake-PB was the > same! > I’ve tried various combinations and I’ve discovered that any fresh fruit > spike is way lower and shorter than anything that includes any kind of > carb-starch. > Now I can understand everything spiking less due to D&E, but just fruit? > — > t2_lurking > geabbottATabbottandabbottDOTcom > Do not mail to t2_lurking (auto-delete)
Two different factors may be involved. 1. Fructose, one of the main sugars found in fruit, does not always register on a meter as does glucose. It still does damage, perhaps even more than glucose. See; http://www.thenutritionreporter.com/fructose_dangers.html "a trail of medical studies dating back a quarter of a century doesn’t paint a terribly sweet picture for fructose. High fructose consumption has been fingered as a causative factor in heart disease. It raises blood levels of cholesterol and another type of fat, triglyceride. It makes blood cells more prone to clotting, and it may also accelerate the aging process. "People should avoid it," urged John Yudkin, M.D., Ph.D., professor emeritus at Queen Elizabeth College, London, and an expert in the health effects of sugar." 2. Your fruit of choice is strawberries, which are very low in carbs, as are most berries. You will probably not get as good a reading if another kind of fruit with a much higher sugar content was being consumed. It’s all about carbs. Not fruit generally. Rice in any form is still a fast, dense carb. The rice cakes are fast, dense carb, and so will raise your bg. The strawberries are low carb, and you have them with cream, which isn’t a carb at all. So only a slight rise in bg. With weight loss, your insulin resistance has dropped, and hence the lower reading, you handle the initial food better. You have PB with the rice cakes, so that slows the digestion and absorbtion of the carbs. There are some carbs in peanuts too. What reading do you get at 2hrs? Is it higher or lower? Time to expand your scientific experiments. Maybe you do handle the rice better than before as well. It’s hard to know, without more testing at the 2hr mark. Annette — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
No this isn’t OT (off topic). It’s very much ON TOPIC – the control of blood sugar levels with diet. And weight loss. Annette — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
Annette: Thanks for the link. I went back to my little T2 library and found some of the same references. I missed fructose-fruit connection entirely. By my 2 hr. readings everything has pretty much evened out, between 93-105. I made sure to check some 90 min readings as well and the choc rice cake-PB was dropping consistent with the 2 hr. reading. By 150 minutes I was totally back +/- meter variables. btw: I tried a half-bagel and next day one slice of store bought potato bread with PB instead of a rice cake, Whoo-Boy, Forget that stuff! Spike City! Rice cakes (Thank God) in my system seem to fit quite well. Thanks again for the response.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m kinda a lucky guy, I eat the same thing all the time and I > really don’t > mind. This is good if you’re trying to get one’s BG under control. > When I was dxed 6-12-03 my wt. was 264. It’s now down to 233 and > I’m > shooting for 200 by March-ish. Everytime I put 10 lbs behind me I > have a > corresponding drop in BG. > Now here comes what I consider interesting. Almost every morning > my FBG is > between 92-102. I have coffee, and something to wash down my > Glucophage. I > then have either sliced strawberries with SF Jell-O and spray > whipped > topping, or two chocolate rice cakes with PB, usually 60-90 > minutes later. > When I was in between 264 lbs. and 244 lbs. my 1 hr. for > strawberries would > be 130-140, and for choc rice cake-PB would be around the same. > When my wt. > dropped below 240 lbs. I started to notice a strange flux in my > BG. My 1 hr. > for strawberries was 105-120, BUT the 1 hr for choc rice cake-PB > was the > same! > I’ve tried various combinations and I’ve discovered that any fresh > fruit > spike is way lower and shorter than anything that includes any > kind of > carb-starch. > Now I can understand everything spiking less due to D&E, but just > fruit? > — > t2_lurking > geabbottATabbottandabbottDOTcom > Do not mail to t2_lurking (auto-delete) > Two different factors may be involved. > 1. Fructose, one of the main sugars found in fruit, does not > always register on a meter as does glucose. It still does damage, > perhaps even more than glucose. See; > http://www.thenutritionreporter.com/fructose_dangers.html > "a trail of medical studies dating back a quarter of a century > doesn’t paint a terribly sweet picture for fructose. High fructose > consumption has been fingered as a causative factor in heart > disease. It raises blood levels of cholesterol and another type of > fat, triglyceride. It makes blood cells more prone to clotting, and > it may also accelerate the aging process. > "People should avoid it," urged John Yudkin, M.D., Ph.D., professor > emeritus at Queen Elizabeth College, London, and an expert in the > health effects of sugar." > 2. Your fruit of choice is strawberries, which are very low in > carbs, as are most berries. You will probably not get as good a > reading if another kind of fruit with a much higher sugar content > was being consumed. > It’s all about carbs. Not fruit generally. Rice in any form is > still a fast, dense carb. > The rice cakes are fast, dense carb, and so will raise your bg. The > strawberries are low carb, and you have them with cream, which isn’t > a carb at all. So only a slight rise in bg. With weight loss, your > insulin resistance has dropped, and hence the lower reading, you > handle the initial food better. You have PB with the rice cakes, so > that slows the digestion and absorbtion of the carbs. There are > some carbs in peanuts too. What reading do you get at 2hrs? Is it > higher or lower? > Time to expand your scientific experiments. Maybe you do handle the > rice better than before as well. It’s hard to know, without more > testing at the 2hr mark. > Annette > — > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
This study smacks of the idiocy of the Aspartame debate…sure when test subjects are fed enough to kill an elephant there are adverse affects ! A few strawberries isn’t going to affect many. You weight loss is likely reducing insulin resistance common among heavier people. As the weight comes off the resistance problem improves. Some people who get to a healthy weight see a complete remission of sorts.
Response:
> This study smacks of the idiocy of the Aspartame debate…sure when > test subjects are fed enough to kill an elephant there are adverse > affects ! A few strawberries isn’t going to affect many. You weight > loss is likely reducing insulin resistance common among heavier > people. As the weight comes off the resistance problem improves. Some > people who get to a healthy weight see a complete remission of sorts.
Is that true? I asked my doctor if that was possible and she said, not really. Do you have cites? websites? more info? Thanks, Chakolate
Response:
> > This study smacks of the idiocy of the Aspartame debate…sure when > test subjects are fed enough to kill an elephant there are adverse > affects ! A few strawberries isn’t going to affect many. You weight > loss is likely reducing insulin resistance common among heavier > people. As the weight comes off the resistance problem improves. Some > people who get to a healthy weight see a complete remission of sorts. > Is that true? I asked my doctor if that was possible and she said, not > really. Do you have cites? websites? more info?
Is what true ? The part about remission ? This only applies to T2 and would likely only occur with someone Dx early. It is only an apparent remission…one who is obese and on meds…etc could do away with the meds and be very loose wth their diet with a good deal of weight loss. But remember, DM is a progressive disease and one must be vigilant. Also, put the weight back on and bang…you’ll lose the ability to easily control your BG. Some diabetics are very high on the insulin resistance end of things which is linked mainly to obesity…lose the weight and the fat and the insulin resistance all but goes away. Keep it off and it could be a very long time before DM plays an active roll in one’s health.
Response:
> Is what true ? The part about remission ? This only applies to T2 and > would likely only occur with someone Dx early. It is only an apparent > remission…one who is obese and on meds…etc could do away with the > meds and be very loose wth their diet with a good deal of weight loss. > But remember, DM is a progressive disease and one must be vigilant. > Also, put the weight back on and bang…you’ll lose the ability to > easily control your BG. Some diabetics are very high on the insulin > resistance end of things which is linked mainly to obesity…lose the > weight and the fat and the insulin resistance all but goes away. Keep > it off and it could be a very long time before DM plays an active roll > in one’s health.
Ah, that was very clear. Thanks. Chakolate — Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don’t matter, and those who matter don’t mind. –Dr. Seuss
Response:
> This study smacks of the idiocy of the Aspartame debate…sure when > test subjects are fed enough to kill an elephant there are adverse > affects ! A few strawberries isn’t going to affect many. You weight > loss is likely reducing insulin resistance common among heavier > people. As the weight comes off the resistance problem improves. Some > people who get to a healthy weight see a complete remission of
sorts. I have no idea what comment of mine or study is being referred to in this post. Could you please indicate what your post is replying to/commenting on ? Annette — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
> I have no idea what comment of mine or study is being referred to in > this post. > Could you please indicate what your post is replying to/commenting > on ?
It was the s3cond post in this thread….your post included some conclusions from some studies…
Response:
> I have no idea what comment of mine or study is being referred to in > this post. > Could you please indicate what your post is replying to/commenting > on ? > It was the s3cond post in this thread….your post included some > conclusions from some studies…
Thank you – I did go back and found the relevant post. Now I can reply.
> This study smacks of the idiocy of the Aspartame debate…
It does? As I read it, the main thrust of the article is mostly about high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), and the use of fructose generally in large quantities in processed foods. And it wasn’t a study per se, it was an article that referred to quite a lot of studies, carried out by reputable researchers. >sure when > test subjects are fed enough to kill an elephant there are adverse > affects !
And that was the whole point of the article. It points out that we *are* unknowingly consuming far too much fructose in our daily diet. Did you notice where it said in the article; "All this should not dampen your taste for fresh fruit or fruit juice. The hazards associated with fructose appear to be dose dependent, according to Yudkin and other experts. If you eat predominantly natural foods, and avoid large quantities of processed foods, you have little to worry about. Fructose accounts for only 5 to 7.7 percent of the wet weight of cherries,pears, bananas, grapes, and apples. That’s about 5.5 to 8 teaspoons per pound of fresh fruit. There’s even less fructose – 2 to 3 percent, or roughly 2 to 3 teaspoons per pound – in strawberries, blackberries, blueberries, oranges, and grapefruit. " Of course if one has diabetes, a lot of the fruit mentioned above is going to affect the blood glucose levels because of their high sucrose or starch content. eg, oranges *may* be low in fructose content, but most in this group would agree that a glass of orange juice is not a good idea when you are endeavouring to avoid a spike. As for bananas and grapes, most diabetics limit or avoid them. Actually, my point originally was in reply to "t2"’s referral to "any fresh fruit". I was trying to say that it was UNLIKELY that the strawberries had any impact on bg levels, but that other fruit might, and consumption of a LOT of fructose may not spike, but could have a negative effect on overall health. He read the article, and seemed to understand. >A few strawberries isn’t going to affect many.
Exactly. That’s what *I* said! >You weight > loss is likely reducing insulin resistance common among heavier > people. As the weight comes off the resistance problem improves. Some > people who get to a healthy weight see a complete remission of
sorts. And now we are back to the chicken and egg argument. Do T2’s gain weight because of insulin resistance, or does insulin resistance cause weight gain? I am not interested in getting back into *that* one. I have my own opinion, based on my personal experience, but as is often said, YMMV. Annette — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
This post not CC’d by email >2. Your fruit of choice is strawberries, which are very low in >carbs, as are most berries.
G’day G’day Annette, The crucial feature. Best wishes, — Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / / "… and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Response:
This post not CC’d by email – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Two different factors may be involved. >1. Fructose, one of the main sugars found in fruit, does not >always register on a meter as does glucose. It still does damage, >perhaps even more than glucose. See; >http://www.thenutritionreporter.com/fructose_dangers.html >"a trail of medical studies dating back a quarter of a century >doesn’t paint a terribly sweet picture for fructose. High fructose >consumption has been fingered as a causative factor in heart >disease. It raises blood levels of cholesterol and another type of >fat, triglyceride. It makes blood cells more prone to clotting, and >it may also accelerate the aging process. >"People should avoid it," urged John Yudkin, M.D., Ph.D., professor >emeritus at Queen Elizabeth College, London, and an expert in the >health effects of sugar."
G’day G’day Annette, Fructose is sometimes called fruit sugar but that is about where the association ends. The sugars in fruit are usually very unglamorous, sucrose as in table sugar or a mixture of fructose and glucose in equal proportions. What this means is the carbs in fruit are similar to that found in homemade cordials made with common table sugar. Some of the sugar hydrolyses into fructose and glucose. (Commercial soft drinks use high fructose corn syrup which has a higher proportion of fructose than hydrolysed cane sugar.) A big difference is not in the composition of the sugar but the quantities. A small can of soft drink has the equivalent of eleven teaspoons of sugar (Headlines in a local paper). No one I know would dream of having that amount of sugar in tea or coffee. In a bowl of strawberries we are talking a couple of teaspoons. Berries offer the best antioxidant to carb ratio of any common food item. There are exceptions. Apples and pears have a higher proportion of fructose. At one time I looked at the possibility of using apple juice for diabetics. The fructose problem then emerges. The fructose is deceptive in that it damages proteins by glycates proteins about at well as glucose but give a low blood glucose test. The sense of security one gains from low blood glucose tests is false in this instance. Best wishes, — Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / / "… and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Response:
This post not CC’d by email >btw: I tried a half-bagel and next day one slice of store bought potato >bread with PB instead of a rice cake, Whoo-Boy, Forget that stuff! Spike >City!
G’day G’day, Good on ya. It is all a matter of learning and the learning that matters here is the learning that we actually use to improve our health. The foods that are giving you problems are starchy foods. The fundamental issue for diabetics is that starches often rapidly break down into glucose. The rate at which they break down depends a bit on whether the starch chains are highly branched ie amylopectin or not so highly branched, amylose. From time to time people talk about different varieties of rice and the affects they have on their blood glucose. The Indian basmati rice and the Australian doongara rice varieties are high amylose strains and this gives them a lower glycemic index. Other varieties have a higher amylopectin. Bananas as they ripen convert amylose to amylopectin amongst other things. With amylopectin type starches the rule is frighteningly simple. By the time the food arrives at the small intestine where glucose can be absorbed, hey presto, that stuff that started out as starch is glucose. One might as well have spooned it out of a packet. It was a neat trick of evolution that our saliva contains salivary amylase the enzyme that starts slicing and dicing the starch chains even before they reach the stomach. Bread made from highly processed flour -> glucose. Potato -> glucose. Some well meaning people promote a lower glycemic index diet. Unfortunately they often tend to suffer from selective attention. Sure if one chooses a low glycemic index diet with items like pearl barley, rolled oats etc the there are health benefits associated with things like beta glucans. Notice an important factor is the intact grain aspect of pearl barley or rolled oats. Unfortunately in the real world, a lower GI diet is determined by one single factor. When they look at GI in wild ie in epidemiology studies they find the single determining factor is table sugar. On the glucose = 100 scale, table sugar is about 70. The starches that people actually eat tend to be close to 100. People just don’t eat enough quality low glycemic foods of their own volition to produce low GI diets. To understand why sugar plays such a dominant part consider these North American average consumption figures Contribution to carb intake. Simple sugars 40% Grains mostly refined 38% Fruit 7% Dairy 6% Potatoes 5% Vegetables 4% Legumes and nuts 2% Hope this helps. Best wishes, — Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / / "… and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Response:
Quentin, thanks for an other informative post! — t2_lurking geabbottATabbottandabbottDOTcom Do not mail to t2_lurking (auto-delete)
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> This post not CC’d by email >btw: I tried a half-bagel and next day one slice of store bought potato >bread with PB instead of a rice cake, Whoo-Boy, Forget that stuff! Spike >City! > G’day G’day, > Good on ya. It is all a matter of learning and the learning that > matters here is the learning that we actually use to improve our > health. > The foods that are giving you problems are starchy foods. The > fundamental issue for diabetics is that starches often rapidly break > down into glucose. The rate at which they break down depends a bit on > whether the starch chains are highly branched ie amylopectin or not so > highly branched, amylose. From time to time people talk about > different varieties of rice and the affects they have on their blood > glucose. The Indian basmati rice and the Australian doongara rice > varieties are high amylose strains and this gives them a lower > glycemic index. Other varieties have a higher amylopectin. Bananas as > they ripen convert amylose to amylopectin amongst other things. With > amylopectin type starches the rule is frighteningly simple. By the > time the food arrives at the small intestine where glucose can be > absorbed, hey presto, that stuff that started out as starch is > glucose. One might as well have spooned it out of a packet. > It was a neat trick of evolution that our saliva contains salivary > amylase the enzyme that starts slicing and dicing the starch chains > even before they reach the stomach. > Bread made from highly processed flour -> glucose. > Potato -> glucose. > Some well meaning people promote a lower glycemic index diet. > Unfortunately they often tend to suffer from selective attention. > Sure if one chooses a low glycemic index diet with items like pearl > barley, rolled oats etc the there are health benefits associated with > things like beta glucans. Notice an important factor is the intact > grain aspect of pearl barley or rolled oats. > Unfortunately in the real world, a lower GI diet is determined by one > single factor. When they look at GI in wild ie in epidemiology > studies they find the single determining factor is table sugar. On > the glucose = 100 scale, table sugar is about 70. > The starches that people actually eat tend to be close to 100. People > just don’t eat enough quality low glycemic foods of their own volition > to produce low GI diets. To understand why sugar plays such a > dominant part consider these North American average consumption > figures > Contribution > to carb intake. > Simple sugars 40% > Grains mostly refined 38% > Fruit 7% > Dairy 6% > Potatoes 5% > Vegetables 4% > Legumes and nuts 2% > Hope this helps. > Best wishes, > — > Quentin Grady ^ ^ / > New Zealand, >#,#< [ > / / > "… and the blind dog was leading." > http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Response:
Thanks for explaining it all Quentin. You do it so well. I really appreciate that, I’m not very good at the scientific explanations, but I sure get the overall message. As for the strawberries, I doubt if I’ve ever eaten a whole bowl full ( how much is that , BTW? -smile). All I know is from what you and others have taught me, and my own experience. Berries are now firmly included in my diet. To quote something you once said about someone else " If you didn’t exist, we would have to invent you"! Annette
> This post not CC’d by email
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Two different factors may be involved. >1. Fructose, one of the main sugars found in fruit, does not >always register on a meter as does glucose. It still does damage, >perhaps even more than glucose. See; >http://www.thenutritionreporter.com/fructose_dangers.html >"a trail of medical studies dating back a quarter of a century >doesn’t paint a terribly sweet picture for fructose. High fructose >consumption has been fingered as a causative factor in heart >disease. It raises blood levels of cholesterol and another type of >fat, triglyceride. It makes blood cells more prone to clotting, and >it may also accelerate the aging process. >"People should avoid it," urged John Yudkin, M.D., Ph.D., professor >emeritus at Queen Elizabeth College, London, and an expert in the >health effects of sugar." > G’day G’day Annette, > Fructose is sometimes called fruit sugar but that is about where the > association ends. The sugars in fruit are usually very unglamorous, > sucrose as in table sugar or a mixture of fructose and glucose in > equal proportions. What this means is the carbs in fruit are similar > to that found in homemade cordials made with common table sugar. > Some of the sugar hydrolyses into fructose and glucose. (Commercial > soft drinks use high fructose corn syrup which has a higher proportion > of fructose than hydrolysed cane sugar.) > A big difference is not in the composition of the sugar but the > quantities. A small can of soft drink has the equivalent of eleven > teaspoons of sugar (Headlines in a local paper). No one I know would > dream of having that amount of sugar in tea or coffee. In a bowl of > strawberries we are talking a couple of teaspoons. Berries offer the > best antioxidant to carb ratio of any common food item. > There are exceptions. Apples and pears have a higher proportion of > fructose. At one time I looked at the possibility of using apple juice > for diabetics. The fructose problem then emerges. The fructose is > deceptive in that it damages proteins by glycates proteins about at > well as glucose but give a low blood glucose test. The sense of > security one gains from low blood glucose tests is false in this > instance. > Best wishes, > — > Quentin Grady ^ ^ / > New Zealand, >#,#< [ > / / > "… and the blind dog was leading." > http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
— Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
This post not CC’d by email >Thanks for explaining it all Quentin. You do it so well. I really >appreciate that, I’m not very good at the scientific explanations, >but I sure get the overall message.
G’day G’day Annette, Relative goodness isn’t important. What’s important is we are relating. Discussing topics that relate to diabetes. Simple obvious stuff that is crucial to the future health of the people who come here looking for information that shows them there is a way to live a better life, a life with better health prospects than the one they had been living. >As for the strawberries, I doubt if I’ve ever eaten a whole bowl >full ( how much is that , BTW? -smile).
OK, I eat a bowl of berries almost every morning. Since it is early Spring here that means frozen blueberries, loganberries, boysenberries, blackberries, raspberries brought from the wholesalers and growers. >All I know is from what you and others have taught me, and my own >experience. Berries are now firmly included in my diet. >To quote something you once said about someone else " If you didn’t >exist, we would have to invent you"!
Some morning when I wake up, I’m a little unsure of my own existence. It’s a new brave world for me going from contract to contract, examination prescription writing, emotional health make overs of managers … So each day reinventing myself comes naturally. <grin> >Annette
Best wishes and thanks. — Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / / "… and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Response:
Related Posts