An Index of Best and Worst Foods for Diabetes - Sort Of

Despite a wealth of clinical studies that support it, many doctors and diabetes associations have been slow to recognize a controlled, low-carbohydrate diet as an effective strategy for managing and even reversing diabetes symptoms.

They have, however, been quicker to give a thumbs-up to low glycemic eating. Which is odd, because if you look at it, the index was originally a plan to identify the effects of carbohydrates on blood sugar levels and a diet with a low glycemic "load" will also be one that controls carbohydrates. Let's break it down so everyone knows just what we're talking about.

The Good, The Bad and the Glucose

What does the "Glycemic Index" do? It 's a chart developed by Dr. David Jenkins in the early '80s at the University of Toronto that measures which foods are best and worst for diabetics. It ranks foods from low to high according to how they affect blood sugar levels.

Carbohydrates that are rapidly broken down in the body and become excess sugar in the blood have a high GI rating. The faster this occurs, the more insulin is needed to deal with it and one of the worst problems caused by high insulin levels is that it triggers the extra storage of fat.

The GI also shows the difference in Good (complex) Carbs and Bad (Simple) ones:

All-Bran cereal is rated at 51 while Cornflakes are rated 83. Why? All-Bran is a natural food with a high fibre content, which cuts down the carbohydrate rating (people on a low carb diet take the amount of carbs in a food and subtract the fibre to get a"net carbs" number.) Corn Flakes are highly-processed corn, with much of the nutrition lost and considerable sugar added.

Some other high GI foods are baked potatoes, white rice, white bread, waffles, most breakfast cereals and most processed foods  almost all diets agree that white flour is one of the worst things we can eat.

Many diets, like the South Beach and Nutri-Systems Nourish Diet, are based on the Glycemic Index.

However ...

there have been a number of questions raised about the index, such as: why doesn't it factor in insulin response, which is pretty much what it sounds like.

Say you eat a large meal heavy in carbs, such as lasagna or spaghetti. You will probably get hungry again in a few hours. A meal rich in carbs causes an increase in blood sugar as the food is broken down into sugar molecules.

Insulin is the stuff that transfers sugar from the blood into the muscles and fat cells and when it's finished, there's still lots of insulin in the blood and it wants some sugar. And so do you. Bingo - you get cravings for something sweet.

You want to avoid this, but the GI doesn't really help you.

Glycemic ratings can also vary even among what appear to be identical foods i.e. white potatoes which can range from moderate to very high even out of the same bag from the store

Glycemic response can also vary from one person to another, and even in the same person from day to day, depending on blood glucose levels and insulin resistance (a diabetic or pre-diabetics inability to process glucose) and other factors.

Lastly, it 's not the simplest method to use. You still need to consider how many calories you're taking in and be careful of portion sizes  just because something has a low GI rating doesn't mean you can fill the plate. Consuming carbohydrates with a low glycemic index and calculating carbohydrate intake would produce the best results. The GI seems to me more a tool than an answer.

Research shows that the number of grams of carbohydrate in a food impact your blood sugar levels more than the glycemic load does. Smaller portions, fewer calories, losing weight, and reducing carbohydrates benefit your blood sugar level more.

If you do want to use the Glycemic Index, here is a link to a printable version that rates close to 2500 foods

http://www.mendosa.com/gilists.htm

For more diet information see the tabs at the top of the page, or the Diabetes Food List