Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / General / March 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Calories That Count In Weight Loss

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
ironjustice@aol.com - 03 Mar 2008 14:31 GMT
"Health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, including ..
potatoes"

Medical News Article on Weight Loss

Two Studies Cast Further Doubt on the Effectiveness of Low GI/GL Diets
for Weight Loss

2008 FEB 25 -- A study published in the September 2007 issue of the
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition provides further evidence that
the glycemic index (GI) of a diet is not important; when it comes to
weight loss it is calories that count. This study adds to the growing
body of evidence supporting the health benefits of a diet rich in
fruits and vegetables, including potatoes, according to the United
States Potato Board.
Researchers from Harvard and the State University of Rio de Janeiro in
Brazil who worked independently from any food industry sponsors,
sought to determine if a low GI diet would be more effective than a
high GI diet for long-term weight...

http://www.ajcn.org/misc/release2.shtml#wolever

Evidence Does Not Support Usefulness of Glycemic Index in Type 2
Diabetes

Background  Although a healthy, well-balanced diet is critical to both
prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes, there is considerable
debate about the most favorable dietary macronutrient composition.
Many health organizations promote consumption of a diet rich in low-
glycemic index (GI) and low-glycemic load (GL) foods. GI is a numeric
value reflecting the body's glycemic response to a specific amount of
a food, whereas GL takes into account both a food's GI and
carbohydrate content. Consumption of foods with high GIs and GLs may
lead to more rapid and/or prolonged elevation of blood glucose.
Nonetheless, there is considerable controversy as to whether low-GI
and/or low-GL diets can prevent type 2 diabetes and its complications.
The January 2008 edition of The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
reports the results of 2 prospective clinical trials concerning this
important issue. Wolever and colleagues compared the effects of low-
GI, high-GI, and low-carbohydrate, high-monounsaturated-fat diets in
subjects who already had type 2 diabetes. Sahyoun et al examined
whether consumption of diets differing in GI and GL is associated with
risk of developing type 2 diabetes in older adults without the
disease. In corresponding perspectives, Miles and Pi-Sunyer provide
additional insight regarding the importance of these studies on the
advice given to individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Study Designs  1) Wolever et al conducted a randomized intervention
study in which they recruited subjects aged 35-75 y who had type 2
diabetes that was being managed by diet alone. Subjects (n = 156) were
educated to consume 1 of 3 experimental diets for 12 mo. Diets were
designed to be high GI, low GI, or low carbohydrate, high
monounsaturated fat. Fasting blood samples were collected, and oral-
glucose-tolerance tests were administered at baseline and throughout
the study. Samples were analyzed for glucose, insulin, glycated
hemoglobin (HbA1c, a measure of long-term glycemic control), lipids,
lipoproteins, and C-reactive protein (CRP, a marker of chronic
inflammation).
2) Sahyoun and colleagues studied a cohort of relatively healthy,
older adults (n = 1898) between 70 and 79 y of age who had not been
diagnosed as having type 2 diabetes. Subjects were followed for 6 y;
dietary intake was assessed at baseline by using a food-frequency
questionnaire, and dietary GI and GL were calculated. In addition,
information was collected concerning whether subjects were diagnosed
as having type 2 diabetes, reported using insulin or oral hypoglycemic
medication, or had elevated fasting blood glucose concentrations
during the study.

Results  Results from Wolever and colleagues showed that HbA1c, a
sensitive biological marker for blood glucose control, was not
influenced by dietary GI or GL, which suggests that low-GI or low-GL
diets are not, by themselves, beneficial in the treatment of people
with established type 2 diabetes. Moreover, consumption of the low-GI
diet resulted in elevated fasting glucose and lower glucose
concentrations 2 h after the oral-glucose-tolerance test. Compared
with the low-carbohydrate, high-monounsaturated-fat diet, the low-GI
diet elevated circulating triacylglycerol and lowered HDL cholesterol
early in the study; these effects disappeared by 6 mo. CRP values were
30% lower in the low-GI group than in the high-GI group. Sahyoun et al
did not find a relation between dietary GI or GL and incidence of type
2 diabetes in their study population.

Conclusions  Neither of these prospective human trials provides
support for the hypothesis that consumption of low-GI and/or low-GL
foods independently prevents or treats type 2 diabetes. Although data
from Wolever et al suggest that a low-GI diet may lower CRP, Pi-Sunyer
points out that the low-GI group started the study with lower
concentrations. Additional research on the effect of GI on
inflammatory markers will clearly be required. Miles concluded that
results of these studies "will be disappointing to some advocates of
low-GI diets." Disappointing or not, data from these carefully
conducted clinical trials suggest that GI and GL are not good measures
of optimal diets for individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Who loves ya.
Tom

Jesus Was A Vegetarian!
http://jesuswasavegetarian.7h.com

Man Is A Herbivore!
http://tinyurl.com/a3cc3

DEAD PEOPLE WALKING
http://tinyurl.com/zk9fk
sphynx.red@gmail.com - 03 Mar 2008 16:31 GMT
The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates article, by Wolever et al, is
here.  (The AJCN is great! They carry some of the most interesting
studies and they make their content free right away.)
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/87/1/114?lookupType=volpage&vol=87&fp=1
14&view=short


The design of this study is screwy.  From the RESULTS:
 The high-GI, low-GI, and low-CHO diets contained, respectively, 47%,
52%, and 39% of energy as carbohydrate

What(?) So the low-GI diet had 5% MORE carb than the high GI diet.
And the so-called 'low carb' diet had only 8% less carb than the high
GI diet?   And they think that it's significant that they didn't find
any difference?

Looking at all their outcome graphs, you see a sharp improvement in
all three groups in the first 2 months, then deteriorating control for
the rest of the year.  Which suggests to me that they were having some
compliance problems.  They seem to say that, since they got a
continuing trend in the CRP and the food-diaries looked ok.  Therefore
they weren't having compliance problems; I'm still suspicious.

Adam Becker Sr
Cubit - 03 Mar 2008 17:00 GMT
> The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates article, by Wolever et al, is
> here.  (The AJCN is great! They carry some of the most interesting
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Adam Becker Sr

Thanks for breaking out the key info.  All three groups were eating high
carbohydrate diets.  5% carbs is a low carb diet.

Anecdotally, my personal experience was that the total carbohydrates
combined with actual significant body fat loss were the key to controlling
type 2, as measured by A1c.
sphynx.red@gmail.com - 03 Mar 2008 17:22 GMT
> Thanks for breaking out the key info.  All three groups were eating high
> carbohydrate diets.  5% carbs is a low carb diet.

Was this study incompetent by accident or design?  It was funded by
THE POTATO BOARD.  Do you think they WANTED to find out if potatoes in
the diet increase HbA1c?

Adam Becker Sr
Jefferson - 03 Mar 2008 18:31 GMT
Hi Adam:

>>Thanks for breaking out the key info.  All three groups were eating high
>>carbohydrate diets.  5% carbs is a low carb diet.
>
> Was this study incompetent by accident or design?  It was funded by
> THE POTATO BOARD.  Do you think they WANTED to find out if potatoes in
> the diet increase HbA1c?

I don't know about the other people, but Thomas MS Wolever
(http://tinyurl.com/23nqtk) is a long time research on glycemic index
and co-authored The New Glucose Revolution with JENNIE BRAND-MILLER.
Others at the University of Toronto, Toronto such as Donald Drucker
(http://www.glucagon.com/) and PL Brubaker (http://tinyurl.com/yuosf5)
are cutting edge researchers.

Frank
randy@val.com - 03 Mar 2008 22:37 GMT
Frank Wrote:
> I don't know about the other people, but Thomas MS Wolever
> (http://tinyurl.com/23nqtk) is a long time research on glycemic index
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Frank

Thanks for the info Frank.

I've been amazed at how quickly some here are willing to discard on
non technical merits on flimsy assumptions of nefarious motivations

I have not been amazed at how these same folks don't apply the same
scrutiny when the study confirms their beliefs.

Regards
Randy
sphynx.red@gmail.com - 04 Mar 2008 13:33 GMT
> I don't know about the other people, but Thomas MS Wolever
> (http://tinyurl.com/23nqtk) is a long time research on glycemic index
> and co-authored The New Glucose Revolution with JENNIE BRAND-MILLER.
> Others at the University of Toronto, Toronto such as Donald Drucker
> (http://www.glucagon.com/) and PL Brubaker (http://tinyurl.com/yuosf5)
> are cutting edge researchers.

Frank,

Thanks for that.  I apologize.  I assumed poor motives by people I'd
not met nor checked out.  Nor, to be honest, had I read the article
closely enough to make the kind of harsh judgement I did.  I
appreciate your gentle reminder.

Adam Becker Sr
Jefferson - 04 Mar 2008 16:56 GMT
Hi Adam:

>>I don't know about the other people, but Thomas MS Wolever
>>(http://tinyurl.com/23nqtk) is a long time research on glycemic index
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> closely enough to make the kind of harsh judgement I did.  I
> appreciate your gentle reminder.

I didn't think an apology was in order.  It is true that sponsors can
effect the interpretation of results or control the research design.
I was not offended in the least.

Incidentally I have communicated with Thomas MS Wolever in the past and
he was most cooperative. Nevertheless he was one of the lead authors
of this particular study.  Lead authors are usually the first or last
listed in the credits.

Frank
Marshall Price - 21 Mar 2008 06:18 GMT
>> The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates article, by Wolever et al, is
>> here.  (The AJCN is great! They carry some of the most interesting
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> combined with actual significant body fat loss were the key to controlling
> type 2, as measured by A1c.

I think that's going overboard.  Most people get most of their calories
from carbohydrates.

In the United States, we typically get 25% of our calories from fat, but
that's considered exceptional, and perhaps harmful.

I, too, favor a low-carbohydrate diet, but to call the carbohydrate
intakes mentioned in the study "high" is simply unrealistic.

Aside from carbohydrates, only fats and proteins supply calories.
Except for strict carnivores, getting no more than 5% of one's calories
from carbohydrates would be hard to achieve.  And populations who are
strictly carnivorous are not noted for their health and longevity.

As for the high- and low-GI diets, the difference in total carbohydrate
intake (47% vs 52%) is trivial.

Signature

Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 21 Mar 2008 06:42 GMT
> >> The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates article, by Wolever et al, is
> >> here.  (The AJCN is great! They carry some of the most interesting
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> As for the high- and low-GI diets, the difference in total carbohydrate
> intake (47% vs 52%) is trivial.

It remains smarter to simply eat less, down to the right amount:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/BeSmart

A simply parable to promote understanding among the wise and
discerning:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/Parable

Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be euglycemic:

http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthy

Prayerfully in the infinite power and might of the Holy Spirit,

Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Lawful steward of http://EmoryCardiology.com
A latter-day disciple of the KING of kings and LORD of lords.
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/DiscipleNow
Arimic - 04 Mar 2008 21:06 GMT
Interesting

On Mar 3, 6:31 am, "ironjust...@aol.com" <ironjust...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, including ..
> potatoes"
[quoted text clipped - 98 lines]
>
> DEAD PEOPLE WALKINGhttp://tinyurl.com/zk9fk
Arimic - 04 Mar 2008 21:07 GMT
interesting

On Mar 3, 6:31 am, "ironjust...@aol.com" <ironjust...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, including ..
> potatoes"
[quoted text clipped - 98 lines]
>
> DEAD PEOPLE WALKINGhttp://tinyurl.com/zk9fk

Rate this thread:






 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.