Glykeemisen indeksin tuijottamiselle ei perusteita (artikkeli englanniksi)

[astro]

Tässä taas ajatuksia herättelemään Alan Aragonin tekstiä.

Elements Challenging the Concept, Principle, & Strict Application of Glycemic Index
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=283787

 

[leenam]

No jos ei tätä jo tiennyt ennestäänkin niin on läksyissä pahasti jäljessä:

AFFECTING FACTORS

The interplay of many variables can either raise or lower GI, and are often difficult to control. Increased acidity, the presence of fiber, fat, and certain protein foods can lower glycemic response. Reduced particle size, greater ripeness, and heat in cooking can raise glycemic response.

GLYCEMIC LOAD DISPARITY

Glycemic load (GL), which is the amount of carbohydrate per serving or unit of volume, is not always directly proportional to GI. For example, watermelon has a GI of 72, which is considered high. Low-GI advocates have vilified watermelon without realizing the fact that it has a relatively low glycemic load, approximately 6g carbohydrate per 4oz serving. The same disparity of GI & GL applies to carrots, potatoes, and even sports drinks such as Gatorade.

Jo melkein säikähdin otsikkkoa!

 

[Lapo]

Samaa asiaa (?): http://www.biovita.fi/suomi/terveyssivut/orto.html

 

[Fatso]

Tosin kun lukee threadin lopusta niin eipä taida olla hirveesti etua dietillä hifistellä GI & GL:llä..

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=9588599&postcount=109

 

[J.Rossi]

Astrolle uusi kuva avatariin:D.

Aragonilla on useampia tutustumisen arvoisia artkkeleita, äijän kirjoituksia kannattaa kyllä seurailla.

 

[astro]

No jos ei tätä jo tiennyt ennestäänkin niin on läksyissä pahasti jäljessä:

Siis tuossa vaan kerrattiin käsitteitä, itse pointti oli otsikossa ja tuossa Fatson postauksessa.

Samaa asiaa (?): http://www.biovita.fi/suomi/terveyssivut/orto.html

Ei ole samaa asiaa. Tuo on ihan hirveetä tuubaa

Astrolle uusi kuva avatariin:D.

Haha :D

 

[Dymond]

Paras kohta on tässä:

Don't get it twisted, GI is a definitely useful tool that gives us clues to the behavior of certain foods, but that's exactly the main point of this article. Clues; mere hints are all we get from our current knowledge of GI. Successful application of GI is most consistent when we use higher GI sources to enhance the speed of postworkout glycogenesis, and lower-GI starch foods tend to be more micronutrient dense than their higher-GI counterparts, but that's really about the extent of it. Satiety, insulin response, & surrounding factors altering glucose kinetics are all much like a roll of the dice in terms of bottom-line certainty & reliability. Like all things in science - especially the deep bubbly cauldron that is applied nutritional science - it ain't all that simple. All avenues in this area are winding & complex.