Message Boards » Website Suggestions/Feedback

TOPIC: Glycemic Index and Load Oriented diets

← Previous 1
← Previous 1
 
Ic_disabled_photos
Topic has been inactive for 30 days or more and images have been disabled.
Display All Images
July 16, 2012 1:20 PM
Folks,

Counting calories is not the only way, but it works. I lost 30 pounds doing that with your application, and thank you for that.
However, I began to level off, even though I was keeping at 1200 calories a day, and was unwilling to go lower.
I was already starting to get bored and cheat, so knew I needed to change things.
I discovered "The Art and Science of Low Carb Living" by Dr. JEFF VOLEK and Dr. STEPHEN PHINNEY. They finally explained to me what the insulin and leptin connections were all about, debunked the "saturated fat is bad" myth, and showed me a way to eat almost what I want without counting (much) and start to loose weight again. BTW, all lipid, liver and kidney function, and CRP numbers improve on their methodology.

I think it would be really great, for folks like me, diabetics, etc., if you had an alternate "view" and focus. This would be an option that one would choose when setting up their application preferences. In this view, the focus would be on Glycemic Load as calculated by the glycemic index of food ingredients (when available). It would also track fats by type and percentage. Goals would be set up, say for example, to keep GL below 20 or 30 per day, and make sure the percentage of target fats were met or exceeded (a very different way to diet, I know, but this works too!).

What does it take to get you to consider a new, major alternative focus like this?
I'll be there are plenty of dieters out there that would vote in favor of this.
July 18, 2012 10:13 AM
YES, YES YES! I just requested this same thing from them yesterday! In fact, I have developed a "work around" trick to sort of use MFP for counting Glycemic Load. Our approach is specifically designed to prevent the "plateau" that you experienced. Calories are important, but it is the GLYCEMIC LOAD that insures total success -- weight loss along with excellent blood markers!
July 18, 2012 10:19 AM
I know of some that would be all for a Load Oriented Diet.
  11265904
July 23, 2012 1:00 PM
I would be very interested in your workaround trick. I have been finding it very tedious and cumbersome to use MFP for a load oriented diet.
August 5, 2012 9:18 AM
Tracking glycemic load would be great. Is like to know more about the work around mentioned above.
  1746412
August 5, 2012 12:01 PM
Counting carbs works for diabetics, can't see why you would be needing anything special.
  22343347
August 6, 2012 7:17 AM
Yes, totally agree. Glycemic index and load should at least be an option to track. For now I track carbs fiber and sugar, along with calories and protein. If there was a category for glycemic index and load it sure would be easier!
August 6, 2012 7:55 AM
Can someone explain to me what glycemic index and load is? I count my carbs, fat protien, cals and sugar, that is what I have mine set to. I have lost just fine like that. Keeping my carbs at 80/less and fat around 100 and lots of protien, This works great for me. I lost 10 pounds and now I am maintaining. I have low blood sugar problems and eating this way keeps me stable. I don't have crashes and get red faced and see black spots and get really sleepy. And it helps me to not get ill and grouchy to when I have bad blood sugar swings it makes me have mood swings to. I love eating this way...I feel sooooo much better. I lost the 10 pounds just by cutting out all the extra bad carbs I was eating everyday and cutting way back on the sugar. I am set to 25g a day for the sugar and for me that all comes from natural sugars in what I eat. Anyways, I was just wondering if there is something I am missing here?
August 6, 2012 8:03 AM
QUOTE:

Can someone explain to me what glycemic index and load is?


It's just the amount that foods raise your blood sugar. I try to keep my carbs under 100, so at 80, you shouldn't be having any problems with that. There are lots of sites about it that explain it all.

http://www.glycemicindex.com/about.php
Edited by downinaggieland98 On August 6, 2012 8:05 AM
August 6, 2012 8:07 AM
bumb
August 6, 2012 8:08 AM
Another great alternate view is the Primal/Paleo/Neanderthal lifestyle! I suggest Mark Sisson's The Primal Blueprint, or, Robb Wolf's , The Paleo Solution! They do a great job of going over the science behind how and why are bodies accept or reject the foods we eat, especially how carbohydrates, cholesterol, and anti-nutrients all negatively affect our digestive system. Food for thought...did you know that the amount of cholesterol you consume(eat) from high quality plant and animal fat has NOTHING to do with your cholesterol levels? Yep, this includes those fantastic egg yolks too!!
August 6, 2012 8:12 AM
QUOTE:

YES, YES YES! I just requested this same thing from them yesterday! In fact, I have developed a "work around" trick to sort of use MFP for counting Glycemic Load. Our approach is specifically designed to prevent the "plateau" that you experienced. Calories are important, but it is the GLYCEMIC LOAD that insures total success -- weight loss along with excellent blood markers!


YES!! please help with this!! I am very interested in any and all tips you can give! I am borderline diabetic and just cant seem to lose even with exercise and 1300 cal limit!!!
  24465975
August 6, 2012 3:17 PM
Bump
  10694860
November 23, 2012 1:43 AM
Bump!! Meanwile, has anyone a method or site to follow their glycemic level? I have bad genetics (both my father and grand-father dies from liever/kidney illness/cancer) and would like to be aware of daily little changes that can impact positively my gl.

I started to look at this matter yesturday only but logging my foods in MFP and check every single aliment on another site to end up with numbers without even knowing if this is "good" or "bad", what should be my goal,..is a huge amount of work for no result at this moment of time.

Today, I changed my usual morning fresh squeezed orange juice by a fresh lemon juice. For the rest, I am lost, completely...and a way to include glycemic level with nutriments (or loads with meals) on mfp would be awesome!!
  1389399
December 10, 2012 8:27 AM
Would love to be able to track glycemic load as well. I have successfully GAINED 14 lbs. since February while keeping my calories between 1400 and 1450 daily as well as tracking my carbs/proteins/fats/etc. as suggested by a registered dietician. Also exercising. Endocrinologist tested and found that I am insulin resistant. Being able to track the glycemic load as opposed to just carbs would be great in order to help stabalize insulin. I ended up having to begin meds last week but would love to hear from anyone who can offer help with this.
  17141394
December 10, 2012 9:11 AM
QUOTE:

Folks,

Counting calories is not the only way, but it works. I lost 30 pounds doing that with your application, and thank you for that.
However, I began to level off, even though I was keeping at 1200 calories a day, and was unwilling to go lower.
I was already starting to get bored and cheat, so knew I needed to change things.
I discovered "The Art and Science of Low Carb Living" by Dr. JEFF VOLEK and Dr. STEPHEN PHINNEY. They finally explained to me what the insulin and leptin connections were all about, debunked the "saturated fat is bad" myth, and showed me a way to eat almost what I want without counting (much) and start to loose weight again. BTW, all lipid, liver and kidney function, and CRP numbers improve on their methodology.

I think it would be really great, for folks like me, diabetics, etc., if you had an alternate "view" and focus. This would be an option that one would choose when setting up their application preferences. In this view, the focus would be on Glycemic Load as calculated by the glycemic index of food ingredients (when available). It would also track fats by type and percentage. Goals would be set up, say for example, to keep GL below 20 or 30 per day, and make sure the percentage of target fats were met or exceeded (a very different way to diet, I know, but this works too!).

What does it take to get you to consider a new, major alternative focus like this?
I'll be there are plenty of dieters out there that would vote in favor of this.


I went to Penn State with Jeff Volek. I know his research well. He is an incredible authority on Nutrition and Exercise science.
  29952235
July 8, 2013 5:11 PM
As an active #QuanitifiedSelf participant I have been using this data for a magnitude of calculations and coorelation analysis and being able to include glycemic load would be massively helpful for a fuller picture of health. Please see the below reading around why glycemic load is so interesting to me.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1007137#t=articleResults
July 8, 2013 5:32 PM
I agree the glycemic index/load tracking could be beneficial to everyone.
July 8, 2013 5:51 PM
QUOTE:

Can someone explain to me what glycemic index and load is? I count my carbs, fat protien, cals and sugar, that is what I have mine set to. I have lost just fine like that. Keeping my carbs at 80/less and fat around 100 and lots of protien, This works great for me. I lost 10 pounds and now I am maintaining. I have low blood sugar problems and eating this way keeps me stable. I don't have crashes and get red faced and see black spots and get really sleepy. And it helps me to not get ill and grouchy to when I have bad blood sugar swings it makes me have mood swings to. I love eating this way...I feel sooooo much better. I lost the 10 pounds just by cutting out all the extra bad carbs I was eating everyday and cutting way back on the sugar. I am set to 25g a day for the sugar and for me that all comes from natural sugars in what I eat. Anyways, I was just wondering if there is something I am missing here?



"The glycemic load of a food tells how much eating that food raises blood glucose. It is a similar concept as the glycemic index, except it takes serving sizes into account. The formula is to take the number of grams of carbohydrate in the serving, multiply by the glycemic index, and divide by 100. Theoretically, if a food has glycemic load of one point, it would raise the blood sugar as much as one gram of glucose."
October 11, 2013 4:34 PM
Hi! I saw this on another forum and tested the link. I just wnated to share it to everyone since it is still working. It's an eBook about Glycemic Index Secrets:
http://youthfullivingreport.com/bonus/book-download/uIT
October 14, 2013 7:14 AM
As a type-2 diabetic I, too, would really value Glycemic Load info per serving.

I use this site, among others:

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

It would be great to incorporate it in my calorie myfitnesspal log.

cheers

pete
  51518164
December 17, 2013 10:49 AM
Another good reason to consider glycemic load: A number of researchers are postulating that Alzheimer's disease may be a form of diabetes (google Type 3 Diabetes), that insulin resistance in the brain may be related to or a cause of Alzheimer's.
April 5, 2014 2:17 AM
Has anything happened re GL tracking since last post? I assume not. I too am border line diabetic and would find it VERY helpful to choose and track low GL foods. Please?
Edited by annienewme On April 5, 2014 2:17 AM
May 21, 2014 3:27 AM
Not all carbs are created equal. In fact, some carbs don't raise your blood sugar much at all (like chick peas and black beans, and even pasta surprisingly). Some carbs will raise even your sugar, but not your insulin (like most raw fruits and vegetables). Since weight gain is usually caused by spikes in insulin, (also known as the fat producing hormone), it is wise to keep insulin levels in check. Low carb diets can achieve this, but a lot of people have trouble staying low carb all the time. Take me for example, I am a vegetarian and insulin resistant/pre-diabetic, and it is very difficult to stay on a low carb diet because I don't eat beef, or pork, or chicken, and even dairy is not well tolerated by my body, though I do indulge now and then. By counting the glycemic load or glycemic index (explanation to follow), it allows me a lot more options. As long as I keep my glycemic load under about 80 per day, I can reduce blood sugar spikes and keep fat producing insulin at bay.

The glycemic index was developed to determine how much a particular food will raise your blood sugar, compared to a piece of white bread (white bread having an index of 100). If a food produced a lower amount of sugar, it might have been given a value of 73, or 57, depending on the food. If it was higher, it may have a glycemic index of 123, or 324.

The glycemic load was developed when a group of scientists got together and said, well the glycemic index is great, but they are not taking into account the normal portion size of a particular food. So they converted the numbers based on portion size. The glycemic load of 100 grams of a particular food can be calculated easily:

* Glycemic index x Grams of carbohydrates / 100

to put real numbers in place, try this calculation for white rice

72 x 36 = 2,592 / 100 = 26 glycemic load

The trick is figuring out how much a 100 grams of white rice is (it's about 1/2 cup).

So, tracking glycemic load may be easier than counting calories or carbs for some people. I am just learning how to do it, but I think once I get the hang of it, it will be much easier.

Hope that helps!

* Courtesy of http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-calculate-glycemic-load.html
June 21, 2014 3:16 PM
Yet another request for glycemic load vs. index. Index would be irrelevant BC, as mentioned previously, it does not take into account portion size. So the load data would configure based on portion/serving just like map calculates calories bases on amount/portion.

Message Boards » Website Suggestions/Feedback

Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.