Re: Carbs and Physical Activity

[Guest guest]

I used to do superslow and trained 3 of my friends regularly awhile

ago. It was hard if done correctly and by end of our " 20 minute " full

body workouts almost fell on the floor afterward. WHile i did it my

strength went up dramatically but i lost size and was quite skinny. (

this I partake to my then high carb diet and then my RAW fruitarian

diet ) I have 2 friends who want me to train them in it again as the

results they got were far better from my program than anything they

had ever done. Recently though i have gone a different way in certain

yoga exersices adn special supplement exercises for my martial art

that are working quite spectacularly right now

> -

>

> To be honest, I think the whole aerobics movement, in large part

created by

> Dr. , is possibly just as bad as the low-fat low-

cholesterol

> fetish in large part created by Dr. Ancel Keys. There's nothing

wrong with

> walking, playing a sport, etc., and for all I know rebounding may

be a good

> thing (I've never tried it and I don't know how hard it is on the

body) but

> an awful lot of the " fitness improvements " noticed due to aerobics

are

> actually due to skill acquisition and motor memory yielding

efficiency

> improvements, not increases in actual capacity. This is why

exercise

> rotation (I forget the official term) came about, because people

convinced

> of the fundamental virtue of aerobics had to find some way around

the

> problem of declining returns.

>

> It's also very possible that Dr. Ray Peat is right in saying that

the

> reason athletes, particularly distance runners, have such low

heartbeats is

> not because they're so fit, but because their exercise regiments

have

> rendered them moderately hypothyroid.

>

> For basic health I think strength training is the most important

type of

> exercise. It builds your body rather than tearing it down, and the

> increase in muscle will increase your metabolism and your body's

> resilience. However, there are many kinds of strength training,

and

> they're not all created equal. Some will do just as much damage as

any

> aerobic workout. The ultimate extension of low-impact high-yield

strength

> training is called by its creators " Super Slow Exercise " . What

that means

> is that you move the resistance (weights, nautilus, whatever) very,

very

> slowly. As I recall, it was originally designed for people with

> osteoporosis who simply couldn't move quickly without breaking

their bones,

> but then they discovered how much more effective and healthy it was

for

> everyone else. " Super Slow " unfortunately is not a great term from

a PR

> perspective, and it is just one branch of what's called High

Intensity

> Training (HIT) but from what I can tell, it's the best.

>

> I have to admit, though, that while all my research points in this

> direction, I haven't tried SS myself yet. I can't afford to go to

a health

> club all the time, and until I can clear out a room and pull

together

> enough money to buy a modest SS-suitable home gym (most home

equipment

> isn't well-suited to SS) I won't be able to try it. However, I

have

> abundant experience with conventional aerobics and a fair amount

with

> conventional resistance training. (I've tried various equipment

and I used

> to have a Trimax.) None of them served me well, and I think that

SS in

> combination with a good diet will enable me to exercise without the

> disastrous effects on my blood sugar previous regiments caused.

>

> (Nothing's perfect, unfortunately -- official SS doctrine is that

diet

> isn't related to musculature.)

>

> >So then, what exercise do you suggest for an aerobic

> >workout. I exercise on the rebounder about 15 min. 4x

> >week. Very mild. I find that if I do more I get too

> >exhausted. If I don't do it at all for a few weeks, I

> >get too winded and tired when playing tennis, etc. In

> >your research, what type and duration is suggested for

> >a healthy body???

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

Interesting! I'll have to research ...

-- Heidi

At 02:13 PM 8/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:

>I used to believe in aerobic exercise myself, and every other day I did one

>hour on the treadmill, pushing myself to the limit. I increased my speed,

>I increased the elevation, etc. -- and I did lose weight, but I didn't gain

>any muscle mass and after about a year of that, my knees were shot and my

>back wasn't too happy. If I'd continued, as some people do, I'd have done

>even more damage. (I also had another problem: serious exercise knocked my

>blood sugar down for the entire day, so that on any day I walked on the

>treadmill, I'd basically be out of commission for the rest of the day.)

>

>Unfortunately, I lost all my bookmarks awhile ago and so I only have a

>couple on the subject of exercise, but here they are:

>

><http://www.superslow.com/main.html>http://www.superslow.com/main.html

>

>http://www.ultimate-exercise.com/

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It could very well be the milk. The three most common food allergies, which can

result in fatigue, are wheat, corn and milk.

When you ferment (I use kefir), the kefir " eats " the lactose. Some people who

are lactose intolerant can drink kefir. Just make sure you let it ferment long

enough. Rule of thumb: The sweeter the kefir the more lactose (milk sugar) is

still present.

Kat

http://www.katking.com

----- Original Message -----

From: yogabud

Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2002 11:46 PM

Subject: Re: Carbs and Physical Activity

This is wierd. I now get organic milk from jersey cows. I have been

taking 1 cup for breakfast and lunch ( well a litte over maybe 300

mills for each meal) I now have gotten slightly lethargic. Perhaps it

is the carb content of the milk? How many carbs are in it?. Is Kefir

the best thign to do with it to get rid of alot of carbs? I also get

butter from teh same guy raw and also as of last week cream (

extremely think it is to ) I do alot of exersise adn i notice in last

2 weeks I am getting tired and have lost some " virbancy "

im thinkign its from teh milk.

> Kat-

>

> >I have been working on putting together a plan, and it seems weird

to " go

> >for the fat! "

>

> It can seem weird, but you'll get used to it once you see how much

better

> you feel!

>

> >The first 2 weeks I am going to really try to stay almost zero

carbs (20

> >per day), but they are hidden in everything.

>

> Hidden in everything is right, unfortunately. It's hard to eat low-

carb,

> and it's doubly hard to do so in accordance with NT/NAPD. Seems

everything

> out there is full of sugar, starch, processed crap, or most likely

a

> combination of all three.

>

> But it's possible. And if you eat enough fat and reduce your

carbs, you'll

> find that you can go a long time between meals.

>

> >So, " half my calories from fat " means I eat in volume about 2

parts meat

> >to 1 part fat.

>

> To be honest, I'd guess that half your calories from fat is a

_minimum_ for

> you, at least for now. As long as you make sure your diet includes

all the

> nutrients you need, which will be helped a lot by the incorporation

of raw

> grassfed butter and organ meats from pastured cows into your meals,

you

> should do great.

>

> >I like bacon, so that will be a good starting point, and I guess

high fat

> >ground beef would be another, I also like Virgin Olive Oil. What

about

> >coconut oil? I checked into nuts, and while they are high in fat

they are

> >also fairly high in carbs. What about fresh broth, that would

have all

> >the fats, right?

>

> Coconut oil is a terrific fat. It stimulates the metabolism, it

has

> germicidal properties, and it's saturated. Highly recommended. My

current

> preference in coconut oils has shifted from Tropical Traditions

> (www.coconut-info.com) to Coconut Oil Supreme (www.coconutoil-

online.com)

> but either are excellent and worthwhile. Spectrum and Omega

coconut oils

> are acceptable in a pinch, but TT and COS are the only true virgin

oils on

> the market that I know of.

>

> Nuts generally can be a problem in the weight loss phase because

they are

> very carb rich, but in the longer term they can be an excellent

source of

> nutrition provided you don't overindulge, as they are somewhat

starchy and

> rich in omega 6 oils. Almonds are particularly easy to digest, and

so I'd

> say they're probably the best nut to eat other than coconuts, which

are

> nearly unique in the vegetable kingdom due to their wonderful lipid

> profile. Still and all, coconut meat is quite carby and you may

always

> need to limit it.

>

> As to ground beef, it can be very useful, particularly if you're on

a

> budget, but I do have certain reservations. First, if it's ground

at the

> processing plant instead of at home by you immediately before use,

it's

> very vulnerable to oxidation. Second, I've been told that plants

use harsh

> detergents to clean the grinders and that they don't rinse very

well,

> meaning that all ground beef on the market contains detergent

residue. If

> true, that's a very bad thing, as those detergents are definitely

not safe

> for human consumption. I can't say for sure that the detergent

problem

> exists as I have no rock-solid evidence, but it's certainly not

unlikely or

> implausible, and I can say that I have more energy and lose weight

more

> easily when I eat steaks every day instead of ground beef.

>

> Finally, WRT bacon, I'd highly recommend either avoiding it or

being

> careful about where you get it. As far as brands you can find at a

> supermarket, Applegate farms is the best that I know of. It

doesn't have

> any nitrites or nitrates, and they're a bit better about how they

raise

> their pigs. But generally speaking, pigs are treated the worst of

all

> livestock animals by far. They're literally fed garbage -- used

fryer oil

> being a common example. To paraphrase, they are what they eat.

That's not

> an indictment of pigs and pork themselves, but it does mean it's

best to

> order pork, bacon and lard from farms which pasture their pigs and

don't

> feed them any waste or soy, and preferably not any corn either, as

the fat

> pigs deposit is basically the fat they consume.

>

> Please don't think that this makes eating healthily untenably

difficult,

> though! Ordering direct from a farm is actually a great way to

support

> sustainable agriculture, and even better, you can save money that

way by

> cutting out the middle man. Eat Wild (www.eatwild.com) is a great

resource

> for finding farms which pasture their animals and which are near

you or

> will ship to you.

>

> >I know that later this will be fine, but do you see anything wrong

with it

> >for the first 2 weeks?

>

> Maybe, maybe not. It's possible that the liver will turn some or

all of

> the lactic acid back into glucose, so estimating the effective carb

count

> of fermented dairy is hard to do. That's why I always use at least

half

> cream, because it has much less sugar than milk to begin with.

I've also

> found that I feel better if I don't eat a meal of fermented dairy

alone,

> but have it with some nice, fatty meat. Kefir is definitely an

excellent

> beverage, though, loaded with nutrients and probiotic cultures!

>

> >What other sources do you get your fats from.

>

> Raw pastured Jersey cream, coconut oil and pastured beef are my

main

> sources. I occasionally use some olive oil, and I'm about to try

some palm

> oil to make mayonnaise, plus I eat a fair amount of eggs, but cream

(and

> butter), coconut oil and beef are the big ones, and if I had to

pick one

> single food that is most important to my health, it'd have to be

beef.

>

>

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

>Which by a more moderate " low carb " standard is probably fairly low carb. I

>can't relate at all the the " normal " diet which seems to me to be

>humoungously high in carbs (like, all starch!).

Well, there's a more traditional calorie ratio of 40% from carbs and 30%

each from protein and fat, which I'd say might be a workable baseline from

which departures can be called " low-carb " and " high-carb " , but certainly

the conventional wisdom seems to be more like 70% carb, 20% protein and 10%

fat, which is both clinically insane and causes clinical insanity. <g>

Personally, I think 30% of calories from fat is probably an absolute

minimum no matter who you are, and for many people the percentage has to be

well over 50%. Steffanson's work involved raw animal food diets which, I

think, broke down to up 80% of calories from fat. That sort of diet

certainly requires care to get all necessary nutrients from various organ

meats, though.

>They could be very fattening: I haven't tested that out much. But they

>don't affect my energy or hunger levels. Maybe because I usually eat them

>fried as hash browns (raw fries) in coconut oil.

Perhaps, but while saturated fats will slow down the digestion and

absorption of a potato, potatoes by themselves give a harder, faster hit

than pure table sugar. They're just not good foods in any quantity.

It's also possible that just as kids don't immediately show problems from

eating a modern diet, you could be showing no visible symptoms from eating

potatoes even while things go wrong inside.

But then again, maybe a modest consumption of potatoes is OK as long as

they're accompanied by tons of fat and a diet rich in animal foods.

>Interestingly though, many cultures DO have big

>starchy roots to consume, like taro. And often they don't eat it just

>cooked -- they ferment it first. Maybe because it's too starchy?

That's very possible. I believe there's even a fermented potato recipe of

some kind in NT.

>If I

>eat very few carbs I get sickish: I need some fruit or potato or something

>to balance the protein, less if there is more fat with the meal though.

The fact that your symptoms are reduced by increasing fat with the meal

suggests to me that it's not any kind of carb-starvation (after all, unlike

fat and protein, carbs are simply not required for life) but a matter of

the overall nature and composition of your diet.

-

[Guest guest]

>>>> Steffanson's work involved raw animal food diets which, I

think, broke down to up 80% of calories from fat. That sort of diet

certainly requires care to get all necessary nutrients from various organ

meats, though.

--->, I'm interested in reading Steffanson's work - I've seen it

referenced in a number of sources but haven't read any of his original work.

Is there a particular book or article that discusses his work in nutrition

and traditional foods?

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

Hi Suze,

There is an entire web site devoted to Steffanson. I found it through

the search engine. It's a Steffenson Association of some kind.

I haven't had time to return to it and read it yet, but I will

eventually. Of course NAPD has quite a bit about him and the book

Metablic Man: The First 1000 Years.....( see in previous recent

message) also talks about him. Enjoy !

Sheila

> >>>> Steffanson's work involved raw animal food diets which, I

> think, broke down to up 80% of calories from fat. That sort of diet

> certainly requires care to get all necessary nutrients from various

organ

> meats, though.

>

> --->, I'm interested in reading Steffanson's work - I've seen it

> referenced in a number of sources but haven't read any of his

original work.

> Is there a particular book or article that discusses his work in

nutrition

> and traditional foods?

>

> Suze Fisher

> Web Design & Development

> http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

> mailto:s.fisher22@v...

[Guest guest]

At 06:01 PM 8/14/2002 -0400, you wrote:

> >They could be very fattening: I haven't tested that out much. But they

> >don't affect my energy or hunger levels. Maybe because I usually eat them

> >fried as hash browns (raw fries) in coconut oil.

>

>Perhaps, but while saturated fats will slow down the digestion and

>absorption of a potato, potatoes by themselves give a harder, faster hit

>than pure table sugar. They're just not good foods in any quantity.

I think a lot of it is how they are cooked and what they are with. I tested

a plain baked potato once: it DOES send your blood sugar off.

But my normal breakfast of raw grated potato fried in coconut

oil with a couple of eggs, does not. My hash browns are pretty

much swimming in oil. Anyway, I guess it's a learning curve --

I'm still experimenting.

You are likely right about adding fats. Coconut oil is an

interesting case -- I'm told the MCT acts more like a carb

(without the insulin response) than a fat. It DOES give

you instant energy, and more energy than I ever get

from carbs (or from other fats).

And I kind of think the lactic acid turns into glucose pretty

quickly too, judging from the energy I get from it.

Heidi

[Guest guest]

Suze-

>Is there a particular book or article that discusses his work in nutrition

>and traditional foods?

Amazon lists six books for him, but five are out of print, and it's unclear

whether any treat on diet extensively.

The Price-Pottenger Foundation has at least one of his books, but it's only

available for perusing in their library.

One reference I found sounds promising, if, that is, you can track down a

used copy somewhere: The Fat of the Land, Vilhjalmur Stefansson, The

MACMillan Company, 1956.

Otherwise it looks like we're limited to secondary sources like NAPD,

" Strong Medicine " by Dr Blake F. son, MD. and the like.

-

[Guest guest]

I was told the waxier the potato the slower it will convert of sugar.

I thought that was an interesting fact. This was told to me today by

a biodymanic farmer neighbor who raises potatoes and many other

vegetables. I suppose the addition of coconut oil and /or butter

would slow it down even more.

Sheila

> > >They could be very fattening: I haven't tested that out much.

But they

> > >don't affect my energy or hunger levels. Maybe because I usually

eat them

> > >fried as hash browns (raw fries) in coconut oil.

> >

> >Perhaps, but while saturated fats will slow down the digestion and

> >absorption of a potato, potatoes by themselves give a harder,

faster hit

> >than pure table sugar. They're just not good foods in any

quantity.

>

> I think a lot of it is how they are cooked and what they are with.

I tested

> a plain baked potato once: it DOES send your blood sugar off.

> But my normal breakfast of raw grated potato fried in coconut

> oil with a couple of eggs, does not. My hash browns are pretty

> much swimming in oil. Anyway, I guess it's a learning curve --

> I'm still experimenting.

>

> You are likely right about adding fats. Coconut oil is an

> interesting case -- I'm told the MCT acts more like a carb

> (without the insulin response) than a fat. It DOES give

> you instant energy, and more energy than I ever get

> from carbs (or from other fats).

>

> And I kind of think the lactic acid turns into glucose pretty

> quickly too, judging from the energy I get from it.

>

>

> Heidi

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/15/02 7:32:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

s.fisher22@... writes:

> ->Sheila, that's probably because 'wax' is a lipid - it's *fat* which slows

> down the digestion time, hence probably lowers the postprandial blood sugar

> spike.

Is this something naturally found in the potato before cooking? How do I

look for " waxier " varieties of potatoes when I go to the store? Is it a

function of the breed/variety of potato, or individual potatoes?

Thanks,

Chris

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of

them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense

compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to

bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature.

Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the

truth, and for those who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

[Guest guest]

Hi Suze,

There is an entire web site devoted to Steffanson. I found it through

the search engine. It's a Steffenson Association of some kind.

------------->hi sheila, thanks for that info. I've been trying to find it,

but no luck so far

I haven't had time to return to it and read it yet, but I will

eventually. Of course NAPD has quite a bit about him and the book

Metablic Man: The First 1000 Years.....( see in previous recent

message) also talks about him. Enjoy !

--------->yeh i know, *i* wrote that post! LOL It references " My Life with

the Eskimos. " On the web, i just found references to " The Friendly Arctic "

and " Discovery " - his autobiography. The site that lists these titles says

he wrote *many* books, though. Has anyone read any of his books, and can

recommend any one in particular?

I DID fiind some info/excerpts? from My Life with the Eskimos here:

http://www.duffyslaw.com/current14.htm

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

>>>>Amazon lists six books for him, but five are out of print, and it's

unclear

whether any treat on diet extensively.

The Price-Pottenger Foundation has at least one of his books, but it's only

available for perusing in their library.

One reference I found sounds promising, if, that is, you can track down a

used copy somewhere: The Fat of the Land, Vilhjalmur Stefansson, The

MACMillan Company, 1956.

Otherwise it looks like we're limited to secondary sources like NAPD,

" Strong Medicine " by Dr Blake F. son, MD. and the like.

-------------->Thanks . I bet " My Life with the Eskimos " might have some

interesting info on their nutrition as well. But " The Fat of the Land "

definitely sounds intriguing! I also saw in my web search just now that some

of his books are out of print. He seems to have been a prolific writer as

i've come across a list of titles of his books that's quite long! (barnes

and noble) you can even buy a $40 book that's a *bibliography* of his works!

oh wait a minute, i just found a reference that says " the fat of the land "

has been re-named from " not by bread alone " and barnes and noble has that

one. this source also says this is the definitive book on pemmican! it's

mine - i just ordered it and also " My Life with the Eskimos "

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

-

[Guest guest]

>>>>I was told the waxier the potato the slower it will convert of sugar.

I thought that was an interesting fact. This was told to me today by

a biodymanic farmer neighbor who raises potatoes and many other

vegetables. I suppose the addition of coconut oil and /or butter

would slow it down even more.

->Sheila, that's probably because 'wax' is a lipid - it's *fat* which slows

down the digestion time, hence probably lowers the postprandial blood sugar

spike.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

> ->Sheila, that's probably because 'wax' is a lipid - it's *fat* which

slows

> down the digestion time, hence probably lowers the postprandial blood

sugar

> spike.

Is this something naturally found in the potato before cooking?

------->yes. plants concentrate wax on their outer surface - often on the

leaves to protect against sun and pests, i believe.

How do I look for " waxier " varieties of potatoes when I go to the store?

Is it a

function of the breed/variety of potato, or individual potatoes?

------->i don't know - i'm not familiar with potato breeds enough to know

which are waxier. i didn't even know potatoes *were* waxy until this

thread - it seems odd to me that a plant's *root* would be waxy, as it's

usually more typical of leaves and stems *above ground* AFAIK. hopefully,

someone else can answer your question.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

Heidi wrote: <I'm told the MCT acts more like a carb

(without the insulin response) than a fat>

What is MCT??

just wondering

[Guest guest]

Heidi wrote: <I'm told the MCT acts more like a carb

(without the insulin response) than a fat>

What is MCT??

--------->Medium Chain Tryglyceride. Triglycerides are composed of 3 fatty

acids and a glycerol backbone. Typically a triglycerides (actually,

technically called " trialglycerols " ) have fatty acids of varying chain

lengths - some shorter, some longer. but apparently coconut oil concentrates

medium chain fatty acids (generally considered to be 10-14 carbons, i think)

so i guess they make up a good portion of the trialglycerols...

FWIW, butter is a concentrated source of butyric acid - a 4 carbon (short

chain) fatty acid, so also should burn up rather quickly as opposed to being

stored.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

--------->Medium Chain Tryglyceride. Triglycerides are composed of 3 fatty

acids and a glycerol backbone. Typically a triglycerides (actually,

technically called " trialglycerols " )

^^^^^dang! i always grossly misspell that! it's actually " Triacylglycerol. "

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

> ->Sheila, that's probably because 'wax' is a lipid - it's *fat*

which slows down the digestion time, hence probably lowers the

postprandial blood sugar spike.

I always though 'waxy' was just a descriptive word for how the

potatoes look - not that there's actually wax. In cookbooks, boiling

potatoes (e.g. the red and white ones) get described as 'waxy'

compared to the brown rough baking ones.

[Guest guest]

> ->Sheila, that's probably because 'wax' is a lipid - it's *fat*

> which slows

> down the digestion time, hence probably lowers the postprandial

> blood sugar spike.

" Waxy " , as a description of texture in potatoes, doesn't have

anything to do with lipids. Rather, the form of carbohydrate is what

underlies the textural difference just as it does with " sticky "

rice. Carb form impacts the GI both in terms of solubility as well

as how quickly and completely the particular starch can be reduced to

glucose in the body. So a " waxy " potato is not really waxy, it just

has a " waxy " texture because of the form that the carbs are in.

Potatoes that are considered " waxy " are fingerlings and red potatoes

(including " new " potatoes). Medium-waxy are all of the rest except

russets. Russets are considered the most starchy. In

general, " waxy " potatoes are most appropriate for boiling and

roasting. Starchy potatoes are most appropriate for baking and

mashing. Medium-waxy (or medium-starchy) are basically dual purpose

(this includes yukon golds).

With that said, waxy or not, I don't think that potatoes are bad for

people unless they eat them to the exclusion of foods that supply

needed nutrients not supplied by the potatoes. I think that high GI

as a pathogenic feature of diet is simply the other side of the

excessively linear, reductionist coin.

If it's a whole food, and it's being eaten in a proportion to the

remainder of the diet of whole foods that doesn't prevent the person

from meeting their nutritional needs, it *will* be good for you.

That's true whether it's white rice, potatoes, white bread, pasta, or

dumplings. It's *probably* even true for sugar.

There is clear evidence, in my opinion, that demonstrates that a high

GI is not a pathogenic feature of foods. Asia's consumption of white

rice, even in those areas known for exceptional health, is quite

high. White rice is, in most of it's forms, anywhere from medium-

high to extremely hign on the GI...and very similar in GI to

potatoes. People in areas with diets very high in rice, still manage

to thrive in general. Why/how? Seafood, sea vegetables, and very

nutrient dense land vegetables. They are able to supply their

nutritional needs in a very small number of calories, so they can eat

more " empty " high GI carbs and not experience problems.

If high GI is so bad for us, we should at least see high incidences

of diabetes in asia. The fact that we don't is telling.

If we ignore contradictory evidence such as this and/or make up all

sorts of " reaching " excuses for the discrepancies, we will simply be

the replacement for the currently misguided anti-cholesterol warriors.

Remember, it's not what's *in* the foods that's the problem; it's

what's *NOT* in the *diet* that's the problem.

[Guest guest]

>>>> " Waxy " , as a description of texture in potatoes, doesn't have

anything to do with lipids.

------->well that explains my confusion why potatoes would be considered

'waxy'. Wax is typically concentrated on leaves and stems to refract

sunlight, among other things. I've also never noticed any pototoes i've

eaten to be 'waxy' in the sense of 'fats'.

>>>>With that said, waxy or not, I don't think that potatoes are bad for

people unless they eat them to the exclusion of foods that supply

needed nutrients not supplied by the potatoes. I think that high GI

as a pathogenic feature of diet is simply the other side of the

excessively linear, reductionist coin.

If we ignore contradictory evidence such as this and/or make up all

sorts of " reaching " excuses for the discrepancies, we will simply be

the replacement for the currently misguided anti-cholesterol warriors.

-------->couldn't agree more! since we've already had this discussion

elsewhere, i assume you're not directing this at me since i'm of the same

mind you are on this. however, oh boy, can't believe i'm saying this....if

the leg's already broken, low glycemic can be a crutch! (someone shoot me!)

lol so perhaps, in *some* instances, low glycemic foods are indicated for

those who've already damaged their system quite a bit and need to hop along

on crutches til they are able to address the root problem..?

Potatoes are my primary carb source these days and i don't pay any attention

to glycemic index. IIRC, beef is pretty high too, and i eat a lot of that,

as well. Whole foods, preferably grown in nutrient dense soils, will not

likely *cause* blood sugar problems, IMO, and that includes potatoes.

Hey, maybe 'endothelial dysfunction' is at the root of the problem! <g>

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

>i assume you're not directing this at me since i'm of the same

> mind you are on this.

Right. I considered breaking it up into two separate posts, but then

it lost its flow...so I just sent it as one big post instead.

> however, oh boy, can't believe i'm saying this....if

> the leg's already broken, low glycemic can be a crutch! (someone

> shoot me!)

Bang! ;-)

> lol so perhaps, in *some* instances, low glycemic foods are

> indicated for those who've already damaged their system quite a bit

> and need to hop along

> on crutches til they are able to address the root problem..?

You know, I think you use the analogy better than the analogy's

progenitor did.

> Hey, maybe 'endothelial dysfunction' is at the root of the problem!

You know, now that I know a bit more about some of this stuff, I'm

struck by how vague the term 'endothelial dysfunction' actually is.

Endothelial cells are *everywhere* and serve many different functions

(with similarities of course). Bladder lining, vascular lining,

cornea, mucous membranes, stomach lining, intestinal lining. It

seems like if it lines something, forms a dynamic barrier, or

secretes something, it's probably endothelial cells.

Noteworthy point: Vitamin A is very important to the health of

endothelial cells.

I would love to see a survey done to discover the relative prevalence

of acne, ulcers (mouth and stomach), IBD, sinus problems, etc among

people with early onset CVD. A high correlation would indeed point

strongly toward endothelial issues...as does the correlation between

diabetes and heart disease. Unfortunately, there are other common

features between those two diseases as well.

[Guest guest]

-

>That's true whether it's white rice, potatoes, white bread, pasta, or

>dumplings. It's *probably* even true for sugar.

Has a truly healthy culture EVER been observed making use of white bread,

pasta and/or sugar as a staple?

>I think that high GI

>as a pathogenic feature of diet is simply the other side of the

>excessively linear, reductionist coin.

And what do you call the single-factor obsession with what is missing from

the diet to the exclusion of any consideration that what's in the diet

might be harmful?

-

[Guest guest]

Suze-

>i *think* justin was thinking in terms of receptor cells

>possibly being damaged by oxidized lipids, likely PUFAs.

That's true, but it's also true that he conceded that the first appearance

of diabetes coincided with the first appearance of sugar, and he postulated

that sugar damages the body. He also objected most strenuously to the idea

that a condition could be caused by more than one factor.

I leave you to do the math. <g>

-

[Guest guest]

> Hey, maybe 'endothelial dysfunction' is at the root of the problem!

You know, now that I know a bit more about some of this stuff, I'm

struck by how vague the term 'endothelial dysfunction' actually is.

Endothelial cells are *everywhere* and serve many different functions

(with similarities of course). Bladder lining, vascular lining,

cornea, mucous membranes, stomach lining, intestinal lining. It

seems like if it lines something, forms a dynamic barrier, or

secretes something, it's probably endothelial cells.

--------->yep! i *think* justin was thinking in terms of receptor cells

possibly being damaged by oxidized lipids, likely PUFAs. but i'd have to

back to the beyondprice archives and my email to verify - don't want to put

words in his mouth. i'm also not sure if he's still thinking along those

lines or has changed his mind with subsequent reading...

>>>>Noteworthy point: Vitamin A is very important to the health of

endothelial cells.

----------->this is good to know as i think i have a really high vit. A

intake. thanks for your thoughts on this! (no thanks for shooting me, though

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

Suze-

>i *think* justin was thinking in terms of receptor cells

>possibly being damaged by oxidized lipids, likely PUFAs.

That's true, but it's also true that he conceded that the first appearance

of diabetes coincided with the first appearance of sugar, and he postulated

that sugar damages the body. He also objected most strenuously to the idea

that a condition could be caused by more than one factor.

---------->no doubt sugar is total garbage that does very real damage beyond

glycemic load btw, BUT, did the rise of diabetes not also coincide with the

sudden increased consumption of PUFAs (via processed vegetable and seed

oils)??

I leave you to do the math. <g>

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...