Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Low-carb Diet Forum
Insulin load index / most ketogenic foods
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Spiker" data-source="post: 840674" data-attributes="member: 102150"><p>I really disagree with this suggestion there is anything like an 80% maximum protein conversion potential. I don't see any evidence for it and frankly I think it is a dangerous claim to make unless you are really convinced about there being solid evidence. Two points on this. </p><p></p><p>1. Yes there are variations in the GNG yield of different amino acids. But we are not talking about huge variations. More to the point we do not consume single amino acids, not even athletes using specialised supplements. We are always consuming a broad mix of amino acid types in our protein, particularly natural protein. So at best we are "tinkering at the margins" if we try to shift our amino acid profile. </p><p></p><p>2. You cannot just look at a theoretical chemical yield of glucose from amino acids / protein. Only a limited number of metabolic pathways are available. Very large numbers of theoretically possible reaction sequences are simply not available in our biology. It's not useful to look at what a chemist in a lab might do to extract glucose from amino acids in a lab (even restricting the options to exothermic reaction sequences not endothermic). GNG is the only game in town, and only conversion ratio that matters is the GNG ratio. Be that 54% or 58%. </p><p></p><p>Whoever is reporting stable blood sugar with a 100% protein to carb ratio, I would immediately question if their basal rate and carb ratios are correct. I would verify that by doing systematic variation tests in their bolus, for example doubling the protein in a meal while holding the carbs constant, and vice versa. I expect you would see a hypo in the first test and probably a hyper in the second test, or alternatively you might discover they are inadvertently using an excess basal rate / dose to cover their typical boluses.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Spiker, post: 840674, member: 102150"] I really disagree with this suggestion there is anything like an 80% maximum protein conversion potential. I don't see any evidence for it and frankly I think it is a dangerous claim to make unless you are really convinced about there being solid evidence. Two points on this. 1. Yes there are variations in the GNG yield of different amino acids. But we are not talking about huge variations. More to the point we do not consume single amino acids, not even athletes using specialised supplements. We are always consuming a broad mix of amino acid types in our protein, particularly natural protein. So at best we are "tinkering at the margins" if we try to shift our amino acid profile. 2. You cannot just look at a theoretical chemical yield of glucose from amino acids / protein. Only a limited number of metabolic pathways are available. Very large numbers of theoretically possible reaction sequences are simply not available in our biology. It's not useful to look at what a chemist in a lab might do to extract glucose from amino acids in a lab (even restricting the options to exothermic reaction sequences not endothermic). GNG is the only game in town, and only conversion ratio that matters is the GNG ratio. Be that 54% or 58%. Whoever is reporting stable blood sugar with a 100% protein to carb ratio, I would immediately question if their basal rate and carb ratios are correct. I would verify that by doing systematic variation tests in their bolus, for example doubling the protein in a meal while holding the carbs constant, and vice versa. I expect you would see a hypo in the first test and probably a hyper in the second test, or alternatively you might discover they are inadvertently using an excess basal rate / dose to cover their typical boluses. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Low-carb Diet Forum
Insulin load index / most ketogenic foods
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…