Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Ask A Question' started by rebetic, Apr 6, 2020.
Whats the difference between glycemic index and glycemic load ?
I think they are both the same thing in a manor of speaking.
Glycemic load is a foods level of carbohydrate balanced by how fast it releases in to the blood steam. So pasta is high carbs and is broken down quickly so has a high load, brown pasta has high carbs but a slightly lower absorbtion rate so is lower then "white" pasta".
The Glycemic index is just the list and order of foods loads compared to each other. So in the case above Pastas glycemic load is first, then whole wheat pasta second in the "glycmic index" of those two foods.
So the full Glycemic index would be all foods ranked by Glycemic load, those at the top have the highest load with decreasing load as you go down the list.
GL=GI x carbohydrate/100
Glycemic load is a better measurement because it takes the serving size into consideration. In theory this means that you can eat small amounts of high GI foods without significant effect on blood sugar.
I don't like GI because it promotes the idea of low GI foods as good carbs, and if you're diabetic there is no such thing. It was created in the 80's by Dr David Jenkins who's an authority on nutrition through studies that weren't the best. He now advocates a vegan diet, and a few years ago he came out and said that nuts were great for diabetics. Nothing wrong with nuts, but his observation was made through a study where he fed one group nuts and the other muffins. Who would have guessed the winner?
Many things that spike blood sugar, like fruit, is low GI. I think you're better off reducing carbohydrates and pre-bolusing insulin for blood sugar control.
I can't say I wholly agree with that. Broccoli for example, it has carbs in it but I simply cannot think of it as an enemy.
Broccoli's not the enemy, you're right. My point is that it's better to look at the amount than the type of carb. I get annoyed at click bait articles touting low GI as the solution to all your blood sugar problems. They say things like eating oranges will barely impact glucose because it's offset by the fibre and low GI. Then they call it "healthy" carbs.
What I mean by there's no good carbs to a diabetic is simply that a carb is a carb and it doesn't matter if it came from pasta or apples. Unless you're on a meat only diet you'll still have to eat some.
Except it does matter what the carb comes from. It may still be a carb. But not all carbs increase glucose levels at the same rate. One of the keys believed to minimize complications is fluctuations in glucose levels as well as high levels. So something that acts too fast and increases levels faster than insulin acts is detrimental to our bodies.
And here we are on the same old roundabout things are different with non insulin dependent T2 when where ever the carb comes from it will raise blood sugar to some extent if it it does it slower or faster you still reach the same level eventually.
As to the opening question for me they are just the same. something I totally ignore.
Not all carbs are equal, there's simple sugars and complex carbs with plenty of 'inbetweeners, we fix hypos with simple sugars as they're water soluble, the right complex carbs will digest around the speed your insulin is taken up, with some experimentation of course.
To answer the OP, I have no idea on 'load' but think 'index' relates to how simple or complex the carb is.
Glycemic load is a ranking system for carbohydrate-rich food that measures the amount of carbohydrates in a serving of food.
Foods with a glycemic load (GL) under 10 are considered low-GL foods and have little impact on your blood sugar; between 10 and 20 moderate-GL foods with moderate impact on blood sugar, and above 20 high-GL foods that tend to cause blood sugar spikes.
glycemic index indicates how rapidly a carbohydrate is digested and released as glucose (sugar) into the blood stream. In other words, how quickly foods break down into sugar in your bloodstream. A food with a high GI raises blood sugar more than a food with a medium to low GI.
But the glycemic index does not take into account the amount of carbohydrate in a food. So glycemic load is a better indicator of how a carbohydrate food will affect blood sugar.
To me a carb is a carb simple or complex I treat them all the same but I am not on insulin so only count total carbs ingested per day broken down into individual meals or snacks simplistic maybe but works for me.
Those on insulin may have to calculate and allow for time taken for carbs to be absorbed as well as how fast insulin works or such like a far more complex situation.
Yes but this is a question asked in Type 1 sub forum, so you giving your opinion on it doesn't matter for type 2's is completely irrelevant here. It does matter where its from, and it matters even more depending on the type of insulin you use.
To put it simply glycemic index shows how quick it will raise your levels. Glycemic load takes into account the amount of carb in the food. If you are having 5g of high GI food may only raise your BS by 1 mmol/L, but if you have something that has 50g of carb and is high GI it will raise say 10 mmol/L and it will do it quick.
So its an indicator, not exact science, but something high in carbs but low in GI may have no rise at all if the insulin profile is better suited.
I am a type 1 and as with type 2s but for differnet reasons, my body can't cope well with carbs and since I do not need to eat them for anything other than pleasre, I try not to with the excepton of a small amont of above the ground veg.
If you are great at guessing your bolus and can keep weight stable on carbs then go for it. When I do eat carbs it is ironic that eating something sweet which enters and leaves my system quickly makes more sense than the unpredictability low GL foods eaten in different contexts.
This YouTube video may make the distinction simpler:
If the first video wasn't helpful, this might
Don't quite understand what you mean by the last part. Obviously low/no carbs helps control BS better. But if you eat carbs, they affect the body in different ways, that's my point. If your body doesn't handle carbs as well, this still applies. Obviously there's anomalies in everything, no one thing works for everyone.