Infographic; trying to get the message over in a picture. feedback please

Brilliant. Very clear, easy to understand, not over complicated with too many items.

I'd be tempted to put 100g of Fried eggs on the "eggs" plate, so that it's consistent on all of them. And there's nothing wrong with fried eggs either.

OK, so I am going to be a bit picky, but you didn't ask just to get compliments.
The "except the eggs" bit could be a bit confusing. Why are eggs so different? (Yes, I know what you are saying, but it's not aimed at me.) Could the egg plate contain two fried eggs, with the shells to one side. I think this would clearly show that the foodstuff was eggs and would be near enough the correct weight. (I've just weighed one egg in its shell and it came to 60g)
Having altered the egg plate, I would re-write the text as follows:

Just trying to simplify slightly and reduce the word count. Hope this helps,
Sally

When I first saw it I was tempted to overcomplicate it in order to get the fat message in there too but I have now changed my mind. This is because keeping it simple should make it more successful, you have to start somewhere and sugar is a good place to start.

Have we forgotten about flour???

I'll second what Sally said.

I agree the eggs should be fried ones. I'm also not so sure about the table sugar. Clearly it has to be avoided, but isn't that something all diabetics already know? In fact, most diabetics think sugar is the only thing we need to avoid. Perhaps rice, or pasta as these are not generally known about?

The only thing I would say is that almonds aren't glucose free but not far off of it (but maybe is according to the GI due to the very slow release). How about showing a chicken leg as well.

Would be good to have a series of these, with rice/pasta/pizza/mash pots/chips etc you couldn't add them all on one as the message would be diluted.

How would you get the fructose even worse message over to the reader.

What's the gycaemic index?

Does 100g of bread really have more glucose in than 100g of pure sugar?

How?

it goes into the blood stream faster than 100g of sugar, Hence relatively it has more

I also agree 'except the eggs' confuses things.

I also think that the foods should be shown sequentially in terms of the amount of glucose, so high to low from left to right, as I personally feel the message is then better conveyed at a glance..

Nice graphic.

I'd stick some Porridge Oats on there as well, or maybe another Breakfast cereal that claims to be healthy.

I agree about the eggs, and would also choose to avoid any mention of glycemic index, which requires some prior knowledge, and may well just cause more confusion. With people generally in a pretty shell shocked state after diagnosis, it's probably better to work on the KISS (keep it simple silly) principle, so that this information's easily taken on board...

What I'd also really like to see is a series of good food - bad food pictures, as it's quite obvious from many posts on the forum that people are not only unsure about what food they must avoid but equally what foods they can eat in their place instead.

Robbity

Very nice graphic! I'd either capitalise all the foodstuffs or not; same with the word 'glucose' underneath each, so that it is consistent. Also, regarding 'Type two Diabetes', isn't it usually written Type 2? If not, then capitalise the 't' in 'two'.

Andrew Colvin said:

it goes into the blood stream faster than 100g of sugar, Hence relatively it has more

Click to expand...

Ah, ok.

So it's a 'relative' amount of glucose, not an actual amount?

The left to trght is a good idea, and I'd stick some spuds in there as well.

Needs a theme running.

Like the bread and eggs (and spuds) go as a main on one and the banana and nuts go as a snack on another.

@Southport GP, is this something you intend to have up at the surgery, and hand out to type 2's from now on?

)@Southport GP , I don't think the scale is at all right, distorting the GI which is a ranking of foods based on an equal amount of available carbohydrate not an equal weight of food. Glucose has 100g of carbohydrate.
http://www.glycemicindex.com/about.php

Since you are using a 100g portion of a food then you have to take that into account the amount of carbs in 100g when applying the GI. You would then be comparing like with like (ie GL) GL = (GI x the amount of carbohydrate) divided by 100 =

Banana have a GI of say 58 (depends on ripeness and I've gone for a higher one,;( the GI was worked out from 120g portion, they have about 21g carb per 100g)
GL=12.18
Sucrose has 100g of carbs per hundred gram and a GI of 65 (worked out from a 10g portion with 10g carb)
GL = 65
Brown Bread is again variable so I'll choose one supermarket type with a GI of 74 (GI based on a 30g serving and 14g carb so 46.6 g carb per 100)
GL=34
Glucose would of course have a GL of 100 for 100g.
And of course I could add Watemelon with a GI of 72 (GI based on 120 g containing only 6g carb ie 5g per 100 )
GL= 3.6

You'll have to check my maths as I may have made mistakes .I need to go and take 10g of glucose or even sucrose, 10g of bread wouldn't fix a hypo! And if I ate a 100g of watermelon with a GI of 72 ,which on your graphic would come close to bread then I might be in need of an ambulance!

So does 100g of bread actually have 74g of glucose, or is it the same effect as about 27 teaspoons of sugar?
In about two slices of bread?

Or something else?

Personally, I think 27 teaspoons of sugar in one sitting would spike me more than a couple of slices of bread.

nomistheman said:

Yes gram for gram there's more glucose in bread than sugar. Glucose is the simplest form of sugar there is - the shortest chain. Table sugar is sucrose a disaccaride or two glucose chains. Bread is a starch - a complex carbohydrate multi chained glucose compound.

So it makes sense that
two glucose = 1 sucrose = table sugar
and
many glucose = 1 complex carbohydrate compound = brown bread.

Click to expand...

What about the fact bread only has 46.6g of carbs, sucrose has 100g per 100g?
Why does it still have more glucose per 100g overall?

Glad I don't eat either, (well, maybe a bit of bread occasionally, hard to believe it's worse than it's own weight in sugar)