Nightmare Before Christmas

[CollieBoy]

I have been hunting the shops for the products with the GL logo, but be damed if I can see anything, maybe it's not reached the uk as yet.
Has anyone seen this logo on foods, it indicates it's low load on the system apparently .

Think that would be the GI logo, as you can make a food any GL you want by varying the portion size

 

[Scardoc]

There are very few people on this forum who will agree that they ate their way to Type2 diabetes. Unless you understand the condition then you really should not make rash statements as they stigmatise people and can be very upsetting. The last thing we want here are divisions between the community.

Who truly understands the condition? I could reply at length here but it's probably better as a new post so I'm off to post it in the Soapbox.

**Edit - reading this again I really would urge people to look at my Soapbox post before dismissing me as being deluded - I do get that it doesn't read well having looked again.

 

[CarbsRok]

Who truly understands the condition? I could reply at length here but it's probably better as a new post so I'm off to post it in the Soapbox.

I think you have either misread or misunderstood what CC has said

 

[Scardoc]

I think you have either misread or misunderstood what CC has said

Not at all.

 

[eddie1968]

Think this thread needs to end it is not constructive criticism and is now becoming a US versus THEM argument. Anyone who can't get CC's post is deluded. I will not be engaging in this thread anymore.

 

[Scardoc]

Think this thread needs to end it is not constructive criticism and is now becoming a US versus THEM argument. Anyone who can't get CC's post is deluded. I will not be engaging in this thread anymore.

As stated above, I did not post at length here but went to the Soapbox instead. It seemed more appropriate. Feel free to read my comments there and call me deluded if you think the cap fits.

 

[Robinredbreast]

Who truly understands the condition? I could reply at length here but it's probably better as a new post so I'm off to post it in the Soapbox.

**Edit - reading this again I really would urge people to look at my Soapbox post before dismissing me as being deluded - I do get that it doesn't read well having looked again.

A post yes, with content, and from reading it again, not a poor comment from a moderator IMHO I'm sure members wouldn't think you are 'deluded'? You are, voicing an opinion, yes.?

RRB

 

[Paul59]

Think that would be the GI logo, as you can make a food any GL you want by varying the portion size

Not quite as simple that.□■■→→→→→→→↓ The glycemic load (GL) of food is a number that estimates how much the food will raise a person's blood glucose level after eating it. One unit of glycemic load approximates the effect of consuming one gram of glucose.[1] Glycemic load accounts for how much carbohydrate is in the food and how much each gram of carbohydrate in the food raises blood glucose levels. Glycemic load is based on the glycemic index (GI), and is defined as the grams of available carbohydrate in the food times the food's GI.

Glycemic load estimates the impact of carbohydrate consumption using the glycemic index while taking into account the amount of carbohydrate that is consumed. GL is a GI-weighted measure of carbohydrate content. For instance, watermelon has a high GI, but a typical serving of watermelon does not contain much carbohydrate, so the glycemic load of eating it is low. Whereas glycemic index is defined for each type of food, glycemic load can be calculated for any size serving of a food, an entire meal, or an entire day's meals.

Glycemic load of a serving of food can be calculated as its carbohydrate content measured in grams (g), multiplied by the food's GI, and divided by 100. For example, watermelon has a GI of 72. A 100-g serving of watermelon has 5 g of available carbohydrates (it contains a lot of water), making the calculation 5 x 72/100=3.6, so the GL is 3.6. A food with a GI of 100 and 10 g of available carbohydrates has a GL of 10 (10 x 100/100=10), while a food with 100 g of carbohydrate and a GI of just 10 also has a GL of 10 (100 x 10/100=10).

For one serving of a food, a GL greater than 20 is considered high, a GL of 11-19 is considered medium, and a GL of 10 or less is considered low. Foods that have a low GL in a typical serving size almost always have a low GI. Foods with an intermediate or high GL in a typical serving size range from a very low to very high GI.

One 2007 study has questioned the value of using glycemic load as a basis for weight-loss programmes. Das et al. conducted a study on 36 healthy, overweight adults, using a randomised test to measure the efficacy of two diets, one with a high glycemic load and one with a low GL. The study concluded that there is no statistically significant difference between the outcome of the two diets.[2]

Glycemic load appears to be beneficial in dietary programs targeting metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, and weight loss; studies have shown that sustained spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels may lead to increased diabetes risk.[3] The Shanghai Women's Health Study concluded that women whose diets had the highest glycemic index were 21 percent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than women whose diets had the lowest glycemic index.[4] Similar findings were reported in the Black Women's Health Study.[5] A diet program that manages the glycemic load aims to avoid sustained blood-sugar spikes and can help avoid onset of type 2 diabetes.[6] For diabetics, glycemic load is a highly recommended tool for managing blood sugar.

The data on GI and GL listed in this article is from the University of Sydney (Human Nutrition Unit) GI database.[7]

The GI was invented in 1981 by Dr Thomas Wolever and Dr David Jenkins at the University of Toronto and is a measure of how quickly a food containing 25 or 50 grams of carbohydrate raises blood-glucose levels. Because some foods typically have a low carbohydrate content, Harvard researchers created the GL, which takes into account the amount of carbohydrates in a given serving of a food and so provides a more useful measure.

 

[Paul59]

Think this thread needs to end it is not constructive criticism and is now becoming a US versus THEM argument. Anyone who can't get CC's post is deluded. I will not be engaging in this thread anymore.

Can't see why it shud end, it's not us verses them, it's peoples opinions & views on the OP's anger vent on how diabetics are being discriminated on & reasons as to how & why this is happening, thus it's turned into a discussion. Which by the way is interesting reading. So why end it, is that not what an thread is for discussion, or am I being dumb.

 

[Pipp]

Can't see why it shud end, it's not us verses them, it's peoples opinions & views on the OP's anger vent on how diabetics are being discriminated on & reasons as to how & why this is happening, thus it's turned into a discussion. Which by the way is interesting reading. So why end it, is that not what an thread is for discussion, or am I being dumb.

No, not being dumb, but I suspect OP wishes they hadn't bothered.

Think we are making a big deal of a rant, legitimately made but maybe done to death now.

@ShellyC23 I am not surprised you were miffed by the restaurant, but in the grand scheme of things, is it that big a deal?

Everyone else, you were not dismayed by the lack of thought by the menu plan, but is it that big a deal if you were not rhere?

 

[Lesleywo]

I havent read anyones reply so I am replying to yours.

There is to much money to be had with diabetes and the drug industry. IF restaurants started offering diabetic friendly meals across the country, then "junk food" would start to be less seductive etc. hence less lucrative income with the drug industry... all this I have learned is why doctors are "acting" so ill informed about diabetes and carbs. I cant wai t to show my nurse my findings with my glucometer xx

Ah yes ... I read the other day that the profits made on insulin sales surpass the profits made my Apple. How sad is that :-(

 

[Paul59]

Yes but the point is if you suffer from from food alleges you are told if it contains things you maybe allergic to on the labeling but not its the GL of the food is high, medium or low, which is all that is needed to know really so you can decide if you want it or not.
Oh happy xmas all & hope you dont hit too many highs, lol.