- Health and Science
- The Free Program
- McDougall Newsletter
- Success Stories
- Search »
Join Dr. McDougall along with fellow McDougallers in lively discussions and share your opinions.
didi wrote:That would be interesting but I know there are a lot more rabid glycemic index people than Barnard and maybe Willet.
When these guys promote the glycemic index, are they only talking about diabetics or do they think everyone should eat low on the gi?
I think they could also address the issue of "are glucose spikes harmful?"
This possibly means that as one loses weight one becomes less and less insulin resistant so numbers won't go as high after a high carb meal.
BarbG wrote:Yes! I would like to hear a debate on this topic.
Spiral wrote:BarbG wrote:Yes! I would like to hear a debate on this topic.
Glad I'm not the only one.
I have read that a fasting blood cholesterol number might be deceptive because a lot of the damage to ones arteries happens in the non-fasting state.
Well, what about blood sugar levels in the non-fasting state? When I get a blood panel done, it's on a 12 hour fast. So, if my glucose number comes out below 100, does that mean I am off the hook? Or is my eating those potatoes doing me damage that isn't being picked up by the fasting blood results?