Discussion Board

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120404144115.htm#.T4Cguwane68.email

[continues...]

I believe chimps have two genes coded for amylase but people have anywhere from two to fifteen with an average of six. So it might be true that some people handle starches more efficiently than others.

It is also true, from my experience that exactly the same breakfast (or any other meal) might cause blood sugars to rise to different levels and fall either more quickly or more slowly. If amylase is involved is it likely that we might have different amounts of amylase on different days?

The amylase theory doesn't seem to explain why, no matter what the diet, losing weight usually always lowers blood sugar in T2s. Do fats and meat interact with amylase in some way because fat in the diet causes insulin resistance? (Lots of people don't agree with this and think it is only fat in the cells that causes insulin resistance.)

And exercise certainly lowers blood sugars.

Since it seems to be universally true that weight loss and exercise lower blood sugar despite different abilities to produce amylase it will be interesting to see further research.

didi

Oh yeah, here are many interacting factors involved in the final number.

Here's one on the exercise connection
http://physiologyonline.physiology.org/content/20/4/260.full

When I was having high spikes and trying to control them I found that doing 100 or so very slow, body weight, full squats would make an almost magical difference about 20 minutes or so after. Maybe 2 seconds on the way down, hold under tension for 1 second, then 2 seconds on the way up. Nice and smooth like a machine piston.

Wow, Geoffrey, ONE HUNDRED slow body squats. Sounds great. I am going to try this as soon as I can find an ambulance to stand by.

Actually, strength training does lower my blood sugars in a lot less time and more predictably than a long walk.

My daughter once took apart a very very large and heavy desk and while she was at work I carried the parts down a flight of stairs and lifted them into the dumpster. It took at least ten trips carrying the heavy pieces down then walking upstairs to get another piece. When I was done I took a blood sugar reading and it was 65. While a starch based diet is healthful, traditional societies who eat this way also worked very hard several hours a day so it is not surprising that eating starches did not produce a society with diabetes. The thought has occurred to me that this higher glycemic way of eating might not be the best if one is a sedentary couch potato and perhaps fuhrman's leafy green vegetable and fruit diet might better suit a very inactive person (who would have to extend a bit of energy shopping for fresh vegetables.) And meat and fat isn't the answer either. This is why I tend to eat more of a MWL type of diet.

Didi

Didi, be sure you use proper form (maintain "neutral spine" w/ proper lumbar curve) and knees must track forward only, directly over second toe and not wobble or bend towards the side. You can do damage otherwise.

I think the deal w/ squats is, they use big big muscles and muscles that have been worked really hard just suck the blood sugar right up, even partially bypassing the need for insulin. The employ other mechanisms specially for that situation.

Re: "couch potatoes"--I do think that you can be fit and not be healthy, but I don't think you can really be healthy and not be fit!