http://perfecthealthdiet.com/category/nutrients/carbohydrates/ Interesting stuff. Apparently a moderate fasting blood sugar (95 mg/dl) correlates to a LOWER mortality rate than not only the higher (105) but also better than the lower (below 90) fasting glucose. Also suggests that if you have been eating low carbs for a while, then you actually will NOT handle sugar as well. There had been speculation that glucose tolerance would improve after periods of low carbs. Supports the hypothesis that medium level of carbs (25% of cals) is healthier than low or high (although amount of aerobic exercise performed might require more carbs for recovery). So also carbs may not work for you if you don’t use them regularly.
No evidence that low carbs improve insulin sensitivity. I am a bit confused though considering the post workout window, but it looks like the post workout window, as well as supercompensation may not be due to insulin response at all.
Interesting.
I have been experimenting with my diet lately and I am leaning towards a high protein/moderate carbs/moderate fat approach.
tweet
I don’t quite see where you got anything regarding insulin sensitivity… just because it compares a high carb diet to a lowish one. I’m currently comsuming 8-14 percent of my calories as carbs (not counting refeeds), and slowly increasing my carb intake. I’ve been low carb for a couple years, so I’m hoping that’ll help.
Postworkout, it says the 100% glucose drink would be best because more of it will be stored as muscle glycogen,
with more fructose for the refeeds to replenish liver glycogen,
starches for the preworkout for the slower release,
and fructose/galatose (milk) on off-days for the liver glycogen.
I’m not sure where sucrose comes in… I’m not too versed on the different sugars.
They are certainly advocates of of the 30p/20c/50f macro ratio to help sensitivity. It gets a bit confusing if you factor in refeeds, and I think the standard deviation would be larger for lifters, and athletes in general, just because of the higher calories consumed, allowing for the minimums for normal functions to be more easily attained.
Interesting about the glycemic index and the temp. at which starches are cooked, and how this is tied into processed foods… also may explain some the to predispositions for diabetes in cultures that do more stirfrying and grilling and other high temperature cooking methods (granted, these are more common for meat).
sucrose will act as (break down to) half glucose and half fructose.
It wasn’t insulin sensitivity, but it did show that those who ate more carbs had a better response to a glucose tolerance test. That is what surprised me in that regard. I would have though that a low carb diet makes you more sensitive to glucose and that that would mean you would respond better to a glucose tolerance test.
But that doesn’t say anything about how it changes over longer periods of time, though… just that when one hasn’t been eating much carbs for some time, they are less sensitive (Note: I did not go back and read the pubmed reference)
[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
But that doesn’t say anything about how it changes over longer periods of time, though… just that when one hasn’t been eating much carbs for some time, they are less sensitive (Note: I did not go back and read the pubmed reference)[/quote]
Oh I get it. So acute low carbs lower sensitivity, but over the long term they may raise it?
At least it is suggesting to me that you don’t necessarily get better using carbs over the course of a 1 week anabolic diet. It would suggest that a 5 days low carb, 2 days high doesn’t necessarily make the 2 days high work better, but of course the longer you go low carb, the more your body is going to use other methods to get glycogen up, and maintain blood sugar and so the longer you go on an anabolic diet the better the 2 days high carbs should work.