Oatmeal GI question

Hey guys, just a strange habit I have that I’ve been wondering about. I prepare my oatmeal in what I guess would be a strange way. I add water, nuke it for a minute, stire, add more water, and nuke it for another minute or so. I find that the oats absorb more water this way, so I feel like I’m eating more and wind up feeling fuller.
Anyway, I remember reading that over-cooking certain things–rice, for example–can raise it’s GI rating. I was wondering if anyone knew if double nuking my oatmeal would do the same thing. Any insight would be great, I appreciate the help.

The longer you cook your oats, the softer and mushier they will be and therfore you will digest them faster which in effect, is the definition of the glycemic index - the faster you digest and absorb a carb, the higher the GI. That is also why steel cut oats are lower GI than old fashioned oats but old fashioned oats are lower GI than quick oats which are starting to get high GI. The reason quick oats are high GI are because they have already been partially precooked at the factory making them more processed. And the reason steel cut is lower than old fashioned is because steel cut will be chunkier and coarser than old fashioned after cooking. So the more processed a carb, the higher the GI. Cooking is part of processing, so the more cooked, the quicker digestion. I actually prefer old fashioned oats and although I will eat them cooked sometimes, I also frequently eat them uncooked - mixed in cottage cheese or yougurt or protein powder mixed thick like pudding or a combination of all of the above. And I use artificial sweetner to also keep GI down. So yes, your highly cooked oatmeal may absorb more water making you feel fuller at the moment, but won’t stick with you as long and will digest faster leaving you hungry again quicker which is in effect what higher GI is.

That’s what I figured the case was; however, I have also read that UNcooked oatmeal actually has a higher GI rating than cooked oatmeal. I forget exactly what the argument behind that claim was, but if you do a search on this site with “oatmeal” as the subject, you can bring up the thread. I remember thinking at the time that the argument seemed sound, if somewhat strange when compared to my overall understanding of the Glycemic Index. In any event, I do appreciate the help, Heb, and I guess it’s back to single cooking my oats.

Trev - I did find the thread you were refering to on uncooked having higher GI. Most of the thread referred to blending uncooked in a blender with a protein shake and I would agree that would result in oatmeal “flour” and thus be more highly processed with a higher GI. However, one poster (Hello, i believe) claimed according to his “sources” that uncooked had a GI of 90 while cooked was 68. I’ve never heard this before and I don’t buy it. I used to study GI indexes and bought several of the books written by the GI gurus and studied GI on line and I’ve never heard raw oatmeal having a GI of 90 before. (that would be like white bread!). His statement that cooking “forces” the fiber out of the oatmeal resulting in slowing digestion sounds like some kind of internet myth. Hello would have to show me the studies or research supporting this idea. I cann’t believe any kind of oatmeal would have a GI of 90! I also base a lot of my beliefs on personal experience and real world results and I know every time I eat equal amounts of cooked vs uncooked oatmeal, I always become hungry sooner after the cooked as I can tell it leaves my stomach a lot quicker than uncooked because the cooked is digesting faster and that is what causes higher GI. As far as GI, I’ll have to stand by uncooked.