Whole Foods!

srs, so basically what you are telling me is that any timw we cook something, we alter the tae at which it is digested and therefor raises insulin. Am I on to you? Well if that is thhe case I dont think I will be trading in my nuked yams, for raw ones, although I love raw oats, they taste just like granola to me. Well thanks for the great info bud.

Considering that all the GI and II info that we have is based on foods cooked according to package or normal directions, I don’t see any need to get concerned about whether or not cooking a foodstuff increases the gylcemic and/or insulinemic responses.

To further illustrate this point, this study should be viewed:

This reply got posted in the wrong thread, dammit:

“Some foods, such as rice, potatoes, and pasta, have multiple GI’s. Often this is caused by the plant species the starch comes from or the way the food is cooked.”

"Potatoes also have a wide range of GI’s, from a low of 47 (raw potato), to a high of 84 (microwaved). Potato varieties have differing amounts of starch: red-skinned potatoes have the lowest GI’s, while Russet and Idaho have the highest. As you can imagine, increasing the heat increases the GI, so boiling is best, baking is medium, and microwaving is the worst of all. "

This is from an article by Dan Duchaine, (where he is discussing low-GI foods, not post-workout meals. That’s why he calls microwaving “bad”…)

http://www.supplements2000.com/nutrition/constant.html

I remember in college we had dinner after both football and track practice. After practices I had no way of downing a post-workout type shake and usually had a hunger to enough to eat “a horse”! My usual dinner was usually:
a white bread turkey sandwich w/bannana and grape juice. I would sit still for about 45minutes and chit chat then follow that with cereal, ice cream, cottage cheese, more sandwiches, salad, cookies, brownies, pasta, potato’s, stir fry, jello, pudding, whatever the hell I wanted basically with as little fat as possible. Worked great, never had negative results because of it. The only thing I had to face was all the whining from everyone thinking I was crazy and unhealthy for all the food I ate, or envy because I could easily get away with it as I never got or looked fat.

Da Boxer

Lumpy & TImbo, both of your articles have conflicting theories, that kind of sucks but is okay as most theoris always have conflicting reports. I do appreciate you guys taking the time to help a bro out, this is always appreciated. I feel the need to do what is best for myself, and I certainly would like to know what the best way possible to cook an already low GI yam is. I have no problem with switching up my method, as I learned that if one cannot adapt to change, he will remain in the same position and never make any progress. Boxer, I remember when I played football also, after lifting weights we would all pile into the cafateria and basically eat everything in sight, this worked great for me, as I had no concern with physisque, as I was a one of the lighest defensive ends on the team, and just wanted size and strenght, oh those were the days triple layered sundaes, chocolate milk, bread and butter, it didint matter. Well long gone are the days of being 240 and soft, hello days of 175, lean, mean, and loving it:)

Janderstein- No, I don’t think they’re coming from different perspectives at all. I think the views of Timbo and Lumpy are very similar. I’m not surprised at Timbo’s oat article findings.


Why?- The main problem that the intestine has with a WHOLE INTACT grain is the breaking of the husk. No break, no digestion (You’ll recognise this if you eat a lot of seeded bread, when you visit the bathroom…). The article discussed here examines rolled oats vs porridge (oats heated in liquid). It is the ROLLING (crushing) that breaks open the husk, and exposes the inner CHO component to the digestive enzymes. Cooking does little after to add/subtract to nutritive value.


In fact DD discusses this phenomenon indirectly in the article Lumpy is quoting:


“…GRAIN PROCESSING: The less processed a grain is, the smaller the surface area. Finely ground wheat flours might make attractive-looking, soft breads, but they are digested very quickly and thus have a higher GI…”

Much as I loathe to criticise the great DD, the comment:

"...As you can imagine, increasing the heat increases the GI, so boiling is best, baking is medium, and microwaving is the worst of all.... "

Is not further substantiated in any way. All the evidence I have found as far as research goes suggests that ALL cooking methods of CHO vegetables (beans, potatoes, legumes) are relatively identical in reducing the NON-starch component (poorly digestible), and increasing the STARCH component (more digestible).

Anyway Janderstein, the bottom line, as Timbo does mention, is that the GI values given in texts are those of the FINAL PREPARED food. Does anybody out there eat raw potatoes?? Cook em any way you like, and the GI differences will be so small as to be insignificant. Oats are different, in that they are already prepared for eating in a different way (crushing). Hope this helps. SRS

Thanks, SRS, for being so kind as to further illustrate the points that have been made. I think this really clears things up.

As far as the different GI values for rices, potatoes and pastas, I dare not disagree with that statement. However, I don’t know if I would attribute it to the method of cooking but rather the different types of each general foodstuff (i.e. short- vs. long-grain, etc.).

In addition, what contributes largely to the discrepancies in these GI values is the amylose to amylopectin ratios, along with fiber content.

Like SRS mentioned, the fact that some foods are whole-grain should be stressed. These foods, no matter the method of cooking (i.e. the oats example), will be digested and absorbed in a much slower manner.

Thankyou fellas for the clear up, on that note I will continue to nuke the yams, and I love the oats raw, so there is no problem there, I did however bake a yam for the kids I work with, and although I did not try it;it looked pretty darn tasty, I will have to soon:)