 Visning av honnørposter for Beefcake
|
|
Sider: 1 ... 69 70
|
|
1036
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / Sv: Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
|
22. mai 2007, 23:24
|
Men som det har blitt nevnt kan det jo være en ide å roe ned på karbon så sent.
Inget man behöver tänka så på mycket egentligen. Speciellt inte på lågkarbodiet då risken för att kroppen skall omvandla karbon man äter innan man lägger sig till fett är väldigt liten då glykogenlagren knappast är fulla. Sen behöver kroppen en del karbo för att reglera blodsockret också, ca 4-5 g i timmen, alltså upp mot ca 40-50 g per natt. Detta tar den från levern, men då levern som mest rymmer 75-100 g, och på diet är den nog antagligen inte är full, så är alternativet för kroppen om det inte finns karbo tillgängligt att bryta ned protein och omvandla det till glukos... Och det vill vi inte. Karbo verkar alltså antikatabolt under natten. 
|
| Honnør gitt av : mdb, 23. mai 2007, 09:18
|
|
|
1037
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / Myten om kveldsmat og fettinnlagring.
|
02. mai 2007, 23:41
|
Du vil ikke bli feit kun fordi du spiser sent på kvelden.
På en diett for vektredusering kan det til og med være en fordel å plasere dagens største måltid sent på dagen for å beholde muskelmasse. Det er mengden mat du spiser over døgnet som helhet som avgjør om du går opp eller ned i fettvekt.
"The purpose of this study was to determine whether meal ingestion pattern [large morning meals (AM) vs. large evening meals (PM)] affects changes in body weight, body composition or energy utilization during weight loss. Ten women completed a metabolic ward study of 3-wk weight stabilization followed by 12 wk of weight loss with a moderately energy restricted diet [mean energy intake ± SD = 107 ± 6 kJ/(kg·d)] and regular exercise. The weight loss phase was divided into two 6-wk periods. During period 1, 70% of daily energy intake was taken as two meals in the AM (n = 4) or in the PM (n = 6). Subjects crossed over to the alternate meal time in period 2. Both weight loss and fat-free mass loss were greater with the AM than the PM meal pattern: 3.90 ± 0.19 vs. 3.27 ± 0.26 kg/6 wk, P < 0.05, and 1.28 ± 0.14 vs. 0.25 ± 0.16 kg/6 wk, P < 0.001, respectively. Change in fat mass and loss of body energy were affected by order of meal pattern ingestion. The PM pattern resulted in greater loss of fat mass in period 1 (P < 0.01) but not in period 2. Likewise, resting mid-afternoon fat oxidation rate was higher with the PM pattern in period 1 (P < 0.05) but not in period 2, corresponding with the fat mass changes. To conclude, ingestion of larger AM meals resulted in slightly greater weight loss, but ingestion of larger PM meals resulted in better maintenance of fat-free mass. Thus, incorporation of larger PM meals in a weight loss regimen may be important in minimizing the loss of fat-free mass."
"Most notably, the best preservation of fat-free mass occurred when large PM meals were consumed."
The Journal of Nutrition Vol. 127 No. 1 January 1997, pp. 75-82
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/127/1/75
"OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the hypothesis that nighttime consumption of calories leads to an increased propensity to gain weight. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Sixteen female rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were ovariectomized and placed on a high-fat diet to promote weight gain, and we examined whether monkeys that ate a high percentage of calories at night were more likely to gain weight than monkeys that ate the majority of calories during the day. RESULTS: Within 6 weeks post-ovariectomy, calorie intake and body weight increased significantly (129 +/- 14%, p = 0.04; 103 +/- 0.91%, p = 0.02, respectively). Subsequent placement on high-fat diet led to further significant increases in calorie intake and body weight (368 +/- 56%, p = 0.001; 113 +/- 4.0%, p = 0.03, respectively). However, there was no correlation between the increase in calorie intake and weight gain (p = 0.34). Considerable individual variation existed in the percentage of calories consumed at night (6% to 64% total daily caloric intake). However, the percentage of calorie intake occurring at night was not correlated with body weight (r = 0.04; p = 0.87) or weight gain (r = 0.07; p = 0.79) over the course of the study. Additionally, monkeys that showed the greatest nighttime calorie intake did not gain more weight (p = 0.94) than monkeys that showed the least nighttime calorie intake. DISCUSSION: These results show that eating at night is not associated with an increased propensity to gain weight, suggesting that individuals trying to lose weight should not rely on decreasing evening calorie intake as a primary strategy for promoting weight loss."
Obes Res. 2005 Dec;13(12):2072-80.
http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v13/n12/abs/oby2005257a.html
|
| Honnør gitt av : s032050, 22. mai 2007, 22:59
|
|
|
1038
|
Arkiv / The Best Of Treningsforum / Sv: mellommåltid
|
22. mai 2007, 11:41
|
Ny studie på 1 måltid vs 3 måltider om dagen. Samma kaloriintag.
Fördelarna med 1 måltid om dagen:
- Mindre fett & mer muskler (de behöll vikten men förlorade fett)
- Betydligt mindre kortisol i omlopp (muskelnedbrytande hormon)
- Högre kolesterolnivåer (kolesterol är det viktigaste utgångsmaterialet för t.ex. testosteron)
Nackdelarna:
- Större hunger (självklart...)
- Högre blodtryck
- Högre kolesterolnivåer (kan vara negativt då det ansetts leda till blodproppar, kärlkramp, stroke och hjärtattacker, men denna uppfattning har på senare tid börjat ifrågasättas.)
---------------
A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 85, No. 4, 981-988, April 2007
Background:Although consumption of 3 meals/d is the most common pattern of eating in industrialized countries, a scientific rationale for this meal frequency with respect to optimal health is lacking. A diet with less meal frequency can improve the health and extend the lifespan of laboratory animals, but its effect on humans has never been tested.
Objective:A pilot study was conducted to establish the effects of a reduced-meal-frequency diet on health indicators in healthy, normal-weight adults.
Design:The study was a randomized crossover design with two 8-wk treatment periods. During the treatment periods, subjects consumed all of the calories needed for weight maintenance in either 3 meals/d or 1 meal/d.
Results:Subjects who completed the study maintained their body weight within 2 kg of their initial weight throughout the 6-mo period. There were no significant effects of meal frequency on heart rate, body temperature, or most of the blood variables measured. However, when consuming 1 meal/d, subjects had a significant increase in hunger; a significant modification of body composition, including reductions in fat mass; significant increases in blood pressure and in total, LDL-, and HDL-cholesterol concentrations; and a significant decrease in concentrations of cortisol.
Conclusions:Normal-weight subjects are able to comply with a 1 meal/d diet. When meal frequency is decreased without a reduction in overall calorie intake, modest changes occur in body composition, some cardiovascular disease risk factors, and hematologic variables. Diurnal variations may affect outcomes.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/4/981 |
| Honnør gitt av : kennyo, 22. mai 2007, 14:41
|
|
|
1039
|
Trening / Kroppsbygging og Fitness / Sv: Hva spiser DU etter trening?
|
22. mai 2007, 08:11
|
Hvorfor det?? Jeg har hørt det stikk motsatte..
Vad gäller gulan (plommen) så kan den gärna vara rå, då en del av de nyttiga mikronutrienterna (vitaminer/mineraler) försvinner vid uppvärmning.
Men vitan bör kokas/stekas, annars försvinner upp mot hälften av proteinerna:
"Egg proteins contribute substantially to the daily nitrogen allowances in Western countries and are generally considered to be highly digestible. However, information is lacking on the true ileal digestibility of either raw or cooked egg protein."
"The true ileal digestibility of cooked and raw egg protein amounted to 90.9 ± 0.8 and 51.3 ± 9.8%, respectively."
Digestibility of Cooked and Raw Egg Protein in Humans as Assessed by Stable Isotope Techniques
The Journal of Nutrition Vol. 128 No. 10 October 1998, pp. 1716-1722
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/128/10/1716
"The availability of stable isotope-labeled protein allowed us to determine the amount and fate of dietary protein escaping digestion and absorption in the small intestine of healthy volunteers using noninvasive tracer techniques."
"Amounts of 5.73% and 35.10% (P < 0.005) of cooked and raw test meal, respectively, escaped digestion and absorption in the small intestine."
Amount and fate of egg protein escaping assimilation in the small intestine of humans
Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 277: G935-G943, 1999;
Fulltext: http://ajpgi.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/277/5/G935
D
|
| Honnør gitt av : Kengdal, 22. mai 2007, 08:16
|
|
|
1040
|
Bilder / Bilder av Diverse / Sv: Dette er det mest fantastisk deilige jeg noen gang har sett!!!
|
19. mai 2007, 00:40
|
ojoj. det er så typisk. alle disse med alle de stjernene og alt det greiene i bunn av innleggene skal alltid si så mye rare ting og pakke inn ordene i så mye rare ordekviblirier til ettertanke. hmmm ... merkelige folk. skal liksom ikke få være lov å si meningen sin nå eller?
Klart du har lov att säga din mening. Men det är också lov att kommentera den.
Slänger du ur dig något som flertalet tycker är idiotiskt (som då jag ser igenom dina tidigare inlägg verkar vara ungefär allt du säger) så kan du räkna med svar på tal. |
| Honnør gitt av : Egil Skallagrimsson, 19. mai 2007, 17:21
|
|
|
1041
|
Treningsforum Crew / Recycle Bin / Sv: Beefcake! Nya bilder s. 59 & 60.
|
18. mai 2007, 18:22
|
nydelige bilder david,dette er bare helt toppers 
Tackar!
Noen bilder av formen nå? Litt spennende å se formen til folk uker etter konkurranse!
Formen är inte på topp om dagen, men here goes:
 |
| Honnør gitt av : kriweb, 19. mai 2007, 13:50
|
|
|
1042
|
Bilder / Bilder av Diverse / Sv: Dette er det mest fantastisk deilige jeg noen gang har sett!!!
|
19. mai 2007, 00:40
|
ojoj. det er så typisk. alle disse med alle de stjernene og alt det greiene i bunn av innleggene skal alltid si så mye rare ting og pakke inn ordene i så mye rare ordekviblirier til ettertanke. hmmm ... merkelige folk. skal liksom ikke få være lov å si meningen sin nå eller?
Klart du har lov att säga din mening. Men det är också lov att kommentera den.
Slänger du ur dig något som flertalet tycker är idiotiskt (som då jag ser igenom dina tidigare inlägg verkar vara ungefär allt du säger) så kan du räkna med svar på tal. |
| Honnør gitt av : inf3rn0, 19. mai 2007, 01:39
|
|
|
1043
|
Treningsforum Crew / Recycle Bin / Sv: Beefcake! Nya bilder s. 59 & 60.
|
18. mai 2007, 20:09
|
hmm  banker sommerformen til de fleste andre uansett  veldig bra bilder fra Loaded! fysikken er helt enestående! brunfargen og lyset kom utrolig bra fram i tillegg!
Tack!
Tenkte å ta det i din logg i stedet for Oda sin; hvordan vil du - helt optimalt for din egen del - fordele karb/prot/fett gjennom uken ? Mener å huske at du også driver carb-cycling ?
Jepp, jag cyklar karbointaget. Men vad som är optimalt är ju inte så lätt att veta..
Jag följer inget exakt upplägg med specifika dagar som jag äter mer och mindre, utan tar det mer på sparken nu för tiden. Träningsdagar äter jag alltid mer, och då mest i måltiden efter träning, vilodagar som regel mindre på bekostnad av karbo. Prövar att hålla det dagliga proteinintaget mellan 250-300 g och fettintaget runt 100-120 g. Karbointaget varierar allt mellan 80-600 g, men i huvudsak runt 250-400 g. Brukar ta en eller två dagar med 80-100 g karbo inemellan (kanske var 2-3 vecka) för att tömma glykogenlagren om jag känner att jag börjar lägga på mig fett. |
| Honnør gitt av : mdb, 18. mai 2007, 20:15
|
|
|
1044
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / STICKY : Myten om GI.
|
17. mai 2007, 16:01
|
GI har ingen innvirkning på kroppssammensetningen (1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Hos friske mennesker er ikke insulinutskillelsen etter matinntak tilstrekkelig i verken varighet eller mengde for å påvirke fettinnlagring/fettforbrenning. For diabetikere kan det dog være et hjelpemiddel (8,9) men ikke avgjørende. Utover at blodsukker/insulinutskillelse ikke har den samme effekten på fettinnlagring osv hos mennesker som man tidligere trodd (i hovedsak basert på studier på dyr, hvor insulin virker annerledes) så har GI som metod mange andre svakheter som:
- GI angir hvor mye glukosehalten i blodet (altså blodsukkeret) stiger etter et inntak av en spesifikk matvare. Når blodsukkeret stiger så kjenner reseptorer i bukspyttkjertelen av dette og utskiller insulin, men med f.eks. melkeprodukter får man et helt annet insulinsvar (insulinindeks, II) enn fra annen mat så melkeprodukter gir altså en stor insulinutskillelse til tross for sitt lave GI.
- GI står heller ikke i samsvar med hvor mettende mat er (mettelseindeks, SI). For å nevne et eksempel her så kan f.eks. potet virke som et dårlig valg da det både har høyt GI og II. Men potet har også et veldig høyt SI. Så med andre ord trenger man ikke spise så mye potet for å bli mett, og med tanke på at potet ikke er spesielt energitett så får man ikke i seg så veldig mange kcal, så den totale effekten på insulinet blir liten (lav glykemisk belastning, GL)... Potet er også veldig næringsrikt. (pommes frites har forresten et lavere GI enn kokt potet, men blir selvsagt ikke et sunnere valg for den saks skyld).
- GI-verdien for en matvare kan skille mye mellom ulike tabeller. F.eks. bakt potet kan ha alt fra 56 til 110, kidneybønner alt fra 13 til 70, osv.
- GI-verdien på en sammensatt måltid stemmer ikke med GI-verdiene på matvarene som måltidet inneholder (10). Protein og fett endrer GI for hele måltiden ganske mye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. “The purpose of this review was to examine the role of glycaemic index in fuel partitioning and body composition with emphasis on fat oxidation/storage in humans. This relationship is based on the hypothesis postulating that a higher serum glucose and insulin response induced by high-glycaemic carbohydrates promotes lower fat oxidation and higher fat storage in comparison with low-glycaemic carbohydrates. Thus, high-glycaemic index meals could contribute to the maintenance of excess weight in obese individuals and/or predispose obesity-prone subjects to weight gain. Several studies comparing the effects of meals with contrasting glycaemic carbohydrates for hours, days or weeks have failed to demonstrate any differential effect on fuel partitioning when either substrate oxidation or body composition measurements were performed. Apparently, the glycaemic index-induced serum insulin differences are not sufficient in magnitude and/or duration to modify fuel oxidation."
Glycaemic index effects on fuel partitioning in humans
Obesity Reviews, Volume 7 Issue 2 Page 219 - May 2006
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00225.x
2. "BACKGROUND: The role of glycemic index (GI) in appetite and body-weight regulation is still not clear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate the long-term effects of a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet with either low glycemic index (LGI) or high glycemic index (HGI) on ad libitum energy intake, body weight, and composition, as well as on risk factors for type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease in overweight healthy subjects."
"This study does not support the contention that low-fat LGI diets are more beneficial than HGI diets with regard to appetite or body-weight regulation as evaluated over 10 wk. However, it confirms previous findings of a beneficial effect of LGI diets on risk factors for ischemic heart disease."
No difference in body weight decrease between a low-glycemic-index and a high-glycemic-index diet but reduced LDL cholesterol after 10-wk ad libitum intake of the low-glycemic-index diet.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):337-47.
Fulltext: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/80/2/337
3. "High glycemic index (GI)/load (GL) diets reportedly enhance appetite and promote positive energy balance. Support for this hypothesis stems largely from acute feeding trials and longer-term studies lacking control over the macronutrient composition and palatability of test foods. This study evaluated the effects of consuming high- and low-GI/GL meals, matched on macronutrient composition and palatability, plasma glucose and insulin, appetite, and food intake."
"RESULTS—There were no significant differences in plasma glucose or insulin responses, appetitive ratings, or food intake between treatments."
Influence of Glycemic Index/Load on Glycemic Response, Appetite, and Food Intake in Healthy Humans
Diabetes Care 28:2123-2129, 2005
Fulltext: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/9/2123
4. "OBJECTIVE—We studied the association of digestible carbohydrates, fiber intake, glycemic index, and glycemic load with insulin sensitivity (SI), fasting insulin, acute insulin response (AIR), disposition index, BMI, and waist circumference.
RESULTS—No association was observed between glycemic index and SI, fasting insulin, AIR, disposition index, BMI, or waist circumference after adjustment for demographic characteristics or family history of diabetes, energy expenditure, and smoking. Associations observed for digestible carbohydrates and glycemic load, respectively, with SI, insulin secretion, and adiposity (adjusted for demographics and main confounders) were entirely explained by energy intake. In contrast, fiber was associated positively with SI and disposition index and inversely with fasting insulin, BMI, and waist circumference but not with AIR.
CONCLUSION—Carbohydrates as reflected in glycemic index and glycemic load may not be related to measures of insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and adiposity. Fiber intake may not only have beneficial effects on insulin sensitivity and adiposity, but also on pancreatic functionality."
Dietary Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, Carbohydrate and Fiber Intake, and Measures of Insulin Sensitivity, Secretion, and Adiposity in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
Diabetes Care 28:2832-2838, 2005
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/12/2832
5 “In diabetes research the glycaemic index (GI) of carbohydrates has long been recognized and a low GI is recommended. The same is now often the case in lipid research. Recently, a new debate has arisen around whether a low-GI diet should also be advocated for appetite- and long-term body weight control. A systematic review was performed of published human intervention studies comparing the effects of high- and low-GI foods or diets on appetite, food intake, energy expenditure and body weight. In a total of 31 short-term studies (<1 d), low-GI foods were associated with greater satiety or reduced hunger in 15 studies, whereas reduced satiety or no differences were seen in 16 other studies. Low-GI foods reduced ad libitum food intake in seven studies, but not in eight other studies. In 20 longer-term studies (<6 months), a weight loss on a low-GI diet was seen in four and on a high-GI diet in two, with no difference recorded in 14. The average weight loss was 1.5 kg on a low-GI diet and 1.6 kg on a high-GI diet. To conclude, there is no evidence at present that low-GI foods are superior to high-GI foods in regard to long-term body weight control. However, the ideal long-term study where ad libitum intake and fluctuations in body weight are permitted, and the diets are similar in all aspects except GI, has not yet been performed.
Should obese patients be counselled to follow a low-glycaemic index diet? No
Obesity Reviews. Volume 3 Issue 4 Page 245 - November 2002
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1467-789X.2002.00080.x
6. "We do not find that there is convincing evidence in the existing literature to suggest that a low GI diet is superior in achieving improvement in cardiovascular health and in reducing body weight in healthy overweight subjects, when compared to official dietary advice recommending a diet high in vegetables, fruit and fiber, and low in sugar and fat. "
Low glycemic index diets and body weight
International Journal of Obesity (2006) 30, S47–S51.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n3s/abs/0803492a.html;jsessionid=8945F60BD37298C9509B3B7D310D2BCB#abs
7. "Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (–9.3 ± 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, –9.9 ± 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and –8.4 ± 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects."
Reduced Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Diets Do Not Increase the Effects of Energy Restriction on Weight Loss and Insulin Sensitivity in Obese Men and Women
The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 135:2387-2391, October 2005
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/135/10/2387
8. "While the glycemic index concept continues to be debated and there remain inconsistencies in the data, sufficient positive findings have emerged to suggest that the glycemic index is an aspect of diet of potential importance in the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases."
The glycemic index: methodology and use.
Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Clin Perform Programme. 2006;11:43-53; discussion 53-6.
http://content.karger.com/produktedb/produkte.asp?doi=10.1159/000094407&typ=pdf
9. "There appears to be a small effect from a low-GI diet over a high-GI diet, primarily on postprandial glycemia, although these values are not consistently measured or noted. Not surprisingly, use of a low-GI diet does not affect fasting plasma glucose values. Although the evidence suggests that other nutrition interventions can lead to greater improvements in overall glycemic control than implementation of a low-GI diet, the GI concept can be used as an adjunct to help "fine-tune" glycemic control. For example, some individuals may benefit from choosing low-GI foods, especially at breakfast, and others may not."
"Using the information from testing foods that contain carbohydrate can help individuals decide if they need to choose smaller portions of the foods that raised their blood glucose levels more than other foods or if they can cover these foods with the right amount of diabetes medication."
"Finally, for a primary nutrition therapy intervention, an approach documented to have the greatest impact on metabolic outcomes should be selected. Information on glycemic responses of foods can perhaps best be used for fine-tuning glycemic control."
The glycemic index: not the most effective nutrition therapy intervention.
Diabetes Care. 2003 Aug;26(8 ):2466-8.
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/26/8/2466
10. "Our prediction models show that the GI of mixed meals is more strongly correlated either with fat and protein content, or with energy content, than with carbohydrate content alone."
"There was no association between GI and II."
"No association was found between predicted and measured GI."
Could glycaemic index be the basis of simple nutritional recommendations?
Br J Nutr. 2004 Jun;91(6):979-89.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=MEDLINE&list_uids=15182383
D
Cred: King Grub, Andreas Guiance.
Myten om måltidsfrekvens.
Myten om karbo på kvällen.
Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
Myten om lågintensiv träning och fettförbränning.
Myten om kardio på tom mage.
Myten om myten om punktförbränning. |
| Honnør gitt av : Harale, 18. mai 2007, 11:53
|
|
|
1045
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / STICKY : Myten om GI.
|
17. mai 2007, 16:01
|
GI har ingen innvirkning på kroppssammensetningen (1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Hos friske mennesker er ikke insulinutskillelsen etter matinntak tilstrekkelig i verken varighet eller mengde for å påvirke fettinnlagring/fettforbrenning. For diabetikere kan det dog være et hjelpemiddel (8,9) men ikke avgjørende. Utover at blodsukker/insulinutskillelse ikke har den samme effekten på fettinnlagring osv hos mennesker som man tidligere trodd (i hovedsak basert på studier på dyr, hvor insulin virker annerledes) så har GI som metod mange andre svakheter som:
- GI angir hvor mye glukosehalten i blodet (altså blodsukkeret) stiger etter et inntak av en spesifikk matvare. Når blodsukkeret stiger så kjenner reseptorer i bukspyttkjertelen av dette og utskiller insulin, men med f.eks. melkeprodukter får man et helt annet insulinsvar (insulinindeks, II) enn fra annen mat så melkeprodukter gir altså en stor insulinutskillelse til tross for sitt lave GI.
- GI står heller ikke i samsvar med hvor mettende mat er (mettelseindeks, SI). For å nevne et eksempel her så kan f.eks. potet virke som et dårlig valg da det både har høyt GI og II. Men potet har også et veldig høyt SI. Så med andre ord trenger man ikke spise så mye potet for å bli mett, og med tanke på at potet ikke er spesielt energitett så får man ikke i seg så veldig mange kcal, så den totale effekten på insulinet blir liten (lav glykemisk belastning, GL)... Potet er også veldig næringsrikt. (pommes frites har forresten et lavere GI enn kokt potet, men blir selvsagt ikke et sunnere valg for den saks skyld).
- GI-verdien for en matvare kan skille mye mellom ulike tabeller. F.eks. bakt potet kan ha alt fra 56 til 110, kidneybønner alt fra 13 til 70, osv.
- GI-verdien på en sammensatt måltid stemmer ikke med GI-verdiene på matvarene som måltidet inneholder (10). Protein og fett endrer GI for hele måltiden ganske mye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. “The purpose of this review was to examine the role of glycaemic index in fuel partitioning and body composition with emphasis on fat oxidation/storage in humans. This relationship is based on the hypothesis postulating that a higher serum glucose and insulin response induced by high-glycaemic carbohydrates promotes lower fat oxidation and higher fat storage in comparison with low-glycaemic carbohydrates. Thus, high-glycaemic index meals could contribute to the maintenance of excess weight in obese individuals and/or predispose obesity-prone subjects to weight gain. Several studies comparing the effects of meals with contrasting glycaemic carbohydrates for hours, days or weeks have failed to demonstrate any differential effect on fuel partitioning when either substrate oxidation or body composition measurements were performed. Apparently, the glycaemic index-induced serum insulin differences are not sufficient in magnitude and/or duration to modify fuel oxidation."
Glycaemic index effects on fuel partitioning in humans
Obesity Reviews, Volume 7 Issue 2 Page 219 - May 2006
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00225.x
2. "BACKGROUND: The role of glycemic index (GI) in appetite and body-weight regulation is still not clear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate the long-term effects of a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet with either low glycemic index (LGI) or high glycemic index (HGI) on ad libitum energy intake, body weight, and composition, as well as on risk factors for type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease in overweight healthy subjects."
"This study does not support the contention that low-fat LGI diets are more beneficial than HGI diets with regard to appetite or body-weight regulation as evaluated over 10 wk. However, it confirms previous findings of a beneficial effect of LGI diets on risk factors for ischemic heart disease."
No difference in body weight decrease between a low-glycemic-index and a high-glycemic-index diet but reduced LDL cholesterol after 10-wk ad libitum intake of the low-glycemic-index diet.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):337-47.
Fulltext: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/80/2/337
3. "High glycemic index (GI)/load (GL) diets reportedly enhance appetite and promote positive energy balance. Support for this hypothesis stems largely from acute feeding trials and longer-term studies lacking control over the macronutrient composition and palatability of test foods. This study evaluated the effects of consuming high- and low-GI/GL meals, matched on macronutrient composition and palatability, plasma glucose and insulin, appetite, and food intake."
"RESULTS—There were no significant differences in plasma glucose or insulin responses, appetitive ratings, or food intake between treatments."
Influence of Glycemic Index/Load on Glycemic Response, Appetite, and Food Intake in Healthy Humans
Diabetes Care 28:2123-2129, 2005
Fulltext: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/9/2123
4. "OBJECTIVE—We studied the association of digestible carbohydrates, fiber intake, glycemic index, and glycemic load with insulin sensitivity (SI), fasting insulin, acute insulin response (AIR), disposition index, BMI, and waist circumference.
RESULTS—No association was observed between glycemic index and SI, fasting insulin, AIR, disposition index, BMI, or waist circumference after adjustment for demographic characteristics or family history of diabetes, energy expenditure, and smoking. Associations observed for digestible carbohydrates and glycemic load, respectively, with SI, insulin secretion, and adiposity (adjusted for demographics and main confounders) were entirely explained by energy intake. In contrast, fiber was associated positively with SI and disposition index and inversely with fasting insulin, BMI, and waist circumference but not with AIR.
CONCLUSION—Carbohydrates as reflected in glycemic index and glycemic load may not be related to measures of insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and adiposity. Fiber intake may not only have beneficial effects on insulin sensitivity and adiposity, but also on pancreatic functionality."
Dietary Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, Carbohydrate and Fiber Intake, and Measures of Insulin Sensitivity, Secretion, and Adiposity in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
Diabetes Care 28:2832-2838, 2005
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/12/2832
5 “In diabetes research the glycaemic index (GI) of carbohydrates has long been recognized and a low GI is recommended. The same is now often the case in lipid research. Recently, a new debate has arisen around whether a low-GI diet should also be advocated for appetite- and long-term body weight control. A systematic review was performed of published human intervention studies comparing the effects of high- and low-GI foods or diets on appetite, food intake, energy expenditure and body weight. In a total of 31 short-term studies (<1 d), low-GI foods were associated with greater satiety or reduced hunger in 15 studies, whereas reduced satiety or no differences were seen in 16 other studies. Low-GI foods reduced ad libitum food intake in seven studies, but not in eight other studies. In 20 longer-term studies (<6 months), a weight loss on a low-GI diet was seen in four and on a high-GI diet in two, with no difference recorded in 14. The average weight loss was 1.5 kg on a low-GI diet and 1.6 kg on a high-GI diet. To conclude, there is no evidence at present that low-GI foods are superior to high-GI foods in regard to long-term body weight control. However, the ideal long-term study where ad libitum intake and fluctuations in body weight are permitted, and the diets are similar in all aspects except GI, has not yet been performed.
Should obese patients be counselled to follow a low-glycaemic index diet? No
Obesity Reviews. Volume 3 Issue 4 Page 245 - November 2002
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1467-789X.2002.00080.x
6. "We do not find that there is convincing evidence in the existing literature to suggest that a low GI diet is superior in achieving improvement in cardiovascular health and in reducing body weight in healthy overweight subjects, when compared to official dietary advice recommending a diet high in vegetables, fruit and fiber, and low in sugar and fat. "
Low glycemic index diets and body weight
International Journal of Obesity (2006) 30, S47–S51.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n3s/abs/0803492a.html;jsessionid=8945F60BD37298C9509B3B7D310D2BCB#abs
7. "Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (–9.3 ± 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, –9.9 ± 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and –8.4 ± 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects."
Reduced Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Diets Do Not Increase the Effects of Energy Restriction on Weight Loss and Insulin Sensitivity in Obese Men and Women
The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 135:2387-2391, October 2005
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/135/10/2387
8. "While the glycemic index concept continues to be debated and there remain inconsistencies in the data, sufficient positive findings have emerged to suggest that the glycemic index is an aspect of diet of potential importance in the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases."
The glycemic index: methodology and use.
Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Clin Perform Programme. 2006;11:43-53; discussion 53-6.
http://content.karger.com/produktedb/produkte.asp?doi=10.1159/000094407&typ=pdf
9. "There appears to be a small effect from a low-GI diet over a high-GI diet, primarily on postprandial glycemia, although these values are not consistently measured or noted. Not surprisingly, use of a low-GI diet does not affect fasting plasma glucose values. Although the evidence suggests that other nutrition interventions can lead to greater improvements in overall glycemic control than implementation of a low-GI diet, the GI concept can be used as an adjunct to help "fine-tune" glycemic control. For example, some individuals may benefit from choosing low-GI foods, especially at breakfast, and others may not."
"Using the information from testing foods that contain carbohydrate can help individuals decide if they need to choose smaller portions of the foods that raised their blood glucose levels more than other foods or if they can cover these foods with the right amount of diabetes medication."
"Finally, for a primary nutrition therapy intervention, an approach documented to have the greatest impact on metabolic outcomes should be selected. Information on glycemic responses of foods can perhaps best be used for fine-tuning glycemic control."
The glycemic index: not the most effective nutrition therapy intervention.
Diabetes Care. 2003 Aug;26(8 ):2466-8.
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/26/8/2466
10. "Our prediction models show that the GI of mixed meals is more strongly correlated either with fat and protein content, or with energy content, than with carbohydrate content alone."
"There was no association between GI and II."
"No association was found between predicted and measured GI."
Could glycaemic index be the basis of simple nutritional recommendations?
Br J Nutr. 2004 Jun;91(6):979-89.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=MEDLINE&list_uids=15182383
D
Cred: King Grub, Andreas Guiance.
Myten om måltidsfrekvens.
Myten om karbo på kvällen.
Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
Myten om lågintensiv träning och fettförbränning.
Myten om kardio på tom mage.
Myten om myten om punktförbränning. |
| Honnør gitt av : Kengdal, 18. mai 2007, 10:50
|
|
|
1046
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / STICKY : Myten om GI.
|
17. mai 2007, 16:01
|
GI har ingen innvirkning på kroppssammensetningen (1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Hos friske mennesker er ikke insulinutskillelsen etter matinntak tilstrekkelig i verken varighet eller mengde for å påvirke fettinnlagring/fettforbrenning. For diabetikere kan det dog være et hjelpemiddel (8,9) men ikke avgjørende. Utover at blodsukker/insulinutskillelse ikke har den samme effekten på fettinnlagring osv hos mennesker som man tidligere trodd (i hovedsak basert på studier på dyr, hvor insulin virker annerledes) så har GI som metod mange andre svakheter som:
- GI angir hvor mye glukosehalten i blodet (altså blodsukkeret) stiger etter et inntak av en spesifikk matvare. Når blodsukkeret stiger så kjenner reseptorer i bukspyttkjertelen av dette og utskiller insulin, men med f.eks. melkeprodukter får man et helt annet insulinsvar (insulinindeks, II) enn fra annen mat så melkeprodukter gir altså en stor insulinutskillelse til tross for sitt lave GI.
- GI står heller ikke i samsvar med hvor mettende mat er (mettelseindeks, SI). For å nevne et eksempel her så kan f.eks. potet virke som et dårlig valg da det både har høyt GI og II. Men potet har også et veldig høyt SI. Så med andre ord trenger man ikke spise så mye potet for å bli mett, og med tanke på at potet ikke er spesielt energitett så får man ikke i seg så veldig mange kcal, så den totale effekten på insulinet blir liten (lav glykemisk belastning, GL)... Potet er også veldig næringsrikt. (pommes frites har forresten et lavere GI enn kokt potet, men blir selvsagt ikke et sunnere valg for den saks skyld).
- GI-verdien for en matvare kan skille mye mellom ulike tabeller. F.eks. bakt potet kan ha alt fra 56 til 110, kidneybønner alt fra 13 til 70, osv.
- GI-verdien på en sammensatt måltid stemmer ikke med GI-verdiene på matvarene som måltidet inneholder (10). Protein og fett endrer GI for hele måltiden ganske mye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. “The purpose of this review was to examine the role of glycaemic index in fuel partitioning and body composition with emphasis on fat oxidation/storage in humans. This relationship is based on the hypothesis postulating that a higher serum glucose and insulin response induced by high-glycaemic carbohydrates promotes lower fat oxidation and higher fat storage in comparison with low-glycaemic carbohydrates. Thus, high-glycaemic index meals could contribute to the maintenance of excess weight in obese individuals and/or predispose obesity-prone subjects to weight gain. Several studies comparing the effects of meals with contrasting glycaemic carbohydrates for hours, days or weeks have failed to demonstrate any differential effect on fuel partitioning when either substrate oxidation or body composition measurements were performed. Apparently, the glycaemic index-induced serum insulin differences are not sufficient in magnitude and/or duration to modify fuel oxidation."
Glycaemic index effects on fuel partitioning in humans
Obesity Reviews, Volume 7 Issue 2 Page 219 - May 2006
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00225.x
2. "BACKGROUND: The role of glycemic index (GI) in appetite and body-weight regulation is still not clear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate the long-term effects of a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet with either low glycemic index (LGI) or high glycemic index (HGI) on ad libitum energy intake, body weight, and composition, as well as on risk factors for type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease in overweight healthy subjects."
"This study does not support the contention that low-fat LGI diets are more beneficial than HGI diets with regard to appetite or body-weight regulation as evaluated over 10 wk. However, it confirms previous findings of a beneficial effect of LGI diets on risk factors for ischemic heart disease."
No difference in body weight decrease between a low-glycemic-index and a high-glycemic-index diet but reduced LDL cholesterol after 10-wk ad libitum intake of the low-glycemic-index diet.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):337-47.
Fulltext: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/80/2/337
3. "High glycemic index (GI)/load (GL) diets reportedly enhance appetite and promote positive energy balance. Support for this hypothesis stems largely from acute feeding trials and longer-term studies lacking control over the macronutrient composition and palatability of test foods. This study evaluated the effects of consuming high- and low-GI/GL meals, matched on macronutrient composition and palatability, plasma glucose and insulin, appetite, and food intake."
"RESULTS—There were no significant differences in plasma glucose or insulin responses, appetitive ratings, or food intake between treatments."
Influence of Glycemic Index/Load on Glycemic Response, Appetite, and Food Intake in Healthy Humans
Diabetes Care 28:2123-2129, 2005
Fulltext: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/9/2123
4. "OBJECTIVE—We studied the association of digestible carbohydrates, fiber intake, glycemic index, and glycemic load with insulin sensitivity (SI), fasting insulin, acute insulin response (AIR), disposition index, BMI, and waist circumference.
RESULTS—No association was observed between glycemic index and SI, fasting insulin, AIR, disposition index, BMI, or waist circumference after adjustment for demographic characteristics or family history of diabetes, energy expenditure, and smoking. Associations observed for digestible carbohydrates and glycemic load, respectively, with SI, insulin secretion, and adiposity (adjusted for demographics and main confounders) were entirely explained by energy intake. In contrast, fiber was associated positively with SI and disposition index and inversely with fasting insulin, BMI, and waist circumference but not with AIR.
CONCLUSION—Carbohydrates as reflected in glycemic index and glycemic load may not be related to measures of insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and adiposity. Fiber intake may not only have beneficial effects on insulin sensitivity and adiposity, but also on pancreatic functionality."
Dietary Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, Carbohydrate and Fiber Intake, and Measures of Insulin Sensitivity, Secretion, and Adiposity in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
Diabetes Care 28:2832-2838, 2005
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/12/2832
5 “In diabetes research the glycaemic index (GI) of carbohydrates has long been recognized and a low GI is recommended. The same is now often the case in lipid research. Recently, a new debate has arisen around whether a low-GI diet should also be advocated for appetite- and long-term body weight control. A systematic review was performed of published human intervention studies comparing the effects of high- and low-GI foods or diets on appetite, food intake, energy expenditure and body weight. In a total of 31 short-term studies (<1 d), low-GI foods were associated with greater satiety or reduced hunger in 15 studies, whereas reduced satiety or no differences were seen in 16 other studies. Low-GI foods reduced ad libitum food intake in seven studies, but not in eight other studies. In 20 longer-term studies (<6 months), a weight loss on a low-GI diet was seen in four and on a high-GI diet in two, with no difference recorded in 14. The average weight loss was 1.5 kg on a low-GI diet and 1.6 kg on a high-GI diet. To conclude, there is no evidence at present that low-GI foods are superior to high-GI foods in regard to long-term body weight control. However, the ideal long-term study where ad libitum intake and fluctuations in body weight are permitted, and the diets are similar in all aspects except GI, has not yet been performed.
Should obese patients be counselled to follow a low-glycaemic index diet? No
Obesity Reviews. Volume 3 Issue 4 Page 245 - November 2002
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1467-789X.2002.00080.x
6. "We do not find that there is convincing evidence in the existing literature to suggest that a low GI diet is superior in achieving improvement in cardiovascular health and in reducing body weight in healthy overweight subjects, when compared to official dietary advice recommending a diet high in vegetables, fruit and fiber, and low in sugar and fat. "
Low glycemic index diets and body weight
International Journal of Obesity (2006) 30, S47–S51.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n3s/abs/0803492a.html;jsessionid=8945F60BD37298C9509B3B7D310D2BCB#abs
7. "Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (–9.3 ± 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, –9.9 ± 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and –8.4 ± 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects."
Reduced Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Diets Do Not Increase the Effects of Energy Restriction on Weight Loss and Insulin Sensitivity in Obese Men and Women
The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 135:2387-2391, October 2005
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/135/10/2387
8. "While the glycemic index concept continues to be debated and there remain inconsistencies in the data, sufficient positive findings have emerged to suggest that the glycemic index is an aspect of diet of potential importance in the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases."
The glycemic index: methodology and use.
Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Clin Perform Programme. 2006;11:43-53; discussion 53-6.
http://content.karger.com/produktedb/produkte.asp?doi=10.1159/000094407&typ=pdf
9. "There appears to be a small effect from a low-GI diet over a high-GI diet, primarily on postprandial glycemia, although these values are not consistently measured or noted. Not surprisingly, use of a low-GI diet does not affect fasting plasma glucose values. Although the evidence suggests that other nutrition interventions can lead to greater improvements in overall glycemic control than implementation of a low-GI diet, the GI concept can be used as an adjunct to help "fine-tune" glycemic control. For example, some individuals may benefit from choosing low-GI foods, especially at breakfast, and others may not."
"Using the information from testing foods that contain carbohydrate can help individuals decide if they need to choose smaller portions of the foods that raised their blood glucose levels more than other foods or if they can cover these foods with the right amount of diabetes medication."
"Finally, for a primary nutrition therapy intervention, an approach documented to have the greatest impact on metabolic outcomes should be selected. Information on glycemic responses of foods can perhaps best be used for fine-tuning glycemic control."
The glycemic index: not the most effective nutrition therapy intervention.
Diabetes Care. 2003 Aug;26(8 ):2466-8.
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/26/8/2466
10. "Our prediction models show that the GI of mixed meals is more strongly correlated either with fat and protein content, or with energy content, than with carbohydrate content alone."
"There was no association between GI and II."
"No association was found between predicted and measured GI."
Could glycaemic index be the basis of simple nutritional recommendations?
Br J Nutr. 2004 Jun;91(6):979-89.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=MEDLINE&list_uids=15182383
D
Cred: King Grub, Andreas Guiance.
Myten om måltidsfrekvens.
Myten om karbo på kvällen.
Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
Myten om lågintensiv träning och fettförbränning.
Myten om kardio på tom mage.
Myten om myten om punktförbränning. |
| Honnør gitt av : kennyo, 18. mai 2007, 09:22
|
|
|
1047
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / STICKY : Myten om GI.
|
17. mai 2007, 16:01
|
GI har ingen innvirkning på kroppssammensetningen (1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Hos friske mennesker er ikke insulinutskillelsen etter matinntak tilstrekkelig i verken varighet eller mengde for å påvirke fettinnlagring/fettforbrenning. For diabetikere kan det dog være et hjelpemiddel (8,9) men ikke avgjørende. Utover at blodsukker/insulinutskillelse ikke har den samme effekten på fettinnlagring osv hos mennesker som man tidligere trodd (i hovedsak basert på studier på dyr, hvor insulin virker annerledes) så har GI som metod mange andre svakheter som:
- GI angir hvor mye glukosehalten i blodet (altså blodsukkeret) stiger etter et inntak av en spesifikk matvare. Når blodsukkeret stiger så kjenner reseptorer i bukspyttkjertelen av dette og utskiller insulin, men med f.eks. melkeprodukter får man et helt annet insulinsvar (insulinindeks, II) enn fra annen mat så melkeprodukter gir altså en stor insulinutskillelse til tross for sitt lave GI.
- GI står heller ikke i samsvar med hvor mettende mat er (mettelseindeks, SI). For å nevne et eksempel her så kan f.eks. potet virke som et dårlig valg da det både har høyt GI og II. Men potet har også et veldig høyt SI. Så med andre ord trenger man ikke spise så mye potet for å bli mett, og med tanke på at potet ikke er spesielt energitett så får man ikke i seg så veldig mange kcal, så den totale effekten på insulinet blir liten (lav glykemisk belastning, GL)... Potet er også veldig næringsrikt. (pommes frites har forresten et lavere GI enn kokt potet, men blir selvsagt ikke et sunnere valg for den saks skyld).
- GI-verdien for en matvare kan skille mye mellom ulike tabeller. F.eks. bakt potet kan ha alt fra 56 til 110, kidneybønner alt fra 13 til 70, osv.
- GI-verdien på en sammensatt måltid stemmer ikke med GI-verdiene på matvarene som måltidet inneholder (10). Protein og fett endrer GI for hele måltiden ganske mye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. “The purpose of this review was to examine the role of glycaemic index in fuel partitioning and body composition with emphasis on fat oxidation/storage in humans. This relationship is based on the hypothesis postulating that a higher serum glucose and insulin response induced by high-glycaemic carbohydrates promotes lower fat oxidation and higher fat storage in comparison with low-glycaemic carbohydrates. Thus, high-glycaemic index meals could contribute to the maintenance of excess weight in obese individuals and/or predispose obesity-prone subjects to weight gain. Several studies comparing the effects of meals with contrasting glycaemic carbohydrates for hours, days or weeks have failed to demonstrate any differential effect on fuel partitioning when either substrate oxidation or body composition measurements were performed. Apparently, the glycaemic index-induced serum insulin differences are not sufficient in magnitude and/or duration to modify fuel oxidation."
Glycaemic index effects on fuel partitioning in humans
Obesity Reviews, Volume 7 Issue 2 Page 219 - May 2006
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00225.x
2. "BACKGROUND: The role of glycemic index (GI) in appetite and body-weight regulation is still not clear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate the long-term effects of a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet with either low glycemic index (LGI) or high glycemic index (HGI) on ad libitum energy intake, body weight, and composition, as well as on risk factors for type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease in overweight healthy subjects."
"This study does not support the contention that low-fat LGI diets are more beneficial than HGI diets with regard to appetite or body-weight regulation as evaluated over 10 wk. However, it confirms previous findings of a beneficial effect of LGI diets on risk factors for ischemic heart disease."
No difference in body weight decrease between a low-glycemic-index and a high-glycemic-index diet but reduced LDL cholesterol after 10-wk ad libitum intake of the low-glycemic-index diet.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):337-47.
Fulltext: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/80/2/337
3. "High glycemic index (GI)/load (GL) diets reportedly enhance appetite and promote positive energy balance. Support for this hypothesis stems largely from acute feeding trials and longer-term studies lacking control over the macronutrient composition and palatability of test foods. This study evaluated the effects of consuming high- and low-GI/GL meals, matched on macronutrient composition and palatability, plasma glucose and insulin, appetite, and food intake."
"RESULTS—There were no significant differences in plasma glucose or insulin responses, appetitive ratings, or food intake between treatments."
Influence of Glycemic Index/Load on Glycemic Response, Appetite, and Food Intake in Healthy Humans
Diabetes Care 28:2123-2129, 2005
Fulltext: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/9/2123
4. "OBJECTIVE—We studied the association of digestible carbohydrates, fiber intake, glycemic index, and glycemic load with insulin sensitivity (SI), fasting insulin, acute insulin response (AIR), disposition index, BMI, and waist circumference.
RESULTS—No association was observed between glycemic index and SI, fasting insulin, AIR, disposition index, BMI, or waist circumference after adjustment for demographic characteristics or family history of diabetes, energy expenditure, and smoking. Associations observed for digestible carbohydrates and glycemic load, respectively, with SI, insulin secretion, and adiposity (adjusted for demographics and main confounders) were entirely explained by energy intake. In contrast, fiber was associated positively with SI and disposition index and inversely with fasting insulin, BMI, and waist circumference but not with AIR.
CONCLUSION—Carbohydrates as reflected in glycemic index and glycemic load may not be related to measures of insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and adiposity. Fiber intake may not only have beneficial effects on insulin sensitivity and adiposity, but also on pancreatic functionality."
Dietary Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, Carbohydrate and Fiber Intake, and Measures of Insulin Sensitivity, Secretion, and Adiposity in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
Diabetes Care 28:2832-2838, 2005
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/12/2832
5 “In diabetes research the glycaemic index (GI) of carbohydrates has long been recognized and a low GI is recommended. The same is now often the case in lipid research. Recently, a new debate has arisen around whether a low-GI diet should also be advocated for appetite- and long-term body weight control. A systematic review was performed of published human intervention studies comparing the effects of high- and low-GI foods or diets on appetite, food intake, energy expenditure and body weight. In a total of 31 short-term studies (<1 d), low-GI foods were associated with greater satiety or reduced hunger in 15 studies, whereas reduced satiety or no differences were seen in 16 other studies. Low-GI foods reduced ad libitum food intake in seven studies, but not in eight other studies. In 20 longer-term studies (<6 months), a weight loss on a low-GI diet was seen in four and on a high-GI diet in two, with no difference recorded in 14. The average weight loss was 1.5 kg on a low-GI diet and 1.6 kg on a high-GI diet. To conclude, there is no evidence at present that low-GI foods are superior to high-GI foods in regard to long-term body weight control. However, the ideal long-term study where ad libitum intake and fluctuations in body weight are permitted, and the diets are similar in all aspects except GI, has not yet been performed.
Should obese patients be counselled to follow a low-glycaemic index diet? No
Obesity Reviews. Volume 3 Issue 4 Page 245 - November 2002
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1467-789X.2002.00080.x
6. "We do not find that there is convincing evidence in the existing literature to suggest that a low GI diet is superior in achieving improvement in cardiovascular health and in reducing body weight in healthy overweight subjects, when compared to official dietary advice recommending a diet high in vegetables, fruit and fiber, and low in sugar and fat. "
Low glycemic index diets and body weight
International Journal of Obesity (2006) 30, S47–S51.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n3s/abs/0803492a.html;jsessionid=8945F60BD37298C9509B3B7D310D2BCB#abs
7. "Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (–9.3 ± 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, –9.9 ± 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and –8.4 ± 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects."
Reduced Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Diets Do Not Increase the Effects of Energy Restriction on Weight Loss and Insulin Sensitivity in Obese Men and Women
The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 135:2387-2391, October 2005
Fulltext: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/135/10/2387
8. "While the glycemic index concept continues to be debated and there remain inconsistencies in the data, sufficient positive findings have emerged to suggest that the glycemic index is an aspect of diet of potential importance in the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases."
The glycemic index: methodology and use.
Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Clin Perform Programme. 2006;11:43-53; discussion 53-6.
http://content.karger.com/produktedb/produkte.asp?doi=10.1159/000094407&typ=pdf
9. "There appears to be a small effect from a low-GI diet over a high-GI diet, primarily on postprandial glycemia, although these values are not consistently measured or noted. Not surprisingly, use of a low-GI diet does not affect fasting plasma glucose values. Although the evidence suggests that other nutrition interventions can lead to greater improvements in overall glycemic control than implementation of a low-GI diet, the GI concept can be used as an adjunct to help "fine-tune" glycemic control. For example, some individuals may benefit from choosing low-GI foods, especially at breakfast, and others may not."
"Using the information from testing foods that contain carbohydrate can help individuals decide if they need to choose smaller portions of the foods that raised their blood glucose levels more than other foods or if they can cover these foods with the right amount of diabetes medication."
"Finally, for a primary nutrition therapy intervention, an approach documented to have the greatest impact on metabolic outcomes should be selected. Information on glycemic responses of foods can perhaps best be used for fine-tuning glycemic control."
The glycemic index: not the most effective nutrition therapy intervention.
Diabetes Care. 2003 Aug;26(8 ):2466-8.
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/26/8/2466
10. "Our prediction models show that the GI of mixed meals is more strongly correlated either with fat and protein content, or with energy content, than with carbohydrate content alone."
"There was no association between GI and II."
"No association was found between predicted and measured GI."
Could glycaemic index be the basis of simple nutritional recommendations?
Br J Nutr. 2004 Jun;91(6):979-89.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=MEDLINE&list_uids=15182383
D
Cred: King Grub, Andreas Guiance.
Myten om måltidsfrekvens.
Myten om karbo på kvällen.
Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
Myten om lågintensiv träning och fettförbränning.
Myten om kardio på tom mage.
Myten om myten om punktförbränning. |
| Honnør gitt av : lfaro, 18. mai 2007, 02:41
|
|
|
1049
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / Sv: Havregrøt til kvelds?
|
02. mai 2007, 23:39
|
Backar upp benpressmannen till 100 %
Litt karbo innan läggdags spelar ingen roll. Kroppen behöver en del karbo för att reglera blodsockret också (ca 4-5 g i timmen). Men så tillvida du inte tränat sent på kvällen så kan mängden gärna begränsas något.
En av grunderna till detta är att ett större karbointag frigör mycket insulin (som är fettinlagrande) samt undertrycker frisättningen av tillväxthormon. Men faktiskt är det så att whey-protein frigör mer insulin än rent druvsocker till och med (1).
En annan grund är om man har fulla glykogenlager, och därtill trycker i sig en massa karbo innan man lägger sig så är risken stor för att en stor del av karbon lagras in som fett. MEN går man på en lågkarbodiet så är sällan glykogenlagrena fulla.. Så då är risken inte lika stor med andra ord.
1. Metabolic effects of amino acid mixtures and whey protein in healthy subjects: studies using glucose-equivalent drinks.
BACKGROUND: Milk protein, in particular the whey fraction, has been shown to display insulinotrophic properties in healthy persons and persons with type 2 diabetes. In parallel to the hyperinsulinemia, a pronounced postprandial rise of certain amino acids and of glucose-dependent insulinotrophic polypeptide (GIP) was observed in plasma.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine to what extent the insulinotrophic properties of whey could be simulated by specific amino acid mixtures.
DESIGN: Twelve healthy volunteers were served drinks consisting of pure glucose (reference drink) or glucose supplemented with free amino acids or whey proteins (test drinks).
RESULTS: A test drink with the branched-chain amino acids isoleucine, leucine, and valine resulted in significantly higher insulin responses than did the glucose reference. A drink containing glucose and leucine, isoleucine, valine, lysine, and threonine mimicked the glycemic and insulinemic responses seen after whey ingestion. With consumption of this drink, the glucose area under the curve (AUC) was 44% smaller (P < 0.05) and the insulin AUC was 31% larger (NS) than with consumption of the reference drink. With consumption of the whey drink, the AUCs were 56% smaller (glucose; P < 0.05) and 60% larger (insulin; P < 0.05), respectively, than with the reference drink. The whey drink was accompanied by an 80% greater GIP response (P < 0.05), whereas the drinks containing free amino acids did not significantly affect GIP secretion. CONCLUSION: A mixture of leucine, isoleucine, valine, lysine, and threonine resulted in glycemic and insulinemic responses closely mimicking those seen after whey ingestion in the absence of an additional effect of GIP and glucagon-like peptide 1.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Apr;85(4):996-1004
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17413098&dopt=Abstract
|
| Honnør gitt av : Xvani, 04. mai 2007, 03:55
|
|
|
1050
|
Kosthold / Kosthold og Ernæring / Sv: Myten om kvällsmat och fettinlagring.
|
03. mai 2007, 09:26
|
Gjelder dette karbohydratrike måltider på kvelden også? Takk for informativ post.
Om du inte tränat sent på kvällen så bör mängden karbo gärna begränsas något. Men litt karbo innan läggdags kan vara bra då kroppen behöver en del karbo för att reglera blodsockret också (ca 4-5 g i timmen).
En av grunderna till att ett stort karbointag bör undvikas är att det frigör mycket insulin (som är fettinlagrande) samt undertrycker frisättningen av tillväxthormon. Men faktiskt är det så att whey-protein frigör mer insulin än rent druvsocker till och med (1).
En annan grund är om man har fulla glykogenlager, och därtill trycker i sig en massa karbo innan man lägger sig så är risken stor för att en stor del av karbon lagras in som fett. MEN går man på en lågkarbodiet så är sällan glykogenlagrena fulla.. Så då är risken inte lika stor med andra ord.
1. Metabolic effects of amino acid mixtures and whey protein in healthy subjects: studies using glucose-equivalent drinks.
BACKGROUND: Milk protein, in particular the whey fraction, has been shown to display insulinotrophic properties in healthy persons and persons with type 2 diabetes. In parallel to the hyperinsulinemia, a pronounced postprandial rise of certain amino acids and of glucose-dependent insulinotrophic polypeptide (GIP) was observed in plasma.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine to what extent the insulinotrophic properties of whey could be simulated by specific amino acid mixtures.
DESIGN: Twelve healthy volunteers were served drinks consisting of pure glucose (reference drink) or glucose supplemented with free amino acids or whey proteins (test drinks).
RESULTS: A test drink with the branched-chain amino acids isoleucine, leucine, and valine resulted in significantly higher insulin responses than did the glucose reference. A drink containing glucose and leucine, isoleucine, valine, lysine, and threonine mimicked the glycemic and insulinemic responses seen after whey ingestion. With consumption of this drink, the glucose area under the curve (AUC) was 44% smaller (P < 0.05) and the insulin AUC was 31% larger (NS) than with consumption of the reference drink. With consumption of the whey drink, the AUCs were 56% smaller (glucose; P < 0.05) and 60% larger (insulin; P < 0.05), respectively, than with the reference drink. The whey drink was accompanied by an 80% greater GIP response (P < 0.05), whereas the drinks containing free amino acids did not significantly affect GIP secretion. CONCLUSION: A mixture of leucine, isoleucine, valine, lysine, and threonine resulted in glycemic and insulinemic responses closely mimicking those seen after whey ingestion in the absence of an additional effect of GIP and glucagon-like peptide 1.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Apr;85(4):996-1004
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17413098&dopt=Abstract
|
| Honnør gitt av : mdb, 03. mai 2007, 09:56
|
|
|
