|
Recent research has suggested that deciding what to eat based on the glycaemic index alone can be misleading. If you look at the nutrition shelves in your local bookshop, you'll find prominent titles on the popular glycaemic index - GI. The GI classifies carbohydrates in foods according to how quickly they raise blood sugar. The idea is that rapid surges in blood glucose aren't good for you. A high GI implies rapid blood glucose elevation and a low index, a slower rise, suggesting a healthier carbohydrate content. But recent research has suggested that deciding what to eat based on the glycaemic index alone can be misleading because it doesn't take into account the whole food - only the kind of carbohydrate in it. And when you do consider the whole food you get some surprises. A banana has more blood sugar impact than an apricot despite having a similar GI. Sultanas have a high sugar effect despite a middling GI, and breads can have similar Glycaemic Indices but different blood sugar results. If the research is right, it means you need to take into account the volume of a food you eat relative to its carbohydrate content. Or just wait for the next diet best-seller flogging 'son of GI'.
|
