And what is difficult to understand is that I have the tendency to be hypoglycemic. I don't have that on SLD. I never feel weak of not eating in time as when I am off of SLD. I would have thought the opposite because of the SW.
Actually, it makes perfect sense, according to this theory. Hypoglycemia is caused by an over-reaction of the insulin response to carbohydrate ingestion, causing your blood sugar to rapidly drop too low, and so you feel like crap. If you can take your sugar flavourlessly, and in a way that does not trigger that insulin response, then you get the sugar circulating in your bloodstream, making you feel fueled and OK.
Hypoglycemia is complex and can have many different causes (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypoglycemia), While an easily triggered insulin response is one possibility it's not the only one. But regardless of the cause, I agree with Shovelqueen that SW should correct the low blood sugar and keep it stable as long as you don't take too much sugar too quickly. I think all of this is about keeping blood sugar in narrow range.
That gets me back to Pinkmug's query about the glycemic index:
I think my smallish post went unnoticed amidst the big posts... but I'm still curious: Todd, if maintaining a homeostatic weight depends on insulin, what do you think about the Glycemic Index Diet? Is it helpful for weight control?
I do think that the glycemic index, or something like it, is useful. Foods with a low GI provide "slow release" glucose to the blood stream, preventing a high spike in glucose that would trigger insulin and lead to both weight gain (by shunting the glucose via the liver to glycogen or fat stores) and hunger (by dropping the glucose concentration down quickly). But a low GI is not an excuse to over-consume carbohydrates -- portion size matters. There is some debate as to the reliability of glycemic index as a true predictor of the actual physiological glucose release profile, so an alternate measure, the "glycemic load" has been proposed as a better measure (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_load) because it adjusts for a constant portion size, rather than a constant amount of sugar. So, for example, Watermelon has a very high glycemic index because its sugars are so readily digestible, but a very low glycemic load, because you'd have to eat a lot of watermelon to get much sugar. On the other hand, ice cream has a moderate GI, but in typical portions it delivers a high glycemic load.
I'm also very interested in the discussion about exercise. In my case, exercise usually suppresses my appetite and gives me hours of energy, but I've also had the opposite experience of getting tired and hungy afterwords. Probably depends on many factors -- your glycogen stores, your blood levels of sugars and triglycerides, your insulin and glucagon levels, etc., etc. But I think one of the most illuminating discussions of excercise and insulin is in "Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes' Solution: A Complete Guide to Achieving Normal Blood Sugars" (
http://www.amazon.com/Dr-Bernsteins-Diabetes-Solution-Achieving/dp/0316167169/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240536499&sr=8-1). Bernstein, a diabetic, almost died from diabetes at age 35 when following the conventional AMA guidelines. On his own, he figured out how to taper off his use of insulin by cutting carbs and employing anaerobic excercise to build his muscles and reverse his insulin insensitivity. (He gives convincing reasons as to why weight training is far more beneficial than aerobic exercise for addressing insulin problems). He found that keeping glucose in a very narrow range provided huge health benefits, and was one of the first to promote frequently glucose monitoring. He became fit and overcame all his diabetic symptoms. I think his understanding of how diet and exercise can improve insulin sensitivity and normalize blood sugars provides an inspirational lesson to all of us - not just diabetics, but pre-diabetics, hypoglycemics....probably ALL of us.
Author
Topic: Appetite Suppression vs. Setpoint Adjustment (Read 54328 times)