Weight Loss and Healthy Living

An excerpt from the book, Lose Fat, Not Faith (ISBN 0976907941) that discusses carbohydrates, the glycemic index, the satiety index, glycemic load, and more.


I have given you every plant with seeds on the face of the earth and every tree that has fruit with seeds. This will be your food. Genesis 1:29.

In the beginning, man and woman shared the ultimate garden. This, the Garden of Eden, is described in exquisite detail in the biblical book of Genesis. God's first directive to man and woman was to eat of the bounty available in the garden, namely plants with seeds and trees that bore fruit with seeds. It seems that much has changed since the Fall, when humans were cast out of the Garden. Although science continues to validate that plants and fruits contain the highest concentration of health-promoting nutrients such as vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals, people consume less and less of these each year. We would do well to reorganize the Food Pyramid and place these crucial foodstuffs at the base of the pyramid.

Many people do not recognize the role that plants and fruits play in overall nutrition. For example, in recent years, two trends have become increasingly popular: the low-carbohydrate trend and the high-protein trend. One camp of fat-loss enthusiasts believes that eliminating carbohydrates from the diet is the key to rapid and lasting fat loss. Another group of fitness "experts" has begun to recognize the crucial role that protein plays in helping to elevate overall metabolism and improve the body's ability to synthesize muscle tissue. Followers of these trends would do well to consider the role of plants and fruits in nutrition.

When you consume flesh meats, a primary source of protein, your body takes the proteins from these foods and breaks them down into their building blocks, known as amino acids. It is the amino acids that your body needs from protein. What many people do not realize is that these amino acids do not originate in flesh meat. Every amino acid can ultimately be traced to plants and fruits. They originate from the mixture of nutrients pulled from the soil and combined through the energy supplied by sunlight. Certain animals consume plants, then we consume those animals and receive the amino acids "second-hand" as they have been incorporated into those animals' flesh.

With respect to the low-carbohydrate movement, fruit and plants produce some of the densest, richest sources of nutrients with relatively low carbohydrates. With the exception of certain tropical fruits and melons, fruit contains an even lower amount of carbohydrate than traditional grains and starches (keep in mind some traditional "vegetables" such as corn are actually grains). The benefit of consuming these plants and fruits is that they provide incredible amounts of nutrients such as vitamins and minerals that are needed by the body for recovery, to fight disease, to repair tissue, and to perform many other functions. They are high in fiber, which slows digestion, improves absorption of nutrients, and helps keep the intestinal tract healthy. They provide phytochemicals, which are special chemicals found only in plants, and have been shown to reduce risk of cancer, stroke, and many other diseases and unhealthy conditions. Finally, fruits and vegetables are a source of amino acids that are just as usable by the body as those processed from the proteins in eggs, dairy, and flesh meats.

i. Simple and Complex Carbohydrates

You have probably heard the advice to avoid simple carbohydrates and embrace complex carbohydrates. Although this advice may seem logical and was popular a few decades ago, science has since demonstrated that there is more to the equation than simple and complex. Let's debunk the myth about sugars and starches and plants first and foremost, so there is no confusion moving forward.

Simple and complex simply refer to the structure of the carbohydrate. The terminology refers to the structure of the carbohydrate at a molecular level. All carbohydrates are composed of chains of sugars. There are many types of sugars, such as glucose, the sugar preferred by your body, fructose, the sugar found in many fruits, and sucrose, or table sugar, which is actually a combination of glucose and fructose.

Any carbohydrate that is one or two molecules (a single molecule of sugar is known as a monosaccharide, and a double molecule is referred to as a disaccharide) is considered a simple sugar. When the carbohydrate consists of three or more molecules chained together, known as a polysaccharide, it is considered complex.

Here is where the confusion starts. Traditional wisdom dictates that simple sugars are rapidly absorbed, while complex carbohydrates are digested slowly, over time. Therefore, the sage advice is to "avoid simple sugars" and "embrace complex carbohydrates." This advice has caused people to take some extreme measures, such as avoiding fruit altogether (as fruit is composed mainly of simple sugars) while embracing such fare as breads, pasta, and potatoes, because they are complex carbohydrates.

The problem with this approach is that it oversimplifies. For example, many fruits such as apples and citrus fruits contain a high quantity of fructose. Although this is classified as a sugar, the notion that it may digest rapidly, "spike blood sugar," and raise insulin simply isn't true. Fructose is not readily used by the body. Although the liver preferentially stores fructose in order to maintain blood sugar levels throughout the day, the rest of the body utilizes glucose. Therefore, in order to be used by the body, fructose must undergo conversion. This means the impact on blood sugar is very gradual, making fruit a fantastic choice for a food that will provide energy for a prolonged period of time.

On the other hand, the baked potato and bread, both touted as complex carbohydrates, act more like sugars in the body. The body contains enzymes that rapidly absorb the starches in baked potato, causing a rapid rise in blood sugar levels if baked potatoes are consumed alone. Bread is highly processed: the constituent grains are broken down (ground into flour), diminishing the need for the stomach to digest them. Therefore, the starches are again rapidly absorbed and quickly released as glucose into the blood stream.

You should be aware of a particular practice used by shake manufacturers. Consumers are on an anti-carbohydrate crusade, and the first type of carbohydrate to fall victim is sugars. The anti-carb consumer is quick to check the amount of sugars on the label of a product. For reasons that will be discussed later, this should not be the primary deciding factor, as it is only a small part of the bigger picture. Many meal-replacement shakes contain an ingredient called "maltodextrin." Because maltodextrin is a complex carbohydrate, it does not have to be listed as a sugar. Therefore, the anti-carb consumer will breathe a sigh of relief when the label lists only trace (or zero) amounts of sugar in the carbohydrate count. In reality, maltodextrin is rapidly broken down into simple sugars by enzymes that reside in the gut, and is released to the bloodstream more rapidly than table sugar! The net effect is that of a "super-sugar" which does not even have to appear on the label as such.

So how does one decide what carbohydrates are best? First, we will explore a few new approaches that have surfaced in the past several years. These approaches help us understand more about carbohydrates, but can also be misleading if used as the sole criterion for selecting foods. For example, Internet forums are abuzz with the friendly advice: "Eat only low glycemic foods. High glycemic foods spike insulin." This advice is dead wrong.

ii. The Glycemic Index

The glycemic index (or GI) is a method of measuring the impact that carbohydrates have on the body. It is based on the impact that carbohydrates have on blood sugar levels. Every carbohydrate you consume consists of a chain of molecules. These molecules are broken apart by your body into simple molecules, or sugars. The main sugar that becomes available to the body is glucose. Glucose is the form of energy that the body utilizes and passes through your bloodstream to fuel activity.

The body tightly regulates blood glucose. Your brain requires fuel; even though it comprises only a small percentage of your body's weight, it can consume up to 30% of your body's fuel. However, excess blood sugar can actually be toxic to the brain. Therefore, your liver works as a "security guard" to monitor blood sugar levels. If blood sugar levels fall too low, the liver has reserves that it releases in order to raise your blood sugar. If blood sugar levels rise too quickly, the liver triggers the release of insulin. Insulin is a hormone that facilitates glucose absorption by your body's cells. Your muscles may store glucose in the form of glycogen to fuel activity. Any glucose not used by the body can be converted to triglycerides, or fats, and stored in your fat cells.

Because blood sugar levels impact insulin, various methods have been developed to enable diabetics to choose nutrition programs that are safe for their condition. This means tight regulation of blood sugar. The goal is to consume combinations of foods that do not cause dramatic rises in blood sugar and insulin. The GI was developed to measure the impact that a meal has on blood sugar. A person consumes a meal, and their blood sugar levels are tested at regular intervals. The rate of change is compared against a standard index, typically sugar or white bread, and the index is created.

The University of Sydney (Australia) has conducted much of the research regarding the GI. It has been generally established that foods less than 50 on the glycemic index (as compared to glucose itself) is low. A score of 50 means that the food will cause about ½ the impact to blood sugar that pure glucose does. A score of 200 would imply twice the impact.

It turns out that most vegetables and fruits are naturally low on the glycemic index. Fruit, which contains sugar, was traditionally considered a "simple carbohydrate" and therefore given a bad reputation. In reality, most fruit contains a special type of sugar called "fructose" (not to be confused with the sweetener, high fructose corn syrup). This sugar requires the body to perform a special conversion process in order to make it usable; therefore, it has a minor impact on blood sugar. All foods in this category tend to come bundled with nutrients (vitamins and minerals) along with fiber, which slows digestion, thus possibly contributing to the lower impact on blood sugar as well.

Of course, some fruit, such as watermelon is also high on the GI. A few vegetables also make the hit list - carrots carry a GI as high as 92, according to the July 2002 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. So should we strike carrots from our list? Not so fast!

iii. Glycemic Load

The glycemic index (GI) is not the whole picture. Many people flocked to this index when it was first published. A few studies support the notion that creating a diet based on low-GI foods may actually help people lose fat more quickly than those eating the same calories of high-GI foods. This led people to believe that items such as baked potatoes and carrots, which have a high GI, should be eliminated from the diet. How confusing is that? First, fruit is out (simple sugar) and potatoes are in (complex carbohydrate). Then this GI thing comes along and swaps their roles on us. What are we to do?

We can use common sense, that's what! Often, people tend to zero-in on the details and forget to look at the bigger picture. This was the case with the GI. Take our GI victim, the carrot, as an example: although the GI of a carrot is rather high, the amount of carbohydrate in a typical serving of a carrot is not. In other words, despite the fact that carrots may empty carbohydrates to the bloodstream quickly, they typically do not have many carbohydrates to provide. To better understand this, consider how the GI works. When comparing apples to oranges (literally) the way to standardize the comparison is to match the amount of carbohydrate in the foods. Therefore, the amount of carrots consumed in order to test the GI was quite large - a lot of carrots have to be eaten to equal the same amount of carbohydrates you might find in an apple or an orange. It just is not practical to compare someone sitting in a laboratory methodically stuffing down carrot after carrot with the average person snacking on a single carrot or two.

The glycemic load (or GL) addressed this by comparing the GI of foods to the typical serving sizes. It turns out that carrots, for example, might be high on the GI, but when you consider them in terms of the serving size, they do not carry much of a GL. The GL of a food is considered to be low if it is below 10. The GL of a carrot is only 1 to 3 depending on the type and country of origin (yes, carrots like to jump into your bloodstream at different rates depending on where they were grown).

Using the GI, pancakes (GI of 67) might appear to be a better choice than a plain baked potato (GI of 85). However, when the GL comes into play, things change a bit. The pancake turns out to have a GL of 39, while the baked potato weighs in at a lower 26. Whew, thank goodness there are only two numbers to worry about with these foods, right?

We are not quite finished. See, as fun as the GI and GL are, a lot of people mistakenly believed that the GI was a direct indication of the impact of a food on insulin. Remember, these studies were conducted originally to help diabetics. It turns out that managing blood sugar and insulin helps people without diabetes lose fat and achieve a healthy weight in the same way it helps diabetics manage their disease. It seemed to make sense that something with a high GI would have a high impact on insulin, right? Let's pause for a second. Remember when we thought simple sugars (like fruit) were all bad and complex carbohydrates (like a baked potato) were all good? Hang on; we are going to figure out this carbohydrate puzzle before long!

iv. The Insulin Index

A few studies decided to go beyond the assumption that the glycemic index (GI) was a good predictor of the insulin response, and instead of studying GI, actually studied the insulin itself. This led to the creation of the insulin index (II). Unlike the GI, which measures the rate of change of blood sugar after consuming a meal, the II measures the rate of change of insulin levels. Before this research was conducted and analyzed, people assumed that foods without carbohydrate would have a minimal impact on insulin, and foods with a higher GI would have a greater impact on insulin.

The tests were run, the data was compiled, analyzed, and reported upon, and the whole saga took yet another turn. It turns out that the University of Sydney once again played a key role in providing insight into the way that foods impact blood sugar and insulin. Some foods appeared to have a similar impact on both blood sugar and insulin. Foods like brown rice, which came under attack for having a high GI, were vindicated by the II because their II is relatively low. Other foods like beef, which has no carbohydrate and therefore a negligible impact on blood sugar levels, actually produce a significant insulin response!

Now what do we do? We are on our third formula to index foods, and we still do not know what is good or bad! Even worse, there appears to be a complex interaction among various foods that makes it difficult, if not impossible, to predict the various indexes of a meal that is composed of different foods. Consider a meal of bacon, eggs, and hash browns. It is not as complicated as it sounds. I want to introduce these concepts so that my final explanation of carbohydrates would make sense. Information overload can cripple your efforts to lose fat - and, trust me, it does not have to be too complicated. Let's look at one more index before we draw some final conclusions about carbohydrates.

v. The Satiety Index

The Satiety Index (SI) was designed by Susan Holt, PhD. The system is used to measure the ability of a food to satisfy hunger. This was determined by feeding a fixed amount of different foods to various subjects. Afterward, they ranked their feelings of hunger every 15 minutes. They were allowed to eat freely for the next 2 hours. The importance of a food with a high SI, or a food that satisfies hunger to a great extent, is that people tend to eat or snack less after a satisfying meal. This, in itself, can help to control calories.

I love using our friend the potato as an example to illustrate how the various indexes can provide information about foods, but should not be used as a rule for eating. See, our potato friend started out on our good side - it was a complex carbohydrate. When we measured the GI, it became a back-stabbing enemy because those sneaky little tubers cause an incredible surge in blood sugar. When we realized that the fiber and other nutrients made this a power-packed food, we pulled out the GL and decided that potatoes were not so bad after all. Then we measured their impact on insulin, and freaked out because they were sending insulin sky high! Finally, the SI came along and, ironically, crowned baked potatoes king of all foods for satisfying hunger! That's right; the baked potato appears to be one of the most satisfying foods that anyone can eat.

The SI appears to be linked to a number of factors. Foods higher in fat and fiber, or foods that are nutrient-dense, are higher on the SI. Highly processed carbohydrates like croissants and donuts score low on the index. High-fiber foods and most fruit score higher, and baked potatoes received the highest SI score of all.

Using any single index does not provide the big picture. Some foods may not impact blood sugar, but have a huge effect on insulin. Others may not be satisfying and could result in one eating more calories throughout the day. The solution is not to focus on any one index or number, but to look at the bigger picture. I am going to provide a special equation that will factor in all of the indexes and help you choose the best carbohydrates possible. It is surprisingly simple to compute, so I think you will enjoy it. Do you have your pen and paper handy?

Consume carbohydrates that are as close to their natural, unprocessed state as possible.

That's it. Done. Nature did a great job of packing our foods for us. It is only when we begin to alter the chemical structure of foods by processing, super-heating, and grinding them to a pulp that they begin to pose a threat. Even raw sugar, such as evaporated cane juice, comes with a plethora of nutrients such as protein, fiber, vitamins, and minerals. It is only high processed sugar that is high in calories but low in nourishment. Whole grains are incredible sources of nutrients and fiber, until they are ground and stripped of fiber and then blended and baked into breads.

A quick examination of grains shows the futility of relying solely on the indexes. Whole grain bread has a low GL, but is higher on the II and has a moderate GI when compared to other grain products. White pasta has a low GI but a higher GL. Crackers have a high GI and high II. Instead of confusing yourself with all of these indexes and acronyms, keep it simple! All of the numbers seem to interchange, but one thing is certain: the whole grains contain more nutrients (fiber, vitamins, and minerals) than the grains that are ground and processed into whole grain bread, and the whole grain bread has more nutrients and fiber than the grains that are ground and processed into white bread or pasta. When consuming calories, choose wisely - eat foods that provide more bang for your buck. This means higher amounts of fiber, protein, vitamins, and minerals per serving. Go natural!

vi. Topping the Food Chain

The plants and fruits with seeds are at the top of the food chain. For this reason, they also belong at the bottom of any food pyramid, not tucked away somewhere in the middle. When you consume flesh meat, you are consuming second-rate, processed nutrients. This does imply these are bad for you - I am not taking a pro-vegetarian stance here - but you must understand that the amino acids in that flesh meat were originally created by a plant that used the energy of the sun to convert nutrients in the soil into amino acids. An animal consumed those amino acids and they were incorporated into its flesh, to be consumed second-hand by carnivores or, in our case, omnivores (animals or people that eat both plants and meats).

Every day, a new study is published touting the benefits of consuming fruits and vegetables. Oranges protect against stroke. Tomatoes enhance cardiovascular health. Broccoli protects against various cancers. No other food group has been shown to contain as many health-enhancing, cancer-fighting properties as the fruit and vegetable group. It turns out the old adages are true - an apple a day can keep the doctor at bay, and you should eat your greens.

---

The figure that stared back at me when I looked into the mirror was not in the shape I had planned. My original fat-loss program was a disaster. I lost a few pounds the first few weeks, and then ended up stuck in a rut: the dreaded plateau. Oddly enough, I knew exactly what it would take to drop the fat, but somehow I could not apply to myself the principles that created success with my clients. I had no problems coaching friends and clients to lower body fat; I could adjust their nutrition and exercise as needed. However, for myself, I would engage in a mental tug-of-war, constantly fluctuating between eating more for fear of losing muscle and nearly starving myself for fear of not losing enough fat. I suddenly realized that as much as I enjoyed coaching others, I was not a good coach for myself. I needed to become a student!

I was already a member of an on-line coaching club. The club manager was an experienced power-lifter and bodybuilder. His system was dedicated to coaching others to achieve low body fat. Although I was a member of his club, pride had prevented me from owning up to my lack of progress and coming to the club for assistance. After realizing that my own approach had turned into a disaster and was taking me nowhere, I decided to suck up a little pride and approach David Greenwalt.

David was quick to reply. He did not beat around the bush. He let me know that I was planning on losing a ridiculous amount of fat in a short amount of time and that I should have approached him sooner. He could not work miracles. However, he would do the best he could. I was working against a deadline. Overconfident and lost in my own ego, I had booked a professional photography session in June. I needed to be lean - leaner than I had been before, because I was also making some bold promises to the communities where I was a member. Therefore, we could not take the gradual, slow approach that is optimal for dropping fat while maintaining or gaining muscle. We had to kick things into turbo drive!

This was one period in my life where I decided to quiet all of those conflicting voices in my head and just become a pure student. I trusted David and followed his program to the exact detail. He gave me a schedule of the calories that I should consume day in and day out, and I created an Excel spreadsheet to track my meals each day. In the morning, I would stack food items on the counter and begin measuring out portions and scribbling totals on a piece of notebook paper until the totals added up. Some days seemed incredibly lean - tiny, 1/4 cup portions of various food items or 2 ounce parcels of meat. Other days were saner - higher protein, lower carbohydrate, or some combination in between.

The weight began to melt away. Each week, I noticed a few pounds more were gone from the scale. More importantly, my waist was shrinking - the love handles were disappearing! My pants became looser and looser until I could once again fit into the 31 inch jeans I had purchased for my previous trip to Miami. I was only a few weeks away from the photo shoot when I began to see the faint outline of my abdominal muscles - I knew I had reached the same level of body fat that I had been for my Miami shoot.

Then, I broke past my personal record. I continued to drop fat day after day. My abs became more defined and my physique literally transformed daily. When the day of the photo shoot arrived, I knew I was in a condition that I had never been before. My wife was amazed and I was thrilled. David had put together exactly what I needed. It was June of 2001.

This article is an excerpt from Lose Fat, Not Faith by Jeremy Likness, ISBN 0976907925.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 License, unless otherwise noted at the footer of the article. Article boilerplates, terms, conditions, and licenses supercede this license when present. Any republication of any form must attribute Jeremy Likness as the author and copyright holder. Any republication on the web must be accompanied by a live, direct, clickable, and visible link to www.LoseFatNotFaith.com. Redirects whereby the actual link does not point directly to the losefatnotfaith.com domain are expressly prohibited with the exception of affiliate links generated through the Lose Fat, Not Faith Affiliate Program; improper links will result in termination of rights to republish this content.

Random Picture

Marinated Lamb Curry
Click the link above for more...