2 ms·
Answering that question is exactly where I found the article interesting, especially with regard to the glycemic index and cognitive functioning. It's one reaso
by robg 18y ago
Answering that question is exactly where I found the article interesting, especially with regard to the glycemic index and cognitive functioning. It's one reason I've almost entirely cut juice and sugar from my morning intake because it nicely explains the mid-morning crash. Even lightly processed cereals are not very good for you. It seems to be much better (physically and mentally) to get complex carbs (look for more fiber and less sugar) with fresh fruit (for fiber and sweetness) and perhaps a bit of protein/fat (nuts are really, really good). But all that's much easier said when full than hungry!
My wife and I have been trying (and failing) to push our diets closer to Michael Pollan's latest mantra:
"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
http://www.michaelpollan.com/indefense.php http://www.michaelpollan.com/indefense.php
Magazine treatment here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine/28nutritionism.t.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine/28nutritionism.t....
- Tichy 18y agoWell I thought the glycemic index was a trend two years ago, but maybe it is still going strong, I am not sure ;-) I will take a second look at the "in defense for food" book. Have you read "The China Study", and do the books agree?
- robg 18y agoNope, can't say I've read "The China Study". Sounds interesting though. Thanks. The glycemic index, to me, simply means how our bodies respond to foods based on the time in which the nutrients are metabolized. I'm very interested in how that process corresponds to mental functioning. and unfortunately there hasn't been enough work done in that area. The work I had heard of is the referenced the oatmeal/cap'n crunch study.