5 ms·
It's not silly, at least not on the face of it to a complete duffer in nutritional science (me). Intuitively it seems like nutrition is a highly interdependent
by rfrey 12y ago
It's not silly, at least not on the face of it to a complete duffer in nutritional science (me). Intuitively it seems like nutrition is a highly interdependent system of variables. The effect of a food on your body and blood chemistry might be completely different when consumed in combination with other foods.
Or it might not. Testable! Give subjects the same combinations of foods (maybe scaled by body weight) a set time before consuming the test food, and measure blood sugar delta.
In any case, it might be wrong but it's not silly.
- equoid 12y agoI stand by my verdict. He was stating that ring fenced measurements are blown out of proportion because they do not reflect real life behaviour. I'd expect a citation otherwise I am happy to dismiss it as silly.
- laichzeit0 12y agoWell, in effect what you're arguing is that because something was tested in isolation, you feel justified in generalizing it to a situation it was not tested in.
- coldpie 12y agoAbsent further evidence, that seems like a safe conclusion given the caveat that it hasn't actually been tested.
- laichzeit0 12y agoHold on a second. It's not that there is no evidence, I just personally haven't bothered to crawl the internet looking for it. A quick google search found the following: "High- and moderate-GI choices may be improved by pairing them with low-GI foods or healthy sources of lean protein or unsaturated fats. For example, the GI of white bread will be lowered if it is eaten with a bowl of chili or spread with peanut butter." I.e. eat your white rice with some chicken and olive oil and you'll be "okay". http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/4/155.full http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/4/155.full