Glucose, brains and deciding what to believe

G'day G'day Folks,

The New Scientist magazine is often a good source of ideas arising
from recently published research. The 18th August issue contains an
article entitled Breakfast Myth, Why it is smarter to skip the cereal.

One of the myths exposed is the suggestion that since brains require
glucose as fuel, they will function better if first fed glucose
producing carbohydrate. Sounds reasonable and up to a point it is.

However, there are some surprises. These results were obtained from
non-diabetics so don't assume they necessarily apply to you.

Memory is improved slightly if one has a high GI breakfast compared
with having no breakfast. However, a greater improvement is obtained
if one has a low GI breakfast.

It is thought that verbal memory is adversely affected by cortisol,
the stress hormone. High GI foods tend to raise cortisol levels more
than low GI foods.




If one engages in tasks requiring a quick reaction time then eating a
high GI breakfast reducing performance. A low GI breakfast reduces
performance even further. Notice the switch around.

Here it is thought that ghrelin, the hunger hormone, raises
performance in anything activity that is similar to hunting. It makes
one mean and keen to be hungry. A low GI meal satisfies one for
longer so quietens the urge to hunt. Simple when you think it
through.


Another interesting point relates to stress. If one is likely to face
stressful events in the day it is wise to avoid high GI breakfasts.
The high GI meal raises cortisol, the stress hormone making dealing
with the situation worse.

Amongst the suggestions for low GI is a banana. GI quoted as 55.
That gave me cause to think. The GI of bananas depends on ripeness.
Not sure if I'd accept the notion of bananas being low GI without
qualification. Whatever. A banana was suggested as being sufficient
for breakfast supplying 25 grams of carbohydrate = 100 Cal.

Plantains, the bananas that stay green took my interest some years
back. The point is they are high in resistant starch. Resistant
starch doesn't break down into glucose as one would expect. Instead
it ferments to form very short chain fatty acids such as propionic
acid and butanoic acid. These moderate the function of the liver and
reduce cholesterol production etc. The problem with resistant
starches is that they also tend to lead to methane production which is
less than pleasant. It seemed from what limited research I could come
across that green bananas should provide more of the short chain fatty
acids and less of the methane making them a good thing. Perhaps
someone has followed up more recent research on the subject.

Best wishes,
--
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin

"Quentin Grady" <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:ur8sc3dj3pqn88oce98sdl6l81sta8o5nh@4ax.com...
>
> G'day G'day Folks,
>
> The New Scientist magazine is often a good source of ideas arising
> from recently published research. The 18th August issue contains an
> article entitled Breakfast Myth, Why it is smarter to skip the cereal.
>
> One of the myths exposed is the suggestion that since brains require
> glucose as fuel, they will function better if first fed glucose
> producing carbohydrate. Sounds reasonable and up to a point it is.
>
> However, there are some surprises. These results were obtained from
> non-diabetics so don't assume they necessarily apply to you.
>
> Memory is improved slightly if one has a high GI breakfast compared
> with having no breakfast. However, a greater improvement is obtained
> if one has a low GI breakfast.
>
> It is thought that verbal memory is adversely affected by cortisol,
> the stress hormone. High GI foods tend to raise cortisol levels more
> than low GI foods.
>
>
>
>
> If one engages in tasks requiring a quick reaction time then eating a
> high GI breakfast reducing performance. A low GI breakfast reduces
> performance even further. Notice the switch around.
>
> Here it is thought that ghrelin, the hunger hormone, raises
> performance in anything activity that is similar to hunting. It makes
> one mean and keen to be hungry. A low GI meal satisfies one for
> longer so quietens the urge to hunt. Simple when you think it
> through.
>
>
> Another interesting point relates to stress. If one is likely to face
> stressful events in the day it is wise to avoid high GI breakfasts.
> The high GI meal raises cortisol, the stress hormone making dealing
> with the situation worse.
>
> Amongst the suggestions for low GI is a banana. GI quoted as 55.
> That gave me cause to think. The GI of bananas depends on ripeness.
> Not sure if I'd accept the notion of bananas being low GI without
> qualification. Whatever. A banana was suggested as being sufficient
> for breakfast supplying 25 grams of carbohydrate = 100 Cal.
>
> Plantains, the bananas that stay green took my interest some years
> back. The point is they are high in resistant starch. Resistant
> starch doesn't break down into glucose as one would expect. Instead
> it ferments to form very short chain fatty acids such as propionic
> acid and butanoic acid. These moderate the function of the liver and
> reduce cholesterol production etc. The problem with resistant
> starches is that they also tend to lead to methane production which is
> less than pleasant. It seemed from what limited research I could come
> across that green bananas should provide more of the short chain fatty
> acids and less of the methane making them a good thing. Perhaps
> someone has followed up more recent research on the subject.
>
> Best wishes,
> --
> Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
> New Zealand, >#,#< [
> / \ /\
> "... and the blind dog was leading."
>
> http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin

Hello Quentin,

Since I've noticed that bananas spike me and apples don't, I've been eating
an apple a day. Unfortunately, the part about keeping doctors away is a myth
)

I will experiment with greener bananas and see if they cause a spike too. If
they don't, I'll be very grateful to you for pointing this out as I really
miss the taste of an occasional banana.

John C.

On 24 Aug, 22:48, "John" <jcarney44_remo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Quentin Grady" <quen...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>
> news:ur8sc3dj3pqn88oce98sdl6l81sta8o5nh@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > G'day G'day Folks,
>
> > The New Scientist magazine is often a good source of ideas arising
> > from recently published research. The 18th August issue contains an
> > article entitled Breakfast Myth, Why it is smarter to skip the cereal.
>
> > One of the myths exposed is the suggestion that since brains require
> > glucose as fuel, they will function better if first fed glucose
> > producing carbohydrate. Sounds reasonable and up to a point it is.
>
> > However, there are some surprises. These results were obtained from
> > non-diabetics so don't assume they necessarily apply to you.
>
> > Memory is improved slightly if one has a high GI breakfast compared
> > with having no breakfast. However, a greater improvement is obtained
> > if one has a low GI breakfast.
>
> > It is thought that verbal memory is adversely affected by cortisol,
> > the stress hormone. High GI foods tend to raise cortisol levels more
> > than low GI foods.
>
> > If one engages in tasks requiring a quick reaction time then eating a
> > high GI breakfast reducing performance. A low GI breakfast reduces
> > performance even further. Notice the switch around.
>
> > Here it is thought that ghrelin, the hunger hormone, raises
> > performance in anything activity that is similar to hunting. It makes
> > one mean and keen to be hungry. A low GI meal satisfies one for
> > longer so quietens the urge to hunt. Simple when you think it
> > through.
>
> > Another interesting point relates to stress. If one is likely to face
> > stressful events in the day it is wise to avoid high GI breakfasts.
> > The high GI meal raises cortisol, the stress hormone making dealing
> > with the situation worse.
>
> > Amongst the suggestions for low GI is a banana. GI quoted as 55.
> > That gave me cause to think. The GI of bananas depends on ripeness.
> > Not sure if I'd accept the notion of bananas being low GI without
> > qualification. Whatever. A banana was suggested as being sufficient
> > for breakfast supplying 25 grams of carbohydrate = 100 Cal.
>
> > Plantains, the bananas that stay green took my interest some years
> > back. The point is they are high in resistant starch. Resistant
> > starch doesn't break down into glucose as one would expect. Instead
> > it ferments to form very short chain fatty acids such as propionic
> > acid and butanoic acid. These moderate the function of the liver and
> > reduce cholesterol production etc. The problem with resistant
> > starches is that they also tend to lead to methane production which is
> > less than pleasant. It seemed from what limited research I could come
> > across that green bananas should provide more of the short chain fatty
> > acids and less of the methane making them a good thing. Perhaps
> > someone has followed up more recent research on the subject.
>
> > Best wishes,
> > --
> > Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
> > New Zealand, >#,#< [
> > / \ /\
> > "... and the blind dog was leading."
>
> >http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
>
> Hello Quentin,
>
> Since I've noticed that bananas spike me and apples don't, I've been eating
> an apple a day. Unfortunately, the part about keeping doctors away is a myth
> )
>
> I will experiment with greener bananas and see if they cause a spike too. If
> they don't, I'll be very grateful to you for pointing this out as I really
> miss the taste of an occasional banana.
>
> John C.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh, an apple a day works great. Stuffing the doctor, getting the apple
in their mouth, and basting them all day at a mediaum heat is a lot of
work, though.

This post not CC'd by email
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:48:26 GMT, "John"
<jcarney44_remove_@verizon.net> wrote:

>Hello Quentin,
>
>Since I've noticed that bananas spike me and apples don't, I've been eating
>an apple a day. Unfortunately, the part about keeping doctors away is a myth
>)

G'day G'day John,

Thanks for that observation. It is the sort of observation that
many people will make. Some don't or for reasons of their own wont.
For me the upper limit was half a banana. Either the banana sold here
are large or higher GI or the writers of the New Scientist article
were mistaken in their deductions. IMHO it is ever so important to
be clear where the reporter leaves off reporting and starts
prosletysing. In this instance the results of several researchers was
reported then came some conclusions about what one should eat for
breakfast. It was at that point that some conclusions were reached
that didn't appear to me to be strictly arrived at from experiment.

The bit about a banana being just right appears to be a "logical"
deduction. The problem with logical deductions is they are only as
good as the assumption on which they are based.

Does a typical ripe banana of the variety sold here really have a GI
of 55?

>I will experiment with greener bananas and see if they cause a spike too. If
>they don't, I'll be very grateful to you for pointing this out as I really
>miss the taste of an occasional banana.

You might not like the taste if you try them raw.

>John C.

BTW. Apples vary. They vary tremendously in their therapeutic
effects. Some have outstanding properties when it comes to keeping
the doctor away. Some cancers are strongly dependent on what foods we
eat. Some aren't influences by diet in the slightest.

When research was done on some old varieties of apple found growing in
New Zealand two were found to have very high levels of compounds that
would reduce the rate of those cancers that are susceptible to diet.
Some varieties have almost none. There is nothing unusual about New
Zealand apples. We do breed some excellent apples that suit our
climate but these OLD varieties were simply imported from places like
the UK and USA.

Some one with a bent for Googling could probably find the URL listing
the old varieties that were exceptional.

Don't whatever you do get sucked in by idiots and scam artists who
attribute the health properties of fruit to their vitamin content.

Apples have a low vitamin C content. That doesn't matter. They have
a high polyphenol content. Polyphenols recycle the Vit C so that an
apple has the equivalent of 1000 mg of Vit C. Whichever way you look
at it, there is no way one can equate the benefits of fruit in the
diet to their vitamin content. The scam artists would like us to
since their supplements can provide so much more. Scam artists is
probably a bit harsh for SOME of them as they could be simply ignorant
of the proven fact that fruit and vegetables have health benefits that
cannot be attributed to the sum total of their vitamin, mineral and
antioxidant content. For whatever reason, fruit and vegetables work
better than supplements over the long haul.

Best wishes,
--
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin

Quentin Grady wrote:

> Apples have a low vitamin C content. That doesn't matter. They have
> a high polyphenol content. Polyphenols recycle the Vit C so that an
> apple has the equivalent of 1000 mg of Vit C. Whichever way you look
> at it, there is no way one can equate the benefits of fruit in the
> diet to their vitamin content.

Excuse me, Quentin, where can I find more information about this?

Thanks.

--
http://www.ornery-geeks.org/consulting/

This post not CC'd by email
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 03:05:18 -0500, Jackie Patti <jpatti@ccil.org>
wrote:

>Quentin Grady wrote:
>
>> Apples have a low vitamin C content. That doesn't matter. They have
>> a high polyphenol content. Polyphenols recycle the Vit C so that an
>> apple has the equivalent of 1000 mg of Vit C. Whichever way you look
>> at it, there is no way one can equate the benefits of fruit in the
>> diet to their vitamin content.
>
>Excuse me, Quentin, where can I find more information about this?
>
>Thanks.

G'day G'day Jackie Patti,

It is tempting to think in these days that all information can be
found on the internet and all one has to do is quote an URL.

Perhaps it can.

In this instance I obtained the information from a NZ book called
Antioxidants, a Health Revolution by Carolyn Lister. I believe she is
or was a scientist working for Crop and Food Research.

Best wishes,
--
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin