Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Stark on December 06, 2006, 07:58:44 PM
-
Alright...
I have about 3 weeks time to get my diet in place, I have a lot of data (computer logs and such) to get my diet right on point for myself.
Now...
One thing I know (and have documented for myself) is how reluctant I am to drink enough fluids, I have serious issues drinking water.
But since I know how important it is to drink in order to loose fat I was looking around for things that could help me.
So I found:
Robinsons apple and blackcurrant (no added sugar),it is basically a syrup and these are the nutrition information:
Per 100ml
Energy: 39kj/9cal
Protein: 0.2g
Carbs: 1.3g (of which sugar: 1.3g)
Fat: Trace (no saturated)
Fibre: Nil
Sodium: 0.1g
Please note that Robinsons Apple & Blackcurrant contains a source of Phenylalanine - one of the main ingredients in artificial sweetener. Although Phenylalanine is actually an important part of our diet (assists protein) there are people who cannot metabolise phenylalanine and as such the warnings are included on all products containing phenylalanine.
Now I love to mix this with about 2 liter of water.
I would like to ask you if you personally think if this is a bad idea to introduce this in a cutting cycle?
Thanks for you answer
-
Why don't you just use Crystal lite?
-
Why don't you just use Crystal lite?
Because I life in Ireland and I have never seen Crystal light here...
I mean there is litteraly nothing in that drink that could be bad lol, and that's excactly my problem I don't trust them since it also tasts great ;D
-
Any chance u could answer me if this could possible spike my insuline?
-
No, It doesn't have enough to spike insulin...besides that, your water ratio should be pretty high.
-
Because I life in Ireland and I have never seen Crystal light here...
That's cus Ireland sucks.
-
Why don`t you just drink whatever you want?
-
besides that, your water ratio should be pretty high.
What do you mean by that?
Thanks for answering btw.
-
No, It doesn't have enough to spike insulin...besides that, your water ratio should be pretty high.
You don`t even know how much an Insulin spike you would get. Besides, an Insulin spike is pointless in a calorie defecit.
-
These guys don't have a clue.
-
Because I life in Ireland and I have never seen Crystal light here...
in Ireland, Crystal light = any beer that isn't Guiness, Stark.
Hope this help 8)
-
in Ireland, Crystal light = any beer that isn't Guiness, Stark.
Hope this help 8)
I have never seen Crystal light here... and no ireland does not suck its a beautiful country you guys should come over one day :)
TA of course insulin spike is an issue
-
Basically, the amount of water you're bringing in (2 gal/ day), will dilute the flavoring enough so that it's not a factor...
-
Basically, the amount of water you're bringing in (2 gal/ day), will dilute the flavoring enough so that it's not a factor...
Thanks for your answer bob
Rest of the lads thanks for your input as well.
-
Basically, the amount of water you're bringing in (2 gal/ day), will dilute the flavoring enough so that it's not a factor...
How would Water Dilute an Insulin Response? Try giving that advice to a Diabetic and watch him die.
-
Just drink water :D
-
Just drink water :D
Dude I seriously hate to drink water, I know I will have to to If this isnt working (and that as such is no big deal) but damn I would love if I can use the Robinson stuff... tastes greeeeeat ;)
-
What a whiner.
-
get some lemons and some equal
-
I have NEVER in my life heard of an Irishman that had problems Drinking .
I thought you guys were professionals. ???
This thread looks an awefull lot like a muscletech plug straight out of MuscleMag International. :P
-
I have NEVER in my life heard of an Irishman that had problems Drinking .
I thought you guys were professionals. ???
This thread looks an awefull lot like a muscletech plug straight out of MuscleMag International. :P
Haha. True. :)
-
That's cus Ireland sucks.
Are you American?
-
get some lemons and some equal
That's the only thing I drink whenever I go out to eat at any restaurants, my friends think I am weird for just drinking that but now I usually have a light beer on the side since I am 21.
-
How would Water Dilute an Insulin Response? Try giving that advice to a Diabetic and watch him die.
Because he would be spreading the sugar out over the whole day.Nobody is going to be drinking two gallons all at once. If he drinks an 8 oz glass of water mixed with a small amount of the other stuff,the ratio of water to juice(whatever that shit is) would be high enough that there would not be a significant amount of sugar ingested at one time. When they test you for diabetes they make you drink some shit that is full of dextrose(75 g I think) to induce an insuline spike,if he has diluted that shit way down,as Chick suggested,there won't be enough to cause problems. Just about my whole family,besides me,is diabetic.They won't die if they take in some sugar now and then.They just need to watch it closely.Most diabetics know their body well enough that they can tell when their sugar is getting high or low.
-
Thanks for summing it up nicely for me, GTBRO...
I seriously thought Adonis was smarter than that...
-
Because he would be spreading the sugar out over the whole day.Nobody is going to be drinking two gallons all at once. If he drinks an 8 oz glass of water mixed with a small amount of the other stuff,the ratio of water to juice(whatever that shit is) would be high enough that there would not be a significant amount of sugar ingested at one time. When they test you for diabetes they make you drink some shit that is full of dextrose(75 mg I think) to induce an insuline spike,if he has diluted that shit way down,as Chick suggested,there won't be enough to cause problems. Just about my whole family,besides me,is diabetic.They won't die if they take in some sugar now and then.They just need to watch it closely.Most diabetics know their body well enough that they can tell when their sugar is getting high or low.
boom........... owned
-
I'm just surprised because I thought it was quite obvious...this was as easy a answer as it gets.
Of course, were talking about a guy who advocates eating doughnuts...
DOH!...................nuts.
-
DOH!...................nuts.
lmao, that's a good one chick
-
lol....................n ice
-
I'm just surprised because I thought it was quite obvious...this was as easy a answer as it gets.
Of course, were talking about a guy who advocates eating doughnuts...
DOH!...................nuts.
Bob, are you suggesting that the " Adonis Principles " are slightly flawed ?
-
Bob, are you suggesting that the " Adonis Principles " are slightly flawed ?
After looking into it further, conducting tests, disecting each principle, breaking down each component to it's base core....YES, I found one, huge glaring flaw in the Adonis principles....
Adonis.
-
lol chick, adonis should jump into his own asshole and disappear.
-
Bob you are gaining ground fast here...TA time to retreat :) and resemble the troops.
Anyways thanks everybody for all your answers :)
-
I'm just surprised because I thought it was quite obvious...this was as easy a answer as it gets.
Of course, were talking about a guy who advocates eating doughnuts...
DOH!...................nuts.
You really still have no clue of why you said what you said.
It makes no difference if you dilute 2000 grams of sugar with water. There will still be 2000 grams of sugar and so forth.
GTBRO is incorrect because its not the amount of water that matters, but the amount of sugar. If you had 2000 grams of sugar and diluted it with 2 gallons of water and drank it or 2 ounces of water, you would in fact elicit the same response as you are ingesting the same amount of sugar. Would you like me to go over water as a gradient in the human body?
-
Background: Dilution has been noticed to increase the glycemic response to various sugars, including glucose. This effect may contribute to the poor reproducibility of the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). To test this hypothesis we assessed the effect of diluting a 75-g OGTT on 2-hour postprandial blood glucose based diagnostic outcomes, incremental glycemia and area under the glucose curve.
Methods: On 3 different occasions, 10 subjects (mean age 40 [and standard error of the mean (SEM) 3.2] years; mean body mass index 27.2 [and SEM 1.2] kg/m2) without previously diagnosed dysglycemia were given a 300-mL, 600-mL or 900-mL 75-g OGTT in random order. The protocol followed the American Diabetes Association's guidelines. Finger-prick capillary blood samples were obtained at fasting and then 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes after the start of the test.
Results: At 30, 45 and 60 minutes, incremental glycemic concentrations were significantly higher with the 900-mL meal (means [and SEMs]: 4.9 [0.4] mmol/L, 5.1 [0.6] mmol/L and 4.6 [0.8] mmol/L, respectively) than with the 600-mL (means [and SEMs]: 4.0 [0.3] mmol/L, 4.2 [0.6] mmol/L and 3.6 [0.7] mmol/L, respectively) and the 300-mL meals (means and [SEMs]: 3.8 [0.5] mmol/L, 4.0 [0.5] mmol/L and 3.2 [0.6] mmol/L, respectively) (p < 0.05). The same was true for peak incremental blood glucose, regardless of time (p < 0.05). The area under the curve for the 900-mL meal (mean [and SEM] 404 [57] min·mmol/L) was significantly higher than for the 600-mL (mean [and SEM] 331 [51] min·mmol/L) and 300-mL meals (mean [and SEM] 280 [48] min·mmol/L) (p < 0.05). No other significant differences were observed.
Interpretation: Dilution of the 75-g OGTT will likely not affect current screening practices that use 2-h postprandial glucose levels as the basis for diagnosis. It may, however, bias the interpretation of older criteria that rely on intermediate time points because these midpoints appear to be sensitive to alterations in the total volume of the meal ingested.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diabetes and intermediate classifications of hyperglycemia are on the rise.1 It is important, therefore, to have a reliable and valid test to diagnose new cases. Both the Canadian and American Diabetes Associations in their most recent reports2,3 recommended the preferential use of fasting plasma glucose values for diagnosis. The use of the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), which had also been previously recommended, was discouraged. One of the reasons for this was the poor reproducibility of the test compared with that of fasting plasma glucose levels.
Differences in the total volume of water ingested in the OGTT may explain some of the variability. The World Health Organization4 and the American Diabetes Association3 instruct that the OGTT meal be given as 75 g of glucose dissolved in 250-300 mL of water, whereas the National Diabetes Data Group5 and the Canadian Diabetes Association2 instruct that it be given as 75 g of glucose in a minimum of 300 mL; that is, it may be given at any volume over 300 mL. In addition, many of our patients have complained of the poor palatability6 of the test and resulting nausea and dizziness7 and have often requested additional water to increase its overall acceptability.
Glycemia may be affected by these volume differences. We recently demonstrated that a 3-fold increase in the volume of a 25-g oral glucose meal increased glycemia by 19.8%.8 Others,9 using a 50-g dose of glucose found that a 3-fold increase in volume raised peak blood glucose significantly, by 14% in pregnant women. However, volume increases in the 75-g OGTT have not been evaluated; we therefore chose to investigate the effects of a 2- and 3-fold increase in the volume of a 300-mL 75-g OGTT on glycemic concentrations, 2-hour postprandial glucose level diagnostic outcomes and the area under the blood glucose curve. The 600-mL and 900-mL volumes were chosen to cover a large physiological range.
Methods
Top
Abstract
Methods
Results
Interpretation
References
The 5 men and 5 women (means [and standard errors of the mean (SEM)]: age 40 [3.2] years; body mass index 27.2 [1.2] kg/m2, fasting glucose 4.9 [0.2] mmol/L) who participated in the study were recruited from faculty and the student body at the University of Toronto and through hospital advertisements; written informed consent was obtained from each. All participants were healthy, medication free and had never been diagnosed with dysglycemia; 2 were smokers, and 6 were overweight by body mass index criteria (> 27 kg/m2). The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ont.
Each participant received three 75-g glucose Glucodex OGTT meals (Technilab Inc., Chambly, Que.) in random order: one at each of 300 mL (undiluted, osmolarity 1.39 mol/L), 600 mL (300 mL of tap water added, osmolarity 0.69 mol/L) and 900 mL (600 mL of tap water added, osmolarity 0.46 mol/L).
The protocol was designed to match the American Diabetes Association guidelines for the administration of the OGTT. Participants attended St. Michael's Hospital on 3 different mornings after a 10- to 16-hour overnight fast. They were instructed to maintain the same diet and exercise patterns the evening before each test and to consume a minimum of 150 g of carbohydrate each day over the 3 days prior to each test. To ensure that these instructions were followed, participants completed a questionnaire detailing information about their diets and lifestyle patterns before each session. Upon commencement of the test a Monoejector Lancet device (Owen Mumford Ltd., Woodstock, Oxon, England) was used to obtain a fasting finger-prick capillary blood sample (approximately 250 µL) from each participant. One of the 3 test meals was then given, with instructions to drink it over a period of exactly 5 minutes. Finger-prick blood samples were obtained again at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes after the start of the meal. No smoking or physical activity was permitted before or during the test.
All blood samples, collected in tubes containing fluoride oxalate, were immediately frozen at -20°C and analyzed within 3 days of collection. The glucose concentration of each was determined by the glucose oxidase method using a YSI 2300 Stat glucose/L-lactate analyzer, model 115 (Yellow Springs Instruments, Yellow Springs, Ohio).
Blood glucose curves were plotted as the incremental change in blood glucose over time, and the positive incremental area under the blood glucose curve was calculated geometrically for each participant, ignoring areas below the fasting value.10 Incremental glucose concentrations were used to control for differences in baseline fasting levels between the treatments; 2-hour absolute blood glucose values were compared with Canadian Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria for impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and diabetes (i.e., glucose cutoff values: diabetes mellitus 11.1 mmol/L, IGT 7.8-11.0 mmol/L, normal glucose tolerance < 7.8 mmol/L).2 Criteria for venous plasma samples were used because the cutoff values for venous plasma and capillary whole blood glucose are the same.4,5 Interactive and independent effects of volume dose (300, 600 and 900 mL) and time (0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 min) on incremental change in blood glucose concentrations were assessed with a repeated measures 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons with the Newman Keuls procedure. Differences in peak blood glucose rise and area under the curve between the 300-, 600- and 900-mL OGTT meals were assessed using repeated measures 1-way ANOVA adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons with the Newman Keuls procedure. All results were expressed as means and SEMs and considered statistically significant if p < 0.05.
Results
Top
Abstract
Methods
Results
Interpretation
References
All participants were able to follow the study protocol without difficulty. Questionnaires revealed that for each subject evening dietary patterns and activities, amount of sleep, reported feelings of health and well-being, mode of transportation to the clinic and weight were consistent between sessions. Subjects were able to consume all test meals in the time allotted, and there were no complaints about the volume of any of the tests. One exception was a subject who complained of a headache following the 300-mL OGTT. No differences were observed between men and women in response to the treatments.
The 900-mL glucose level for 1 participant (8.8 mmol/L) was diagnostic for IGT, but the 600-mL and 300-mL results for that person were not. Similarly, for another participant the 600-mL result was diagnostic for diabetes (11.8 mmol/L), but this was not confirmed by the 900-mL and 300-mL tests, both of which were diagnostic for IGT (9.9 mmol/L and 9.0 mmol/L, respectively). The results of all 3 of the OGTT tests for the remaining 8 subjects were negative for impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes. According to the criteria of the Canadian Diabetes Association and the American Diabetes Association that require 2 abnormal glucose values to confirm a diagnosis, these data indicate that only 1 of the 10 participants had impaired glucose tolerance.
Table 1 and Fig. 1 show the incremental changes in glycemic concentrations at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes following the consumption of the 300-mL, 600-mL and 900-mL OGTT meals. The effects of dilution and time on blood glucose levels were significantly independent (p < 0.01) with no interaction (p = 0.41). Pairwise comparisons showed that incremental changes in glycemic concentrations at 30, 45 and 60 minutes for the 900-mL meal (means [and SEMs]: 4.9 [0.4] mmol/L, 5.1 [0.6] mmol/L and 4.6 [0.8] mmol/L, respectively) were significantly higher than both the 600-mL (means [and SEMs]: 4.0 [0.3] mmol/L, 4.2 [0.6] mmol/L and 3.6 [0.7] mmol/L, respectively) and the 300-mL (means and [SEMs]: 3.8 [0.5] mmol/L, 4.0 [0.5] mmol/L and 3.2 [0.6] mmol/L, respectively) meals (p < 0.05). Incremental peak blood glucose rise, calculated irrespective of time, was also significantly higher for the 900-mL meal (mean [and SEM] 5.7 [0.6] mmol/L) than the 600-mL (mean [and SEM] 5.0 [0.5] mmol/L) and 300-mL (mean [and SEM] 4.6 [0.4] mmol/L) meals (p < 0.05). No other significant differences in glycemic concentrations were observed at any other time interval, including the diagnostically relevant 2-hour time point.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
Table 1: Indices of blood glucose following a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test at 3 treatment dilutions
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
Fig. 1: Glycemic responses to 75-g oral glucose tolerance test at 300 mL, 600 mL and 900 mL over time in 10 subjects with previously undiagnosed dysglycemia. Values are means and standard errors of the means; different letters indicate a significant difference between treatments (p < 0.05).
There was a significant difference between the means of the areas under the curves for the 300-, 600- and 900-mL OGTTs (p = 0.006) (Table 1 and Fig. 2). Pairwise comparisons indicated that the area under the curve for the 900-mL meal (mean [and SEM] 404 [57] min·mmol/L) was significantly greater than for the 600-mL (mean [and SEM] 331 [51] min·mmol/L) and 300-mL meals (mean [and SEM] 280 [48] min·mmol/L) (p < 0.05). No other significant differences were observed.
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
Fig. 2: Comparison of the positive incremental area under the blood glucose curve for the 300-mL, 600-mL and 900-mL volume doses of a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test. Values are means and standard errors of the means; different letters indicate a significant difference between treatments (p < 0.05).
Interpretation
Top
Abstract
Methods
Results
Interpretation
References
This preliminary study suggests that both the 3-fold dilution of the 75-g OGTT from 300 mL to 900 mL and the a 1.5-fold dilution from 600 mL to 900 mL significantly increased postprandial glycemia. The same was not true for a 2-fold dilution from 300 mL to 600 mL. These findings are consistent with those of our previous study in which we diluted 25 g of oral glucose, sucrose and fructose solutions 3-fold.8 They are also in agreement with the findings of other studies in which both liquid9 and solid test meals11,12 were diluted 3-fold or greater.
The mechanism by which volume amplifies postprandial glycemia is likely similar to that described previously.11 An increase in the volume13 or decrease in the osmolality14 of a meal may result in an increase in the rate of gastric emptying and in a subsequent increase in glycemia.15 We believe the timing of glycemic differences observed on the present study to be consistent with this hypothesis. Findings of other related studies offer further support. It was twice observed that the faster an OGTT meal is emptied from the stomach, the higher the resulting postprandial glycemia level.16,17 Schwartz and coworkers9 also attributed a significant rise in glycemic concentrations at 30 minutes and fewer cases of nausea following a diluted 50-g tolerance test to a faster rate of gastric emptying.
These results, have implications for the reproducibility of the OGTT. The 30%, 14% and 19.8% differences in postprandial glucose after the dilution of 75-g (present study), 50-g9 and 25-g8 tolerance tests, respectively, suggest that alterations in volume may be contributing to the reported poor reproducibility of the test. Our observations that the 900-mL meal, in the case of one subject, and the 600-mL meal, in the case of another, produced false-positive 2-hour results may offer additional support. Differences in incremental changes, however, were seen only at the peak blood glucose rise and intermediate time intervals (i.e., 30, 45 and 60 min). Alterations in volume also appeared to have the least effect on incremental change in glycemic levels at 2 hours (p = 0.97). The likelihood, therefore, that dilution will affect the 2-hour-based diagnostic criteria and lead to misdiagnoses seems low.
It is nevertheless possible that some of the earlier reports of poor reproducibility of the test may be attributable to a volume effect. In addition to 2-hour glucose, the 1979 National Diabetes Data Group guidelines5 relied on intermediate glycemic values for diagnosis. As we alluded, these points appear more sensitive to changes in volume than the 2-hour postprandial glycemia levels, indicating that a diagnostic vulnerability may have existed. Our data may lend support to abandoning the use of these values in subsequent established protocols for the test.2,3,4
Further study is required before we can be confident about exactly how much of the variation seen with the 75-g OGTT can be explained by differences in volume. Studies should be conducted to assess whether the present findings hold true in groups with different glucose tolerances and whether 1 dilution has superior reproducibility over another. Further exploration of a gastric-emptying link is also warranted.
We would like to thank MuscleTech Research and Development (Toronto) for their financial support of this study and Technilab (Montreal) for supplying the Glucodex test meals.
Competing interests: Mr. Sievenpiper and Dr. Vuksan received travel grants from MuscleTech Research and Development to attend meetings.
Acknowledgments
Bulk reprints of CMAJ articles are available in minimum quantities of 50
For information or orders: Reprint Coordinator; tel 800 663-7336 x2110, fax 613 565-2382; murrej@cma.ca
Association médicale canadienne
Canadian Medical Association
Footnotes
This article has been peer reviewed.
Reprint requests to: Dr. Vladimir Vuksan, University of Toronto, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Nutritional Sciences, Toronto ON M5S 3E2; fax 416 867-7495; v.vuksan@utoronto.ca
References
Top
Abstract
Methods
Results
Interpretation
References
Harris MI, Flegal CM, Cowie KC, Eberhardt MS, Goldstein DE, Little RR, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance in US adults: The third national health and nutrition examination survey, 1988-1994. Diabetes Care 1998;21:518-24[Abstract]
Meltzer S, Leiter L, Daneman D, Gerstein HC, Lau D, Ludwig S, et al. 1998 clinical practice guidelines for the management of diabetes in Canada. Canadian Diabetes Association. CMAJ 1998;159(Suppl 8):S1-29.
The Expert Committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Report of the Expert Committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 1997;20:1183-97.[Medline]
World Health Organization Study Group. Diabetes mellitus: Report of a WHO Study Group. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1985. p. 99.
National Diabetes Data Group. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. Diabetes 1979;28:1039-57.[Medline]
Stolk RP, Orchard TJ. Why use the oral glucose tolerance test? Diabetes Care 1995;18:1045-9.[Medline]
Elks ML. Oral glucose tolerance tests [letter]. Diabetes Care 1996;19:271.[Medline]
Sievenpiper JL, Vuksan V, Wong EYY, Mendelson RA, Bruce-Thompson C. Effect of meal dilution on the postprandial glycemic response: Implications for glycemic testing. Diabetes Care 1998;21:711-6.[Abstract]
Schwartz JG, Phillips WT, Blumhardt MR, Langer O. Use of a more physiologic oral glucose solution during screening for gestational diabetes mellitus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;171:685-90.[Medline]
Wolever TMS, Jenkins DJA. The use of the glycemic index in predicting the blood glucose and insulin response to mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr 1986;43:167-72.[Abstract]
Torsdottir I, Andersson H. Effect on the postprandial glycaemic level of the addition of water to a meal ingested by healthy subjects and type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. Diabetologia 1989;32:231-5.[Medline]
Young KWH, Wolever TMS. Effect of volume and type of beverage consumed with a standard test meal on postprandial blood glucose responses. Nutr Res 1998;18:1857-63.
Hunt JN, Smith JL, Jiang CL. Effect of meal volume and energy density on the gastric emptying of carbohydrates. Gastroenterology 1985;89:1326-30.[Medline]
Sole CC, Noakes TD. Faster gastric emptying for glucose-polymer and fructose solutions for glucose in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 1989;58:605-12.
Mourot J, Thouvenot P, Couet C, Antoine JM, Krobieka A, Derby G. Relationship between the rate of gastric emptying and glucose and insulin responses to starchy foods in young healthy adults. Am J Clin Nutr 1988;48:1035-40.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Thompson DG, Wingate D, Thomas L, Harrison D. Gastric emptying as a determinant of the oral glucose tolerance test. Gastroenterology 1982;82:51-5.[Medline]
Horowitz M, Edelbroek MAL, Wishart JM, Straathof JW. Relationship between oral glucose tolerance and gastric emptying in normal healthy subjects. Diabetologia 1993;36:857-62.[Medline]
-
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t4544446vj714657/
Effect on the postprandial glycaemic level of the addition of water to a meal ingested by healthy subjects and Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients Journal Diabetologia
Publisher Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
ISSN 0012-186X (Print) 1432-0428 (Online)
Subject Medicine
Issue Volume 32, Number 4 / April, 1989
Category Originals
DOI 10.1007/BF00285289
Pages 231-235
Online Date Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Add to marked items
Add to shopping cart
Add to saved items
Recommend this article
Originals
Effect on the postprandial glycaemic level of the addition of water to a meal ingested by healthy subjects and Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients
I. Torsdottir1 and H. Andersson1
(1) Department of Clinical Nutrition, University of Göteborg, Sahlgren's Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden
Received: 5 October 1988 Revised: 5 February 1989
Summary The effects on postprandial glycaemic reactions of adding a glass of water to a meal were studied in 7 healthy male subjects and 20 Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients for a period of up to 3 h. The subjects were served a meal of potatoes and meat, with or without 300 ml of water, in random order on two mornings after a 12-h fast. The diabetic patients were considered as well-controlled or not well-controlled according to HbA1c and blood glucose fasting values. Water addition increased the peak blood glucose (p<0.02) and serum insulin (p<0.02) levels in healthy subjects, and the blood glucose concentration in well-controlled diabetic patients (p<0.02). The addition of water also increased the overall blood glucose response, calculated as the positive incremental area, in healthy subjects by 68±25% (p<0.02) and in well-controlled diabetic patients by 40±14% (p<0.01). In poorly-controlled diabetic patients, however, the addition of water did not display significant effects, probably due to the varying fasting glycaemia in these patients. Thus, altering the physical property of a meal by dilution with water can affect the physiological responses; the results are considered to be relevant for the on-going discussion concerning the use of physiological responses to foods as a basis for diet instructions to diabetic patients.
Key words Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes - postprandial glycaemia - water ingestion - glycaemic index
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References secured to subscribers.
more options Find Query Builder Close | Clear Title (ti) Summary (su) Author (au) ISSN (issn) ISBN (isbn) DOI (doi) And Or Not ( ) * (wildcard) Within this issue
Within this journal
Within all content
Export this article Export this article as RIS|Text
Text PDF
The size of this document is 503 kilobytes. Although it may be a lengthier download, this is the most authoritative online format.
Open: Entire document
Frequently asked questions | General information on journals and books | Send us your feedback
© Springer. Part of Springer Science+Business Media
Privacy, Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions, © Copyright Information
Remote Address: 65.190.80.190 • Server: mpweb20
HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
-
Chick,GTBRO, and the other dumbasses,
You sirs, are all idiots.
-
The most important thing to remember concerning dilution is that you are only adding solvent. You are not adding solute when you dilute. Therefore:
moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution
-
The most important thing to remember concerning dilution is that you are only adding solvent. You are not adding solute when you dilute. Therefore:
moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution
Hmmmm....hard choice
Either listen to the advice of a Mr USA, IFBB Pro, and reigning Master's World Champion or a Runner Up at a internet contest...... ::)
-
You really still have no clue of why you said what you said.
It makes no difference if you dilute 2000 grams of sugar with water. There will still be 2000 grams of sugar and so forth.
GTBRO is incorrect because its not the amount of water that matters, but the amount of sugar. If you had 2000 grams of sugar and diluted it with 2 gallons of water and drank it or 2 ounces of water, you would in fact elicit the same response as you are ingesting the same amount of sugar. Would you like me to go over water as a gradient in the human body?
Ask a diabetic if it matters whether they ingest 2000 g. of sugar at once, or spread out throughout the day...the whole point is to dilute the amount being ingested, so that your NOT taking in too much as to spike insulin response...
Can't see the forrest for the tree's can you?
-
Ask a diabetic if it matters whether they ingest 2000 g. of sugar at once, or spread out throughout the day...the whole point is to dilute the amount being ingested, so that your NOT taking in too much as to spike insulin response...
Can't see the forrest for the tree's can you?
Why wouldn`t you just drink less of the non-Diluted substance?
Doesn`t make much sense to add water at all.
-
Ask a diabetic if it matters whether they ingest 2000 g. of sugar at once, or spread out throughout the day...the whole point is to dilute the amount being ingested, so that your NOT taking in too much as to spike insulin response...
Can't see the forrest for the tree's can you?
The funny thing is,
You actually thought that adding water dilutes an insulin response.
-
Why wouldn`t you just drink less of the non-Diluted substance?
Doesn`t make much sense to add water at all.
TA it's going to be hard for you to support or defend anything you post cause you have no idea what you are posting. You copy & paste everything you post. Any idiot (proven) can Google something and find all the crap you find and then post it. Jeez, I could go to a NASA related website and take shit off there and sound like Iknwo what I talking about. Its what you do but it means nothing. Hope this helps.
-
TA is this what you are saying. If you take a cup of sugar, pour it into 16 oz. of water and drink it. This would be equal to taking a cup of sugar and pouring it in 2 gallons of water, then taking 16 oz. frm this and drinking it and it would be the same.
-
we're not talking about 3000 grams of sugar to begin with.
-
Exactly...
A simple point made difficult merely for the sake of Adonis trying to make himself look smarter than he is....
The guy was worried about having to much sugar at one time...even though it wasn't that high in sugar to begin with...the other problem he wanted an answer to, was how to drink more water throughout the day, because he didn't like drinking plain water...
Simple solution....mix it in 2 gal. of water...best of both worlds.
Why this Frankenstein looking goof insists on chiming in is beyond me.....
-
You really still have no clue of why you said what you said.
It makes no difference if you dilute 2000 grams of sugar with water. There will still be 2000 grams of sugar and so forth.
GTBRO is incorrect because its not the amount of water that matters, but the amount of sugar. If you had 2000 grams of sugar and diluted it with 2 gallons of water and drank it or 2 ounces of water, you would in fact elicit the same response as you are ingesting the same amount of sugar. Would you like me to go over water as a gradient in the human body?
So according to you, if you made a pizza and used 2 cups of cheese evenly spread over the entire pizza,and then ate 1 slice of the pizza,you ate 2 cups of cheese.
.
A better example would be alcohol.According to you,if I take a pint of whiskey and poor it into two gallons of water and mix it completely,and then drink 1 pint of this liquid mixture,my blood alcohol level will be exactly the same as it would have been had I downed the entire pint of whiskey by itself.
I think you should ask for one of these for Christmas....Once you have mastered putting all the shapes into the correct slot,THEN you will be ready to start thinking about this extremely complicated topic.
(http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:Sua1uOSoSGVQkM:http://order.tupperware.com:8080/coe-images/items/10054276000_detail.jpg)
-
You are an idiot.
So according to you, if you made a pizza and used 2 cups of cheese evenly spread over the entire pizza,and then ate 1 slice of the pizza,you ate 2 cups of cheese.
.
A better example would be alcohol.According to you,if I take a pint of whiskey and poor it into two gallons of water and mix it completely,and then drink 1 pint of this liquid mixture,my blood alcohol level will be exactly the same as it would have been had I downed the entire pint of whiskey by itself.
I knew you were an idiot and couldn`t follow my post on Molarity. Again,
The most important thing to remember concerning dilution is that you are only adding solvent. You are not adding solute when you dilute. Therefore:
moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution
If you were to drink 2 gallons of water with 1 pint of whiskey versus 1 Pint of Whiskey, you would still drink 1 Pint of whiskey.
If you had 3000 grams of sugar water dilluted with a gallon of water versus 3000 grams of sugar in a cup of water, you still have 3000 grams of sugar. Furthermore water dillution is pointless to consider with an Insulin Response.
Water alone has no effect on Insulin Sensitivity. Water combined with any substance still has no effect in reality. If any effect, it would be an increase in sensitivity as evidenced by the above studies, since there would be less enzymatic breakdown aiding in easier digestion.
The same principle applies when you grind up oatmeal into a fine powder, or mash a potato. The Glycemic Index changes.
The Glycemic Index is meaningless anyway in most situations.
BOB CHICK,
You really are dumb. You don`t even have the slightest clue.
-
It's really pretty simple. Whilst the true adonis is completely correct in asserting that moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution, what this doesn't imply is that moles of solute before dilution consumed = moles of solute after dilution consumed.
So, yes, if he was to drink 2 gallons of water with 1 pint of whiskey, or just 1 pint of whiskey, he would have consumed 1 pint of whiskey. However, if he only drank 1 pint of liquid per hour, then before/after dilution affects the amount of whiskey he is drinking per hour.
So, 2 gallons of water + 2g sugar drank over 10 hours = a drastically lower hourly rate of digestion of sugar than ingestion of 2 gallons of water +2 g sugar drank immediately, or, for that matter, 2g sugar eaten immediately. So, it's not the water dilution which matters, rather the amount of sugar ingested at any given time.
Does that help to clarify things for you the true adonis? Try and think dialectically.
-
It's really pretty simple. Whilst the true adonis is completely correct in asserting that moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution, what this doesn't imply is that moles of solute before dilution consumed = moles of solute after dilution consumed.
So, yes, if he was to drink 2 gallons of water with 1 pint of whiskey, or just 1 pint of whiskey, he would have consumed 1 pint of whiskey. However, if he only drank 1 pint of liquid per hour, then before/after dilution affects the amount of whiskey he is drinking per hour.
So, 2 gallons of water + 2g sugar drank over 10 hours = a drastically lower hourly rate of digestion of sugar than ingestion of 2 gallons of water +2 g sugar drank immediately, or, for that matter, 2g sugar eaten immediately. So, it's not the water dilution which matters, rather the amount of sugar ingested at any given time.
Does that help to clarify things for you the true adonis? Try and think dialectically.
We are also talking 2 liters Not 2 Gallons. Certainly he wasn`t going to space out 2 liters of liquid in a day period.
The real argument is about dilution itself. Chick and company seem to think diluting sugar with water will cause less of an Insulin "Spike" due to the introduction of water. They think that diluting 1 gram of sugar with water will somehow magically lower the effect of insulin response of 1 gram of sugar.
That was their original intent. Scroll back up and read. Quite hillarious that they could be so stupid.
-
I knew you were an idiot and couldn`t follow my post on Molarity. Again,
The most important thing to remember concerning dilution is that you are only adding solvent. You are not adding solute when you dilute. Therefore:
moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution
If you were to drink 2 gallons of water with 1 pint of whiskey versus 1 Pint of Whiskey, you would still drink 1 Pint of whiskey.
You are correct....IF YOU DRINK the whole two gallons there is still the same amount ingested.If there are 10 glasses full of the mixture total,and you drink 1 glass,you still have 9 left...so you only drank 1/10 of the whiskey.
-
I knew you were an idiot and couldn`t follow my post on Molarity. Again,
The most important thing to remember concerning dilution is that you are only adding solvent. You are not adding solute when you dilute. Therefore:
moles of solute before dilution = moles of solute after dilution
If you were to drink 2 gallons of water with 1 pint of whiskey versus 1 Pint of Whiskey, you would still drink 1 Pint of whiskey.
If you had 3000 grams of sugar water dilluted with a gallon of water versus 3000 grams of sugar in a cup of water, you still have 3000 grams of sugar. Furthermore water dillution is pointless to consider with an Insulin Response.
Water alone has no effect on Insulin Sensitivity. Water combined with any substance still has no effect in reality. If any effect, it would be an increase in sensitivity as evidenced by the above studies, since there would be less enzymatic breakdown aiding in easier digestion.
The same principle applies when you grind up oatmeal into a fine powder, or mash a potato. The Glycemic Index changes.
The Glycemic Index is meaningless anyway in most situations.
BOB CHICK,
You really are dumb. You don`t even have the slightest clue.
If you add one box of jello mix to 2 cups of water it will turn into a solid. If you add one box of jello to one gallon of water it turns to colored water. If you stuff a jelly donut with 1/2 cup of jelly it remains a jelly donut. But if you put in 2 cups of jelly into a jelly donut it becomes a mess. I know this cause I eat donuts. ;D
-
We are also talking 2 liters Not 2 Gallons. Certainly he wasn`t going to space out 2 liters of liquid in a day period.
The real argument is about dilution itself. Chick and company seem to think diluting sugar with water will cause less of an Insulin "Spike" due to the introduction of water. They think that diluting 1 gram of sugar with water will somehow magically lower the effect of insulin response of 1 gram of sugar.
That was their original intent. Scroll back up and read. Quite hillarious that they could be so stupid.
wrong dumbass. NOBODY said adding water made less of a response to sugar. What was said is 8 ounces of water plus 2 ounces of sugar= LESS SUGAR INGESTED than 10 ounces of sugar.
-
We are also talking 2 liters Not 2 Gallons. Certainly he wasn`t going to space out 2 liters of liquid in a day period.
The real argument is about dilution itself. Chick and company seem to think diluting sugar with water will cause less of an Insulin "Spike" due to the introduction of water. They think that diluting 1 gram of sugar with water will somehow magically lower the effect of insulin response of 1 gram of sugar.
That was their original intent. Scroll back up and read. Quite hillarious that they could be so stupid.
Yeah, well, it's obviously basic chemistry that the addition of water (unless it results in a chemical reaction of course) doesn't change the total amount of the original compound- merely the concentration.
I haven't really been following this thread save for page three- it looked like the argument is that the addition of water means that the drinker takes a longer time to consume the mixture, and so the total amount of sugar consumed per minute/hour is lowered. Hence, lower insulin response.
Which, of course, is spot on.
Perhaps an innocent mistake was made and ammended. They're agreeing with you now, so they're surely not stupid.
-
Well, I just read the thread from page one, and nowhere did anyone assert what you seem to be saying they said. All it comes down to is a misinterpretation of Bob's post on page one- as confirmed by his agreement with gtbro1.
-
BOB WEARS HIGH HEELS NOUGH SAID.
-
Exactly...
A simple point made difficult merely for the sake of Adonis trying to make himself look smarter than he is....
The guy was worried about having to much sugar at one time...even though it wasn't that high in sugar to begin with...the other problem he wanted an answer to, was how to drink more water throughout the day, because he didn't like drinking plain water...
Simple solution....mix it in 2 gal. of water...best of both worlds.
Why this Frankenstein looking goof insists on chiming in is beyond me.....
TA has owned himself once again, truely he is a waste of a human life...
-
Haha what a major misunderstanding here
Ofcourse 3000 grams of sugar in water is still 3000 gr of sugar and would give the same insulin response as the 3000g sugar by itself if you drank the whole mixture at once
However that was not the point, the guy will drink it throughout the day, not at once
-
If you add one box of jello mix to 2 cups of water it will turn into a solid. If you add one box of jello to one gallon of water it turns to colored water. If you stuff a jelly donut with 1/2 cup of jelly it remains a jelly donut. But if you put in 2 cups of jelly into a jelly donut it becomes a mess. I know this cause I eat donuts. ;D
Well...what would happen if you eat all that & then walk outside when's it's below 32 degrees?
;D
-
Hmmmm....hard choice
Either listen to the advice of a Mr USA, IFBB Pro, and reigning Master's World Champion or a Runner Up at a internet contest...... ::)
according to him, he won the contest..Never mind what the judges said.
-
Nice roll of fat around the belly button TA
-
Chick,GTBRO, and the other dumbasses,
You sirs, are all idiots.
who is the idiot now you retard? You can't even read and understand what EVERYONE in this thread,except you,was saying. You sir should just kill yourself.
-
wow, I feel pretty dumb after reading this. Being obvisiouly wrong but still continuing to insult other peoples intelligence.
Nice try talking about molarity of solutions. You sure seem to understand the concept behind it........and that coming from somebody that claims to have several degrees in several natural sciences.
"It's so easy"...........well doesn't seem to be the case this time, right??
-
I love crystal light fruit punch flavor. If the damn Coors Original didnt get in the way..................... ..... :-\
-
I have never seen Crystal light here... and no ireland does not suck its a beautiful country you guys should come over one day :)
TA of course insulin spike is an issue
Ireland rocks... never been there but 1000's of their finest women turn up in sydney every year and they are horny bitches! ;D
-
wow, I feel pretty dumb after reading this. Being obvisiouly wrong but still continuing to insult other peoples intelligence.
Nice try talking about molarity of solutions. You sure seem to understand the concept behind it........and that coming from somebody that claims to have several degrees in several natural sciences.
"It's so easy"...........well doesn't seem to be the case this time, right??
It is so easy for him. Looking like a fool that is
-
BOB I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU DO YOU SPIT OR SWALLOW?