I think these guys are just great to agree to be guinea pigs. I think the article makes some important points, even though I suspect the experiment was sub-optimal just as both diets were. Unfortunately it equates starch to sugar. I dont think that is accurate. I am reading a book by a neurologist who thinks that sugar has TEN TIMES the glycemic effect of starch. I would also guess that the degree of refinement is a variable as well. Dont eat white bread, white rice, and peeled mashed potatoes. Fiber presumably slows down your digestion, and a higher-fiber diet is linked to longevity. I would guess that an optimal human diet is mostly vegetables, some meat, and some unrefined starch but not at modern ratios. My guess is that the ratio of starch rose with civilization, because starches are much easier to store than animal protein and fresh vegetables. The rise of sugar is even more modern; sugar used to be the food of the rich. Before the spread of sugar cane, it was refined from carob pods, and even in the Mediterranean countries where it came from it was the food of the rich. Sugar cane and sugar beets came later and took a while to reach commodity status. Our current average sugar consumption is extremely high by historical standards. I suggest cutting out sugar first. dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2546975/One-twin-gave-sugar-gave-fat-Their-experiment-change-YOUR-life.html
Posted on: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 04:36:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015