How about a low GI diet ? Well I tried that at diagnosis, and found it to be a complete faluire. OK it reduced my BG numbers from mid twenty’s to around 12-15, a big drop, but still in the extremely high risk of complications territory. So, low GI did not work for me, but could it work for others ? My money is on NO! and I will give you my reasons. For me a carb is still a carb, it’s just a question of how fast it raises BG. Secondly, there is a huge amount of misinformation out there. You read one GI chart, and it says a certain food is low GI, you read a different GI chart, and it says the same food is high GI. So, very confusing especially for newly diagnosed, and possibly very dangerous for the type two getting no test strips, and cannot afford to buy their own. Trusting a GI chart could lead to dangerous BG numbers. Now, an outfit that should have some accurate GI food information is the largest diabetes charity in the UK DUK alas no. Have a look at the chart from the DUK website below.
As you can see, they state Special K is low GI. Kellogg’s Special K varies from country to country, but is typically around a GI of 70, please bear in mind, white table sugar has a GI of around 65. DUK tell us brown rice is high GI, but the GI is in fact around 45. As regulars to this blog know, I have one keen sense of smell, and I am smelling a rat here. Could it be if you are giving money to DUK as Kellogg’s do, you get a nice safe GI rating, and lot’s of recommends in the diet section ? Or have DUK made a mistake ? As I said earlier, the GI diet is fraught with danger and misinformation. If DUK don’t have clue, who does ?
One more thing, the Special K diet is a complete crock. I had my wife on it for six months and she looked nothing like the woman in the ads.