Thread: Since GI is affected by all foods eaten...

I've been wondering this myself, seems like it would all average out. But I've been told that I overthink everything so I've never had the courage to ask.

the GI is reduced by combining it with slower digesting foods, HOWEVER you are greatly lacking nutrition. those bleached white foods provide you with nothing but empty calories next to a complex whole grain

Originally posted by Habib
...why is it so bad to eat white rice/potatoes/pasta when you combine it with meat and some green veggies?

It really isn't so bad to eat those things, save maybe the white rice

It comes down to nutrients...brown rice is much denser with nutrients and fiber...same thing goes for sweet potatos...DO NOT rely solely on GI as a basis of what foods to eat.

Eat foods rich in nutrition....it just so happens...go figure...that nutrient dense foods are often lower on the GI index.

Originally posted by Fit Freak
It comes down to nutrients...brown rice is much denser with nutrients and fiber...same thing goes for sweet potatos...DO NOT rely solely on GI as a basis of what foods to eat.

Eat foods rich in nutrition....it just so happens...go figure...that nutrient dense foods are often lower on the GI index.

When you say dense, you mean that they have more fiber/pro/fat per area. Correct ? I guess that following the same logic, one can say that not dense foods are good in a cutting ?

If G.I is not that relevant, you are saying that all carbs/pros/fats are "clean". If not, what is the difference between this or that calorie ?

a said NUTRIENT dense...not calorie dense...bu that I meant a lot of nutrients per the amount of calories

Originally posted by Fit Freak
a said NUTRIENT dense...not calorie dense...bu that I meant a lot of nutrients per the amount of calories

Nutrients dense, calorie dense, isn´t it all the same thing? Since nutrients are carbs/fats/protein, if there is more nutrients per volume then there is more calories.
Let´s take casein supplementation for example, if you take it isolate, the product that you buy is more dense than milk, but if you drink like a gallon of milk, it ends up the same thing.
That is why I think that doesn´t matter if one is more dense or not.

they are definetly not the same thing.

take plant fats like olive oil, it is caloric dense but has very little nutritional value.

Originally posted by LAM
they are definetly not the same thing.

take plant fats like olive oil, it is caloric dense but has very little nutritional value.

I know why you don´t agree with me.
We were talking about "nutrient dense" not nutritonal value.
Using your example of olive oil:
10 g of olive oil has 9.6 g of fat. So you might say that it is full/dense with nutrient, in this case fat.

Nutritional value is a weird concept too, since some people say that it is to describe what types of nutrients some food has and others use it to say that a food has a high nutritional value to describe a food with good portions of pro/carb/fat/oil/minerals/vitamins.
Anyway, I guess we were trying to say the same thing with different words.

By nutrient I do not mean macro nutrients like carbs, protein, and fats. I am referring to nutrients (vitamins, minerals, and fibre).

Looking at nutrients this way then you are right.

So on a cutting diet, it would be alright once a day or so to have some pasta with my meat and veggies in order to raise my carb intake (see my previous post about the dining halls here not providing the "good" carbs on a consistent enough basis)?

I would avoid pasta totally when cutting...too calorically dense in my opinion...but if that's all you have access too go for it.

You could always go for WW pasta if your going to have pasta. It is a much healthier option than regular seminoli pasta.

only prob with pasta is ...i always eat like a plate load with sauce...mmmmm