# Glycemic Index



## imp (Jul 30, 2015)

Among Seniors, diabetes is commoner than in the young, I think. I found this list of sweet substances' Glycemic Indexes, which gives an idea of what sweeteners are "safer" than others. Common sugar is given an index of 100. Many "sugars" are much lower, as can be seen. The artificial sweeteners mainly have no index. Note that the _highest, _maltodextrin, is to be found packaged, mixed, with artificial sweeteners such as Sucralose or aspartame.  What are your thoughts?   imp

Sweetener​Type​Glycemic Index​MaltodextrinSugar110MaltoseSugar105DextroseSugar100GlucoseSugar100TrehaloseSugar70HFCS-42Modified Sugar68SucroseSugar65CaramelModified Sugar60Golden SyrupModified Sugar60Inverted SugarModified Sugar60Refiners SyrupModified Sugar60HFCS-55Modified Sugar58Blackstrap MolassesSugar Extract55Maple SyrupNatural Sugar54HoneyNatural Sugar50Sorghum SyrupNatural Sugar50LactoseSugar45Cane JuiceSugar Extract43Barley Malt SyrupModified Sugar42HSHSugar Alcohol35Coconut Palm SugarNatural Sugar35MaltitolSugar Alcohol35HFCS-90Modified Sugar31Brown Rice SyrupModified Sugar25FructoseSugar25GalactoseSugar25Agave SyrupModified Sugar15XylitolSugar Alcohol12GlycerolSugar Alcohol5SorbitolSugar Alcohol4LactitolSugar Alcohol3IsomaltSugar Alcohol2MannitolSugar Alcohol2ErythritolSugar Alcohol1Yacon SyrupNatural Sweetener1OligofructoseSugar Fiber1InulinSugar Fiber1BrazzeinNatural Sweetener0CurculinNatural Sweetener0GlycyrrhizinNatural Sweetener0Luo Han GuoNatural Sweetener0MiraculinNatural Sweetener0MonellinNatural Sweetener0PentadinNatural Sweetener0SteviaNatural Sweetener0ThaumatinNatural Sweetener0Acesulfame KArtificial Sweetener0AlitameArtificial Sweetener0AspartameArtificial Sweetener0CyclamateArtificial Sweetener0NeotameArtificial Sweetener0SaccharinArtificial Sweetener0SucraloseArtificial Sweetener0


----------



## chic (Jul 31, 2015)

Interesting list, Imp. Some of those I'm unfamiliar with. When it comes to sugars or sweeteners, I'm trepiditious about anything that offers up a 0 on the glycemic index for fear that it contains something else entirely more toxic to the body?


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 31, 2015)

I use Sweet 'n' Low (saccharine) in my coffee and when preparing unsweetened juices. It was removed from the government's cancer-causing substances list a while back, but who really knows. 



> The Report on Carcinogens 9th report prepared by the National Toxicology  Program was sent to Congress by the Department of Health and Human  Services on May 15, 2000. The report, published every two years,  identifies substances that are "known" or "reasonably anticipated" to  cause cancer. Saccharin was removed from the list of substances  "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.


source


----------



## d0ug (Jul 31, 2015)

Imp
Good information thanks


----------



## imp (Jul 31, 2015)

chic said:


> Interesting list, Imp. Some of those I'm unfamiliar with. When it comes to sugars or sweeteners, I'm trepiditious about anything that offers up a 0 on the glycemic index for* fear that it contains something else entirely more toxic to the body*?



Not necessarily something else in content, but rather what is _produced _within the body, as the ingested substance is "metabolized", that is, removed from the body. In the case of Aspartame for example, it was early-on determined that one of the products produced as the liver went about removing it is METHANOL, which is "Wood Alcohol", a quite toxic substance. Proponents of acceptance of Aspartame as a "General Use Food Additive" sought to allow it's addition to many already-prepared foodstuffs, like cereals. Opponents pointed out that, allowing that would not adequately limit the amount of Aspartame ingested at one time. A dash in one's coffee vs. several cups of cereal containing much more, are two different things.

In fact, the issue became so heatedly debated that a top gov't. official who fought acceptance of Aspartame, was fired, his replacement immediately ordering acceptance of the material. This all happened because, allegedly, the govt. official seeking to allow marketing of the sweetener sat as a board member of the drug company holding patent and manufacturing rights! Thus, we have persons in high places easily able to control the poisoning of Americans, albeit slowly.    imp


----------



## Lara (Jul 31, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I use Sweet 'n' Low (saccharine) in my coffee and when preparing unsweetened juices. It was removed from the government's cancer-causing substances list a while back, but who really knows


*Stevia* is the safest sugar substitute, is completely natural, and tastes better.


----------



## Josiah (Jul 31, 2015)

Being on a low carbohydrate diet (< 100 g per day) goes a long way towards preventing blood sugar spikes. Despite this my latest A1c lab result was higher than I would like.
Lara, I use stevia too.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 31, 2015)

Lara said:


> *Stevia* is the safest sugar substitute, is completely natural, and tastes better.



Yes, but it still has potential side-effects like any other substance ...


----------



## imp (Jul 31, 2015)

We all gotta remember something regarding "all-natural" compounds like Stevia; they derive as chemical compounds, somewhere, whether from plant bark, beets, cane, or maybe even "sweet-breads" (facetiously used). Therefore, like he says, any material we swallow may produce some undesirable effects.    imp


----------



## imp (Jul 31, 2015)

*Aspartame*

Yeah, so how much is "in moderation"? Qualifying statement, if I ever heard one. "In moderation" =  None?        imp

[h=2]Is aspartame safe?

Aspartame is one of the most researched sugar substitutes available in the 
United States. More than 100 studies have examined its safety. It has been 
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a food additive since 
1981. This means that the FDA has reviewed scientific evidence to be sure that 
aspartame is safe for use in foods and drinks.
[/h]According to the National Cancer Institute, there is no evidence that 
aspartame and other sugar substitutes approved for use in the United States 
cause cancer or other serious health problems. Medical research studies have 
shown that *these sweeteners are safe for most people when used in moderation. *


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 31, 2015)

Yep - as with all things, use in moderation. I think that principle alone would heal so many problems ...


----------



## imp (Jul 31, 2015)

I just today received my 500g. pouch of Mannitol, ordered on-line, quite reasonable. The stuff shows promise if used in my coffee. It's a sugar alcohol with glycemic index = 2. Have not yet found out about tooth-rot, though, my primary concern. So far, the old pancreas still handles as much gooey sugary baked goods as I can give it!     imp


----------



## Butterfly (Jul 31, 2015)

imp said:


> I just today received my 500g. pouch of Mannitol, ordered on-line, quite reasonable. The stuff shows promise if used in my coffee. It's a sugar alcohol with glycemic index = 2. Have not yet found out about tooth-rot, though, my primary concern. So far, the old pancreas still handles as much gooey sugary baked goods as I can give it!     imp



Sugar alcohols cause very unpleasant GI difficulties in many people -- me included.


----------



## imp (Jul 31, 2015)

Interesting! Can you drink beer? Beer is made using Malt, which contains Malt Sugar, one of the sugar alcohols. Of course, the little yeasties consume most of it in their voracious way, so that beer likely contains very little once they have finished eating.    imp


----------

