In the comments section of Jimmy's "safe starch" post, Jimmy had this to say:
I'm still concerned with the use of the phrase "safe starches" because people will think that is universally true--and it may not be. Perhaps calling them "potentially safe starches" with the caveat that you should be checked by a physician to determine if they are safe for you or not would be better.
Has low carb dogma really come to this? Where a couple of scientists with some health issues work them out with what appears to me to be exhaustive research, share their results with others in the form of a book, and are basically being accused of possibly harming people by suggesting that some starches are safe?
Kurt Harris' response was apropos:
... I must say I object to the default presumption that starch is dangerous. Why not qualify the safety of fat? Should our dietary fats be physician approved? Even our beloved animal fat is dangerous if it leads to caloric excess, and yes, I see plenty of this clinically. ...
Even with so many eating the SAD, only 11% of the population has diagnosed or undiagnosed diabetes. Considering that the undiagnosed diabetes is nothing but an educated guess, the numbers are likely far lower. Now consider that there is absolutely no evidence that starch consumption causes diabetes (T2, the underlying pathology of which is insulin resistance) and abundant evidence that fat consumption can contribute to the etiology of the disease, and one has to wonder who needs a disclaimer on their diet advice books. As many studies and clinical reports demonstrate, for the four out of five T2's who become diabetic through the path of obesity, weight loss can absolutely cure their hyperglycemia. How many Biggest Loser contestants go off their diabetes meds after a couple of months?
Considering starch in particular or all carbs in general as by default dangerous and only deemed "safe" for a select few with good genes or something is absurd. I wonder if these people hear themselves some times! Over on Paul's blog, Jimmy is angling to test Paul's idea of "safe starches". I don't know if Paul is just being his usual gracious self, but exactly how would this be done? What makes them safe is that they don't come with anti-nutrients.
Blood glucose variations in normal individuals: A chaotic mess. At right is the graphic from that post.
I think what bothers me most about Jimmy is that he is amazingly metabolically healthy despite the dietary hoops of fire he's put his body through most of his life ... including his low carb crash diets like that egg-fest. Trust me, there are hundreds of Jimmy's fans who would give their left eye (presuming they hadn't ruined it with a sugar spike) to have his metabolism. Because when Jimmy eats a normal amount of food he loses weight like gangbusters. And when he eats a lot he gains. Yet he claims it's some mysterious metabolic problem causing his weight to climb. He was not hyperinsulinemic when he thought he had reactive hypoglycemia and had his insulin response checked. Oh ... and speaking of starches and blood sugar spikes, apparently a pizza splurge (was this the 16 slices episode?) in July 2008 did nothing to his BG levels.
You’ll recall last month I did an experiment where I splurged out on some pizza to test what would happen to my blood sugar since eating a “normal” low-carb meal produced a significant DROP in my blood sugar. I couldn’t believe it was possible for your blood sugar to go DOWN after a meal, so I forced the issue by consuming more carbs in one sitting than I had done since I started livin’ la vida low-carb in January 2004.
The result? My fasting blood sugar of 91 actually DROPPED to 90 when I checked it one hour after eating (WOW!) all those slices of pizza, it finally rose to 100 by the second hour, and was back down to 98 by the third hour after this extremely high-carb meal. It was quite an illuminating self-experiment that had me scratching my head about what the heck was going on. I have been spending a lot of time over the past month trying to figure this out and I’m still perplexed about it.
Hmmmm ... it's interesting what one comes across when "thumbing through" posts trying to find the whole OGTT thing Jimmy had done which wasn't an OGTT after all (I can't find it and can't be bothered looking any longer). For instance, ... it would be great to share some of my thoughts about the whole ridiculous “fat acceptance” movement that has crept into our society. So YEAH BABY! . This links to a post entitled: Fat Acceptance is a Ruse to Avoid Weight Loss. My how times have changed since Sept. 2006!
Well ... enough tangents there for one day :-)