Re: [IPk] Sugar to Carb ratio? + ? dawn phen.
In message <007e01c48cfd$dda1cec0$email @ redacted>, Miriam Connor
<email @ redacted> writes
>At diagnosis we were told to choose foods that Carbs, of which sugars were,
>a third of the number of Carbs. Initially I presumed that this was a
>reflection of glycemic index. It took a while to cop on that many of the
>foods that seem to have the best ratio are really high glycemically.
>Example Weetabix per 100grms :68gCHO of which sugars :4.7g. Glycemic Index
>Sorry if I am missing something really obvious but it would be helpful to
>understand if the sugars of which are as relevant as was implied.
I am completely muddled by this description!
'Foods of which sugars were a third of the number of carbs' - does this
mean food where, for every 10g of CHO, 3.3g CHO is derived from sugars,
and 7.7g CHO is derived from starches? That simply doesn't make sense
to me, for two reasons. First, sometimes people think (it's untrue, but
they think) that the source of CHO (sugars or starches) makes a huge
impact on blood glucose levels). Second, those people who _do_ think it
makes a difference _never_ say that one should aim to get 30% from
sugars - they always say 'minimise sugars'.
I wonder if you have this confused with recommendations on balance of
1 gram carbohydrate has 4 kcal (called calories from here on in, because
that's what everyone calls them).
Protein is the same: 1 gram has 4 calories.
Fat has a wapping 9 calories per gram.
Or has this been confused with the Glycaemic index, with a
recommendation that foods under 70 on the GI should be eaten in
preference to other foods????
>Can I also ask if Dawn phenomenon fluctuates? In the early days Grace missed
>her breaky and freaking I checked and she was up rather than down. I
>understood this may due to Dawn Phenomenon.( Didn't seem to be rebound as
>day progressed). Over the past few months preparing for the pump I've tried
>to see the pattern of the dawn phenomenon. there doesn't seem to be one.
>Grace's numbers are the same or less 30mins after waking. I usually have
>checked her asleep, within an hour of her waking up. Through the hols I
>have let her sleep on. I am wondering if the occasional times there are
>minor rises are more due to going past her time and absence of insulin
>rather than realise from the liver. This may be so obvious if I knew more. I
>just want to understand if there are time frames to check that might be
>better reflections? When it comes to talking basal rates i'd like to be sure
>I am making the right deductions. I'm trying to focus on the positive of
>there being discussions on basal rates!! My way of coping with the fear of
>the pump becoming elusive!
Again, I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that monitoring
bgs 30 mins after rising, and occasionally checking an hour before
rising shows no difference? All that means is that between those two
times, her bgs don't move that much.
What you need to do to check for dawn phenomenon: check on the hour,
throughout the night (different nights, two or three nights apart. do
this for some weeks, so you've got 3 or 4 checks at each hour of the
night. Also check every hour of the day, skipping breakfast (this can
be done on 3 separate days, as you can do the measurements on the same
Then look at the pattern - is it consistent? Is there a rise? When is
the rise? (My dawn phenomenon is there around 6am - 8am, but it is at
its worst around 10am)
If you are saying that you have done this, and you used to see the peak
around the time she wakes up, but now don't see it any more .... I can
only respond that from time to time our bodies seem to reset themselves
(often around seasonal changes), and the dawn phenomenon increases or
decreases or shifts in time of peak).
Hope that helps,
dm 30+, 508 3+
email @ redacted
"It might look a bit messy now,
but just you come back in 500 years time"
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe/change list versions,