Sugar vs. starches

12:48:09 Sun, 5 Oct 2003sci.med.nutrition Ignoramus28530 at Ignoramus28530

Quoted message said:

I have heard an opinion tat effects on sugar are identical to the effects of starches. E.g. if you
eat a piece of sugar or you eat an identical (in calories) piece of starchy white bread, they say,
the effect is the same. And yet my own feeling is that it is not the same. Can anyone elucidate
that difference or similarity? Thanks

It depends, but in general, the starches will take your body longer to convert to glucose, so you
get less of a blood glucose spike than you would with straight sugar (the spike is more spread out
and so lower).

--
Martin Thompson [email hidden] (use "martin" not "bin"😉 London, UK Home Page:
tucana.demon.co.uktucana.demon.co.ukOpen ↗ Web Shop: buy.attucanaOpen ↗ Mobile Phone Ring Tones:
ringamoby.comringamoby.comOpen ↗

"Everything I do and say with anyone makes a difference." Gita Bellin

Martin Thompson <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

12:48:09 Sun, 5 Oct 2003sci.med.nutrition Ignoramus28530 at Ignoramus28530

Quoted message said:

I have heard an opinion tat effects on sugar are identical to the effects of starches. E.g. if you
eat a piece of sugar or you eat an identical (in calories) piece of starchy white bread, they say,
the effect is the same. And yet my own feeling is that it is not the same. Can anyone elucidate
that difference or similarity? Thanks

It depends, but in general, the starches will take your body longer to convert to glucose, so you
get less of a blood glucose spike than you would with straight sugar (the spike is more spread out
and so lower).

But with something like white bread, the difference is pretty small.

It appears that a lot of the subjective perceived effects of sugar consumption (like the "sugar
high"😉 are really just results of suggestion and expectation. There's also the matter of quantity;
even if X grams of carbohydrate from sugar have the same effect as X grams of carbohydrate from
starch, somebody eating, say candy may be consuming a lot more carbohydrate from sugar at once than
they would from bread. Or drinking soft drinks; a 12-oz can of cola contains as much carbohydrate as
three slices of white bread. Two cans of cola wouldn't strike most people as "pigging out" but six
slices of bread would.

thanks gentlemen...

i

In article said:

Martin Thompson <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

12:48:09 Sun, 5 Oct 2003sci.med.nutrition Ignoramus28530 at Ignoramus28530

Quoted message said:

I have heard an opinion tat effects on sugar are identical to the effects of starches. E.g. if
you eat a piece of sugar or you eat an identical (in calories) piece of starchy white bread, they
say, the effect is the same. And yet my own feeling is that it is not the same. Can anyone
elucidate that difference or similarity? Thanks

It depends, but in general, the starches will take your body longer to convert to glucose, so you
get less of a blood glucose spike than you would with straight sugar (the spike is more spread
out and so lower).

But with something like white bread, the difference is pretty small.

It appears that a lot of the subjective perceived effects of sugar consumption (like the "sugar
high"😉 are really just results of suggestion and expectation. There's also the matter of quantity;
even if X grams of carbohydrate from sugar have the same effect as X grams of carbohydrate from
starch, somebody eating, say candy may be consuming a lot more carbohydrate from sugar at once
than they would from bread. Or drinking soft drinks; a 12-oz can of cola contains as much
carbohydrate as three slices of white bread. Two cans of cola wouldn't strike most people as
"pigging out" but six slices of bread would.