> Thanks for the explanation, I got it Yet, I still se no reason for avoid them since papaya, mango,
> granadilla, pineapple and many others have both low glygemic index and low glycemic load Banana
> has a low glycemic index
Depending on where the bana comes from the GI ranges from about 50-70. Since white bread is about
70, bananas definitely aren't low GI.
> and a low-range medium glycemic load I still, a part from dates, can't see any fruit that has a
> high glycemic index and an high glycemic load
> > For example, carrots have a fairly high GI, but a serving of carrots doesn't contain a lot of
> > carbohydrates, and thus unless you're pretending to be Bugs Bunny carrots don't have much effect
> > on your blood sugar. A large amount of carbohydrates from low-GI sources can have as much, if
> > not more, effect on blood sugar as a small amount of carbohydrates from high-GI sources.
> Could you please explain this, please ? I thought that the blood-sugar raising effect of a food
> can't be enhanced by a larger consumed amount of it
The more you eat the more glucose will be released. It is that simple. Digestion isn't a conveyor
belt process, where food travels through at the same rate it's eaten. There are delays, storage
points and mixing involved.
> After all, the amount of food that can pass through the stomach is limited If we eat food that are
> slow to digest then no other food will be processed, if we eat food that digest quickly, then what
> we ate has already been processed and any addition will just no raise the blood sugar more than
> the amount eaten before For example: if I ate 2 bananas they raise my blood sugar to a specific
> level but if I eat 5 bananas, then when I going to swallow the last three, the first two have
> already been digested and the blood sugar level has already come back to its normal level so that
> the other three don't raise the blood sugar more but just in the same way the first two did (hope
> you understand what I mean, sorry for my english)
While bananas are quickly digested compared to many foods, they're not digested as quickly as you
suggest. Firstly, no food is absorbed through the stomach - it is really only the start of the
digestive process. Its major function is churning up the food into a mush that is more easily
attacked by the digestive enzymes. Once the food's liquid enough it leaves the stomach (a little bit
at a time) and enters the duodenum where the real digestion occurs. After this the digested food
enters the small intestine where mixing and absorption occurs.
Even if you ate pure glucose (which requires no actual digestion), it will have to go through the
stomach and duodenum before it will be absorbed. With food there is plenty of opportunity for food
eaten later to catch up with food eaten sooner. I don't know precise times, but with your example of
bananas you would probably have to leave more than half an hour between the first two and the last
three to see two separate glucose peaks.
> Anyway, it seems to me that what's more important is the amount of insulin required by a food to
> be processed It seems that the GI is not reliable in predicting the insulin output
For the same quantity of food, a high GI food will cause more insulin to be released than a low GI,
although there may be exceptions if the protein content is very different. You might be interested
in this page: http://www.mendosa.com/wolever.htm
> > Note that much of the available carbohydrate in bananas is starch, not fructose.
> Where can I find the exact percentage of complex carbs in banana ?