I thought I'd finally found
something in the world of nutrition that made some sense, but now there's a study (isn't there always)
saying that the glycemic index (the basis for diets such as South Beach) may not be all that useful.
"Now, diabetes researcher Elizabeth Mayer-Davis of the University of South Carolina says the use of the index should be ended altogether in favor of more traditional methods of losing weight and reducing the risk of diabetes — eating less and exercising more.""Eat less and exercise more." Now where have I heard that advice before? The problem is, of course, that
it's not useful to make a blanket statement like that without giving people some indication of what they can and can't eat. It just makes us all confused and frightened off by food.
Anecdotally, I can tell you that I had a chronic condition that went away (at least so far) once I started doing the first phase of the South Beach diet, and I also have lost weight and felt better since I've been doing it. I don't know if it's glycemic in nature or the fact that cutting out sugar and white bread is a sound nutritional principle. But I know I'm eating more healthfully, and that's... still good, right?
"Mayer-Davis said that researchers should develop a new measure of how different carbohydrates can affect health. She said a better index would be based on the physical characteristics of foods, such as fat content and calories, because numerous factors influence a food's effect on blood-sugar levels."Well, keep me posted, Mayer-Davis. The whole thing makes my head hurt.