Jump to content
Diabetes forums
  • Welcome To Diabetes Forums!

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today to contribute and support the site.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Daytona

"Safe Starch" Controversy

Recommended Posts

Daytona

Has anyone been following the whole "safe starch" controversy that's been rippling through the low-carb and paleo blogs lately? Jimmy Moore has 2 great blog posts that really bring together everyone's responses in a single place. In this context, "safe starch" = starch sources that do not have toxic properties (like gluten) and does not mean low GI.

 

Is There Any Such Thing As ‘Safe Starches’ On A Low-Carb Diet? « Jimmy Moore's Livin' La Vida Low Carb Blog is a collection of responses from many low-carb/paleo experts to Paul Jaminet's Perfect Health Diet's recommendation to get 100+g of "safe starch" carbohydrates a day. Note that he doesn't recommend that for diabetics or for people with metabolic disorders.

 

Paul Jaminet’s Response To The Critics Of His ‘Safe Starches’ Concept « Jimmy Moore's Livin' La Vida Low Carb Blog is Dr Jaminet's response to everyone's thoughts on his recommendations. He is incredibly detailed, respectful and thorough!

 

Personally, I am a bit confused. I had thought that gluconeogenesis generates however much glucose your body needs (given enough protein) but he calls that into question.

 

He also suggests that if someone's weight loss has been stalled on low-carb, upping carbs may jump start the weight loss again. I have been stalled for 3 months and it's certainly tempting to believe that adding back some carbs would help me start losing again. Jimmy Moore is going to try adding "safe starches" supervised by Jaminet himself; I will be following that very closely!

 

I know some of you follow Jimmy (I'm looking at you NickP!) and would be very interested in your opinions and reactions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psb

This article had some pretty insightful points. I'm not sure I've seen that term, "hormesis" before but I love this line:

 

The clean up and repair response cannot happen if there is no rest from it.

 

I've just been on a keto diet for a short period of time but I do think I will have a carb-up day maybe ever couple of weeks or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psb

I made it through this whole article. At the end Jimmy asks a bunch of low carb gurus to comment on this "Perfect Health diet/safe starches" book and set of ideas and most of them come down against it. A couple of them come close to calling it an outright fraud. Interestingly the guy from my new favorite blog, hyperlipid is one of the people that he asks to comment. Good reading though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foxl

I had no luck with green bananas so not sure if I would with purely resistant starch, either.

 

Maybe it is a some can, some cannot thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daytona
I had no luck with green bananas so not sure if I would with purely resistant starch, either.

 

Maybe it is a some can, some cannot thing?

 

Oh without a doubt! The idea of "safe starches" isn't that they are safe for diabetics. The "safe" part only means that these particular starches aren't packaged with anti-nutrients (such as phytates, lectins, etc) or other substances which are known to have negative effects on the body (such as gluten contributing to intestinal permeability).

 

I think of the big reason why there is so much controversy and confusion is the name that they are using. By calling them "safe" it implies much more than they really mean. If they had instead called them "non-toxic" starches or something else, it would help prevent people thinking that they are saying that these starches are "safe" for everyone all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foxl

Oh? So this is NOT your "resistant starch," Marty? Then, this is jsut idiocy for low-carbers to be addressing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MCS

Its a mixed message that I read. The idea of safe-starch and then throw in SFA's short chain fatty acids would indicate resistant starch, but I do not think they even addressed that issue at all. Linda I am pretty sure the reason you get a rise out of green bananas is the bacterial flora which has had plenty of time to adapt to this type of food source being you are a vegeterian of long standing. I would assume you had no difficulty in taking Metformin as well, this also provides a different food source by reducing digestion of carbs in your stomach and small intestine allowing it to travel to your large intestine. The idea of fermenting SFA's threw resistant starches has been studied a good bit at this point. There are several different type of RS. Any plant material that can by pass digestion in your upper digestive system, but then ferment in your large intestine is considered a resistant starch, this could be what they are referring to in this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janknitz

I've been following the discussions and Jaminet's thoughtful reply admits that these safe starches may not be safe for individuals with impaired metabolisms. It will be interesting to see how Jimmy's n=1 trial goes and I'm happy to see him posing the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NickP
Has anyone been following the whole "safe starch" controversy that's been rippling through the low-carb and paleo blogs lately? Jimmy Moore has 2 great blog posts that really bring together everyone's responses in a single place. In this context, "safe starch" = starch sources that do not have toxic properties (like gluten) and does not mean low GI.

 

Is There Any Such Thing As ‘Safe Starches’ On A Low-Carb Diet? « Jimmy Moore's Livin' La Vida Low Carb Blog is a collection of responses from many low-carb/paleo experts to Paul Jaminet's Perfect Health Diet's recommendation to get 100+g of "safe starch" carbohydrates a day. Note that he doesn't recommend that for diabetics or for people with metabolic disorders.

 

Paul Jaminet’s Response To The Critics Of His ‘Safe Starches’ Concept « Jimmy Moore's Livin' La Vida Low Carb Blog is Dr Jaminet's response to everyone's thoughts on his recommendations. He is incredibly detailed, respectful and thorough!

 

Personally, I am a bit confused. I had thought that gluconeogenesis generates however much glucose your body needs (given enough protein) but he calls that into question.

 

He also suggests that if someone's weight loss has been stalled on low-carb, upping carbs may jump start the weight loss again. I have been stalled for 3 months and it's certainly tempting to believe that adding back some carbs would help me start losing again. Jimmy Moore is going to try adding "safe starches" supervised by Jaminet himself; I will be following that very closely!

 

I know some of you follow Jimmy (I'm looking at you NickP!) and would be very interested in your opinions and reactions.

 

Hey Daytona,

 

Sorry it took me so long to respond.....where is Salim when you need him?

 

First, to be clear, Jaminet is referring to small group of carbs that are "safe"- safe meaning no toxins remain after cooking. So NO WHEAT or GLUTENS are included in the safe carbs.

 

Second, Jaminet is very careful when he says these carbs are safe, that he is NOT referring to folks with Metabolic Disorders (like Diabetes).

 

So, I think his idea is interesting and is worthy of further conversation. However, safe or not, I will not consume items that elevate my BG.

 

I do believe that some folks may have some issues with a very Low Carb diet, but not everyone will experience these issues. We are all unique individuals, and it takes a while to truly understand what works for each one of us.

 

For me, my weight loss stopped last year, and I slowly gained back about 10 pounds. I was not happy with the 10 pounds, and the LCHF diet is keeping me steady, but not allowing me to go back to that number. To a large degree, my metabolism is so messed up from the 40+ years of eating a SAD diet, this may just be my new normal.

 

For Jimmy, he has struggled very hard with his weight. He was orignally at 420 pounds, then lost over 180 pounds in a year. Over the past six years, he gained back about 50 pounds, despite closely following his diet plan. So, he is searching for answers also.

 

I will continue to follow Jimmy, because I know he is open to the truth, and is trying to find his own answer.

 

For me, I have found that Sweet Pototoes work OK for me. I may have a small spike after eating them, but hours later, I have no long term impacts. I don't think I am ready to try the "safe carbs" but if you are looking for change, it might work for you. Again...YMMV!

 

My advice to you is to try what makes sense to you. Keep monitoring your weight, waist, and BG. Become you own "n=1" and let us all know what works for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daytona

It seems like a lot of people hit a wall after losing a certain amount of weight. While I'm sorry that you hit a plateau too, it's reassuring to know I'm in good company. It was driving me crazy that what worked great to lose the weight initially isn't working as easily to lose the rest! :D

 

The 2 blog posts (and comments) have given me a lot of extra ideas for how to attack this plateau. I 100% agree that Jaminet isn't suggesting that diabetics eat 300 carbs a day. To me that seems to be the root of the misunderstanding and hard feelings, he isn't recommending this for everyone. Either way I found everyone's thoughts on the question of safe starches to be very interesting. For awhile I toyed with the idea with upping my carbs a little (maybe from 20g to 50g) but I'm just not convinced that will work and I don't want to mess around with my great BG's. If it's not broke, don't fix it, right?

 

I learned about Jack Kruse from the comments. Now I'm looking into leptin resistance. His site suggests eating the bulk (50+g) of your proteins for breakfast and to go 5 hours between meals without snacking. The idea being it helps stop the morning cortisol spike and reduces hunger/cravings for the rest of the day. I decided to give that a whirl today, we'll see how it goes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NickP
It seems like a lot of people hit a wall after losing a certain amount of weight. While I'm sorry that you hit a plateau too, it's reassuring to know I'm in good company. It was driving me crazy that what worked great to lose the weight initially isn't working as easily to lose the rest! :D

 

The 2 blog posts (and comments) have given me a lot of extra ideas for how to attack this plateau. I 100% agree that Jaminet isn't suggesting that diabetics eat 300 carbs a day. To me that seems to be the root of the misunderstanding and hard feelings, he isn't recommending this for everyone. Either way I found everyone's thoughts on the question of safe starches to be very interesting. For awhile I toyed with the idea with upping my carbs a little (maybe from 20g to 50g) but I'm just not convinced that will work and I don't want to mess around with my great BG's. If it's not broke, don't fix it, right?

 

I learned about Jack Kruse from the comments. Now I'm looking into leptin resistance. His site suggests eating the bulk (50+g) of your proteins for breakfast and to go 5 hours between meals without snacking. The idea being it helps stop the morning cortisol spike and reduces hunger/cravings for the rest of the day. I decided to give that a whirl today, we'll see how it goes!

 

I keep telling folks that we have the technology to put a man on the moon, but we don't know how our body really works.

 

I will keep experimenting with my own methods, and will keep trying. Everyone hits a wall at some point. Losing weight is not that difficult, keeping it off is.

 

If you see updates from any of the contestants on "The Biggest Losers" - NONE of them are still at the weight (or lower) than they were at the Season Finale. After you have been overweight, it is very hard for your body to maintain a lean metabolism.

 

Plus, our bodies are really designed to store fat, to get us through periods of famine and no food. Obviously, today, we no longer have to deal with very little food during the cold winter months, but our bodies are still wired to hold onto fat to help us through those lean periods that no longer exist.

 

In the Art & Science of Low Carbohydrate Living, Dr Volek estimates that only 25 pounds of fat would allow us to survive up to 90 days without food. Nearly all of us have at least that amount of fat (and many of us have much more).

 

We have sooooo much more to learn about how our bodies truly operate. However, my simple advice is still to eat the foods that are natural and unprocessed. With a list of ingredients a mile long on each box of prepared foods, who really knows which specific chemical is causing damage to us.

 

However, I have found by eliminating the Carbs, we have also eliminated most of the processed foods, and for many of us, that is enough to get healthy again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jillybean

Sounds like your primary conern/interest is because you've hit a stall in weight loss. Increasing carbs can absolutely help to get weight loss started again, but it has nothing to do with "safe" or "resistant" or whatever...it's just that ading carbs in after having avoided them for a long time disrupts your normal routine and sort of wakes up your body. This is why calorie or carb cycling work for so many - their bodies don't fall into a rut of constant routine. Choose "safe" starches if you want, but you'll essentially likely get the same impact from having a meal at Olive Garden or scarfing a few candy bars one day :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daytona
Sounds like your primary conern/interest is because you've hit a stall in weight loss. Increasing carbs can absolutely help to get weight loss started again, but it has nothing to do with "safe" or "resistant" or whatever...it's just that ading carbs in after having avoided them for a long time disrupts your normal routine and sort of wakes up your body. This is why calorie or carb cycling work for so many - their bodies don't fall into a rut of constant routine. Choose "safe" starches if you want, but you'll essentially likely get the same impact from having a meal at Olive Garden or scarfing a few candy bars one day :P

 

I have tried upping carbs for a single meal, the result was feeling sick and immediate weight gain. :D But it was yummy! I do agree that changing up the diet for a bit (e.g. carb cycling, upping calories, etc) can help stop a stall, it just didn't seem to work for me this time around.

 

I posted a thread earlier discussing the stall, I finally pinpointed it to a new medicine I'm on. Unfortunately the medicine isn't negotiable so I'm working with the doc to play around with dosing and delivery.

 

p.s. I love seeing you still on the forums Jilly! Every time I see your posts I get warm fuzzies knowing that you are doing so much better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NickP
Sounds like your primary conern/interest is because you've hit a stall in weight loss. Increasing carbs can absolutely help to get weight loss started again, but it has nothing to do with "safe" or "resistant" or whatever...it's just that ading carbs in after having avoided them for a long time disrupts your normal routine and sort of wakes up your body. This is why calorie or carb cycling work for so many - their bodies don't fall into a rut of constant routine. Choose "safe" starches if you want, but you'll essentially likely get the same impact from having a meal at Olive Garden or scarfing a few candy bars one day :P

 

Hey Jill,

 

I have heard several trainers and dieticians push for "carb cycling" but I am not a believer (this is one of "normal" diets that Dr Oz advocates). I do believe that this works for some people, but I am a little older and my metabolism is not quite as useful. I certainly wouldn't discourage it if someone hits "a wall" - but even the carb-cyclists promote eating "healthy carbs". I don't think I would recommend a candy bar...... I have heard stories of folks on the Atkin Induction Diet saving all 20 of their carbs for a snicker bar....guess what?.....the diet didn't work for them. Again....YMMV!

 

BTW....have your tried "carb cycling?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jillybean
BTW....have your tried "carb cycling?"

I wasn't necessarily "recommending" a candy bar, just saying the result would likely be the same ;)

 

I've not done carb cycling, but I did do calorie cycling back before I had my surgery, and it worked really well for me. It was probably much like carb cycling, though, since my low-calorie days were more meats, eggs, and veggies, while the higher-cal days incorporated more fruit, bread, etc. My real long-term low-carb experience came after my surgery, though, so I didn't hit many stalls in weight loss along the way.

 

Slightly off topic, but since you mentioned it, I would also like to mention how much I can't stand Dr. Oz! We end up watching some of his show sometimes because it comes on right after Judge Judy, which I love :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwags

I do think this shows how all diabetics are different in the way we process carbs. I cannot handle any amount of fuit, but I can handle a small amount of beans 1/2 cup , usually. My weight loss has stalled for about a year on 30 carbs a day. I'm not sure if it is because my body doesn't think I need to lose anymore weight or what. I feel best at around 118 pounds but now I am 122-123 pounds. For a diabetic it is a tricky balance between carbs, fats and protein. Eating the fats provides me with much lower bgs which I like but I am afraid it is stalling my weight loss. I do think some of us spike on almost everything we eat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
puzlnut

I have found in the past 3 months that when I have added more low carb calories to my diet for a few days that my weight loss seems to get a little more vigorous. I am not advocating this for anyone else---it is just something I noticed a couple of months ago and have since purposefully repeated and gotten the same results. I have also added running to my morning walk to try to shake things up a bit. Seems to be working for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daytona
I have found in the past 3 months that when I have added more low carb calories to my diet for a few days that my weight loss seems to get a little more vigorous.

 

By low carb calories do you mean "low carb foods", more carb foods or just more total calories (that are low carb)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NickP
Slightly off topic, but since you mentioned it, I would also like to mention how much I can't stand Dr. Oz! We end up watching some of his show sometimes because it comes on right after Judge Judy, which I love :P[/color]

 

Oh Gosh.....don't get me going about Dr Oz....he is a QUACK when it comes to nutrition. Just because you are a great heart surgeon, does not mean you are The Authority on Nutrition. What I really love about his show is that his advice changes from show to show. He can't stay true to his message and his sponsors so his advice is always changing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daytona

I've only seen a few Dr. Oz shows and never really liked his message. The last episode I watched was the Gary Taubes interview, I was so angry at how rude Oz was and how manipulative the editing was to make Gary look bad... I won't watch again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NickP
I've only seen a few Dr. Oz shows and never really liked his message. The last episode I watched was the Gary Taubes interview, I was so angry at how rude Oz was and how manipulative the editing was to make Gary look bad... I won't watch again.

 

Most of the people who watched the TV episode with Gary Taubes never heard the radio show that Dr Oz did with Gary Taubes the week before. During the radio interview, Dr Oz was agreeing with virtually everything that Gary was saying. However, it was a much different story when the TV show was recorded. Dr Oz's TV show depends heavily on its sponsors, and agreeing with Gary Taubes would not make for good relations with the sponsors of the Dr Oz show. Once again....commercial interests are placed ahead of good science.

 

....Sorry....did not mean to get Off Topic.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.