I don’t know the metrics they use for calculating their glycemic index, my guess would be that because it is a metabolic energy loss they consider the index to be zero. The problem with that approach is that blood sugar is still handled the same way, with the same biological mechanisms; insulin to facilitate cellular absorption, then liver conversion to free fatty acids for adipose tissue storage. Excess blood glucose is toxic to the body, when the cells refuse receipt of the glucose, your liver must step in to moderate, or there will be coma and death. Plant protein is much worse with amino acid/glucose conversion efficiency. If you have the time and inclination there is a guy who explains these concepts named Sten Ekberg. He’s a sensible fellow Scandinavian with a decent grasp on human biological function.
nostr:npub14eng8plhflea40cu3lafnw6nwkxsp5te2v7hzy74lz6a9mjhpaks0wm4rw Foods that contain fat and protein usually measure as having no glycemic index. You say it gets converted into sugars. Seeing as this is not seen when measured, how do you explain that?
Discussion
nostr:npub14eng8plhflea40cu3lafnw6nwkxsp5te2v7hzy74lz6a9mjhpaks0wm4rw GI is usually measured, not estimated. There are figures. They vary a bit. But roughly speaking, you want to consume foods with a low GI for health reasons. Most diet advice contains foods with a low GI.
I agree, my understanding is that low GI is less likely to result in blood glucose spikes. However none of that matters if your A1C is already high and your body is experiencing insulin resistance. Modern dietary routines result in this condition inevitably at an age that depends on dietary choices and activity levels. I would guess that a majority of the population equates an empty stomach with hunger, but hunger from a biological perspective is very different. The default state is no food processing, with fatty acid metabolism to maintain blood ketones and glucose levels. Very few people are hypoglycemic until insulin resistance causes their body to malfunction.