File :-(, x, )
complex carbs: ?less ?more? RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
Complex carbs give energy over a longer period of time, as they take longer to digest.

So what makes a complex carbohydrate complex, or more so, or less? i know complex is natural, and simple is refined. but in google i'm seeing lists of every vegetable/fruit/ intact grain that exists called complex, and every refined cake/candy/cookie being called simple. There should be a better measurement to compare. Like "more complex" and "less complex", on a scale or something.

What r the best complex, and worst complex carbs?

for example here it lists a like 50 various foods considered complex, but appears in a completely randomly chosen order. just scroll down a bit:
http://www.howtothinkthin.com/instincts2.htm

pic at least half related. p.s. chemistry scares me. i like meathead speak, if convertible.
>> Anonymous
Complex does not mean natural, and simple does not mean refined. White bread is not natural, and it's all complex carbs. Guess what kind are in fresh, natural apples? That's right: simple.

Basically a complex carb is a very long string of glucose molecules bonded together, while simple carbs are much smaller molecules, consisting of one part (monosaccharides) or two parts (disaccharides).

The best complex carbs are from the most natural, unrefined sources: 100% whole grain oats and bread are the two best choices.

The best source of simple carbs is fresh fruit (NOT fruit juice).
>> Anonymous
>>38225
i thought i'd presuppose something wrong there. in the link it says *contains complex*. so apples would be mostly simple, and a tiny bit complex probably. wonderful. my orig post has erred.

>>Basically a complex carb is a very long string of glucose molecules bonded together
that reminds me. the more you role dough, the denser it becomes, the longer the molecule chain grows. except i almost never roll dough, i just know it gets "tougher" or something.

so, is there a better way to "list" these, other than putting on a lab coat and looking at foods at 1000x zoom through a microscope??
>> Anonymous
>>38235
The best way to list them is how natural they are. You want to eat foods that look the closest to how they did when they came out of the ground (after cleaning them of course). Wheat grows as whole grain and brown. There is no white bread plant, get my drift? It becomes white because it gets processed to hell and back.

So basically, stay away from processed foods and eat natural foods as fresh as you can find them.
>> Anonymous
tl;dr
simple means sugar, complex means not sugar
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>38238
Well jeeze! Thanks for the informative and highly useful post!
>> ordered list RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
     File :-(, x)
irst, second, third, last? is just a chasm of difference from simples to complexes, all complex foods serve equally the purpose of giving the same energy out over time? of course not, but which is best/worst for energy/time. almost everything in that 50 list is equally natural. i definitely stay away from processed foods, the question is about that.

some complex foods have to give energy longer than others. are apples the most instantly burned foods, or others come before/after? ordered list.
>> RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
is not about "processed vs. natural". sorry
>>ground
aka "root vegetables" are the best? OK thanks.
>> Billybananahead !vMKdOrQkjw
It's not so much a question of simple/complex as it is one of Glycemic Index. Foods with a high GI cause a large insulin spike, which can lead to excessive fat gain and insulin resistance (read diabeetus) over time.

You can find charts of different foods' GI all over the tubes.
>> RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
>>38258
i heard the glycemic index is garbage, as it firstly measures portions on empty stomachs which is almost never true for day-to-day eating, and secondly another is it measures carrots the same cookies. but obviously a carrot is much healthier than a cookie. following that logic is silly.

however i just read about "glycemic loads" which seems to take this stuff into account. that may be the ticket i'm seeking. i just don't know jack all anything about them. never heard of it before.

ok, link,
http://www.carbs-information.com/glycemic-load.htm
>> RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
quoth:
Glycemic Index Versus Glycemic Load
The glycemic index tells you how quickly a carbohydrate-containing food turns into sugar, but it doesn’t tell you how much carbohydrate is in a serving of a food. To assess the full impact of a food on blood sugar levels you should have an idea of both. This is where glycemic load comes in.

from the more official looking link, scroll down a bit for a promising chart.

http://www.tshc.fsu.edu/he/nutrition/Nutrition_Specialneeds/glycemic_index.htm

ok, brain full, until someone dumbs down glycemic loads for me, i'm watching some vids and checking back periodically.
>> Anonymous
>>38258
this is not quite true. foods with a high insulin index give a high insulin spike. the relationship to glycemic index is not always so direct.

insulin index is a much better way of looking at things. it's not used so much at the moment though, only really just starting to catch on.
>> Billybananahead !vMKdOrQkjw
>>38266
>>38274
Insulin index is very interesting. Some guys I respect were leery of the whole thing back when II was first being talked about, so I kept my pro-GI bias.

Thanks for the links.
>> Insulin index RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
>>38288
Ok, yes, this sounds like the money.

This index is similar to the Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, but rather than relying on blood glucose levels, the Insulin Index is based upon blood insulin levels. Pasted from wikipedia.

i remember more now. measuring blood glucose levels is a waste of time, because the body will go crazy trying to normalize blood glucose levels. only in the very diabetic type 2 people will you find it, but by then they're super fucked. blood tests on sugar levels will almost always come back normal, they don't tell you shit most the time.

measuring insulin is much smarter. that's what the body produces to fight excessive sugar, and that's what i heard sticks to artery walls and wreaks all sorts of stuff in the body. it's a much more accurate way to predict health, and i heard can be measured quite accurately. any one know more?

measuring blood insulin is done how? where? price? *that's* what I want to know now. if it involves needles, thread is over. I don't like needles.
>> Billybananahead !vMKdOrQkjw
>>38308
It's in the blood, so you do the math.

Ever read any of the Zone books? They're all about managing blood insulin levels. Some of it comes off as quackery, but the anecdotal evidence is strong.
>> RSI guy !HjbWRiSTJ.
>>38310
I like the zone diet, those books sound right up my alley. Calls of quackery make think of the things Western medicine cannot do, but other parts of the world can cure, treat and prevent. Any in particular, or just any "zone" book?