Hi Jim,
As you probably know, the glycemic index was an attempt at providing 
something of a guide for people who wanted to understand how common 
foods compare with sugar when inciting insulin secretion. There were 
some problems with that, as foods such as raw carrots were depicted as 
highly glycemic when it would actually take an enormous amount of 
carrots to cause a problem. The glycemic load attempted to solve that 
problem by using a standard serving size. It has its own set of 
problems. Nonetheless, both systems have their uses. For instance, my 
parents are in their late 80s (87 and 89). They live in a place where 
two meals a day are prepared for them.  They have never paid any 
attention to glucose issues until the last few years. Instead of trying 
to change how the institution prepares meals (where they offer a limited 
set of choices at each meal) I haveI printed out a list, for my parents, 
of foods that shows glycemic index and glycemic loads. I have told them 
to eat only the foods that  have a low rating in at least one domain. It 
is far from a perfect system, especially when they have eaten carrots 
that were cooked to mush, then showed me the list and said "see, carrots 
are okay".

Nonetheless, the list is easier than my checking every meal they eat.  
It is also a handy reference when they shop for the foods they eat for 
breakfast and snacks. While I agree that both lists are not wonderful, 
they do provide some guidance. A better system is definitely needed.

best wishes,
Ron






-- 
PK