On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Amadeus Schmidt wrote:

> I think what you describe for your diet with overall low carbs for sake of
> emptying the glycogen stores should work similarly in a normal.
> "Normally" insulin like glucose goes up only for a limited time of 2-3 hours
> after a meal, that makes for 3 meals 6-9 hours, out of 24.

Yes.  This, incidentally, is why Allan and Lutz recommend no more
than 72g of carbs/day.  That is, they argue for using the 9-hour
insulin "window" (@ 8g/hour) for dealing with dietary glucose.

> Despite missing new glucose (from food) the blood suger doesn't drop in
> all the rest of 15-18 hours. This would be 2/3 to 3/4 of the time.
> All this time the blood sugar needs are satisfied from glycogen stores.

Correct.

> Even if this is only used by tissues for which it's essential  (the
> 180g/day) it should be able to signinicantly lower the short term stores.
> For the given example 2/3 of it =120g carb per day.

Right, it would just take a bit longer that way.

> >..  After four
> >days, I'm out of glucose and I need to burn protein (in reality,
> >I think, it's a more gradual transition).  At this point I may
> >experience "cravings" for carbohydrate
>
> Why can then anybody experience cravings for carbohydrate, while the
> stores are full? Something's not working.
> The signal for it's release is glucagon. Does it fail?

Yes, I think it does if (a) the diet is low in protein and (b)
insulin levels *remain* high, because elevated insulin cancels
the effect of the glucagon.  This is exactly the phenomenon of
insulin resistance.  Those of us who have this condition know it
very well.  We experience carbohydrate cravings even though we
have plenty of glycogen.  Clearly what's not working is the
glucagon.  To get it working we have to eat more protein and less
carbohydrate.

> If a person has a thiamin deficit, a big part of all carb has to be
> converted to fat *anyway* before it can be fuelled.

Yes, and that is why some people find that they have "more
energy" when they take a B-complex vitamin.  I never experienced
it myself.

> As Walsh describes it, most glucose is burnt by tissues for which it is
> essential (180g). This is only 1/4 of all energy, though much more of the
> daily energy comes from carbs (in western diets 60%).
> This implies that the difference goes to fat and is burnt if form of fat.
> Isn't it so?
> Isn't it so even, that long insulin time is *required* to allow
> (intermediate) fat formation to take place?

I think so.  This suggests that 25% of energy should be regarded
as a "ceiling" value for carbohydrates.  For anyone with signs of
insulin resistance, less is better, since glycogen is supplied in
a more gradual manner than dietary glucose.  Obviously, total
calories have to be considered as well.

> Including enough protein with the meal seems to cause that glucagon
> production doesn't stop after it -
> but insulin .. is actually stimulated by leucin and arginin --protein..

But these amino acids also stimulate glucagon, so it should
balance out.

> Sears' main goal I understood as good eicosanoid production.
> Which is blocked by insulin, he sais....

Right.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]