Pls advise. Coz im a asian and our diet are made up of white rice mainly. OF cos there are meat and veg.
Printable View
Pls advise. Coz im a asian and our diet are made up of white rice mainly. OF cos there are meat and veg.
White rice is very high GI. Try to stick to mostly brown rice if possible.
Bignbuff
What about light/diet sliced bread, it's low GI right?
yeah,white rice is high GI but it is better then candy
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ultraboi [/i]
[B]Pls advise. Coz im a asian and our diet are made up of white rice mainly. OF cos there are meat and veg. [/B][/QUOTE] white rice should never be eaten man, its just as bas as white sugar. over-processed, bad for you.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by bignbuff [/i]
[B]White rice is very high GI. Try to stick to mostly brown rice if possible.
[/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jkl12345 [/i]
[B]white rice should never be eaten man, its just as bas as white sugar. over-processed, bad for you. [/B][/QUOTE]
um i wouldnt say never eat them.
What about light white bread? And wheat bread? What r their GI?
Ive noticed how fat I get when I eat to much white rice
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Johnny Bravo 00 [/i]
[B]What about light white bread? And wheat bread? What r their GI? [/B][/QUOTE]
white bread is high-gi, but wheat bread and other grain breads are fairly low-gi.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jkl12345 [/i]
[B]white rice should never be eaten man, its just as bas as white sugar. over-processed, bad for you. [/B][/QUOTE]
white rice is as "bad" as white sugar?
got any proof/articles or are you just talking out of your ass?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jkl12345 [/i]
[B]white rice should never be eaten man, its just as bas as white sugar. over-processed, bad for you. [/B][/QUOTE]
haha, well it is over-processed and high gi. however, it is not "bad" for you and it is not near as bad as white sugar. it is still a complex carbohydrate and if it is your only option then its not horrible but I would recommend something lower on the gi scale like brown rice.
Strictly in terms of GI, I believe white rice is actually worse for you than white sugar (as sucrose = fructose + glucose, not glucose; the latter has a GI of 100, and white rice is just below that [white instant rice is just above]).
However, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to eat sugar instead...
What is the catch of white rice having a high GI? Why is high GI not recommended? Because of the unnecessary insulin spike it gives?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by powergrip [/i]
[B]What is the catch of white rice having a high GI? Why is high GI not recommended? Because of the unnecessary insulin spike it gives? [/B][/QUOTE]
Basically - white rice is not good because it has a higher GI....
Being a higher GI it will cause more of an insulin response, and result in a faster release of energy..... Try this:
[url]http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=176857&highlight=curve[/url]
Im in the army now. Meals are served with white rice as the main dish. White rice is our staple diet. Asians are smaller built. As my point of view, white rice will not contribute to fats. As long u work it out, it will not affect yr body fats. In addition, i cant aviod white rice at all. I could only eat less. If not wat am i supposed to eat in camp. hahahah.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ultraboi [/i]
[B]Im in the army now. Meals are served with white rice as the main dish. White rice is our staple diet. Asians are smaller built. As my point of view, white rice will not contribute to fats. As long u work it out, it will not affect yr body fats. In addition, i cant aviod white rice at all. I could only eat less. If not wat am i supposed to eat in camp. hahahah. [/B][/QUOTE]
Everyone said some good comments, though I'm not sure of what jkl12345 got his info from...
If you don't have a choice, then there isn't much you can do in terms of your carb intake, huh? If your meals are served with white rice, then eat up. I don't know what other alternatives there are, but if you did have a choice between white rice and brown, then I wouldn't think twice :p
nosliw, I wouldn't say they are fairly 'low' GI choices, rather moderate :)
just eat the white rice post and pre workout, I don't care what anyone says your body isn't stupid and if it starts needed energy in short demand, the insulin spike won't do jack
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Emma-Leigh [/i]
[B]Basically - white rice is not good because it has a higher GI....
Being a higher GI it will cause more of an insulin response, and result in a faster release of energy..... Try this:
[url]http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=176857&highlight=curve[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
I've read great posts here at BB and this link is one of the best! Thanks for the good info, Emma!!
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Zachary [/i]
[B]Strictly in terms of GI, I believe white rice is actually worse for you than white sugar
However, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to eat sugar instead... [/B][/QUOTE] true
It depends very much on the type of white rice you choose. Jasmine white rice for example has a GI of 109 where as Basmati White rice has a GI of 55, which is the same of Oatmeal.
Parboiled white rice has a low 40's high 30's GI rating.
It has to do with the type of starch Amylose vs. Amlyopectin. A higher amlyose content results in a lower GI rating. Whether or not it is white has little to do with it. Brown rice has 1 to 2 grams of fiber per serving, hardly enough to lower the GI.
comparing the same types of rice brown will lower the GI about 10-15 points.
Don't be so quick in trashing white rice. Think back to old school nutrition where it's all about the total calorie consumption. Total calorie consumption imo is the "ultimate" factor(of course macronutrients plays a role too but let's set that aside to make my point) in deciding if you're going to gain weight or lose weight. Why do you think so many easterners and asians eat tons of rice but they never get fat off of it? Here's an excerpt and article crossing the line between macronutrients and calorie consumption.
[url]http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/nutrition/leaneating_1.htm[/url]
U.S.:
Energy - 30.6kcal/kg
Carbohydrate - 42% (224g)
Fat Intake - 36% (85.86g)
Alcohol - 7%
Fiber - 11g/day
Protein - 15% (80g)
% Protein from Animal - 70% (56g)
BMI (wt/ht*ht) - 25.8
China
Energy - 40.6kcal/kg
Carbohydrate - 71% (504g)
Fat Intake - 14% (44g)
Alcohol - 5%
Fiber - 33g/day
Protein - 10% (71g)
% Protein from Animal - 11% (7g)
BMI (wt/ht*ht) - 20.5
It's interesting to note that while the Chinese have a much lower body mass index (as represented by weight in kg/height squared in meters) and a much lower prevalence of obesity and cardiovascular disease, they eat about 25 to 35% more food than we do! Now, the Chinese tend to be more active than we are, but when the numbers were corrected for activity levels, the differences remain!
Looking at the macronutrient breakdowns, the Chinese are on a high-carb diet, no doubt. But they're not fat. And while their protein intake, by percentage, is lower, they do get nearly as much total protein, by gram amount, as we do. Perhaps we could take a lesson from the Chinese. Clearly not all calories are created equal because if they were, the Chinese would be fatter than we are! But instead, the average 100kg Chinese person gets to enjoy a 4060kcal diet while keeping his lean physique.
While I, and just about everyone with a decent knowledge of nutrition, tend to agree with you, there is one flaw in that logic.
The problem with 'cultural examples' is that different 'races' tend to have different adaptations genetically. This is why people with genes decending from normally warm climates without a need for bodyfat are more often of the ectomorph type, while those with genes from colder climates (thus needing more bodyfat) gravitate towards the endomorph type. Obviously this isn't always true, but it does tend to be.
For this reason, saying that because asians eat lots of rice and don't get fat, everyone can, is sorta like saying that because ectomorphs can eat absolute crap (especially in childhood) and remain beanpoles, so can endomorphs. Which is patently false. Now, I'm not really sure if asians do in fact have genetic adaptations here, but it wouldn't surprise me. When you're surrounded by white rice for thousands and thousands of years, one would think the body would evolve to deal with that.
Again, this is all speculation, but in general it's wise to be careful with cultural diet comparisons.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Zachary [/i]
[B]While I, and just about everyone with a decent knowledge of nutrition, tend to agree with you, there is one flaw in that logic.
The problem with 'cultural examples' is that different 'races' tend to have different adaptations genetically. This is why people with genes decending from normally warm climates without a need for bodyfat are more often of the ectomorph type, while those with genes from colder climates (thus needing more bodyfat) gravitate towards the endomorph type. Obviously this isn't always true, but it does tend to be.
For this reason, saying that because asians eat lots of rice and don't get fat, everyone can, is sorta like saying that because ectomorphs can eat absolute crap (especially in childhood) and remain beanpoles, so can endomorphs. Which is patently false. Now, I'm not really sure if asians do in fact have genetic adaptations here, but it wouldn't surprise me. When you're surrounded by white rice for thousands and thousands of years, one would think the body would evolve to deal with that.
Again, this is all speculation, but in general it's wise to be careful with cultural diet comparisons. [/B][/QUOTE]
good point...
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Zachary [/i]
[B]While I, and just about everyone with a decent knowledge of nutrition, tend to agree with you, there is one flaw in that logic.
The problem with 'cultural examples' is that different 'races' tend to have different adaptations genetically. This is why people with genes decending from normally warm climates without a need for bodyfat are more often of the ectomorph type, while those with genes from colder climates (thus needing more bodyfat) gravitate towards the endomorph type. Obviously this isn't always true, but it does tend to be.
For this reason, saying that because asians eat lots of rice and don't get fat, everyone can, is sorta like saying that because ectomorphs can eat absolute crap (especially in childhood) and remain beanpoles, so can endomorphs. Which is patently false. Now, I'm not really sure if asians do in fact have genetic adaptations here, but it wouldn't surprise me. When you're surrounded by white rice for thousands and thousands of years, one would think the body would evolve to deal with that.
Again, this is all speculation, but in general it's wise to be careful with cultural diet comparisons. [/B][/QUOTE]
nice point.....playing the old evolution hand, can't really argue against it
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Zachary [/i]
[B]Strictly in terms of GI, I believe white rice is actually worse for you than white sugar (as sucrose = fructose + glucose, not glucose; the latter has a GI of 100, and white rice is just below that [white instant rice is just above]).
However, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to eat sugar instead... [/B][/QUOTE]
I ain't saying you are full O' ****, but I might be implying it.......
I really can't stand brown rice. White rice seems to get the job done for me.
high gi carbs have their place in a bodybuilding diet. if you are competing and watching each and everything you eat of course you would'nt really eat white rice all that much. for a good postworkout meal it would be alrite once in a while. just don't overdo it. i'm asian and i was raised on that stuff, its pretty damn hard to give up. brown rice = yuck.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Zachary [/i]
[B]While I, and just about everyone with a decent knowledge of nutrition, tend to agree with you, there is one flaw in that logic.
The problem with 'cultural examples' is that different 'races' tend to have different adaptations genetically. This is why people with genes decending from normally warm climates without a need for bodyfat are more often of the ectomorph type, while those with genes from colder climates (thus needing more bodyfat) gravitate towards the endomorph type. Obviously this isn't always true, but it does tend to be.
For this reason, saying that because asians eat lots of rice and don't get fat, everyone can, is sorta like saying that because ectomorphs can eat absolute crap (especially in childhood) and remain beanpoles, so can endomorphs. Which is patently false. Now, I'm not really sure if asians do in fact have genetic adaptations here, but it wouldn't surprise me. When you're surrounded by white rice for thousands and thousands of years, one would think the body would evolve to deal with that.
Again, this is all speculation, but in general it's wise to be careful with cultural diet comparisons. [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm surprised that people still make this mistake. Look, the human genome has been decoded, and there is NO genetic basis for race. Therefore genetic flaws can NOT be linked to race.
Race is socially constructed. What makes a black person "black"? Before you even answer, look around you. There are light skined and dark skined black. Some so light you would mistake them for white. Some black people have green eyes and straight hair.
What makes a white person "white"? Is "White" even a race? what about polish vs. german vs. swedish vs. french.
What happens when you mix "Races"?
Take a look at the pictures of me on my article content page, and even on my website. What race do you think I am?
Take a REALLY close look before you answer. Look at my hair, skin tone, and facial features before you answer.
Look, I'm as liberal as they come, but don't jump on me like you're the ACLU's bitch, for crying out loud.
What I'm talking about here is ethnic diversity -- groups from different parts of the world DO have different genetic traits. Just because the GENOME is decoded doesn't mean some people don't have certain genes that are 'on' or 'off' in different patterns/ways than other people.
Absolutely absurd.