I want to dispel a few myths about potatoes as well as teach you how to properly prepare them in a healthy way.
Vit. C..............23%
Calories.....................413
Fat............................19.5g
I have had MANY comments about the Glycemic Index of potatoes....
First I must mention the oils
DO NOT contain any carbohydrate, protein, fiber, vitamins, minerals....they are essentially empty calories...some oils contain vitamin E or vitamin A but that is it! How can we say that oils are GOOD CALORIES when they don't provide us with any essential nutrients but pack a HUGE calorie punch at 120 calories per TB?
My definition of a 'heatlhy food' is one that provides a WIDE range of nutrients including fiber, carbohydrates, protein, fat, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants etc... a Balanced whole food. N
ot a fat that has been isolated from its whole food such a olive fat from an olive, or sunflower fat from a sunflower seed.
I had one commenter state that
"potatoes are high glycemic...turn straight to sugar and then get stored as fat."
That sounds scary but can you actually explain physiologically how this happens? NO because it makes absolutely NO sense at all!
WE NEED blood sugar, without blood sugar you DIE!!! Ask a diabetic who has had a hypoglycemic episode how they felt.....ask a doctor what the risks of a hypoglycemic episode in a diabetic are...it isn't pretty.
So the fact that the body breaks down complex carbohydrates into simpler sugars to utilize for energy is not a bad thing, it is excactly what the body is supposed to do and we have insulin for a reason, to help get that fuel into the cells. Insulin is not the enemy....yes when we have diabetes or insulin resistance that is a problem but insulin in itself is not bad! We need it or our cells would STARVE and we would die!
Type I Diabetics MUST inject insulin for a reaon....to prevent the cell from starving!
Why do Type I diabetics have to inject insulin.....because we NEED it! They would DIE if they did not inject insulin because insulin is how the blood glucose 'energy' is able to enter the cell and without that the cell would starve plain and simple. This whole fear of blood sugar and insulin has gotten WAY out of hand and has caused a lot of dangerous and false information about nutrition to circulate causing mass confusion.
Don't post a comment and tell me how a potato turns to sugar and then turns to fat, if you post a comment I want a physiological explanation with scientific references!
Before commenting about how potatoes are 'high glycemic' and make you fat please read this from the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition:
As a precursor please understand that the physiological process by which carbohydrates are converted into fat is called De Novo Lipogenesis. .
According to research published in the American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition:
"De novo lipogenesis from carbohydrate is energetically
expensive and evidence to date suggests it does not contribute significantly to
increased fat balance in persons consuming a typical high-fat western
diet."
Carbohydrate is not fat and cannot be stored as fat unless
it goes through the process of conversion called de novo lipogenesis, during
this process 30% of the calories from carbohydrates are burned in order to
convert them into fat. This is the
reason the AJCN states in the article it is an energetically expensive process.
Our bodies were designed to utilize carbohydrates or long
chains of simple sugars that the body can digest and utilize for energy.
Enzymes in the digestive system breakdown the long carbohydrate chains and we
can utilize the resultant sugars for energy. These sugars are utilized as blood
glucose, which fuels the cells.
Misunderstandings about Glycemic Index
Please understand that the glycemic index was NOT designed for healthy people!! It was designed for individuals who already have diabetes to know what foods would have the least impact on blood sugar levels.
The misunderstanding that has resulted is that we have decided that EVERYONE should use the glycemic index and we should be afraid of foods with higher GI's. This is absolutely not the case, a healthy body can perfectly handle the breakdown and utilization of carbohydrates from carrots, potatoes, or any other whole food without any negative consequences.
Glycemic Index DOES NOT deal with the underlying cause of insulin resistance or diabetes, it merely manages symptoms. It also has absolutely nothing to do with weight gain, a carrot, potato, brown rice are not the reason Americans are overweight. If we look at the Japanese or other Asian cultures where white rice is a HUGE staple in their diet we do not see rampant obesity, nor do we see diabetes which on the traditional diet only occured in merely 5% of the population.
As an example, in the traditional Japanese diet the dietary
staple was rice. In a study, prior to
1980 Diabetes occurred in about 1-5% of the population. After 1980, when American restaurants like
McDonalds and other fast food chains began to emerge in Japan the dietary
habits changed, the fat content of the Japanese diet skyrocketed and yet, the
carbohydrate intake dropped.
by 1990 the diabetes rate in Japan jumped to 11-12% of the
population.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7859598
What about diabetes?
In the New England Journal of Medicine, Yale University
researchers tested young adults whose grandparents were diabetic. Some of these young adults had insulin
resistance, they had a higher level of intra-myocellular lipids within the
muscle cells. When intra-myocellular
lipids accumulate within the cell this interferes with insulin's intracellular
signaling process preventing insulin from allowing glucose into the cell
causing high circulating blood glucose levels.
— Intra-myocellular
lipids begin to build up in muscle cells due to a diet too high in fat. These fats inhibit the insulin receptor on
the cell from binding with insulin and allowing glucose into the cell. These fats cause insulin resistance. Several studies have shown that when a low
fat diet comprised of only whole food fats is adopted these intra-myocellular
lipids clear from the cells and the insulin receptors become sensitive to
insulin again.
Researchers at Pennington Biomedical Research Center in
Baton Rouge studied 10 young men who were in their 20's, were healthy and of
normal weight. The put these men on a
high fat diet comprising 50% of its calories from fat and after only 3 days on
the diet these men had built up significantly more intramyocellular
lipids. These lipids build up very
rapidly, but with the right diet, they can also decrease rapidly.
The potato is NOT the cause of weight gain, it is the way we prepare them!!!!
Notice that hash browns prepared without any oil only have 60 calories per cup and yet contain a great nutritional profile with 4.3 grams of protein but when we add a few Tablespoons of oil the calorie content sky rockets by many times!!!
This is why we have so many problems with weight gain and it is NOT the potato!!! Potatoes are fairly low in calories, high in fiber and nutrients. Unfortunately most people do not know how to prepare foods without large quantities of oils which have NO nutritional value but pack a HUGE calorie punch.
If you need more information about the pitfalls of the glycemic index.....
Q&A by David Richards, D.C., M.D.
Do you recommend that diabetics avoid white potatoes?
I certainly do not. I encourage my diabetic patients to eat freely of baked, steamed, microwaved, or boiled potatoes of any variety (prepared without added salt, oil, or sugar) as part of a healthy diet that also includes fruits, raw and cooked vegetables, whole grains, and legumes.
The idea that white potatoes are problematic for diabetics stems partly from the concept of the glycemic index, and partly from the inaccurate way that potatoes have been categorized in some scientific studies.
The glycemic index measures the extent to which a food raises blood sugar levels after it is eaten.1 Because white potatoes have been characterized as having a high glycemic index, it is often assumed that they can worsen diabetes. However, the glycemic index has not been found to be a useful concept when devising optimal diets for diabetics.2,3 One of the major problems with the glycemic index is its variability; not only do blood sugar responses to similar foods differ between individuals, they can vary significantly in the same person on different occasions.4 A recent review of the scientific literature conducted by the American Diabetes Association concluded that there is little difference in blood sugar control between “low-glycemic index” and “high-glycemic index” diets.5 For this reason, in their most updated guidelines, the American Diabetes Association has deleted a statement suggesting benefit from the glycemic index.6
Studies that have associated white potatoes with worsening of blood sugar control included the consumption of fried potato products (i.e., French fries and potato chips) under the category of “potatoes.”7,8 It is, therefore, not surprising that potato intake led to worse health outcomes when studied in this way. However, when processed potatoes are excluded, there is no evidence that white potato consumption is linked to diabetes or other negative effects on health. On the contrary, when looking at the nutritional makeup of a potato, it becomes clear that it can be included in a health-promoting eating plan. While I don’t want people to become obsessed with the nutrient composition of the foods that they are eating, it is important to know that potatoes rank high in a number of areas.
For example, a medium-sized Russet potato:(9, 10, 11)
● has only 168 calories
● is an excellent source of vitamin C
● has no sodium, fat, or cholesterol
● is a good source of potassium and vitamin B6
● has 8 percent of the daily requirement for fiber
● has one of the highest overall antioxidant activity among vegetables (more than broccoli)
● is a source of “resistant starch,” which improves insulin sensitivity
I can assure you that our epidemic of diabetes is not a result of Americans eating too many baked or boiled potatoes. Furthermore, there is no evidence that in people already diagnosed with diabetes, white potato consumption (when consumed without added oil, salt, or sugar) worsens control of blood sugar levels. Diabetes (as well as obesity and metabolic syndrome) are due to eating a diet composed of foods that are calorically dense, low in fiber and other beneficial nutrients, and high in fat. Potatoes have none of these attributes and should be regarded as an excellent food for both diabetics and nondiabetics. Labeling white potatoes as unhealthy because of the problems associated with French fries and potato chips is akin to claiming that apples are not wholesome because eating apple pie causes weight gain.
References:
1. Monro JA, Shaw M. Glycemic impact, glycemic glucose equivalents, glycemic index, and glycemic load: definitions, distinctions, and implications. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Jan;87(1):237S-243S.
2. Wolever TM, Gibbs AL, Mehling C et al. The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates in Diabetes (CCD), a 1-y controlled trial of low-glycemic-index dietary carbohydrate in Type 2 diabetes: no effect on glycated hemoglobin but reduction in C-reactive protein. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 87(1), 114–125 (2008).
3. Ma Y, Olendzki BC, Merriam PA et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing low-glycemic index versus ADA dietary education among individuals with Type 2 diabetes. Nutrition 24(1), 45–56 (2008).
4. Vega-López S, Ausman LM, Griffith JL, Lichtenstein AH. Interindividual variability and intra-individual reproducibility of glycemic index values for commercial white bread. Diabetes Care 30(6), 1412–1417 (2007).
5. Wheeler ML, Dunbar SA, Jaacks LM et al. Macronutrients, food groups, and eating patterns in the management of diabetes: a systematic review of the literature, 2010. Diabetes Care 35(2), 434–445 (2012).
6. American Diabetes Association. Evidence for changes in recommendations. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2012.
http://www.care.diabetes%20journals.org/content/suppl/2012/01/06/35%20Supplement_1.S11_DC2/EvidenceTable
7. Halton TL, et al. Potato and French fry consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes in women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(2):284-290.
8. Mozaffarian D, et al. Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:2392-2404.
fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=russet+potato
10. Wu X, Beecher GR, Holden JM, et al. Lipophilic and hydrophilic antioxidant capacities of common foods in the United States. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2004; 52:4026-4037.
11. Murphy MM, Douglass JS, Birkett A. Resistant starch intakes in the United States. J Am Diet Assoc. 2008;108:67-78.
David Richards, D.C., M.D., is a chiropractor and board certified internist currently practicing internal medicine in St Louis, MO. His philosophy is to provide the highest quality, evidence-based health care with as little medical intervention as possible.
Reprinted from the magazine, Health Science, Winter 2013
Potatoes & Diabetes:
Dietary Trends & Truths About Taters
Jeff Novick, MS, RD
Are potatoes dangerous? Do potatoes cause diabetes?
You might think so if you followed the headlines, as in 2006, the media was full of reports making these claims, some of which are still being made today. All of this attention was based on the results of a study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.(1)
The study was a prospective study of 84,555 women in the Nurses’ Health Study. At the start, the women, aged 34–59 years, had no history of chronic disease, and completed a validated food frequency questionnaire. These women were then followed for 20 years with repeated assessments of their diet. The studies conclusion, as stated in the abstract was, "Our findings suggest a modest positive association between the consumption of potatoes and the risk of type 2 diabetes in women. This association was more pronounced when potatoes were substituted for whole grains.”
So, lets take a closer look at the study and see how accurate these claims are, and where the "truth about taters" really lies. Specifically, we will look at 6 important key points.
1) Are all potatoes equal? Or “when is a potato not a potato?”
In the study, participants were asked how often, on average, in the previous year, they had consumed potatoes. The options they were given to choose from were either
a) - 1 baked or 1 cup mashed potato
b) - 4 oz of French fried potatoes
These were the only 2 choices the subjects could pick from. So, while these may represent how potatoes are often consumed here in American, they do not account for any differences in how the potatoes were prepared and served. And, mashed potatoes were counted in with baked potatoes, which are two completely different forms of potatoes. So, lets take a closer look at these important issues.
In American, whether it is at home or in restaurants, most all mashed potatoes are made with milk and butter and/or margarine. In addition, most all baked potatoes are served with butter, sour cream and/or cheese.
The following analysis represents these important differences. They are of a serving of mashed potatoes, a loaded baked potato and a plain baked potato as served in a popular national restaurant chain. They are typical for how mashed potatoes and baked potatoes are often served and consumed in American. In addition, I have included the analysis of a plain medium baked potato for comparison.
Mashed Potatoes (Restaurant)
367 calories
24 grams of fat
59% calories from fat
11.4 grams of sat fat
28% calories from sat fat
9 mgs of cholesterol
Loaded Baked Potato (Restaurant)
505 calories
22 grams of fat
39% calories from fat
10 grams of fat
18% calories from sat fat
30 mgs cholesterol
Regular Baked Potato (Restaurant)
329 calories
4.5 grams of fat
12% calories from fat
.4 grams of Sat fat
1% calories from sat fat
22 mgs cholesterol
Baked Potato (Home)
A typical medium potato
160 calories
.2 grams of fat
1% calories from fat
.1 grams of fat
.05% calories from sat fat
0 mgs cholesterol
So, compared to an at-home, plain baked potato;
The mashed potato gets 207 calories (56%), 23.8 grams of fat (99%), 11.3 grams of sat fat (99%), and 9 mgs of cholesterol (100%) from the other "non potato" ingredients,
The loaded potato get 345 calories (68%), 21.8 grams of fat (99%), 9.9 grams of sat fat (99%), and 30 mgs of cholesterol (100%) from the other "non potato" ingredients,
Even the regular baked potato from the restaurant gets 169 calories (51%), 4.3 grams of fat (96%), .3 grams of sat fat (75%), and 22 mgs of cholesterol (100%) from the other "non potato" ingredients (most likely oil and/or butter used on the outside and/or as a regular topping)
As we can see, the potato is contributing only a small percentage to what is most likely being counted as “potatoes” in this study. This is very important to take this into consideration when applying the conclusion of the study to "potatoes" because the association applied to potatoes in this study may be more accurately applied to how potatoes are prepared and consumed and the toppings they are served with here in America, more so then just the potato itself. The study admitted that "cooking methods" were not assessed so it is safe to assume that these were typical Americans consuming potatoes the way there are typically served.
In addition, other studies on the Nurses database show the majority of their diets are not low fat, low saturated fat, low cholesterol or high fiber which confirms that they are not choosing or consuming the healthier versions.
So, when is a potato not a potato? When nurses in American consume them.
2) The Potato: The Finger or the Moon?
In Buddhism there is a famous saying, "the finger pointing to the moon is not the moon."
In other words, language and words are merely symbols with which to express the truth. Words points at the truth, but the truth is not in words. Language and words are merely symbols with which to express the truth. In science, we call these "markers." A marker is something that may not be responsible for the observed effect, but points to what is responsible for the observed effect.
So, in this study, was the potato the problem itself, or was the potato acting as a marker and pointing to something else that was associated with potato consumption.
Quoting the researchers.
"White potatoes and French fries are large components of a “Western pattern” diet. This dietary pattern is characterized by a high consumption of red meat, refined grains, processed meat, high-fat dairy products, desserts, high-sugar drinks, and eggs, as well as French fries and potatoes. A Western pattern diet previously predicted a risk of type 2 diabetes. Thus, we cannot completely separate the effects of potatoes and French fries from the effects of the overall Western dietary pattern.”
This "previous" study the authors refer to is a study of dietary patterns and risk for type 2 diabetes in men, which was reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine back in 2002 (2). In that paper, which followed 42,504 male health professionals for a period of 12 years, the “Western dietary pattern” was associated with a modest increase in type 2 diabetes.
This “Western dietary pattern” discussed in this previous study was characterized by a “high consumption of red meat, processed meat, refined grains, French fries, high-fat dairy products, sweets and desserts, high-sugar drinks and eggs.” "However, the correlation of potatoes with the Western pattern of eating was low and the association with type 2 diabetes was nonexistent." The only individual foods that had a significant positive association with type 2 diabetes were red meat and refined grains.
We see similar patterns here in the current study under discussion; the subjects who ate more potatoes also ate more red meat, more refined grains and consumed more total calories, over 500 more calories per day. In addition, potato intake was also associated with a slightly higher intake of sat fat and trans fat and less physical activity.
Lastly, the significance of the association between potatoes and type 2 diabetes, which was modest to begin with, disappears completely in the subjects who were not obese.
So, was the potato the problem, or was the potato a marker for a dietary pattern and lifestyle that was responsible for the results. In this study, the potato was the finger pointing to the moon and not the moon itself.
3) Trends and Truth in Taters
If a food really is a causative factor in a disease, then as we consume more of the food (as an individual or as a nation) we should see the disease rates go up accordingly. In addition, when we remove or lessen the consumption of the food, we should see disease rates (as an individual or as a nation) go down.
However, this is not the case for potatoes and diabetes.
Total Potato Consumption
1970: 122 lbs/person/yr
1996: 145 lbs/person/yr
2008: 117 lbs/person/yr
Potato consumption rose from 1970 to its peak in 1996 at which time it began to fall and by 2008 was lower than its 1970 level, a drop of 18% since its peak.
Fresh Potatoes
1970: 61 lbs
1996: 50 lbs
2008: 36 lbs
As we can see, fresh potatoes (the ones most likely to be prepared and served in a healthy manner) have fallen steadily from 1970, dropping over 41%
Frozen Potatoes
1970: 28 lbs
1996: 60 lbs
2008: 52 lbs
Frozen potatoes, (the ones most likely to be prepared and served as French fries) doubled from 1970 to 1996 and then fell slightly but are still up significantly from 1970, up around 86%
Prevalence of Diabetes
1970: 2%
1996: 2.89%
2008: 6.29
During this same period, diabetes rose 45% from 1970 to 1996 and then rose another 117% from 1996 to 2008. From 1970 to 2008, there is a 215% increase in diabetes
So, from 1996 to 2008, potato consumption fell 19% but diabetes rose over 200%.
When we look closer at the types of potato, the only clear relationship we see is an "inverse" relationship between fresh potatoes and diabetes and a trend towards correlation between frozen potatoes and total potatoes but only until 1996-1998 where we see an inverse relationship develop. So consumption of all types of potatoes is now trending down yet prevalence of diabetes is rising faster than ever.
Most importantly, the prevalence of diabetes really began to increase in 1996-1998, which is the same time that potato consumption of all types, began to fall sharply.
Potato consumption is not related to the prevalence of diabetes and shows an inverse relationship with the consumption of fresh potatoes.
This link is to a picture of a graph that highlights this information.
I use a factor of 10 on the prevalence of diabetes so it would scale better with potato consumption. Therefore, instead of 2 in 1970 I uses 20 and instead of 6.29 I used 62.9. Diabetes prevalence from CDC, Potato consumption figures from USDA ERS.
4) Associations
Studies like the Nurses Study cannot prove cause and effect but only show associations. These associations can be of various "strengths" depending on other variables.
Quoting.
"Although we assessed and adjusted for a variety of potential confounding variables, we cannot rule out the possibility of residual confounding, especially because the observed association between potatoes and the risk of type 2 diabetes was modest in the present study."
In this study, the association was "modest" at best.
5) Replication
In science, the results of any one study are always interesting but never prove anything unless they can replicated and/or reproduced. Reproduction and replication are what increase the validity of any claim.
In a 4-year prospective study of 36,787 adults which was done one year later, researchers, working independently from any food industry sponsors, investigated the association between a variety of dietary patterns and type 2 diabetes (3) The study results, which were published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, looked at potatoes and diabetes and also looked at cooking method and only found an association with potatoes when they were cooked with oil. They concluded that consuming a variety of cooked vegetables, including potatoes, cooked in ways other than frying, was associated with a reduced risk of developing Type 2 diabetes.
From the study.
"Fish, chicken, and potatoes, when cooked in ways other than frying, loaded on factors that were not associated with increased risk of diabetes."
"The results indicated that a dietary pattern characterized by meats and fatty foods was associated with increased diabetes risk while a dietary pattern characterized by a variety of salad and cooked vegetables, including potatoes cooked in ways other than frying, was associated with a decreased risk."
Also, as I mentioned before in point 2, there was an earlier study of dietary patterns and risk for type 2 diabetes in men, which was reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine back in 2002 (2). In that paper, which followed 42,504 male health professionals for a period of 12 years, the “Western dietary pattern” was associated with a modest increase in type 2 diabetes. "However, the correlation of potatoes with the Western pattern of eating was low and the association with type 2 diabetes was nonexistent."
Therefore, other studies have not found the same results. In fact, one found no association at all and one, which accounted for cooking methods, only found an association for potatoes when they were cooked with oil/fat and otherwise, found a decreased risk..
6) The Moon
What really causes diabetes and do potatoes play a role.
Being overweight or obese, and physical inactivity are two key factors in developing diabetes and have an over 90% correlation. In addition, high blood pressure and elevated cholesterol and triglycerides also play a role.
During the 20 years that the subjects in the Nurses study were followed, we saw a dramatic shift in the dietary and lifestyle pattern of Americans. Not only in potato consumption and the type of potato which changed dramatically, but in many other areas as well. During that same time, other components of the “Western dietary pattern” sharply increased including; refined sugars/sweeteners, refined grains/carbohydrates, added oils/fats, hydrogenated fats/trans fat, cheese, calories etc. In addition we saw a large increase in the calorie density of foods and the American diet and in the percentage of Americans who are overweight and/or obese while at the same time, the percentage of Americans who were active fell dramatically.
This is what is responsible for the dramatic increase in the incidence of diabetes.
Mashed potatoes, loaded baked potatoes and French fries, as prepared and consumed as part of a “Western Dietary Pattern” are extremely calorie dense, high in fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sugar, and salt and increase your risk for disease. Even the typical baked potato, as served in a restaurant today, can be much higher in calories, fat, and saturated fat than a plain baked potato made with nothing added.
Therefore, avoid all these Western forms of potatoes.
However, there is no real credible evidence at all that potatoes, when consumed close to their natural state and cooked conservatively by baking, boiling, and/or steaming, etc, without added fat, salt, sugar, oil as part of a healthy diet of fruits, veggies, starchy veggies, intact whole grains and legumes, will cause diabetes or are associated with an increased risk.
In Health,
Jeff
(1) Potato and French fry consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes in women– Am J Clin Nutr 2006;83:284 –90.
(2) “Dietary Patterns and Risk for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in U.S. Men. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:201-209.
(3) Dietary Patterns and Diabetes Incidence in the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study Am J Epidemiol 2007;165:603–610
Example: Extra Virgin 1 Tb. Olive Oil
