Special foods

Hello, someone around knows with certainty, if the foods that put without added sugars (zumos type, cookies, ice cream .....) Are they suitable for diabetics?
I can't read it anywhere in the container, and I don't know a hair.
I know that in specialized stores, I could find something, but the economy is not very bollante to say

On the other hand, I would like to know if drinking a lot of water (+ 3 liters day), helps glucose.
A kiss

Yeah.
No.

Now seriously: Mrgreen:

There are no diabetic foods ...
What glycemia rises are carbohydrates ...
An added sugar orange juice rises glycemia ...

The carbohydrates are:

Drinking a lot of water alone does not lower glycemia.

My opinion on special foods for diabetics is that it is nothing more than a business for people who have no scrupulous to benefit from the evils of progress, something so fashionable in our days.
There is nothing healthier for a diabetic than feeding with the same healthy foods of a lifetime, the less treated and close production the better.
And above all, not be influenced by advertisements that promise us expectations of our cholesterol and diabetes levels, from the acquisition of a concoction or a pseudo-compliance with herbs that come from the oldest culture in the world.

My opinion on special foods for diabetics, is that it is nothing more than a business for people who have no scrupulum to benefit from the evils of the neighbor, something so fashionable inOur days.
There is nothing healthier for a diabetic than feeding with the same healthy foods of a lifetime, the less treated and close production the better.

I do not agree partially on what you say.I do not agree that sugar -free products are food to avoid and that we should go to their "sugary equivalent or normal product."Because?Well, simply, because in many cases these products have dispensed with the rapid HCs providedThe "we swallow all everyone" :- that is, that in a product "without" we can have HC, of ​​course, but from flour, and not its sweetener.And that is worth it.
Another issue is that these products in some cases unbalance their recipes to reduce the sweetener, and come to balance it with more fat, and we already know that in industrial sweet, the fat used is not always good;In fact, it is usually bad (a lot of palm is used, which is pure poison), but that happens in all types of products.
These manufacturers are not scrupled, they want to sell, and they have the same scrupulum (as you are called) to sell some sugar -free muffins than sugar cookies.They don't care.
Where you are right is in the products that put "for diabetics."There is nothing for diabetics.A diabetic knows what he has to eat and calculates it.And I am also against the products that under that epigraph have existed in previous years, when everything was sweetened with the treacherous fructose.That we should avoid it.I don't know who was the list that said a good day that fructose was a substitute for sweetening food, but covered with glory.It is a monosaccharide that although it metabolizes very slowly (almost 50% slower than glucose) also produces a remarkable elevation of it.And what brands (that they are given healthy in what it sells) as Santiveri have sold (and I think they continue to do so) these products say very little of them.By the way, their sugar products are bad like hitting a father.

and above all not to be influenced by advertisements that promise us some expectation improvements of our cholesterol and diabetes levels, from the acquisition of a concoction or a pseudo-herbsthat come from the oldest culture in the world.

totally agree.Very careful with that.Especially type I. There is nothing that can replace our treatment (diet, exercise and insulin).But sometimes people with very little training (here this does not happen, but in South America it is too common), they fall seduced by the possibility that their diabetes will heal, as those advertisements pray.

I have not said to avoid any food, I have said to select the healthiest and the less prepared the better.

I reaffirm it, and of course it is my opinion, today it is more important for companies that facilitate most of food their results account than our well -being.

The scrupulus (from Latin, scrupulus, diminutive of scrupus, pebble that gets into the shoe) [1] is the concern of encouragement caused by doubt about whether something is good or bad, correct or incorrect, true or false

And yes, they have no doubt, reasonable or not, (scrupulum), in deceiving us about the benefits of their products, they really care about a pepper as they can sit down.

I insist that it is a very personal opinion.

I understand that these foods that are suitable for diabetics are already prohibited from putting it in their advertising.I don't know if it is already being applied.Some years ago I bought them and the same endocrine told me not to do so that my son would give him, for example a little "normal" nougat before giving him the one they announced for diabetics.
Peace.

I totally agree with Antoni ... There are many people dedicated to the "business" of health and it cares little anything other than benefits margins.Let us know that I, today (in the public sector) living health, tomorrow my intention is to live in the private sector.I do not think it is incompatible to prosper while helping other people.

Regarding the water, large amounts of liquid lower glycemia if it is very high (I think it speaks of the physiological mechanisms of this in some post).Under normal conditions it does not serve much drink a lot per day.

For the same reason that some we support natural foods we also have to leave nature to do their job.The body has enough resources to ask for water when it needs it.Drinking a couple of liters per day may help you better eliminate some toxin, but you don't have to force to drink an exaggerated amount.

All the best

I think that the products without added sugar depends on the product, what I do is look at the component table and see the grams of carbohydrates from there I see the portions that it has and I am trying, there are cookies that do not upload almost meNothing other than ... also having a lot of eye with the HC section both of which fast sugars ... eye with that !!That is what in juices for example is actually high because they do not have added sugar but the fruit of the fruit does not know anyone ...
On the other hand I do not share the water, since the three pillars of diabetes are diet, exercise and insulin and in the diet of a diabetic that is balanced there must be 2 liters of water a day since this helps the body to eliminate betterThe glucose..Ademas according to my experience I notice in the glycemia cdo drink 2 liters a day and I take several days drinking less ... I think it is something quite important!
Greetings to allss

Indeed drinking 1.5-2l from gu a day is a good habit that is part of anyone's healthy diet and enters reasonable limits .. what I mean is that you do not have to force the body in normal conditions (in other postsSome had read recommendations of 4 and more liters per day, that is in my opinion and are amounts that will not produce a noticeable descent except with quite high glycems).

All the best

hello
The other day by chance, a relative came to visit me, and very gladly it brought me from the town Pastas de Te (cookies), without sugar.As they were from a traditional workshop, I could not check the carbohydrates that composed them, and decided to try it with myself.I took two palmeritas with the afternoon milk, and observed in the pre before I had 128 (I have been advised to take a cookie in the afternoon, since I arrived very short at dinner 80-90), and took two cookies (Different to the above), at breakfast (usually, I take 6 Maria cookies with milk), and in the middle of the morning, I had 130. Could you take them as a suitable for diabetics?More than anything to vary, you get tired of eating the same.
Since we are, usually in the middle of the morning I take an apple (the bread rises a lot), and although I am hungry, the levels keep me well.It is possible that the size and mark of the apple influence the glucose? If the apple is tiny, I get well, but if it is bigger and sweet (Fuji), I arrive high before meals.I know if possible, but we are talking about a simple apple.
Although I am low, I find it almost impossible (for my rest schedule for the medication that I take (cortisone-anmunosuppressors)) to make the posts post at two hours after eating, and I do them at 2 and a half hours. Is there any problem.And is it reliable?
Supposedly the diabetics we have to exercise, but I cannot, someone would know how to work for home (sweep, clean soils, scrub, iron .....), does it work as an exercise ???????
Sorry I know that there are four questions in one, but between doctor and doctor, and that my children do not leave me the computer, I have to take advantage of the only five minutes I have.

Thank you

I hate the expression "suitable for diabetics", for a simple reason: everything is "suitable for diabetics", provided you know what you are eating, in what amount and how to apply the necessary insulin.
Obviously, it is not advisableAnd they are usually harmful fats (coconut, palm, palmist, animal fats ...), not counting that sweeteners are not always adequate.With excessive frequency we read the contradiction: "without sugar, with fructose", when fructose is a sugar.Or they can carry polyalcohols that, in not too high doses they already cause unpleasant intestinal effects.

To my daughter, the only things that I buy without sugar are drinks (Cocacola Zero or Light) and sweeteners for coffee or yogurts (aspart or stevia) the rest is counterproductive.

Health

Puri, in my modest opinion and coinciding in part with what has already been said here, the products "suitable for diabetics" have simply reduced their amount of glucose/HC or have modified them APRA that are not of such rapid absorption.I honestly do not think there is anything for diabetics: sugarless chocolate still has sugar and HC, and it seems to me that it is horrible, so I prefer to take normal chocolate although in less quantity.

I do not take absolutely any product suitable for diabetics, not because of ideology, but because what we have to take care of is the amount and type of sugars, and being cautious, our diet is exactly equal to that of a healthy person.Do not worry in whether the cookies are suitable or not for diabetics: simply worry about the incidence they have in glycemia, controlling the amount you take from them.

As for the apple: obviously, a larger apple has more HC and a sweeter as well.The example of the Fuji is good, I attest that they have more rations, but that does not mean that you cannot eat them.I love and simply be careful that if as a huge fuji, I have to take less rice, or less pasta, or less than the first dish.

With regard to the posts, here I speak for my consideration but perhaps the most experts have to correct myself: I believe that the 2H post food is approximate.I also usually do it 2h and a half, I doubt that the thing varies a lot ... in terms of exercise, exercise = activity carried out for a certain time that supposes a physical effort.A general cleaning to the house for me does count as exercise, but I don't know if it will be enough to have glycemia at bay.Maybe giving walks of 30 minutes or an hour at a normal pace help you more and are more reliable.I don't know if this type of activity can be done, but consider it.

Maaadre Mia, go scam, that now, in several brands of cookies "suitable for diabetics", instead of putting that, puts: suitable for diabetics, approved by the association of such diabetics, or approved by the association which, of diabetics, and are known associations.If you later look at the hydrates, one of the cookie mark, it has the same cookie hydrates as a normal (or very similar) and in another, at least it puts the hydrates by cookie they are, which also avoids youcalculations ... I know ...

maaadre mia, go it is "suitable for diabetics" ... hahaha, which learns a ... is possible as you comment, that they are prohibiting it to put that inThe food, but I do not know if you have seen or have fixed, that now, in several brands of cookies "suitable for diabetics", instead of putting that, puts: suitable for diabetics, approved by the association of such diabetics, or approvedFor the association as, of diabetics, and they are known associations. If you later look at the hydrates, one of the cookie brand, has the same hydrates by cookie as a normal (or very similar) and in another, at least it puts youThe cookie hydrates that are, which also avoids calculating ... I know ...

I don't think all these foods are any scam.What I do give you the reason is in the deception and the pernicious phrase "suitable for diabetics."That should have banished a thousand years ago.Everything is suitable for a diabetic if you know how to control your diet and what you eat.But in many cases these products have less HC than their homonyms with sugar, and as I said in a post above, I am worth it (provided they do not unbalance the original recipe too much and distort it, either losing the organoleptic properties of theirImited original or by the addition of harmful and abundant fats instead of sugar to balance the recipe).If this is fulfilled that I have said, that product is worth, and in fact, I will eat it instead of the "original" with more HC.