Paleo Diet and Paleolithic Diet Questions & Answers

Question

1

'Wheat Belly' has been discussed and reviewed quite thoroughly on here, but one of Dr. Davis' statements that I haven't seen talked about much is what he says about amylopectin-a and it's ability to raise blood sugar quicker.

I do not have his book, but I've been looking for papers about this without much success. Here's one that talks about different properties, but doesn't mention blood sugar.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144861797002476

Does anyone have any studies that specifically relate to amylopectin-a and blood sugar?

flag	asked Dec 3 2011 at 18:26 Jeff 16.5k●1●8●33

AndyM · Accepted Answer · 2011-12-18 11:37:03Z UTC

This is the reference Davis uses in the book for the different structures of amylopectin and the subsequent faster digestion of amylopectin-A

http://www.ajcn.org/content/61/4/938S

The theory is that the structure is more readily handled by amylase, resulting in more of the starch being digested faster, naturally leading to a greater rise in blood sugar.

Beth-WeightMaven · Answer 2 · 2011-12-03 20:51:32Z UTC

1

That there aren't a lot of references about these three different types of amylopectin suggests to me that Dr. Davis' statement may be simply speculative and/or correlated with the GIs of amylopectin-containing foods in general. Then again, I know I've come across articles that say that rice that has more amylopectin than amylose (e.g., sticky rice in sushi) has a higher GI than rice that has less amylopectin (e.g., basmati).

answered Dec 3 2011 at 20:51

Beth-WeightMaven
15.3k●1●11●55

There actually are enough studies between amylopectin-a and b and c as you can read in the links that I provided in another answer and the link that AndyM provided. One has to understand that studies on the difference between Wheat/Corn, potato/banana, and bean ARE studies on the difference between A-A, A-B, and A-C – Bill1102inf Dec 18 2011 at 18:09

1

Your definition of "enough" studies and mine are different. – Beth-WeightMaven Dec 18 2011 at 18:34

Jim Prado · Answer 3 · 2013-01-28 22:41:40Z UTC

1

Here is a basic Science paper from Pub Med that talks about the 3 types of Amylopectin relative to molecular structure (degree of branching - thus digestability)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12110196

answered Jan 28 at 22:41

Jim Prado
11●1

Bill1102inf · Answer 4 · 2011-12-18 04:30:18Z UTC

0

Here you go:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/76/5/1023.short?related-urls=yes&legid=ajcn;76/5/1023

and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7782895

Mind if I ask what your trying to determine?

answered Dec 18 2011 at 4:30

Bill1102inf
7,510●7●26

Thanks, but those aren't exactly what I'm looking for. Dr. Davis talks about a specific type of amylopectin (a), as opposed to amylopectin-B or -C, which is a combination of A and B I believe. I want to see how the different types of amylopectin affect blood sugar, not just the amylose:amylopectin ratio. – Jeff Dec 18 2011 at 6:44

Bill1102inf · Answer 5 · 2011-12-18 17:07:12Z UTC

Aha, I see what you are looking for now:

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholesterol/c/7986/112680/carbohydrates

http://www.trackyourplaque.com/blog/2010/05/super-carbohydrate.html

Bean Vs Wheat – Journal Article http://jn.nutrition.org/content/128/1/35.full

This above article compares Mung Bean A-C to corn starch A-A and is a great read with a lot of links to mostly unavailable studies.

Thanks for bringing this up as I have often wondered WHY corn vs banana/potato vs bean causes different sugar/insulin response in animals, and now I know.

Sam87 · Answer 6 · 2012-11-07 11:01:20Z UTC

In response to the last post: The first two articles are both opinions, of 1 person, who does not provide any references. That is hardly scientifically convincing. The last article, while a scientific article, compares beans to wheat based on amylopectin:amylose ratio. In response to the theory in general: There is absolutely no evidence, ever, anywhere, to support this "super-starch"/"amylopectin-a" theory.

Greg Carveth · Answer 7 · 2013-01-18 18:20:20Z UTC

0

The only evidence that exists is the growing number of people who have lost weight and feel better about themselves and life in general after they stop eating wheat.

answered Jan 18 at 18:20

Greg Carveth
1

Mark Blue · Answer 8 · 2013-02-23 01:45:45Z UTC

At any level of study of a behavior, like eating wheat, you are going to get the results of an average human's reaction, and have to compare them to your own personal experience. So let's get to it! The suggestion here is not to go jump off a cliff, but to try leaving wheat out for awhile, and see what happens.

amylopectin-a and blood sugar

8 Answers