

Spreadsheet of the glycemic indices of 4,000 foods as measured by the NCI [xls] - carbocation
http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/DHQ/database/gi_values.csfii_94-96_foodcodes.xls

======
carbocation
More details for the interested:
<http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/tools/glycemic/>

------
herdrick
Sigh. Glycemic index doesn't really tell the story.

Eat whole foods, avoid sugar.

~~~
carbocation
While the glycemic index doesn't tell the whole story, it is more actionable
in today's environment than "eat whole foods, avoid sugar." There are plenty
of whole foods that are little better than sugar, and some processed foods
that are not horrible. Plus, if you don't have the luxury of eating whole
foods for each meal, the glycemic index can help you choose the lesser among
evil alternatives. That something is imperfect does not make it useless.

~~~
tomsaffell
I looked at the list, and now I'm more confused. Can you explain how ground
pork can go from the bottom of the list to the top just by breading it? (0 to
95). How does adding <10% bread (by weight) do that?

    
    
      Pork, ground or patty, cooked	                 0.0
      Pork, ground or patty, breaded, cooked	95.0

~~~
carbocation
Great question. I can't say for sure. I can try to back-of-the-envelope it,
though. Normal glucose is below 100mg/dL, and you have 5L of blood. This means
you only have ~5g of glucose in your blood at any given time, so a very small
amount of glucose absorbed as a bolus could conceivably have a strong effect.
This is/should be fairly tightly regulated by insulin, so I can't say for sure
that this isn't simply a lab error, but it does seem plausible.

------
keefe
interesting, looks legit. I love posts like this, just here's something useful
that I'm really unlikely to come upon on my own.

------
arvindnatarajan
As an online spreadsheet - <http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/sFTcP>

