Ismael Galancho, dietitian and author of 'Balance your glucose': "We blame carbohydrates for the damage that affluence and sedentary lifestyle have done"

Cristina Galafate

Updated Friday, March 1, 2024-02:07

• Luis Suárez and Antonella Rocuzzo's dietitian: "Junk food is the easiest and fastest way to get dopamine"

• Nutrition This is the order in which you should eat foods so that they feel good

• Jessie Inchauspé The 'goddess of glucose': "Breakfast should not be a dessert"

After inviting us to stop living on a diet in his previous book, in

Balance your glucose

(Ed. Grijalbo)

Ismael Galancho

(Málaga, November 11, 1984) wants us to avoid metabolic alterations to

enjoy full health

.

This specialist in nutritional planning, professor at several universities,

clinical sports dietician

for a long list of influential and elite figures, physical trainer, researcher and disseminator, member of the Spanish Society for the Study of Obesity (SEEDO) and writer explains in these new pages the thesis that chronic alteration of blood glucose is the

basis of many diseases

today.

"Together with inflammation and oxidative stress, they are the horsemen of the apocalypse."

Malaga dietician Ismael Galancho.EM

Now, to have correct control of insulin in the blood, you have to clear your mind of a lot of misinformation.

For example,

the belief that carbohydrates make us fat

or are to blame for all our ills.

"Many of the things they tell us on social networks or on the internet even work against us, such as adding fat left and right with the idea of ​​​​reducing the glucose peak. In the short term you are happy, but in the long term you increase body fat and you alter blood glucose over time no matter how few carbohydrates you eat," says the professional.

As was done with fats in recent decades, is the same mistake being made by demonizing carbohydrates?

Yes, without a doubt, we are blaming carbohydrates for the damage that affluence and sedentary lifestyle have done.

In fact, many nutritionists agree that

carbophobia is emerging: the fear of consuming carbohydrates

.

We see it a lot in consultation and, although it is unfounded, in the most extreme cases, it is becoming a mental health problem.

Can a macronutrient be so bad? Carbohydrates are accused of being responsible for overweight and obesity, diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease or cancer and this is not the case.

These are all

multifactorial

problems , not from the carbohydrates themselves, not even when there is an excess.

Lately there has been talk that whole grains are not the same as refined grains.

Do people really understand that all carbohydrates are not equal? ​​Not at all and that is one of the problems.

If you ask anyone what carbohydrates are, they will recite a list of industrial and ultra-processed pastries.

But sugars are only one type of carbohydrate, which also includes foods such as legumes, fruits, whole grains, vegetables... There is not a single study that tells you that consuming whole

grains, fruits and vegetables

causes any health problems. obesity or diabetes.

Scientific evidence tells you that these foods help the opposite. In his book he makes a very graphic comparison between glucose and exercise, which is not bad even if it raises the heart rate.

When is that spike harmful then? As many authors have talked about glucose spikes, it seems that they are bad, but they have to occur after meals.

Now, like everything in our body, in its correct magnitude.

The same happens with cholesterol or heart rate.

When to worry?

We would have to look at two parameters:

the magnitude in which it rises and the time

it takes to return to its basal level. And how do we know that? If it takes a long time to go down, that is, the glucose peak is maintained, it is an indication that something is wrong.

But if I eat a paella or a pizza with a friend and my glucose spike goes up, it is normal because I have eaten a lot of carbohydrates.

Something specific is not symptomatic.

It has to be

chronic and maintained over time

.

If it returns to normal after two or three hours, my body has good insulin sensitivity and it means that I am healthy.

If it takes five hours, on the other hand, I'm having a hard time regulating that meal. Why do we usually relate insulin to fat accumulation? Because the physiology is not understood.

They tell you that when you eat, glucose rises, and that when there is insulin in the blood, you accumulate fat and inhibit burning.

So we thought: okay, since carbohydrates are the macronutrient that increases insulin the most, they are bad and make you fat.

It is true that insulin stores energy for when there is no energy, for example, between meals, when you exercise, when fasting... How is it stored?

In the form of glycogen in the muscle and, if there is an excess of carbohydrate intake or we are sedentary and our stores are full, they do become fat.

Still, that does not mean that you will get a belly from eating carbohydrates, because fat can be burned with exercise and the increase can be specific, just when you eat.

Your body uses fats as a source of energy. What determines whether we accumulate fat at the end of the day? It is not carbohydrates, but

excess calories from the diet.

You will never use up reserves if you eat a lot and don't exercise.

But, if you are in debt, it doesn't matter if you eat a lot of carbohydrates because your body will use them.

It's like when you collect your payroll, you have a thousand euros in the bank and you don't get paid for a month and you spend.

If you spend more than you earn, you won't be able to save.

In a caloric deficit, spending more than you eat, you cannot accumulate fat. To achieve this caloric deficit, many people live on a diet or compensate.

What difference does the flexible approach you propose make? That you are in a deficit to lose fat is a physiological concept.

A law of the universe.

This balance that our body makes should not be confused with living on a diet or counting calories.

You can simply change the chocolate Neapolitan or croissant for breakfast for a bowl of oatmeal, for example, and you will start to lose weight.

But that is not being on a diet, but rather modifying caloric and nutritionally low-dense foods for others that are more satiating and beneficial.

You just have to know that by eating less than what we spend we will lose weight.

And this can be achieved indirectly, by increasing the consumption of vegetables and whole grains or legumes, although the ideal is to have a nutritionist, but if we do not have a professional, simply with foods with lower energy density and more satiating.

In the long run, it's not all going to be chicken and broccoli.

How is balanced flexibility achieved? At times we can include high-calorie or not-so-healthy foods, but always in a controlled and timely manner.

I follow

the 80-20 rule.

.

80% healthy food and 20% other foods that we like more will not ruin our progress.

And with that adherence we will be able to maintain it for a lifetime, which would be ideal. What is true in the strategies proposed in the book, such as adding apple cider vinegar before the meal, eating the vegetables first or covering a fruit with yogurt? ?It's like supplements: there is no point in taking creatine if you don't do sports and your diet is rubbish.

The effect is zero.

This is the same.

What good is a shot of vinegar before eating if you have a pizza afterwards?

All that is the tip of the iceberg.

We focus on that as if it were the most important thing, when it is the icing on the cake.

The real impact of all this on the blood

does not make much sense if we do not first control other variables

.

Like which ones?Maintain an adequate body composition, that is, not having a lot of fat accumulated at the visceral and ectopic level [around the heart and along the main coronary branches].

Exercise, mainly

strength training

.

And have an adequate energy balance, that is, not have chronic overeating.

It is also important to reduce poor quality foods and enhance good ones.

With this you do 90%, although it also affects sleep or stress control, but focusing only on food. The book includes the shot of vinegar. Of course, I include it because the scientific evidence says that it does have an impact, although minimal .

But if you think that's the most important thing, people

keep the shot of vinegar before eating but then go up the elevator

, you understand?

Like someone who doesn't eat red meat because it causes cancer but smokes a pack of tobacco a day.

You have to explain the magnitude of things.

I add the vinegar, yes, but if you understand the studies, it is true that the control group that takes the vinegar has a lower glucose peak compared to the one that does not, but in both groups after two hours it returns to its same basal state .

Therefore, it is not very relevant.

And the vegetables thing beforehand is fine and we already do it by culture even on the roadside menu that includes salad first, but not to the point of

deconstructing a sandwich

by removing the lettuce, then the chicken and lastly the bread.

That's idiotic.

What myths surround carbohydrates?

One of the myths about carbohydrates is that they make you fat.

, which are transformed into fat if we eat a lot while we are already eating fat directly through the mouth, and insulin, which is not well understood how it works.

The hypothesis of obesity as a carbohydrate-insulin is already more than dismantled at a scientific level. Why is it said that they gain weight then?

Since carbohydrates are the macronutrient that raises the blood glucose level the most, therefore, carbohydrates are bad and cause diabetes.

The usual thing when there are high blood glucose levels is that you are a sedentary person who eats more than you spend and accumulates fat.

Carbohydrates, first, have to be carbohydrates, and not just sugars, and then

eat them in relation to the physical activity

we do. They are very necessary for elite athletes, right? Look, high performance people usually have

health problems from eating less carbohydrates

than they need: the energy deficiency syndrome that many athletes have and that causes insomnia, injuries, irritability, amenorrhea and osteoporosis in the case of women...Now there is an evolutionary trend that banishes carbohydrates, what do you think? ?It is an insult to anthropology.

It is thought that the paleo-evolutionary diet is the absence of carbohydrates and that our ancestors only ate fat and protein, when this is a lie.

The agricultural revolution was 10,000 years ago, but there is evidence of previous mortars, only that from then on their consumption increased, but we have been eating cereals for many more years.

Societies that only eat meat and fat are very few, such as the Inuit Eskimos, who live in the Arctic, and have existed for 9,000 years.

Human beings are adapted to different types of diet.

There are as many evolutionary diets as there are tribes in the world.

You can be healthy by eating 70% carbohydrates, or by eating fat and protein, like the Maasai, who feed on cow's milk, meat and blood.

There are many patterns. And in developed countries with our current lifestyle, how should we eat according to scientific evidence? Mainly we should eat

70% vegetables

, and that does not mean being vegan, because in addition to vegetables there are legumes, whole grains, tubers, fruit, nuts... And the remaining 30% of food of animal origin: dairy products, eggs, meat and fish.

Lifelong Mediterranean diet

.

That is the good eating pattern.

Do you want to eat 80% or 60% vegetables?

You can also be healthy.

And in animals we should prioritize white meat, oily fish rich in Omega 3 and fermented dairy products, which are very good.

You can never go wrong with the Mediterranean diet patterns. We are seeing a lot of people who don't have diabetes putting on patches to measure glucose. Is it useful or can it lead us to obsession? My feelings are mixed, because they contribute to making us think. to healthy people who are sick.

This helps to

weaken the population

.

But, on the other hand, I also think that everyone is free and if you care about your health and want to buy a sensor with your money and monitor it, that's up to you.

But you have to know that there are many things that alter glucose peaks, and you can do a blood test but, if you don't know how to interpret it, it is of little use to you.

The doctor explains it, we cannot do a self-diagnosis because you will make a mistake and your diet will worsen.

I keep

seeing cases in which their

diet worsens because of things they see on social media.

An example is someone who covers carbohydrates with peanut butter, which is fine, but their calories skyrocket because fats are higher in calories.

You must have training to understand glucose peaks and adjust your diet.

Balance your glucose

is published by Grijalbo and you can buy it here