In reality, even though we watch our diet, blood sugar is not a perfect science. However it is known that some foods are more influential than others. These foods are mostly carbohydrates - and they can affect more than just our blood sugar. Carbohydrates can affect our moods and appetite through a neurotransmitter called serotonin.

Serotonin is unique in that it is indirectly controlled by foods, specifically carbohydrates. It's not surprising that eating foods like chocolate cake and potato chips can lift your spirits for a moment or two - but the aftermath doesn't always seem as exhilarating. This becomes a fattening trend, after a while. Why do we get a spiritual uplift from indulging in these no no yum yums?

There is an explanation for this fattening fix. Different sugars affect the brain in different ways. Beware of sugars that are more processed like: glucose, dextrose, and sucrose. These sugars enter the bloodstream quickly, reaching high levels in a short time. This triggers the release of large amounts of insulin. The evolution of man has not adapted for highly refined sugars. This type of sugar is quickly ushered to the cells. Depending on how active a person you are - this energy may not be used up and therefore results to fat storage. A good indicator to use when choosing carbs is the glycemic index. The lower you stay on the index, the less the overall impact on your blood sugar rise. Checkout Fifty50 glycemic index for a list of everyday foods.

Summer is here (from where I'm sitting -- in 90-plus degree temps -- it's Definitely here!), which means that it's beach season again. And while it's cool to float around the pool in an inner tube, looking like you ate one might not be the look you're going for this year. What's more, it's certainly not a healthy look, for an excess of abdominal fat can greatly raise a person's risk of developing type 2 diabetes. So, if this whole enlarged waist issue happens to be one to which you can relate, I've outlined some easy and healthy ways to help make this summer your healthiest ever.

1 - Cut Back on the Carbs. For people with type 2 diabetes, this is nothing new. The key, as you likely know, is to avoid refined carbs (pasta, white rice, candy, etc.) like the plague, as they will spike your insulin levels, leading to the storage of more fat. Stick to slower-digesting carb sources like vegetables and whole grains.

2 - Reduce Your Caloric Intake. This pretty basic tenet is one that people, for some reason or another, tend to be the worst at adhering to. For best results, try cutting about 20% of your normal caloric intake. This way, you don't run the risk of catabolizing muscle, too, by restricting your diet to too few calories. If you don't know how many calories you're currently consuming, start checking nutritional labels today. Or, you can visit www.fitday.com for a complete listing of how many calories are in some of your favorite foods. Then, once you've established how many calories you're currently eating, take that number and reduce it by 20%.

3 - Trim the Fat. Remember, fat is not always a bad thing. But, it's also important to bear in mind that for each gram of fat you consume, you're taking in 9 calories. So, without going too crazy, you may want to try cutting back your fat consumption by one-third. The best way to do this is to try low-fat versions of foods (providing they haven't upped the carb/sugar content to make up for the flavor void), eat leaner choices of meat and poultry, and skip a yoke now and again with your eggs. Be this all as it may, do not go as far as to neglect your body of the healthy fats found in fish, avocados, nuts, and olive oil.

4 - Go Pro. To make up for the small caloric deficit left by cutting back on fat and carbs, try eating a bit more protein. Because protein is relatively slow-digesting, it requires your body to burn more calories for it to be processed, thereby amping up your metabolic rate. Also, protein helps curb hunger by increasing certain peptide levels, which signal your brain that you are satiated.

5 - Eat More. Seems counterintuitive, doesn't it? The key is to make sure that you are eating small meals throughout the day. Gone are the days when three squares is the norm (that is, unless you're in prison). Most people by now are hip to the concept that eating five to six small meals at regularly scheduled times of the day is the best way to rev up your metabolism and burn more calories. This isn't to say that you have to eat like a bird all day. Breakfast and dinner, in particular, can still be larger in portion size (lunch can be sizeable, as well). But, you don't want to starve yourself in between those meal times. This is where the other small meals come into play. As a result, you won't end up gorging a few Big Macs for dinner because you're level of hunger won't necessitate such indulgence. Instead, you might opt for a small piece of fish or chicken and a side of vegetables.

I'm not a dietitian, nor have I ever played one on TV, so you may want to consult with a professional before making some or all of the above dietary changes. Still, in my personal opinion -- and based on years of experience with health and fitness -- I can say with confidence that these are healthy and effective ways to help deflate that inner tube of yours.

Eureka! I have just stumbled across the best explanation of Type 2 diabetes that I have ever read. The author is fitness enthusiast Mark Sisson and the entire text can be accessed at his website, Mark's Daily Apple. This is where Mark posts his blogs on health and fitness-related topics, and it also links into his online store, which sells nutritional supplements.

Mark does a great job of explaining what he calls the "Completely Unnecessary Disease Epidemic" - how Type 2 diabetes works and why the US Food and Drug Administration could be doing much more to help people avoid or minimize the disease's impact. We are overloading ourselves with carbohydrates and those carbs are poisoning us. Why? Because they are converted into sugars that our bodies just can't handle. In a detailed, yet easy-to-read and light-hearted way, Mark explains exactly how this occurs and his advice is simple: ignore the government's stodgy old food pyramid and cut those carbs. (Yes, I know, they've updated the food pyramid, but not enough to really address the problem, as far as I'm concerned.)

Mark, in fact, personally favors the "Stone Age" diet that did good things in a recent study involving overweight Type 2 diabetics. Click here to read more about that. He has even designed his own "Carb Pyramid," which you can view by clicking here. Mark happily describes his own food routine, and this is where he and I part ways because he says "I'm not really a pasta or pizza guy" and "I'm not much of a snacker." Must be nice...

After you've read his blog, Mark says, "Print this explanation out, stick it on your fridge, email it to your aunt. And put down the pasta." Oh, Mark, now you're just breaking my heart!

Yes, whole foods are good for your health. But maybe even better than you imagined. A Swedish study has concluded that a "Stone Age" diet is great for the health and could even prevent Type 2 diabetes. So what did people eat in the dark depths of prehistory? Well, a variety of foods, but nearly all of it was high in fiber, low in fat, fresh, and nearly unprocessed.

Scientists took a small group of fourteen glucose intolerant heart patients and put them on the diet of a lifetime: lean meat, fish, fruits, vegetables and nuts. This, it is assumed, is the sort of diet consumed by our Stone Age ancestors - hunter gatherers who lived around 70,000 years ago, long before the emergence of agriculture. Meanwhile, another group of patients with similar health issues were put on a supposedly healthy "Mediterranean diet" rich in whole grains, dairy, fruits and vegies, and unsaturated fats. Well, you guessed it. After twelve weeks, the researchers found those on the Stone Age diet had much more stable blood sugar levels and were better able to process carbohydrates without such major blood sugar fluctuations. In fact, all the Stone Age patients had normal blood glucose levels by the end of the study and also dropped a few pounds too. Those on the Mediterranean diet, however, experienced hardly any changes at all.

Admittedly, this is a very small-scale study. But the results are interesting nevertheless, and, I'd wager, not a huge shock to well-informed diabetics who understand the importance of curbing carb intake for better health. On the other hand, I was interested to note that the author of the study, Dr. Staffan Lindeberg, played down the "carb as culprit" angle, and instead emphasized the following simple rule for better health: avoid modern, processed foods.

Chicago has a long way to go when it comes to diabetes awareness amongst the general public, says pharmaceutical company Abbott. And if the picture in Chicago is representative of the nation as a whole, we should all be very concerned. Or should we? Yes, diabetes awareness - or lack thereof - is a problem. But is Abbott painting an overly pessimistic picture of the situation?

Abbott's comments about Chicago came as it announced the results of a poll sponsored to evaluate public understanding of diabetes in the city. The initiative was in preparation for the American Diabetes Association's Scientific Sessions, which begin June 22 in Chicago. (Abbott's North American home base is in Abbott Park, Illinois, near Chicago.)

Abbott's conclusion? Most people surveyed flunked out big-time when it came to basic facts like how diabetes affects the body and how the condition can be managed. The findings are as follows: twenty-eight percent of Chicagoans know little or nothing about diabetes, while thirty-five percent of non-diabetics say they are not prepared to manage diabetes should they themselves be diagnosed in the future. My view: the former is a problem, but at least it means a majority do know something about it. And what of the the latter (preparedness)? So what if many Average Joes say they're unprepared to deal with diabetes themselves. I'd bet very few people indeed would be prepared to manage a chronic condition with which they have not yet been diagnosed! Other findings portrayed by Abbott as problematic: twenty-three percent believe glucose monitoring involves pain, while eighteen percent believe diabetics cannot eat carbohydrates at all. Again, is the glass half empty or is it half full? Quite honestly, I'm pleasantly surprised that most of those polled know better. On the up-side, Abbott does acknowledge the good news that eighty-eight percent believe having diabetes does not necessarily preclude living a long and healthy life. Another factor to keep in mind: only five hundred people participated in the poll.

Bottom line: Abbott's press release paints an extremely, and I would say overly, dire picture of the situation. Yes, many people are still pretty darn ignorant about diabetes. They may not be able to write you an essay describing its exact cause or all the treatment options. However, most now grasp that it is a serious chronic condition. Is it hopelessly optimistic to believe that things can only get better from here?

If you're avoiding refined carbs, you probably already know that you should be. Whether it's because their effect on blood sugar is the reason, and/or if is more for the purpose of merely trying to eat healthier, avoiding starches such as white bread, rice, pasta and simple sugars such as sweets and juices is a smart move.

New evidence has surfaced connecting excessive refined carb consumption with an increased risk of kidney cancer. According to a study published in the International Journal of Cancer, when the diets of 767 kidney cancer patients and 1,534 healthy people were compared, it was discovered that patients who ate the most white bread (7 ounces or more daily) were almost twice as likely to have kidney cancer than those who ate 3.5 ounces or less.

Moreover, people who ate 2 or more cups of regular pasta were one-third more likely to have kidney cancer than those who ate half that much.

Foods such as white bread, regular pasta and other refined carbs cause glucose levels in the blood to spike, as most people with diabetes know. Being that insulin plays a significant role in the development of kidney cancer, the researchers knew where to look in making this connection.

Carbs, carbs, carbs -- yeah, we know all about carbs. There's so-called "good" ones and there are definitely "bad"ones. There are times when we need them, and there are times when we should probably steer clear of them altogether. People with diabetes know the carb better than just about anyone on the planet, but even they may not know something that researchers from the University of North Carolina recently discovered. Interested to know what they found? If so, meet me on the next paragraph.

Welcome back. So, what did the researchers find out about carbs? That by cutting back on them, you can relieve heartburn. According to the data, patients experienced a 44 percent reduction in the severity of their heartburn symptoms after spending a mere 4 days eating a reduced carbohydrate diet. In addition, the pain-inducing acid in each patient's esophagus decreased by an average of 60 percent.

Patients that returned to eating a higher-carb diet after the study found their heartburn to return, as well. As of this writing, the scientists involved in the study are unsure why reducing carbs worked to relieve heartburn, but further investigation into the correlation may soon reveal some answers.

Having been in the fitness game for quite some time now, I've seen and heard just about every claim (mostly false) possible by supplement manufacturers. "Lose 10 pounds in a week," "Gain 20 pounds of lean muscle," "Grow a curly mustache like former Milwaukee Brewers relief pitcher Rollie Fingers." Okay, perhaps I made up the last one, but it truly wouldn't surprise me if I saw a product on the shelf that claimed to do that very thing.

The craziest thing about the vast majority of these snake oils -- beside the fact that most of them don't work -- is how exorbitantly they are priced. But, what if I told you that there may be a product out there that can prevent our bodies from absorbing some of the calories and carbohydrates that we consume during a meal? And, what if I told you that you may very well already have it sitting in your kitchen cabinet? Still interested? Then read on.

Time for the unveiling of this super-product. Are you ready? Are you sure? Okay, here it is: Tea. Kind of anticlimactic, I know, but that doesn't take away from the apparent absorbent properties that black, green, and mulberry teas seem to possess. Research published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggests that drinking tea with a meal may cause your body to not absorb as much as 25 percent of the calories from that meal. While more studies on this fascinating discovery still need to be done, in the meantime it brings to bear the countless boxes of Earl Gray you have hidden in the back of your cabinets. And just in case the 25 percent absorption of calories didn't seem all that impressive to you, know that you could lose as much as 16 to 18 pound in year by reducing your caloric intake by this much.

The carb craze, just when will it end? Years ago, carbs were an essential part of a well-balanced, if athletic, diet. Olympic gold medal runners would eat massive pasta dinners the night before a big road race, swimmers would carbo-load before meets, and everyday people went as far as taking carb-rich nutritional supplements to get them through a workout or two. BUT, then came along diets with strange names, like Zone and Atkins, all claiming that carbs will cause you to gain weight. Soon, people were avoiding carbs like the plague and instead opting for extra sides of bacon. The madness ensued for quite some time, until the masses finally came around to the concept of "good" carbs and "bad" carbs, something that people with diabetes have long since been aware of.

But, there's some new evidence to suggest that not only are "good" carbs (i.e. carbs that are not high on the glycemic index) easier on blood sugar, but they may also lead to weight loss. The prevailing thought behind this assertion is actually quite simple: It takes longer to digest low GI foods, which therefore causes you to feel more full for a longer period of time, and also requires the burning of more calories to complete the digestion process.

In a related study, now published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, 129 overweight and obese people followed one of four reduced-calorie diets for 12 weeks. Two of the diets were high in carbs and two were high in protein, and of each of these two groups, one followed a low GI carb diet. The results? All groups lost weight (chalked up to the reduced-calorie diet itself), but the low GI diets lost nearly two times as much body fat.

Diabetic members of ethnic minority groups may face a dilemma when they compare their traditional diets and foods with what the doctor says they should be eating...and find there's much room for improvement. This is a big problem amongst Hispanic communities, but advice and assistance is out there for those who go looking. The Orlando Sentinal has published an article on this topic and profiles a Type 2 diabetic, Linda Landaverde (pictured) of Orlando. Landaverde knows that eating a lot of beans is a no-no because of the carbohydrates, but she says she just can't face a future of salads and fruit, as recommended by her doctors and nutritionists. What to do? Well, Landaverde started out by attending a Spanish language seminar on diabetes management, which provided some much-needed guidance and helped her make some healthful compromises to her diet. That way she has not been forced to give up all the foods she loves.

Apparently, food manufacturers who count Hispanics as important to their customer base are beginning to respond to a demand for healthier products too. This article cites the example of Goya, which has introduced light, no-sodium and low-sodium beans, and also has plans to launch a line of organic beans.

A great place for Hispanic web-searchers to begin looking for advice is the American Diabetes Association's Spanish-language page. There's a lot of info on there. Check it out!

Back in June I posted a blog about a Canadian family in which three out of four children have been diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes. That's unusual, to be sure. At the time, I wondered how many other families out there have had to deal with something like this. Well, there is at least one other one out there that turned up in a little Seattle Times local news item: The Watkins family of Bothell also consists of mom, dad and four kids and, again, three of the four have Type 1 diabetes. Daughter Austyn (now twenty-one) was diagnosed at age eleven. One year later, son Lucas (now seventeen) was also diagnosed at age ten. Later, son Jake (now eight) was diagnosed. The family's fourth child, Cole (eleven) so far shows no sign he's headed down the same path.

Mother Stephanie Watkins downplays the experience, saying it's just something you learn to manage day-by-day. "We don't feel sorry for ourselves. Everyone has something to cope with and this is ours. Taking care of diabetes has become natural, just like brushing our teeth." She even says there's been an up-side to the situation: "Our kids are good at math because they have to calculate their carbohydrates and insulin ratio." Wow, how about that for a great attitude? On the other hand, this is a mom who has been dealing with this for ten years. I guess you make your peace with it and become super-pragmatic.

Good news for devotees of the glycemic index, a technique used for assessing the carbohydrates contained in meals: a study has confirmed that it works. Not only that, the glycemic index has also been found to be effective at predicting blood sugar levels after meals.

The study was carried out by researchers at the University of Toronto and results have been published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The researchers got together a small bunch of willing participants in Sydney and Toronto for the study, had them eat several test meals, and then measured their post-meal blood sugar levels. The results showed a close correlation between carb content, glycemic index and variations in blood sugar levels.

Says Dr. Thomas M. S. Wolever, an author of the study, "The good news is that the glycemic index works. For sensible people it makes a lot of sense."

I was just reading about Camp Kudzu, one of these wonderful-sounding camps for kids with diabetes. This particular camp is in the Atlanta area. People involved with the camp describe why it's such a great thing for their kids. No, it's not just about having fun and bonding with other diabetic kids...although that is a big part of diabetes camp. It's also about education, but with a practical emphasis. Kids can practice in groups, day-after-day, all the ins and outs of testing their blood sugar and administering insulin -- everything involved in managing diabetes. This is a big relief for moms and dads, just to know their children have that knowledge to fall back on so they're used to not being totally dependent on their parents for their diabetes needs.

Every day the kids check their blood sugar before lunch. They then choose from an array of foods, with each food item being assigned a carbohydrate number. After lunch, camp counselors help the children to add up the total number of carbs they've consumed and evaluate their choices. This is helpful just in itself, but the environment also helps. They can test and talk openly in groups without anyone coming up asking questions or whatever.

My only question is, why name a kids' summer camp after a noxious weed that's choking up the countryside?! Hmm.

A new University of South Carolina (USC) study indicates that the Glycemic Index (GI), a popular tool ranking carbs' ability to affect blood sugar levels, may not help people determine the foods they should eat. The USC study, funded by the National Institutes of Health, suggests that the GI is a limiting tool because the numbers in the index are based on strictly controlled settings -- namely, that blood-sugar levels are recorded two hours after ingesting test foods and after a person has fasted overnight. The study argues that many factors can affect food's impact on glucose levels, like how long the food is cooked and other foods eaten at the same time. When USC researchers followed 1,000 participants' overall blood-glucose levels and diets (with low and high GI's) over five years, they found that a diet's GI was not related to any of the measures of blood glucose. This means that the GI is probably not picking up the specific effects of food on blood glucose.

But here's the good (if not common sense) news: Several recent studies show that dietary fiber is important to diabetes, and foods high in fiber typically have a relatively low GI. So, in some studies, the GI may have been related to good health because of dietary fiber, not because of a unique, artificial number assigned through the glycemic index. Once again, here's the common sense part: If we eat a diet low in saturated fat that includes whole grains, fiber, fruits and veggies -- and maintain moderate, consistent physical activity -- this will support diabetes control and weight management. It's not new news but it certainly bears repeating.