- advertisement -

Dreamfield Pasta vs Regular Pasta (a study)

Discussion in 'Parents of Children with Type 1' started by frizzyrazzy, Jan 31, 2011.

  1. frizzyrazzy

    frizzyrazzy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    14,141
  2. shekov

    shekov Approved members

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,382
    Thanks for sharing this. I've always wndered if there truely were a difference.
     
  3. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Hmm.
    Does this discredit those of us who think we see a difference, or discredit studies? :p
    This stuff is always so hard, because anectdotal is so subjective. But I find so much about diabetes is unavoidably subjective.
     
  4. nanhsot

    nanhsot Approved members

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,626
    Yeah, this! I have found that my son can dose for a MUCH lower carb amount uisng the dreamfield, so it's worth it to him, and he sees absolutely no spike whatsoever. He takes insulin based upon 10 per cup vs 40 per cup, which is significant. I'm assuming that FOR HIM, if the dreamfield didn't process in his body differently he would see some wacky highs, but nope.

    He's big into eating low carb, so he prefers that brand to standard pastas.

    Interesting though.
     
  5. AlisonKS

    AlisonKS Approved members

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,391
    interesting, but there are more than dreamfields-we've been using different types like brown rice, spinach, etc.
     
  6. chbarnes

    chbarnes Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,215
    This is a pretty small study, but very interesting. I assume the manufacturer calculated the glycemic index rather than performing clinical trials. I think this may also call into question the other low GI foods on the shelf.
     
  7. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Wait, I just looked, I don't understand the study. It tracked bg levels in nondiabetics, right? Aren't those going to stay steady because the glucose enters the cells and leaves the bloodstream before there can be a rise? I don't understand. :confused:
     
  8. sarahspins

    sarahspins Approved members

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,205
    Yes, this is what I am wondering too.. for a non-D the glycemic response may very well be "identical" compared to regular pasta, but you would expect that anyways! I think it would be interesting to do a study on PWD's to see how THEY respond to it.
     
  9. hawkeyegirl

    hawkeyegirl Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    13,157
    Well, in my own little sample size of one, we see a difference, but they're both equally hard to dose for. Since the pasta he will get in the "real world" will almost inevitably be regular old pasta, that's where I've decided to concentrate my energy in figuring it out.
     
  10. ROVERT81402

    ROVERT81402 Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,258
    Dreamfields definitely works for us. If Trevor eats regular pasta, he has a delayed high, every time. We haven't seen one since we started using the Dreamfields.
     
  11. wilf

    wilf Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    9,652
    It's looking like a bogus "study"..
     
  12. frizzyrazzy

    frizzyrazzy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    14,141
    I'm not sure why you think it's a bogus study.

    Just because they didn't study what you want them to study (blood sugar in diabetics) doesn't mean their results are incorrect. They simply are reporting on 10 participants and their findings which are contrary to the claims that Dreamfields is making. Perhaps a study of people with diabetes wold find a different outcome. Still wouldn't make this study bogus though.
     
  13. Sarah Maddie's Mom

    Sarah Maddie's Mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    12,521
    Excellent point.
     
  14. wilf

    wilf Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    9,652
    And just how are their findings contrary to the claims that Dreamfields is making?
     
  15. frizzyrazzy

    frizzyrazzy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    14,141
    If you follow the links in the study you can see where Dreamfields makes the following claim: "All of these qualities translate into a lower blood glucose rise after eating Dreamfields as compared to eating the same amount of traditional white pasta. "
     
  16. wilf

    wilf Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    9,652
    Here's why I have a problem with the study results as reported:

    1) The key to the Dreamfield's claim of lower GI and digestible carbs is how the pasta is prepared.

    Quoting from their website:
    "Q. Does overcooking Dreamfields increase the pasta?s digestible carbs?
    A. For all of Dreamfields pasta shapes, we recommend cooking the pasta as directed on the carton, in boiling water for the appropriate time depending on the shape. It is very important not to overcook Dreamfields because over cooking can damage the protective matrix and increase the digestible carbs per serving. We also recommend pouring any sauce over the pasta just before serving."

    It obviously matters greatly how the Dreamfields pasta is prepared, which makes sense. It is well known that the glycemic index and glycemic load of various foods (eg. rice is a classic example) increases the longer you cook them.


    2) The study authors do not indicate that they prepared the pastas as directed by Dreamfields. This point is important enough that I am confident that they would have mentioned it if they'd done it. Instead the study's authors simply say:
    "When the first five subjects were studied using the same cooking method for both products, the Dreamfields pasta did not result in a smaller glucose rise."

    Note they don't say "using the cooking method specified by Dreamfields for both products".

    *****

    For me as a scientist a bogus study is one in which a likely to be false hypothesis is set up and tested, with the test results confirming the hypothesis was false. When products are involved, this sort of "testing" can be incredibly damaging to the company involved and cost great sums to refute/correct. It's irresponsible behavior by the "scientists" involved.
     
  17. frizzyrazzy

    frizzyrazzy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    14,141
    you could write to the authors and ask what cooking method they used. :)
     
  18. thebestnest5

    thebestnest5 Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,001
    We've never tried Dreamfield pasta because of this reason.
     
  19. DsMom

    DsMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,700
    I love Dreamfields! Instead of 42 g per 2 oz for regular pasta, I only bolus him for 5 g per 2 oz of pasta--and it works as advertised for us. Now, he can have bread with his spaghetti and have the same amount of spaghetti as everyone else without worrying about super highs.

    I didn't really understand this study either--just know it works for us.
     
  20. wilf

    wilf Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    9,652
    Do you follow the cooking instructions on the package?
     

Share This Page

- advertisement -

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice