Visit the Microscopic Colitis Foundation Website
Tex,
I ran across this product and thought about it's effectiveness for DH, who has diabetes.
http://store.honeyvillegrain.com/hi-mai ... fiber.aspx
However, I don't think it would be good for MC because it is high-fiber.
Have you heard of it? Do you think it could help with diabetes?
Gloria
Hi-maize Resistant Starch
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
Hi-maize Resistant Starch
You never know what you can do until you have to do it.
Gloria,
That's a product made from high amylose corn. Normal corn varieties contain roughly 75 percent amylopectin and 25 percent amylose. Amylopectin is a form of starch which consists of branched glucose molecules, (which is easily digested), whereas amylose is made up of unbranched glucose molecules, (which is resistant to digestion). High-amylose corn is referred to by the generic term, "amylomaize", in the industry, and it's generally defined as corn that has an amylose content higher than 50%, (IOW, twice the amylose content of ordinary corn). High-amylose corn is grown exclusively for wet-milling. The starch from high-amylose corn is primarily used in textiles, candies and adhesives. Evidently, Hi-maize 260 contains 60% amylose, and 40% amylopectin.
http://nutritiondietnews.com/positive-i ... ch/853951/
As far as I'm aware, there have been no feeding trials conducted with livestock, using high-amylose corn, because, unlike the other specialty corns, there would be no apparent benefit derived from using it, in terms of weight gains - (IOW, livestock are fed rations designed to maximize the rate of gain, per pound of feed, or per dollar spent on feed, and no feeder would be interested in feeding a low-efficiency ration). That means that this product is of interest only for human use.
In the small intestine, amylose is broken down by water and pancreatic amylase, to produce a mixture of glucose and maltose.
There is at least one inconsistency in these articles which bothers me, and that can be found in the following statement from the article that you cited:
Anyway, my point is that soluble fibers can be fermented in the colon, (typically producing gas, and possibly cramps), but insoluble fibers cannot be digested, even by fermentation - they pass through the entire GI tract intact, (unaltered from their original form). So which is it? Does hi-maize 260 contain soluble fiber, (which ferments in the colon), or insoluble fiber, which is not digestible and not fermentable. They seem to be talking in riddles, which shakes my confidence a little, and makes me wonder if they really know what they're talking about.
Anyway, despite all of the above discussion, the product appears to provide a way to decrease the digestibility of corn starch, which presumably would naturally lower it's glycemic index, by making some of the sugar unavailable. I'm not a baker, but since corn starch doesn't seem to have any qualities that might enhance the elasticity and/or strength of dough, to begin with, why not just replace part of the corn starch with a source of refined fiber, or another starch with a lower glycemic index. Wouldn't that yield roughly the same result, at a much lower ingredient cost?
That appears to be a pretty expensive product, but if it works well, I suppose it might be worth it.
All the research claims are based on a prediabetic condition - I don't understand why diabetes itself is not considered. I can understand why the product ad wouldn't mention that, since the FDA would consider it as an unregistered drug, if they were to make that claim, but I'm wondering why the research didn't include a study on subjects with preexisting diabetes.
This claim also bothers me:
Hi-maize promotes digestive health. The fiber in Hi-maize is fermented within the large intestine and encourages the growth of friendly bacteria (a "prebiotic" fiber).
I have no idea how prebiotics work for someone with diabetes, but as we are aware, they don't generally work very well for someone with MC. I agree with you, that all the talk of "fermentation in the colon" would seem to raise a big red flag for someone with MC.
On the other hand, FWIW, here is one fan's personal endorsement:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carole-ca ... 41485.html
It's claimed that resistant starch contains a "third" type of fiber, which is neither soluble nor insoluble. If so, why don't they call it a third type of starch, rather than calling it insoluble, and then claiming that it can be fermented in the colon?
Here's what Wikipedia says about resistant starches:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch
So I dunno - I haven't had any experience with it, but for all I know, it might be good stuff for someone with diabetes. I would be much happier about it if the research that they provide actually covered subjects who have diabetes.
Tex
That's a product made from high amylose corn. Normal corn varieties contain roughly 75 percent amylopectin and 25 percent amylose. Amylopectin is a form of starch which consists of branched glucose molecules, (which is easily digested), whereas amylose is made up of unbranched glucose molecules, (which is resistant to digestion). High-amylose corn is referred to by the generic term, "amylomaize", in the industry, and it's generally defined as corn that has an amylose content higher than 50%, (IOW, twice the amylose content of ordinary corn). High-amylose corn is grown exclusively for wet-milling. The starch from high-amylose corn is primarily used in textiles, candies and adhesives. Evidently, Hi-maize 260 contains 60% amylose, and 40% amylopectin.
The only study I can find on this particular product, (for the purpose of evaluating it's suitability in the diets of prediabetic men), was underwritten by Corn Products International. Note that in the study, (strangely), the product showed no benefits for prediabetic women:Hi-maize 260 resistant starch contains approximately 60% resistant starch (insoluble dietary fiber) and 40% digestible (glycemic) starch content.
http://nutritiondietnews.com/positive-i ... ch/853951/
As far as I'm aware, there have been no feeding trials conducted with livestock, using high-amylose corn, because, unlike the other specialty corns, there would be no apparent benefit derived from using it, in terms of weight gains - (IOW, livestock are fed rations designed to maximize the rate of gain, per pound of feed, or per dollar spent on feed, and no feeder would be interested in feeding a low-efficiency ration). That means that this product is of interest only for human use.
In the small intestine, amylose is broken down by water and pancreatic amylase, to produce a mixture of glucose and maltose.
There is at least one inconsistency in these articles which bothers me, and that can be found in the following statement from the article that you cited:
And in the following quote copied from above, (taken from the article that I cited):It resists digestion in the small intestine and is fermented within the large intestine.
Now, I realize that there is a class of arbitrarily-defined, (IMO), "functional fibers", as noted in the quote taken from Wikipedia, below, but really, from a structural, (chemical), standpoint, there is a lot of difference between fibers, and indigestible starches. Just because something is indigestible, does not make a fiber, (certain sugar substitutes fall into this category, for example, and they are most definitely not fibers). Some proteins also fall into this category, such as the gliadins and glutelins in wheat, for example, which are indigestible, but that doesn't make them fibers.Hi-maize 260 resistant starch contains approximately 60% resistant starch (insoluble dietary fiber) and 40% digestible (glycemic) starch content.
Anyway, my point is that soluble fibers can be fermented in the colon, (typically producing gas, and possibly cramps), but insoluble fibers cannot be digested, even by fermentation - they pass through the entire GI tract intact, (unaltered from their original form). So which is it? Does hi-maize 260 contain soluble fiber, (which ferments in the colon), or insoluble fiber, which is not digestible and not fermentable. They seem to be talking in riddles, which shakes my confidence a little, and makes me wonder if they really know what they're talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_fiberDietary fiber, dietary fibre or sometimes roughage is the indigestible portion of plant foods having two main components:
* soluble (prebiotic, viscous) fiber that is readily fermented in the colon into gases and physiologically active byproducts, and
* insoluble fiber that is metabolically inert, absorbing water as it moves through the digestive system, easing defecation.[1]
It acts by changing the nature of the contents of the gastrointestinal tract, and by changing how other nutrients and chemicals are absorbed.[2] Soluble fiber absorbs water to become a gelatinous, viscous substance and is fermented by bacteria in the digestive tract. Insoluble fiber has bulking action and is not fermented.[3] Although a major dietary insoluble fiber source, lignin may alter the fate and metabolism of soluble fibers.[1]
Chemically, dietary fiber consists of non-starch polysaccharides such as arabinoxylans, cellulose and many other plant components such as resistant dextrins, inulin, lignin, waxes, chitins, pectins, beta-glucans and oligosaccharides.[1] A novel position has been adopted by the US Department of Agriculture to include functional fibers as isolated fiber sources that may be included in the diet.[1] The term "fiber" is something of a misnomer, since many types of so-called dietary fiber are not fibers at all.
Food sources of dietary fiber are often divided according to whether they provide (predominantly) soluble or insoluble fiber. Plant foods contain both types of fiber in varying degrees, according to the plant's characteristics.
Advantages of consuming fiber are the production of healthful compounds during the fermentation of soluble fiber, and insoluble fiber's ability (via its passive hygroscopic properties) to increase bulk, soften stool and shorten transit time through the intestinal tract.
Disadvantages of a diet high in fiber is the potential for significant intestinal gas production and bloating. Constipation can occur if insufficient fluid is consumed with a high-fiber diet.
Anyway, despite all of the above discussion, the product appears to provide a way to decrease the digestibility of corn starch, which presumably would naturally lower it's glycemic index, by making some of the sugar unavailable. I'm not a baker, but since corn starch doesn't seem to have any qualities that might enhance the elasticity and/or strength of dough, to begin with, why not just replace part of the corn starch with a source of refined fiber, or another starch with a lower glycemic index. Wouldn't that yield roughly the same result, at a much lower ingredient cost?
That appears to be a pretty expensive product, but if it works well, I suppose it might be worth it.All the research claims are based on a prediabetic condition - I don't understand why diabetes itself is not considered. I can understand why the product ad wouldn't mention that, since the FDA would consider it as an unregistered drug, if they were to make that claim, but I'm wondering why the research didn't include a study on subjects with preexisting diabetes.
This claim also bothers me:
Hi-maize promotes digestive health. The fiber in Hi-maize is fermented within the large intestine and encourages the growth of friendly bacteria (a "prebiotic" fiber).
I have no idea how prebiotics work for someone with diabetes, but as we are aware, they don't generally work very well for someone with MC. I agree with you, that all the talk of "fermentation in the colon" would seem to raise a big red flag for someone with MC.
On the other hand, FWIW, here is one fan's personal endorsement:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carole-ca ... 41485.html
It's claimed that resistant starch contains a "third" type of fiber, which is neither soluble nor insoluble. If so, why don't they call it a third type of starch, rather than calling it insoluble, and then claiming that it can be fermented in the colon?
Here's what Wikipedia says about resistant starches:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch
So I dunno - I haven't had any experience with it, but for all I know, it might be good stuff for someone with diabetes. I would be much happier about it if the research that they provide actually covered subjects who have diabetes.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Thank you for your usual very thorough explanation.
It looks like it can't hurt, but possibly can help a diabetic keep glucose levels stable, particularly in baked products. I don't normally use cornstarch in gluten baked goods, so this would be different. I've been baking DH almond flour muffins, and they are very low in carbohydrates. I'll have to think about this.
I'm at DD's in Utah this week - I'll look into this more once I'm home.
Gloria
It looks like it can't hurt, but possibly can help a diabetic keep glucose levels stable, particularly in baked products. I don't normally use cornstarch in gluten baked goods, so this would be different. I've been baking DH almond flour muffins, and they are very low in carbohydrates. I'll have to think about this.
I'm at DD's in Utah this week - I'll look into this more once I'm home.
Gloria
You never know what you can do until you have to do it.