White potatoes......bad ??
 

A nutritionally hip friend insists that white potatoes are a hypoglycemic crime and a nutritional disaster. Like eating white bread. I enjoy (low fat prepared) white potatoes a few times a week.....how unwise am I being? Is there any good in potatoes to balance whatever damage they may do?

I think as with everything them being labeled as "bad" is an over reaction to people eating too much. In moderation I don't think it's any worse then other foods.

Certainly, compared to other simple-carb foods, potatoes are one of the best.

They contain a decent amount or Iron, vitamin C, calcium and antioxidants. Of the different varieties the Russet potato is one of the best.

Potatoes have a high glycemic index, so if that bothers you, some other carbohydrate might be more satisfying.

As far as being a "nutritional disaster, just put some butter, sour cream, cheese, and bacon bits on the potato and you'll add plenty of nutrition.

Well, white potatoes do have a pretty high glycemic index, so you don't want to eat a lot of them. But it's not quite as simple as that - glycemic index is moderated based the other foods that you eat at the same time.

So, now and then is okay.

It's also true that glycemic index isn't as big of a deal for endurance athletes because they are considerably less prone to metabolic syndrome and type II diabetes, but too much high-glycemic foods can compromise weight loss, if that's one of your goals.

unless you eat the potato in a fasted state gi is no concern. Baked potato comes out top of the sateity (fullness) index anyway

White potatoes don't have enough nutritional value packed in. I prefer the yellow potato sticks served at a quaint little Irish restaurant.

I switched to sweet potatos about a year ago and I think they are much better for you. I read somewhere to stay away from anything white, sugar, flour, potatos, etc.

From a recent article on msn (actually, the link is still there):

Myth #2: "Sweet potatoes are better for you than white potatoes."

The origin: Because most Americans eat the highly processed version of the white potato—for instance, french fries and potato chips—consumption of this root vegetable has been linked to obesity and an increased diabetes risk. Meanwhile, sweet potatoes, which are typically eaten whole, have been celebrated for being rich in nutrients and also having a lower glycemic index than their white brethren.

What science really shows: White potatoes and sweet potatoes have complementary nutritional differences; one isn't necessarily better than the other. For instance, sweet potatoes have more fiber and vitamin A, but white potatoes are higher in essential minerals, such as iron, magnesium, and potassium. As for the glycemic index, sweet potatoes are lower on the scale, but baked white potatoes typically aren't eaten without cheese, sour cream, or butter. These toppings all contain fat, which lowers the glycemic index of a meal.

The bottom line: The form in which you consume a potato—for instance, a whole baked potato versus a processed potato that's used to make chips—is more important than the type of spud.

i LOVE sweet potatoes...they're also very high in vitamin A, like all yellow vegetables.

The protein in potatoes is useful for athletes. It's basically OK if you are not on a low glycemic diet.

I think they get the rap for the butter and sour cream more than anything in the potato itself.

One thing I like to do is take a white potato and a white sweet potato and mash them together.

They say that yellow veggies are good for a cancer fighter.

I had to look this up, if your looking for beta-carotene, vitamin A, fiber, vitamin C and B6 with some minerals, eat a sweet potato.

i was gonna quote that! Alan is a great nutritionist.

You can't go wrong with cooked acorn squash.