This White Rice Variety Is The Healthiest
There are many varieties of rice, each with specific characteristics, which means that some are better than others for different dishes—and that rice varieties notably differ in their nutritional properties as well. Basmati, a long-grain white rice from India, is especially popular with athletes due to properties that distinguish it from 'normal' white rice.
What is the difference between 'normal' rice and basmati rice?
Basmati rice is characterized by it's narrow, long-grain shape, which extends when cooked. Other varieties of rice have more of an oval shape and fuller grains that tend to clump together. Basmati rice is less refined than white rice, so it retains more fiber and nutrients. It also has a lower glycemic index than other varieties of white rice and is easier to digest. Basmati rice additionally retains seasoning better and has a distinctly richer aroma.
Basmati rice's nutritional properties
The nutritional numbers for 100 grams of cooked basmati rice are:
Carbohydrates: 27 grams
Protein: 2.5 grams
Fats: 0.3g
Fiber: 0.4 grams
Vitamins: contains B vitamins
Minerals: provide iron, zinc, magnesium, and phosphorus
Basmati rice's glycemic index
Basmati rice has a lower glycemic index than other types of white rice, which helps prevent sudden spikes in blood sugar. Glycemic peaks can cause negative effects such as increased hunger and insulin resistance.
Have a beauty or wellness trend you're curious about? We want to know! Send Vogue's senior beauty & wellness editor an email at beauty@vogue.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Which Diet Strategy Best Suits T2D Care in Obesity?
TOPLINE: Patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D) achieved similar improvements in A1c levels and weight loss with intermittent energy restriction, time-restricted eating, and continuous energy restriction; however, intermittent fasting provided additional benefits in lowering fasting blood glucose and triglyceride levels, improving insulin sensitivity, and increasing patient adherence. METHODOLOGY: The 5:2 intermittent fasting method, which involves eating normally for 5 days and restricting calories for 2 days each week, has shown effectiveness in weight management and blood glucose control; however, its direct comparison with 10-hour time-restricted eating in patients with obesity and T2D remains unclear. Researchers in China conducted a single-center, randomized trial between November 2021 and November 2024 to compare the effects of three different dietary interventions in patients with obesity and T2D. They randomly assigned 90 patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups — intermittent energy restriction, time-restricted eating, or continuous energy restriction — with a similar weekly intake of calories across all groups. A nutritionist provided supervision and guidance for the interventions over 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in A1c levels, and secondary endpoints included various laboratory parameters, adverse events, and patient adherence. TAKEAWAY: The 16-week intervention was completed by 63 patients including 18 women (average age, 36.8 years; baseline BMI, 31.7; A1c level, 7.42%). Adherence was highest with intermittent energy restriction (85%), followed by continuous energy restriction (84%) and time-restricted eating (78%). After 16 weeks, A1c levels were reduced by 1.03%-1.56% and weight reduced by 5.7-8.6 kg across all three groups; although no significant differences were found between the groups, the intermittent energy restriction group showed the greatest absolute changes. Compared with the other two interventions, intermittent energy restriction resulted in significantly lower fasting glucose and triglyceride levels (by an average of 2.3 mmol/L and 1.139 mmol/L, respectively) and improved insulin sensitivity (Matsuda index, 80.23; P < .05 for all). Hypoglycemia occurred in two patients each in the intermittent energy restriction and time-restricted-eating groups and three patients in the continuous energy restriction group. IN PRACTICE: 'The research fills a gap in directly comparing 5:2 intermittent energy restriction with a 10-hour time-restricted eating in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes. The findings provide scientific evidence for clinicians to choose appropriate dietary strategies when treating such patients,' said the lead author in a news release. SOURCE: This study was led by Haohao Zhang, PhD, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University in Zhengzhou, China. It was presented on July 13, 2025, at the ENDO 2025: The Endocrine Society Annual Meeting, in San Francisco. LIMITATIONS: This study did not report any specific limitations. DISCLOSURES: This study did not report any specific funding or conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Vogue
2 hours ago
- Vogue
5 Natural Sweeteners That Won't Spike Your Glucose
There's no way around it—many of us consume far too much sugar. Though the maximum recommended daily amount of sugar is 9 teaspoons, most adults in the United States average a whopping 17 teaspoons each day. Of course, a lot of that sugar is consumed accidentally. Often, it is hidden in plain sight. According to research, between 60% and 80% of packaged foods and beverages sold in grocery stores contain added sugar. And it's not just in the obvious 'sweet' foods like cookies, cakes, and chocolates either; even so-called savory foods like dips, sauces, and soups are often covertly laced with sugar in some form. Think: high fructose corn syrup, fruit juice, and aspartame. Sugar is so omnipresent in our foods that it insidiously creeps into our diets and becomes addictive. Luckily, there are some things you can do to cut back. First, learn to read ingredient labels and remember that anything that ends in '-ose' is usually a form of sugar—i.e. glucose and sucrose. Next, avoid processed foods as much as possible. And, lastly, find substitutes for white sugar that won't cause blood glucose to spike. The latter isn't as hard as it sounds. Many natural sweeteners come without the glucose-spiking qualities of conventional white sugar. Here, we've listed some favorites along with their glycemic indexes (GI)—a.k.a. the rate at which the glucose level of the blood is raised on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being pure glucose. After all, sometimes you need a little something sweet. Life is short—and a life without the occasional treat would be no fun at all. 5 natural sweeteners that won't spike glucose 1. Agave syrup (GI 15) Agave syrup is a natural sweetener extracted from the sap of the agave plant, which is the same plant that tequila is made from. Agave has a fluid texture and a sweet flavor thanks to its fructose concentration, but its glycemic index is three times lower than that of white sugar (GI 15). It can easily be used in drinks, desserts, dressings, and other dishes that require a little sweetness. 2. Honey (GI 55) Though vegans may want to stay away, raw honey is a great sugar substitute. With a moderate glycemic index (GI 55) and distinctive flavor, it's the perfect compliment to healthy breakfasts and snacks. Most honey—especially Manuka—also contains medicinal properties and can be used for everything from soothing sore throats to healing wounds. Win-win. 3. Coconut sugar (GI 35) Coconut sugar is the natural sweetener obtained from the sap of coconut blossoms. Less refined than white cane sugar, it has a fairly low glycemic index (GI 35), making it a sensible alternative for curbing cravings. It also contains a significant amount of inulin, a prebiotic fiber beneficial to digestion. And its unique, sweet, caramelized flavor makes it an indispensable part of the culinary repertoire, especially in pastry-making. 4. Monk fruit (GI 0) Monk fruit is 250 times sweeter than cane sugar, yet it contains no calories or carbohydrates. Derived from the fruit of the monk fruit plant, this natural sweetener contains mogrosides that do not raise blood sugar levels—it does not contain any glucose or fructose. Thus, the glycemic index of monk fruit sugar is 0, which means it does not raise blood sugar levels. 5. Date syrup (GI 47) Dates are like nature's candy, with a sweet, caramel flavor. But despite their confectionary conjurings, the fruit's glycemic index is around 47, less than half that of conventional sugar. Same goes for date syrup, which contains essential minerals like potassium, magnesium, and iron as well as antioxidants and fiber. Have a beauty or wellness trend you're curious about? We want to know! Send Vogue's senior beauty & wellness editor an email at beauty@
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Clinical Trials: The Future Hinges On Orchestration, Not More Tools
Rahul Saluja, Managing Partner & Board Advisor at Cognizant, driving growth in Life Sciences, Digital Transformation & Smart Manufacturing. Over the past few years, we've seen a wave of digital innovation in clinical trials: decentralized models, eConsent, real-time monitoring and direct-to-patient logistics. We've digitized nearly every touchpoint. But here's the problem: Digitization doesn't equal transformation. In many cases, we've simply layered new tools onto an outdated operating model. The structure beneath—the way clinical trials are orchestrated across functions—has barely evolved. We're running modern trials with legacy assumptions, and it's showing. Sponsors are still dealing with mid-trial surprises, delayed shipments, inconsistent patient engagement and misaligned teams. And patients, who now live in a world of real-time apps and same-day delivery, are losing patience with trial timelines and broken communication loops. We don't have a technology gap; we have a coordination gap. The Illusion Of Progress There's a difference between having digital capabilities and knowing how to use them to drive outcomes. Today, different teams manage different parts of the trial: • Clinical ops oversee protocol execution. • Supply manages depots and packaging. • Commercial stays focused on engagement and growth. • Digital leads the platform strategy. Each function is doing its job, but in isolation. The challenge is no longer about building new platforms. It's about aligning those platforms around a common operational framework. That's where most organizations are falling short—and where real transformation needs to happen. Borrowing From Industries That Got It Right In complex industries like aviation and logistics, orchestration isn't optional. It's built in. These industries rely on control towers—centralized command centers that bring data, systems and decision making together in real time. Life sciences needs something similar—a clinical control tower. Think of it as a strategic layer that connects your decentralized trial ecosystem, where supply chain, protocol changes, site performance and patient data all speak to each other. This isn't a dashboard. It's an orchestration engine—one that allows your teams to anticipate disruptions, coordinate faster and act with clarity. What It Looks Like In Practice A clinical control tower connects: • Randomization and trial supply management (RTSM) and supply planning tools. • Real-time site feedback and patient insights. • Protocol changes with operational impact modeling. • AI and analytics to identify risk signals before they escalate. The impact? • Fewer surprises • Smoother amendments • Faster delivery • Better sponsor experience • Higher patient retention And perhaps most importantly, it builds trust—with internal teams, external partners and the patients we're ultimately serving. The Leadership Shift That's Needed Transformation at this level doesn't happen from the bottom up. It requires leadership that understands how strategy, operations and execution intersect. Life sciences leaders—especially across clinical, digital and commercial domains—need to ask tougher questions: • Are our systems integrated, or are they simply adjacent? • Do our teams operate from the same data and timelines? • Can we course-correct mid-trial in real time? • Are we building toward speed and scale or stuck in reaction mode? The organizations that can confidently answer these questions will be the ones that define the next era of clinical development. What's At Stake It's not just about efficiency. It's about resilience and the ability to adapt quickly, maintain compliance, protect timelines and ensure quality—all while keeping the patient at the center. In the next five years, life sciences companies will be judged not just by innovation, but by execution. Those most successful won't necessarily have the most tools, but those that know how to connect them. Final Thought The future of clinical trials won't be defined by technology alone. It will be defined by how well we orchestrate that technology across teams, systems and time zones. Patients are living in 2025. They expect seamless, smart and responsive experiences. It's time our trial infrastructure caught up. To get there, we don't need more dashboards. We need alignment. We need orchestration. And most of all, we need leadership bold enough to rethink how trials are truly run. Forbes Business Development Council is an invitation-only community for sales and biz dev executives. Do I qualify?
