DUK - Eating Well with T2 - DOH!!!!

[Dillinger]

She did say that BS & HBA of 5-6.5 would be satisfactory & NOT cause brain malfunction.

That was good of her... :roll:

So, are we to take it that people with HbA1c's below that figure would be 'unsatisfactory' and would need to fear 'brain malfunction'? What people would fall into that group? Hmmm, how about every single non-diabetic in the world and those well controlled diabetics such as Fergus. Actually, she may have a point there... :shock:

I'd be interested to see her 'brain malfunction' studies though. I'd also be interested to see the Loch Ness Monster, I fear though that neither of them exist.

Dillinger

 

[phoenix]

So, are we to take it that people with HbA1c's below that figure would be 'unsatisfactory' and would need to fear 'brain malfunction'? What people would fall into that group?...
I'd be interested to see her 'brain malfunction' studies though. I'd also be interested to see the Loch Ness Monster, I fear though that neither of them exist.

An Aunt Sally don't you think? make up something to argue about!
who was it that suggested that there might be a problem with glucose or HbA1cs in the 5's?

If you really want to know what research has been done on cognitive function and carbohydrate intake then why don't you do a proper literature search yourself?
To get you started:
There was an Australian study this month comparing isocalorific low carb and low fat diets. You will be pleased to hear that there was no difference in weight loss( LC group, 96.0 [1.6] kg to 82.3 [2.1] kg; LF group, 97.6 [1.6] kg to 83.9 [1.9] kg; P = .26 for time x diet interaction)
At full term there was no effect on working memory or processing speed.
Both groups had initial improvements in mood from baseline.

At the end of the study though there was a difference in mood.Those on the low carb diet had regressed to their former mood levels. ( measures for total mood disturbance, anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, and depression-dejection (P < .05)
Well that explains a lot :wink:



If you read the study there is a very fair, balanced discussion referring to previous research, including possible reasons for the difference in mood states.
Long-term Effects of a Very Low-Carbohydrate Diet and a Low-Fat Diet on Mood and Cognitive Function
Grant D. Brinkworth, PhD; Jonathan D. Buckley, PhD; Manny Noakes, PhD; Peter M. Clifton, PhD; Carlene J. Wilson, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(20):1873-1880.

 

[veggienft]

.
Some studies have found higher levels of metabolic syndrome on high-fat high-carb diets than on low-fat high-carb diets. So public health officials merely extrapolate that high-fat low-carb diets must be bad for people too. They cram low-fat high-carb diets down everyone's throats as if they had real evidence supporting it.

They don't.

If officials would bother noticing the results of high fat-low carb diet studies they would sing a totally different tune. But drug companies don't make money when people get well. They make money by treating people. The truth would mean no ........"extra" to hand out to government officials.
..

 

[IanD]

So, are we to take it that people with HbA1c's below that figure would be 'unsatisfactory' and would need to fear 'brain malfunction'? What people would fall into that group?...
I'd be interested to see her 'brain malfunction' studies though. I'd also be interested to see the Loch Ness Monster, I fear though that neither of them exist.

An Aunt Sally don't you think? make up something to argue about!
who was it that suggested that there might be a problem with glucose or HbA1cs in the 5's?

I asked if 5.0-6.5 would cause mental problems & was assured that would be OK. There was no suggestion that a lower value for non-diabetics (or diabetics) would cause problems.

For the study Phoenix cites, please see below.

If you read the study there is a very fair, balanced discussion referring to previous research, including possible reasons for the difference in mood states.
Long-term Effects of a Very Low-Carbohydrate Diet and a Low-Fat Diet on Mood and Cognitive Function
Grant D. Brinkworth, PhD; Jonathan D. Buckley, PhD; Manny Noakes, PhD; Peter M. Clifton, PhD; Carlene J. Wilson, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(20):1873-1880.

'Long-term Effects of a Very Low-Carbohydrate Diet and a Low-Fat Diet on Mood and Cognitive Function'
There was no evidence that the nutrient content of either diet was associated with changes in cognitive function, since both groups experienced similar changes in thinking and memory performance over time. "Further studies are required to evaluate the effects of these diets on a wider range of cognitive domains," the authors conclude.

This study was for a year, & there was no mention of diabetics.

A linked article:

Low Carbohydrate Dieters Lose Memory Skills - Study
A new study from the psychology department at Tufts University shows that when dieters eliminate carbohydrates from their meals, they performed more poorly on memory-based tasks than when they reduce calories, but maintain carbohydrates. When carbohydrates were reintroduced, cognition skills returned to normal.

While the brain uses glucose as its primary fuel, it has no way of storing it. Rather, the body breaks down carbohydrates into glucose, which is carried to the brain through the blood stream and used immediately by nerve cells for energy. Reduced carbohydrate intake should thus reduce the brain's source of energy. Therefore, researchers hypothesized that diets low in carbohydrates would affect cognitive skills.
....
"The data suggest that after a week of severe carbohydrate restriction, memory performance, particularly on difficult tasks, is impaired," Taylor explains.

Low-carb dieters showed a gradual decrease on the memory-related tasks compared with the low-calorie dieters. Reaction time for those on the low-carb diet was slower and their visuospatial memory was not as good as those on the low-calorie diet. However, low-carb dieters actually responded better than low-calorie dieters during the attention vigilance task. Researchers note that past studies have shown that diets high in protein or fat can improve a person's attention in the short-term, which is consistent with the results in this study.

This study only lasted 3 weeks, & again no mention of diabetics.

My question to the techie was to get an opinion as to whether a diabetic with better than average control (5 - 6.5) would be likely to suffer brain effects. Obviously at that level, there is more glucose in the blood than with non-diabetics, & presumably no possible reason for brain effects.

To be meaningful, blood glucose would need to be measured throughout the study, & to continue for at least 6 months to allow the body to stabilise & adjust to the diet.

To echo Hana's point low carb brain malfunction is an urban myth, based on a VERY inadequate piece of "research."

 

[graham64]

At the end of the study though there was a difference in mood.Those on the low carb diet had regressed to their former mood levels. ( measures for total mood disturbance, anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, and depression-dejection (P < .05)
Well that explains a lot :wink:

So whats your excuse Phoenix :wink:

The results would perhaps be different if the participants had been Diabetics and seen the true benefits of a LC diet. .

Whether the detrimental effects of the LC diet on mood that were observed in our study would exist if delivered ad libitium without intensive dietary control over the long term remains unknown; data reported by McClernon et al14 suggest that this may not be the case.

McClernon

Despite these limitations, the present study confirms that weight loss can result in significant improvement in a broad range of self-report symptoms and that, compared with an LFD, an LCKD results in specific improvements in mood and decreased hunger. Further trials seeking to understand the mechanisms underlying these effects are warranted.

http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v15/n ... 7516a.html

This reflects the results I got, I definitely had no mood swings in fact quite the opposite, along with improved energy levels and other benefits, I no longer suffer from acid reflux. Seems us Low Carbers are saving the NHS a fortune.

Seeing DUK recommend carbs should make up about half of what you eat and drink, I think being on a minimum 3500 cals and following that advice, would give me mood swings due to the Diabetic complications that would surely follow.

Low Carb Love and hugs.
Graham

 

[ally5555]

oh dear - this thread is derailed again.

I have spoken at length to the Dietitians at DMUK and expressed my concern about the amount of sugary snacks they appear to be encouraging . They have told me they are reviewing their advice but I am not convinced.

Ian you are a mod carber i think and Graham I recall your calories were around 2800 - from my snapshot analysis. If you are eating 3500 without carbs would love to look at what you are eating!

What really annoys me is that you believe you are the only ones getting good control - there are many who are not low carbing who are as well. I do not think that a few of you providing anecdotal to DMUK is going to influence them - I am not trying to be provacative but a realist. What you are providing them is not hard evidence and the fact is the low carb evidence is still very patchy and you can see the way that you are all reading the studies is open to individual interpretation!

I await the flak!

 

[Bluenosesol]

Ally,

To cut through the complexities of the statistical minefield...80% of diabetics in the UK do not control their BG within even the NHS "acceptable" range. A far higher percentage than 20% enjoy NHS support. Something is going wrong and I am simply suggesting that to tell someone with high blood glucose to eat lots of glucose generating material could be a large contributor to these statistics.

Steve.

 

[ally5555]

Blue

Statistics are fine but they do not tell the individual picture - in my clinic I have quite a number of pts who take no advice from any one and their HBa1s in double figures skew the results. everyone on here cares about their health it may suprise you that many dont care at all!

There may be 10-15 people on here who are low carbing do you honestly believe that anyone would change advice based on their experience - there are the same number eating carbs!

The problem within the NHS is that too many HP are dabbling and giving the wrong advice and confusing people. To give an example - yesterday I saw a new Type 2 , very over weight - nurse had told him it was ok to eat rich tea biscuits first thing in the morning. i am now telling him you cannot do that - he is now thinking they do not know what they are talking about! It happens all the time and the NHS is encouraging generic HP - it doesnt work.

The problem is that there are not enough dietitians working in diabetes and don't believe all you read on here about their advice - alot carb count , reduce cards etc. They do not use no fat , low fat diets nor discourage protein. It was an intersting exercise on here when I analysed the low carbers diets - they were mainly lower in fat than they thought , some were low in calcium, fibre, vit C etc. So LC is not perfect either.

 

[ally5555]

i just saw a comment about me on the low carb forum - not here the other one!

Bodies like DMUK , ADA are not going to use comments by diabetics taken from forums like this. It is anecdotal and not evidence.There is no real data about numbers of low carbers and no real dietary analysis either.

 

[catherinecherub]

This forum is small in relation to the amount of diabetics in the U.K. There are no figures around to say how many diabetics are successful with different management strategies.

More statistics:-

.....One in ten people is actively being treated for obesity.

.....One in twenty of those has been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes.

.....That does not take into account pre-diabetes.

.....There are various figures suggesting the amount of people who are unaware they have Type 2.

The care for diabetics is very patchy and until we are all given 1st. class care there will be problems for us.

However you manage your diabetes should not be the issue. There are various strategies that work and we shouldn't get caught up in arguing with each other but use the skills that we have acquired to help other diabetics. If you keep arguing about the rights and wrongs of a different method then who benefits?
Newbies get more confused as they don't know what to believe. What we should be saying is that if the advice that you have been given doesn't work then explore other options and ask your HCP what they would do if they were in your position. You should also ask how you can be successful if you are not allowed test strips to see what foods spike your blood sugars. The division on this forum is so obvious and does no one any favours.

It reminds me of someone I know who maintains that the only reliable car to buy is a Ford. I disagree with that and I am sure that others do too but nothing will budge him. I am entitled to my opinion but he is right. :roll: :roll:

If people here who follow a low G.I. diet wrote to DUK saying that their diet is better than the advice given then we would get the same response as low carbers. A small percentage of diabetics is not going to change anything.

 

[IanD]

From the booklet:

Bread, cereals, rice, pasta and potatoes.
One portion is equal to:
• 2–4 tbsp cereal
• 2–3 tbsp rice, pasta, cous-cous, noodles or mashed potato
• 1 slice of bread
• half a small chapati
• 2 new potatoes or half a baked potato
• 2–3 crispbreads or crackers

7–14 portions per day
Include starchy foods at all meals.
Choose more slowly absorbed
varieties whenever possible.

So we can have what amounts to 14 slices of bread (196 g carb), or 7 baked potatoes (300 g carb) per day :!:

AND they're worried about us getting brain damage if we don't follow their advice :!: :?: :!:

Who, I wonder, is brain damaged :?:
Those who restrict carbs or those who give that advice to unsuspecting diabetics :?: :twisted: :?:

 

[Kastrian]

I'm just glad I found this forum before the DUK site.

 

[Bluenosesol]

Catherine,

I personally would never argue with anyone who has gained control of their blood glucose by whatever method. If someone eats 500g of carbs a day and no fats and his/her lipids, HBA1C etc testify then how can anyone argue?. The reason that low carbers get a little defensive, is the imbalance not by people on this forum but by the main Diabetic Authorities in the UK, namely the NHS and Diabetes UK. If you are an advocate of high input starchy carbohydrates, then good luck to you and you can feel content that the "authorities" are supporting you every step of the way. The frustration for low carbers, is that they know that if their diet works for them, then they could help others to gain control who have failed by the high carb route, except that the "authorities" trash their endeavours from the offset. That is very frustrating and tends to make people fight even harder for balance and to make themselves heard. It gets even more difficult when fellow diabetics who all have the same goals tell us to keep our "opinions" to ourselves.

Regards Steve.

 

[cugila]

Bluenosesol stated.

It gets even more difficult when fellow diabetics who all have the same goals tell us to keep our "opinions" to ourselves.

Hi Steve.

I have just reviewed this topic and I am a little puzzled by that comment of yours. Can you point us in the direction of who actually said that ? Was it in this topic or elsewhere.

 

[IanD]

Blue

Statistics are fine but they do not tell the individual picture - in my clinic I have quite a number of pts who take no advice from any one and their HBa1s in double figures skew the results. everyone on here cares about their health it may suprise you that many dont care at all!

Looking at the advice in the leaflet, it could be better NOT to take the advice! I had 1 slice of bread with my cauliflower cheese last night & went over 10. I don't normally have ANY of the recommended starchy carbs.

There may be 10-15 people on here who are low carbing do you honestly believe that anyone would change advice based on their experience - there are the same number eating carbs!

More like 400.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Review and re-evaluate the advice being given to Type 2 diabetics by the health authorities. More details

Submitted by John – Deadline to sign up by: 28 April 2010 – Signatures: 443

The problem within the NHS is that too many HP are dabbling and giving the wrong advice and confusing people. To give an example - yesterday I saw a new Type 2 , very over weight - nurse had told him it was ok to eat rich tea biscuits first thing in the morning. i am now telling him you cannot do that - he is now thinking they do not know what they are talking about! It happens all the time and the NHS is encouraging generic HP - it doesnt work.

You know the problem then, Ally. Did you correct his nurse? Its good news if a new patient "is now thinking they do not know what they are talking about!" Perhaps he will seek informed advice - from you or us. If you refer him to us, we won't tell on you. :wink:


The problem is that there are not enough dietitians working in diabetes and don't believe all you read on here about their advice - alot carb count , reduce cards etc. They do not use no fat , low fat diets nor discourage protein.

Where are your "sisters" in the carb counting faith :?: None of them work for DUK

It was an intersting exercise on here when I analysed the low carbers diets - they were mainly lower in fat than they thought , some were low in calcium, fibre, vit C etc. So LC is not perfect either.

I started buying butter, & using it in cooking. My general health, sporting ability, & cognitive functions are satisfactory.

 

[veggienft]

.

It was an intersting exercise on here when I analysed the low carbers diets - they were mainly lower in fat than they thought , some were low in calcium, fibre, vit C etc. So LC is not perfect either.

Vitamin C is an antioxidant. I'm sure it's no accident that fruit contains both sugar and vitamin C. Our bodies need vitamin C to clear a byproduct of mitochondrial sugar metabolism.

That byproduct is H2O2, hydrogen peroxide, the simplest form of bleach. H2O2 would be the inert chemical water (H2O), except that it has a free radical oxygen atom. The oxygen attaches to tissue in the body, and burns it. Vitamin C circulates throughout the body removing atomic oxygen, and preventing tissue bleaching.

Conversely, metabolizing fat does not create hydrogen peroxide. Less hydrogen peroxide means you can survive quite healthily on less vitamin C.

As for low calcium and fiber on a high-fat low-carb diet....... Most low carbers are pretty heavy carnivores. Meat has lots of calcium. I can testify that the need for fiber is a high carb paradigm. When lowering carbs, there's a transition period, then everything flows fine .......better than before. And digestive diseases are reduced, not increased.

Maybe low carb dieting isn't perfect, but I don't see a problem in these areas.
..

 

[graham64]

oh dear - this thread is derailed again

.

I have spoken at length to the Dietitians at DMUK and expressed my concern about the amount of sugary snacks they appear to be encouraging . They have told me they are reviewing their advice but I am not convinced.

I'm certainly not convinced.
Eating well with Type 2 Diabetes-New

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/upload/9831 ... pe%202.pdf

And this from one of your colleagues.

Dr Sarah Schenker, one of the UK’s leading dieticians, gives her top diabetes diet tips

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Diabetes/P ... betes.aspx

Ian you are a mod carber i think and Graham I recall your calories were around 2800 - from my snapshot analysis. If you are eating 3500 without carbs would love to look at what you are eating!

I don't understand the without carbs Ally. As for having a look at what I eat, If I do need advice I can always get in touch with Mrs Pugwash, I should think a “low carbing diabetic dietitian” would far better understand my needs.

What really annoys me is that you believe you are the only ones getting good control - there are many who are not low carbing who are as well. I do not think that a few of you providing anecdotal to DMUK is going to influence them - I am not trying to be provacative but a realist. What you are providing them is not hard evidence and the fact is the low carb evidence is still very patchy and you can see the way that you are all reading the studies is open to individual interpretation!

Hardly anecdotal Ally when they are giving the facts about their experiences.

There may be 10-15 people on here who are low carbing do you honestly believe that anyone would change advice based on their experience - there are the same number eating carbs!

Graham

 

[nannybarbara]

10-15 people out of 18,000 odd? Really? Ah, well, perhaps all the others have been driven away in despair?

 

[graham64]

Please ignore first and last quotes in my previous post. I was going to edit them out but my post was locked, without my "contentious comments" the quotes are pointless.

Cheers
Graham

 

[veggienft]

.
Type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol are manifestations of metabolic syndrome. When government physicians see high blood cholesterol they tell us to eat less fat. ........an assumption that what we eat goes directly into the blood. But when government physicians see high blood sugar they tell us to eat.....

.......uhhhhhh less fat. .......an assumption that uhhhhhhh......

.........Wait. That cant be right. Can it?

It's okay, the advice is only 180 degrees off. Circulating excess cholesterol and sugar both represent abnormal physiology.

Carb ingestion causes blood sugar and blood cholesterol buildup. If one cuts back on fat ingestion, the blood will circulate slightly less cholesterol. But if one cuts back on carbs, the [body] will use and clear far more sugar and cholesterol. It will store and circulate far less of both.
..