What is the story with Diabetes UK?

[Daibell]

Hi. I've been following both forums for years now and find that the other, DUK, one is gradually moving towards an acceptance of low-carb and seems to be freeing itself from DUK high-carb dogma. I resigned from DUK 1 year ago as I couldn't stand the dietary nonsense any more and also their rigid view of T1 versus T2. As a LADA I find they don't really believe it exists and people like me are ignored. I had a letter this week from the CEO (as a past 'Supporting Member') asking for a donation for their research and how successful the low-calorie (=ND) research was becoming. He was emphatic that they will listen to their Supporters; I'm tempted to test that again. So, they have a very close relationship with the ND lot and seem to prefer chummy relationships rather than fighting for what those on this and to some extent the other forum know works. Those relationships sadly are often with researchers who are in turn often funded by the food industry. I give it another 3-5 years before DUK and other government bodies catch up with the fact that blood sugar and carbs are, amazingly, related to one another. Also that fat has little to do with diabetes and that T1 is caused by more than an auto-immune response and can and does occur at any age.

 

[Oldvatr]

And from what I see from the outside some MD are royal assholes, to put it mildly, don't giving interest to nothing but their bank accounts, especially uninterested to the well being of their patients. Google "Brega Massone" from what I mean.

My MD is very interested in what I am doing, and supportive. He cares about my health, and remembers things that even I have forgotten about historic hiccups I have had and that I am allergic to statins etc, HE is very good.

 

[letstalk1]

I doubt they'll have much success stamping out recommendations to try LCHF as a strategy to address type 2 diabetes in their forum. It works so well for so many people that they won't be able to suppress it. I've heard that it took a while for LCHF to overcome resistance and become accepted here on our forum.

Yes , and LCHF IS NOTHING NEW been around years for medical reasons and simply for weight loss.

 

[GrantGam]

I spot a trend here (going off what I'm reading on this thread); only T2's have a grievance with DUK. And I also notice that this site appears to have a grievance with carbs. Funny that, isn't it?

 

[Oldvatr]

I spot a trend here (going off what I'm reading on this thread); only T2's have a grievance with DUK. And I also notice that this site appears to have a grievance with carbs. Funny that, isn't it?

I think there is a simple explanation for that. As a T2 not on insulin I would find it difficult to adjust my medication in advance of eating a carb based meal. It is more effective for me to restrict the carb intake instead, So the advice given to each is different. Those on insulin are advised to eat high carb and increase insulin dose to counteract it, But DUK et al advise us T2D on orals to do the same except we have no tool to counteract the carbs, Specifically DUK tell T2D that restricting carb intake for a T2 is WRONG and dangerous. This is why we T2D have issue with DUK (et al)

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

I spot a trend here (going off what I'm reading on this thread); only T2's have a grievance with DUK. And I also notice that this site appears to have a grievance with carbs. Funny that, isn't it?

Yes, carbs really suck if you have insulin resistance. Funny that!

 

[bulkbiker]

I spot a trend here (going off what I'm reading on this thread); only T2's have a grievance with DUK. And I also notice that this site appears to have a grievance with carbs. Funny that, isn't it?

Ok lets see if this helps...
If they gave Type 1's advice of a similar calibre to the advice they give Type 2's .. something along the lines of .. "oh that insulin is really bad for you don't take it" would you then be able to appreciate the view that a lot of the Type 2's here have that DUK does not work in our best interest yet claims charitable status on our behalf? Advising Type 2's to eat starchy carbs wth every meal must be condemning 100's.. 1000's maybe more to amputations and blindness. Yet we are all supposed to sit back and say aww that's ok they mean well..
You may not have noticed but this site does run a low carb program.. maybe because it works for loads of people with Type 2 as well as a fair few Type 1's.

 

[ickihun]

I just see DUK as old fashioned and this forum more up with modern thinking.
One may suit some more than others.
I dont say this to be offensive just my observation. We are all different.

 

[Jaylee]

Ok lets see if this helps...
If they gave Type 1's advice of a similar calibre to the advice they give Type 2's ..

Hi,

They do sort of give T2s dietary advice that is a similar calibre to T1s..
From about 40 years ago...!

 

[KathyCP]

ok, i sent DUK an e-mail asking about why nothing about lchf diet on their website, and i received a reply on fri. it was quite helpful, and included a link to their current position statement on lchf, which seems pretty ok (if an ordinary visitor to the site can ever find it): https://www.diabetes.org.uk/profess...tyle/low-carb-diets-for-people-with-diabetes/
however, i noticed that the first thing that the person replying did in her response was to congratulate me on losing weight and improving my bg levels through diet and exercise. no mention anywhere of the commonly-experienced effect of carbs on T2 bg levels. so i emailed back again, and asked her why she'd made that point about my weight, when it hadn't been the subject of my e-mail and has never been a major problem in relation to my diabetes, whereas my body's inability to process carbs certainly has been. i also asked her why the only info that DUK gives about carbs is that they are essential for a healthy diet but also that the main sources of carbs are starchy carbs and sugar, thereby implying that you must eat starchy carbs in order to stay healthy, as there is no mention of any other types of food which you can eat to get the relatively small amount of carbs your body needs. i also gave her an example with figures of the effect of starchy carbs on my own bg levels. awaiting the next reply .....

 

[bulkbiker]

ok, i sent DUK an e-mail asking about why nothing about lchf diet on their website, and i received a reply on fri. it was quite helpful, and included a link to their current position statement on lchf, which seems pretty ok (if an ordinary visitor to the site can ever find it): https://www.diabetes.org.uk/profess...tyle/low-carb-diets-for-people-with-diabetes/
however, i noticed that the first thing that the person replying did in her response was to congratulate me on losing weight and improving my bg levels through diet and exercise. no mention anywhere of the commonly-experienced effect of carbs on T2 bg levels. so i emailed back again, and asked her why she'd made that point about my weight, when it hadn't been the subject of my e-mail and has never been a major problem in relation to my diabetes, whereas my body's inability to process carbs certainly has been. i also asked her why the only info that DUK gives about carbs is that they are essential for a healthy diet but also that the main sources of carbs are starchy carbs and sugar, thereby implying that you must eat starchy carbs in order to stay healthy, as there is no mention of any other types of food which you can eat to get the relatively small amount of carbs your body needs. i also gave her an example with figures of the effect of starchy carbs on my own bg levels. awaiting the next reply .....

Please let us know what they say...

 

[Oldvatr]

ok, i sent DUK an e-mail asking about why nothing about lchf diet on their website, and i received a reply on fri. it was quite helpful, and included a link to their current position statement on lchf, which seems pretty ok (if an ordinary visitor to the site can ever find it): https://www.diabetes.org.uk/profess...tyle/low-carb-diets-for-people-with-diabetes/
however, i noticed that the first thing that the person replying did in her response was to congratulate me on losing weight and improving my bg levels through diet and exercise. no mention anywhere of the commonly-experienced effect of carbs on T2 bg levels. so i emailed back again, and asked her why she'd made that point about my weight, when it hadn't been the subject of my e-mail and has never been a major problem in relation to my diabetes, whereas my body's inability to process carbs certainly has been. i also asked her why the only info that DUK gives about carbs is that they are essential for a healthy diet but also that the main sources of carbs are starchy carbs and sugar, thereby implying that you must eat starchy carbs in order to stay healthy, as there is no mention of any other types of food which you can eat to get the relatively small amount of carbs your body needs. i also gave her an example with figures of the effect of starchy carbs on my own bg levels. awaiting the next reply .....

Interesting that they state quite firmly that LC is not suitable for T1D, then they go on about not feeding LC to children, I suspect that most children with diabetes will tend to be T1 rather than T2. Are they really in touch, or is this double indemnity? Covering all angles in case an LC diet slips in by mistake?

At least this mission statement is better than the one they published earlier this year, which had a couple of pages of disclaimers and warnings against LC diets, The wheels of progress grind on inexorably. Hope they don't get a puncture....

 

[KathyCP]

Please let us know what they say...

will do - if they do.

 

[pollensa]

Can anyone tell me why Diabetes UK still gives people such dreadful advice about diet? Since joining this forum, I have realised how many thousands of us there must be who have had brilliant results by adopting an LCHF diet - I don't for a moment want to suggest that everyone should follow it, and it may not work for everyone, but I would have thought that anyone with T2 should at least be told that it's worth trying to see what sort of an effect it has. Seeing as Diabetes UK is the leading national charity/organisation whose remit is to support people with diabetes, I find it pretty shocking that they seem to be so off beam.

Hello, I totally agree, I am very surprised many times at the suggestions of what people should or should not eat, and many of the should eat, are a no no fruit for example, if one wishes to lower sugar levels, its best if possible not to even look at fruit for example. I agree too, there is no recommendations such as Keto eating plan or LCHF, why is the question, I think its all about marketing and business to be honest, not sure, but that's what I feel could be the reason.

No one in Diabetes associations or webs even suggest either that it seems reviews should be made as to focus and target on treating the CAUSE of the disease, instead of the symptoms which is High Sugar Levels, the cause is insulin resistance, and the high sugars are a symptom. Diabetes is a dietary problem, so if Insulin resistance is the problem, why give Insulin, its rather like giving alcohol to an alcoholic, and really common sense alone indicates, this is absolutely crazy.

I think the best medication one can have is in their own hands, and that is read, but don't always believe, and use common sense, eat low carb food, exercise more, and intermittent fast, one day min or two or more depending on ones individual lifestyle.

This works for me.

Mallorca.

 

[KathyCP]

At least this mission statement is better than the one they published earlier this year, which had a couple of pages of disclaimers and warnings against LC diets, The wheels of progress grind on inexorably. Hope they don't get a puncture....

unlikely, they're probably not using pneumatic tyres yet ....

 

[Neoncat]

When I was first diagnosed and very scared, and very alone in the hospital, Diabetes UK were there for me in a way that no one else was. They gave me the information and support my overworked DSN simply didn't have the time to give me. And later when I went through a phase of burn out they were there for me again. And both times they came to me rather than me having to search them out. They run workshops, go into schools, run holiday camps, support research and provide literature all of which costs money. Everyone here seems to be under the impression that they are part of a global conspiracy with Tesco (who by the way will be quite as happy to sell you a pack of bacon instead of a loaf of bread as long as it comes from them), to keep diabetes going. But food companies sponsor studies about the impact of food for the same reason drug companies sponsor events talking about the conditions they treat because they are the ones who are interested and have something to potentially gain. We need to ensure the right safe guards are in place to ensure interest doesn't turn into influence and I am certainly not pretending that line is never crossed or danced too closely too but let me ask the question that is always ignored: how else do you propose this stuff should be paid for? I don't see Halfords lining up to sponsor a study into anything diabetes related any time soon (no offence to Halfords). They may not whole heartedly recommended the treatment regime you favour and they may not be perfect but they do a lot of good and are not the cackling monsters people here are making then out to be. If they disappeared tomorrow we would be in a worse state for it.

 

[ickihun]

Look the website is too mushed up to advise lchf. For 1 some type2s on insulin can be too far advanced with the disease for only a low carb diet will create remission results.
2. Type1s arent segregated so all dietary advice is GENERAL advice. They dont intend their website to replace nhs advice nor support.
I could go on but their set up is different to this one and may never want to replica this one neither.
Like I said they may want to give a different perspective to the whole diabetes disease and not become primarily for new type2s?

 

[bulkbiker]

Like I said they may want to give a different perspective to the whole diabetes disease and not become primarily for new type2s?

But should that allow their for the most part appalling dietary advice for the majority of the people they are there to help?
if 90% of diabetics are Type 2 then maybe 60-70% of them could be helped with a low carb diet. So why will they only admit through gritted teeth that they aren't totally opposed to it. Could it maybe have something to do with the major contributors or do they just want us all dead?

 

[ickihun]

But should that allow their for the most part appalling dietary advice for the majority of the people they are there to help?
if 90% of diabetics are Type 2 then maybe 60-70% of them could be helped with a low carb diet. So why will they only admit through gritted teeth that they aren't totally opposed to it. Could it maybe have something to do with the major contributors or do they just want us all dead?

Behind the times, i feel. It is good to question their future intentions for diabetics. All diabetics!
I agree that diabetes now affects so many people and more are being diagnosed. They have to move with the times. For sure.

 

[Lally123]

When I was first diagnosed and very scared, and very alone in the hospital, Diabetes UK were there for me in a way that no one else was. They gave me the information and support my overworked DSN simply didn't have the time to give me. And later when I went through a phase of burn out they were there for me again. And both times they came to me rather than me having to search them out. They run workshops, go into schools, run holiday camps, support research and provide literature all of which costs money. Everyone here seems to be under the impression that they are part of a global conspiracy with Tesco (who by the way will be quite as happy to sell you a pack of bacon instead of a loaf of bread as long as it comes from them), to keep diabetes going. But food companies sponsor studies about the impact of food for the same reason drug companies sponsor events talking about the conditions they treat because they are the ones who are interested and have something to potentially gain. We need to ensure the right safe guards are in place to ensure interest doesn't turn into influence and I am certainly not pretending that line is never crossed or danced too closely too but let me ask the question that is always ignored: how else do you propose this stuff should be paid for? I don't see Halfords lining up to sponsor a study into anything diabetes related any time soon (no offence to Halfords). They may not whole heartedly recommended the treatment regime you favour and they may not be perfect but they do a lot of good and are not the cackling monsters people here are making then out to be. If they disappeared tomorrow we would be in a worse state for it.

I agree with you. I think it would be very difficult for them to put their weight behind very low carb diets as a recommendation simply because there is NO long term evidence that a low carb diet is any more beneficial than any other. If that data becomes available at some point in the future then I'm sure their advice will change accordingly. It may turn out that depriving the body has significant negative long term effects who knows? And the other point, as you said, is that they offer general advice. Most diabetics would find very low carb dieting very difficult, for some it may not work, for others it may not be recommended for medical reasons. Others may choose a more "normal" diet plus medication to keep glucose levels stable. We are all different and DUK sticks with recommended dietary advice which would suit the majority of people which will be updated in line with updated evidence. I think it's unfair to criticise they are a charity and they provide huge benefits advice and support to an ever increasing number of diabetics.