Just saw my doc

[ChrisSamsDad]

This isn't a Peer Review journal it is a support forum for people with diabetes.

That's true in general, but my objection is specifically talking about doctors and other health care workers as if they were evil, stupid or reckless. I think it would help if we all realised how much they are constrained by the system and why that's not always a bad thing. The trouble with forums and self-guiding internet communities is that they tend to 'groupthink' - driving away any users and ideas that go against the flow and reinforcing faulting thinking.

Those of us who are managing our own BS and in particular low-carbing don't have all the answers, it works for us to a lesser or greater extent, but we're NOT the entire diabetic community and there's a lot which we are doing which we don't know are good for us in all ways - you look on here and you'll mainly see stories of success, because perhaps those who don't have the willpower or the enthusiasm or whatever, don't come here or leave more than those for whom it works.

It's therefore not wise to talk as if it's a done deal which doctors and other NHS staff are deliberately or through ignorance keeping us in the dark about. We're essentially performing experiments on ourselves and my point is that doctors, especially GPs, don't work like that - as far as they are concerned, a whole different standard of evidence is needed before they can recommend a course of action - they follow guidelines - and if anything, it's the guidelines which need changing, not doctors just liking the sound of a new treatment because some patients said it worked for them - if they did they'd be recommending such quack treatments as Reiki, Reflexology, Faith Healing, Homeopathy, Acupuncture and Chiropractic.

 

[bulkbiker]

That's true in general, but my objection is specifically talking about doctors and other health care workers as if they were evil, stupid or reckless. I think it would help if we all realised how much they are constrained by the system and why that's not always a bad thing. The trouble with forums and self-guiding internet communities is that they tend to 'groupthink' - driving away any users and ideas that go against the flow and reinforcing faulting thinking.

Those of us who are managing our own BS and in particular low-carbing don't have all the answers, it works for us to a lesser or greater extent, but we're NOT the entire diabetic community and there's a lot which we are doing which we don't know are good for us in all ways - you look on here and you'll mainly see stories of success, because perhaps those who don't have the willpower or the enthusiasm or whatever, don't come here or leave more than those for whom it works.

It's therefore not wise to talk as if it's a done deal which doctors and other NHS staff are deliberately or through ignorance keeping us in the dark about. We're essentially performing experiments on ourselves and my point is that doctors, especially GPs, don't work like that - as far as they are concerned, a whole different standard of evidence is needed before they can recommend a course of action - they follow guidelines - and if anything, it's the guidelines which need changing, not doctors just liking the sound of a new treatment because some patients said it worked for them - if they did they'd be recommending such quack treatments as Reiki, Reflexology, Faith Healing, Homeopathy, Acupuncture and Chiropractic.

OK last response..

I went to the GP for a blood test. I was a fat, ignorant soon to be Type 2 diabetic. The nurse I saw gave me some advice which had I followed it would have probably led to my condition worsening and the medications they immediately prescribed for me becoming ineffective and requiring ever stronger versions. Because their pills made my guts fall out I decided to do my own research and found this forum and its advice. By following that I have stopped all meds and controlled my blood sugar levels. I have also lost almost 5 stone in weight. I am no longer quite such a fat, ignorant Type 2 diabetic because of what I did.
This was not down to what my Health Care Professionals told me but down to doing my own research and finding what had worked for others.
Does this make the HCP's evil and stupid and maybe even reckless with my health? Well it certainly doesn't make them kind and wise and caring now does it. Draw your own conclusions.
Tata
Regards
Mark

 

[Myangelsmom]

if they did they'd be recommending such quack treatments as Reiki, Reflexology, Faith Healing, Homeopathy, Acupuncture and Chiropractic.

But it is okay to label other alternative approaches to health "quacks"?

Seems you want only your approach/opinion to be considered.

Doctors, FOR THE MOST PART, are uneducated in nutritional matters, and diabetic nurses, well, they follow the guidelines. Otherwise they'd see those of us who are strict and succeeding as fuel for a movement to heal others who are facing diabetes... And who might be in more dire need of a non-allopathic approach.

Neither are being cast here as "evil", but rather, just doing as they've been told. And doing as they've been told creates the illusion that diabetes is an irreversible, progressive disease. It is not. People right here are proving that, formally funded research study or not.


I hope I don't sound mean, but I personally believe in at least four of your condemned holistic approaches.


Sent from my iPad using DCUK Forum

 

[ChrisSamsDad]

Good for you, but doctors believe

But it is okay to label other alternative approaches to health "quacks"?

Seems you want only your approach/opinion to be considered.

Doctors, FOR THE MOST PART, are uneducated in nutritional matters, and diabetic nurses, well, they follow the guidelines. Otherwise they'd see those of us who are strict and succeeding as fuel for a movement to heal others who are facing diabetes... And who might be in more dire need of a non-allopathic approach.

Neither are being cast here as "evil", but rather, just doing as they've been told. And doing as they've been told creates the illusion that diabetes is an irreversible, progressive disease. It is not. People right here are proving that, formally funded research study or not.

I hope I don't sound mean, but I personally believe in at least four of your condemned holistic approaches.
Sent from my iPad using DCUK Forum

I only call them 'quacks' in the sense that they are unqualified pedlars selling 'therapies' that are proven not to work, "Snake-Oil Salesmen" might be better. Belief in therapies is not the best way to decide: I'm sure you believe they work and you're entitled to that opinion, but in the hierarchy of scientific evidence - 'opinion' is quite low, there are better ways to decide if it works:

(Out of interest: I'm low carbing and a lot of people here are and apparently getting good results - that comes under 'Case Reports' - as you so rightly said healthcare people have to work to a higher standard than that)

The sensible thing is to take that belief and test it against evidence: If you don't that's unquestioning FAITH (I hope we can agree that's the bad kind) and for all those therapies, the jury is not just no longer out, it's come in, laughed the case out of court, said goodbye to each other, gone home and moved on with it's life, got married, bought a house, had children, grandchildren, retired, died and become one with the universe.They don't work any more than placebo, that's a PRATT (Point Refuted A Thousand Times) and in many cases are dangerous (giving people strokes in the case of Chiropractic) and convincing people not to have proper treatment in the case of the others.

You might say this about doctors and drug treatment for diabetes, but it does work to some extent - it extends your life more than without it, but clearly the science of nutrition has had and continues to have problems - however, they're caused by BAD SCIENCE, not by the fact they were too scientific. They relied on received wisdom and 'experts' too much, instead of being open to change in light of new evidence.

 

[Brunneria]

Everyone has a religion.
Money, Family, Designer Clothes, God, Saving The World from Whalers...

but I always find it rather ironic when people make a religion out of Science.

 

[KevinPotts]

Good for you, but doctors believe


I only call them 'quacks' in the sense that they are unqualified pedlars selling 'therapies' that are proven not to work, "Snake-Oil Salesmen" might be better. Belief in therapies is not the best way to decide: I'm sure you believe they work and you're entitled to that opinion, but in the hierarchy of scientific evidence - 'opinion' is quite low, there are better ways to decide if it works:

(Out of interest: I'm low carbing and a lot of people here are and apparently getting good results - that comes under 'Case Reports' - as you so rightly said healthcare people have to work to a higher standard than that)

The sensible thing is to take that belief and test it against evidence: If you don't that's unquestioning FAITH (I hope we can agree that's the bad kind) and for all those therapies, the jury is not just no longer out, it's come in, laughed the case out of court, said goodbye to each other, gone home and moved on with it's life, got married, bought a house, had children, grandchildren, retired, died and become one with the universe.They don't work any more than placebo, that's a PRATT (Point Refuted A Thousand Times) and in many cases are dangerous (giving people strokes in the case of Chiropractic) and convincing people not to have proper treatment in the case of the others.

You might say this about doctors and drug treatment for diabetes, but it does work to some extent - it extends your life more than without it, but clearly the science of nutrition has had and continues to have problems - however, they're caused by BAD SCIENCE, not by the fact they were too scientific. They relied on received wisdom and 'experts' too much, instead of being open to change in light of new evidence.

That pyramid is excellent, thanks. Coming from a non-scientific background, I've enjoyed reading and combing the literature, but getting a hierarchical context is very useful and much appreciated.


Sent from my iPhone using DCUK Forum mobile app

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

I think the current treatment approach by HCPs for type 2 diabetes is based primarily on "ideas, editorials, and opinions." A week with a blood glucose meter and it was obvious what I needed to do and it wasn't to follow what my doctor, dietician or nurse told me to do. It was pretty close to the opposite! If I can figure it out, why can't they? It boggles the mind.

 

[Myangelsmom]

@ChrisSamsDad, sorry, but you are wrong by blanket statements about homeopathic and chiropractic medicine being "proven" not to work. My daughter's gastroenterologist would beg to differ after the allopathic meds m daughter had been given failed to work but taking a homeopathic remedy did, and when the "professional" said she'd live in a wheelchair her who life and never speak or learn properly, but is now a gifted student after an osteopath treated her even after the OT said the same as you were saying. In one half hour she was a new baby, who grew to become a lovely child who is not only incredibly active and fit, but on the gifted track academically. So. Yes, I do believe, with good cause. I have other "anecdotal" evidence I'm sure you would disregard, but to arrogantly refer to anything you don't approve of as quacks and snake oil salesmen, that's just wrong. Sorry.


Sent from my iPad using DCUK Forum

 

[Welshman1952]

I always have a bit of a problem when I hear or read phrases that a group of people (doctors, nurses, pharmacists ot whatever) are bad, evil or wrong. Logically, not all of any group can be bad - sure, some will be, but against that there will be good ones too.

The question here should be 'are the recommendations given to GPs fit for practice. Now,on this we have to face the bureaucracy of the NIH in the USA and NICE in the UK. Both are extremely conservative and slow. Remember, the memories of thalidomide still cloud the judgement of many of their senior clinicians. They don't want to make mistakes and, more importantly, they don't want to be seen to make mistakes. As far as they are concerned, if there is evidence that LCHF works, it needs to be tested, retested and tested again. And only then will it be given a cautious welcome.

Don't get me wrong, I am no apologist for bad GPs (I happen to have one) but we won't convince our opposition by calling them bad or evil. We will do it by the strength of our own argument - and on that the responsibility lies with us.

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

I always have a bit of a problem when I hear or read phrases that a group of people (doctors, nurses, pharmacists ot whatever) are bad, evil or wrong. Logically, not all of any group can be bad - sure, some will be, but against that there will be good ones too.

The question here should be 'are the recommendations given to GPs fit for practice. Now,on this we have to face the bureaucracy of the NIH in the USA and NICE in the UK. Both are extremely conservative and slow. Remember, the memories of thalidomide still cloud the judgement of many of their senior clinicians. They don't want to make mistakes and, more importantly, they don't want to be seen to make mistakes. As far as they are concerned, if there is evidence that LCHF works, it needs to be tested, retested and tested again. And only then will it be given a cautious welcome.

Don't get me wrong, I am no apologist for bad GPs (I happen to have one) but we won't convince our opposition by calling them bad or evil. We will do it by the strength of our own argument - and on that the responsibility lies with us.

Sure, except the current dietary guidelines haven't been shown to do a particularly good job of treating type 2 diabetes. In fact, I was specifically told if I follow their dietary recommendations, then my diabetes would get worse over time with more meds until finally I would be on insulin. Even now, after having reversed my diabetes and improved my overall health drastically with LCHF, they would have me eat a high carb low fat diet if they could get their way.

 

[ChrisSamsDad]

I think the current treatment approach by HCPs for type 2 diabetes is based primarily on "ideas, editorials, and opinions." A week with a blood glucose meter and it was obvious what I needed to do and it wasn't to follow what my doctor, dietician or nurse told me to do. It was pretty close to the opposite! If I can figure it out, why can't they? It boggles the mind.

You're not wrong - the guidelines do seem to be decided upon without very good evidence and lack of research. I just think we shouldn't fool ourselves into replacing it with another system that's derived from the same method. We really need strong evidence - not just to convince doctors but to separate the good and bad things we're doing but aren't aware of. If you look at the difference between our LCHF and the Atkins diet, Atkins got many things right, but he got a lot wrong because they were ideas based on his opinion as much as research - the very idea behind it all, that the diet produced weight loss through more energy being burned - was easy to prove wrong. Many studies of low-carb diets in the general population have been done, and given the difficulty of scientific study of people dieting (they don't all stick to it and lie to themselves and researchers basically) they did a meta-review of only a few hundred but found no difference for weight-loss after 12 months.

I think research is vitally important - given the epidemic proportions of diabetes and all the emerging evidence that many things are wrong with the current advice for diabetics. If you look around on here, it's clear that just calling this LCHF doesn't cover the nuanced approach each of us have - I think you're a case in point from what I've read - your diet is a bit more extreme than most and it would be very useful to separate the wheat from the chaff - I'm sure many people have convinced themselves that something they really like to eat is fine when it isn't really ideal and also it seems clear to me that the people on here are very able to educate themselves about the food they eat and try to understand the biology that's going on in their bodies. That's not the case with everyone. I went on one of those NHS 'Expert' courses and to be honest, several people on it just couldn't understand basic things like food groups or actively revelled in their ignorance.

For many people the level of complexity needed to do this is too high for whatever reason, and that's hopefully what better research could come up with - a simplified approach with an easier toolkit.

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

You're not wrong - the guidelines do seem to be decided upon without very good evidence and lack of research. I just think we shouldn't fool ourselves into replacing it with another system that's derived from the same method. We really need strong evidence - not just to convince doctors but to separate the good and bad things we're doing but aren't aware of. If you look at the difference between our LCHF and the Atkins diet, Atkins got many things right, but he got a lot wrong because they were ideas based on his opinion as much as research - the very idea behind it all, that the diet produced weight loss through more energy being burned - was easy to prove wrong. Many studies of low-carb diets in the general population have been done, and given the difficulty of scientific study of people dieting (they don't all stick to it and lie to themselves and researchers basically) they did a meta-review of only a few hundred but found no difference for weight-loss after 12 months.

I think research is vitally important - given the epidemic proportions of diabetes and all the emerging evidence that many things are wrong with the current advice for diabetics. If you look around on here, it's clear that just calling this LCHF doesn't cover the nuanced approach each of us have - I think you're a case in point from what I've read - your diet is a bit more extreme than most and it would be very useful to separate the wheat from the chaff - I'm sure many people have convinced themselves that something they really like to eat is fine when it isn't really ideal and also it seems clear to me that the people on here are very able to educate themselves about the food they eat and try to understand the biology that's going on in their bodies. That's not the case with everyone. I went on one of those NHS 'Expert' courses and to be honest, several people on it just couldn't understand basic things like food groups or actively revelled in their ignorance.

For many people the level of complexity needed to do this is too high for whatever reason, and that's hopefully what better research could come up with - a simplified approach with an easier toolkit.

The current approach to treating type 2 diabetes is based on the disproved idea that it can't be reversed and that the biggest problem for type 2 diabetics is heart disease, so a high carb low fat diet is the best thing to prevent heart disease. These ideas are patently wrong and there's plenty of research that shows they're wrong and that LCHF can reverse type 2 diabetes. Most LCHF studies are not actually low carb in that they are just a little bit lower carb than a normal diet. By the way, LCHF is quite simple and it works. Whereas trying to following the healthy plate, or whatever it is, is not easy and it doesn't work. Anyway, I won't argue with you anymore. LCHF worked for me, so that's enough evidence that it can work as far as I'm concerned.

 

[KevinPotts]

The current approach to treating type 2 diabetes is based on the disproved idea that it can't be reversed and that the biggest problem for type 2 diabetics is heart disease, so a high carb low fat diet is the best thing to prevent heart disease. These ideas are patently wrong and there's plenty of research that shows they're wrong and that LCHF can reverse type 2 diabetes. Most LCHF studies are not actually low carb in that they are just a little bit lower carb than a normal diet. By the way, LCHF is quite simple and it works. Whereas trying to following the healthy plate, or whatever it is, is not easy and it doesn't work. Anyway, I won't argue with you anymore. LCHF worked for me, so that's enough evidence that it can work as far as I'm concerned.

BOOM brother!! Could not have said it better. Simplest lifestyle change I have ever encountered and the results are stupendous.


Sent from my iPad using DCUK Forum mobile app

 

[satkins]

Just saw the doctor with the results and I'm happy to report that my a1c is at 5.5! That's after 3 months of diagnosis. Must say LCHF is working for me. There is one problem. Both my HDL and LDL and total have all gone up a bit. My Total is a 5.4, LDL is 3.? can't remember and my HDL is 1.03. I'll see him again in a week or two after a 24 hour blood pressure monitor. So I may have to change what fats I am eating and/or get a few more greens in the diet.

Doc was really happy to see I'm taking charge of this. He even said that if I can keep my numbers at 5.5 or lower he'll take me off the metformin. He also didn't have any problem prescribing more test strips. I really haven't told him about the high fat part of the diet as I'm not sure how he'll take it. I think that if I can get my numbers in to the "normal" range he'll be happy. I'll be happy also. So he's not all about pushing pills but he also wants to make sure I don't fall back to my old habits. I told him if I can keep getting test strips it will help keep me honest.

I'm still not convinced he's all that knowledgeable about diabetes but he doesn't really need to be. He just has to sign the blood test forms and give me the results. I think I can handle it from there. Besides he's not the one telling me what to eat. The dietician is. So if I can get my HDL/LDL under control then she won't have anything to say about it either.

Thanks for all the support everyone. Thanks for keeping me honest. Most of all thanks for all the links to good recipes.

 

[Prem51]

Well done on lowering your HbA1c results @satkins! As for the higher cholesterol levels, I wouldn't worry too much about them. From what I have read on here cholesterol levels might well increase a bit after adopting a LCHF approach to eating, but should fall again as your body adapts. And there are differing views on how good or bad cholesterol is for you anyway.

My cholesterol level last September was 4.7, and that was with statins. My next HbA1c test isn't due until this August. I have stopped taking the statins last month so it will be interesting to see what my cholesterol reading is, but I don't worry about it.

 

[KevinPotts]

satkins, you must be so pleased. That's a great result in just 3 months.

A few thoughts:

1. If your HDL keeps climbing terrific - this is a number that should increase. So called "good" cholesterol

2. Don't worry about your LDL - lots of instances of this increasing on an LCHF diet. The key is the particle size of your LDL. I would venture to guess your small dense particles (bad) are now large and fluffy (good) and so an absolute increase in amount is not a problem.

The only way to know for sure is to arrange for a Subfraction Profile, but if you are in the UK, you may not find it easy to get this on the NHS.

Hope this puts your mind at rest.

Again, big congratulations!!


Sent from my iPhone using DCUK Forum mobile app

 

[librarising]

Must say LCHF is working for me. There is one problem. Both my HDL and LDL and total have all gone up a bit. My Total is a 5.4, LDL is 3.? can't remember and my HDL is 1.03.

Congrats on the A1c

On the cholesterol front I wouldn't worry until I knew what your triglycerides were. This is a good indicator of how healthy your LDL is. Yes, cholesterol can go up under LCHF, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Geoff

 

[amgrundy]

Well done satkins I wish my doctor would take the positive approach to testing BG levels, he seems to think I do not need to and may [at next visit to him in July] not prescribe the test strips anymore. I get the feeling he thinks its all about KEEP TAKING THE METFORMIN YOU WILL BE OK.

 

[seadragon]

Well I am sorry ChrisSamsdad but each of us goes on our own experience here and since most of us on here are low carbing, then we are the ones who are encountering the 'unenlightened' HCP's and know it. There are plenty of them. Mine was the diabetic specialist doctor and even they are supposed to recommend diet and exercise first but mine didn't. Not even the NHS's own version.
It is also true that the practices get extra money for every diabetic on their books (not an incentive to get you well and off the diabetic register then) and also for every person they put on statins (yes following the NICE guidelines for sure but look at the make up of the panel who make those guidelines - very biased towards pharmaceutical industry insiders so hardly likely to suggest less medication are they). My understanding is that the money is divided among the practice members so yes a direct influence on the pocket even if they don't consciously think like that it is certainly possible.
My mum was lucky enough to see a fairly young doc who was happy for her to try lower carb and reduce her dependence on glic, ( she now has come off it).
My doc on the other hand would not even discuss alternatives, insisted Type 2 was progressive and I'd end up on insulin. When I got my results after 6 months I was just told over the phone my levels (now non-diabtic and improved lipid profile) by the secretary and just told 'no action'. No-one was interested in how I did it. Don't you think as a doctor their curiosity should be even a little bit piqued if their patients are suddenly curing themselves - isn't that what doctors should be interested in? Particularly in their specialist field?
Granted it may not work for everyone but the current dietary guidelines they are giving out to diabetics have proven not to work over the past 40 years. If they had, diabetes would not be progressive as it has proved in every case apparently following their guidelines. Whereas for those following LCHF who continue to follow it, it has worked to improve if not reverse diabetes in just about every case. It only stops working if people go back to their old diets or decide they can't follow it or don't understand it properly. Does that mean people should not be told about it as an option?
Even if they want to say that it is not current NHS advice but some people are finding success with it - at least that would show an open mind. Some doctors like my mum's are doing that but many many aren't.
I think as people who have discovered a way to help ourselves we are duty bound to help others to do it too. If people don't like it, can't follow it, or don't want to, that is their choice but to keep them in the dark about it is not a great option.
They have established it is perfectly safe for at least year ( we know it is safe for a lifetime but hey let them tell people to follow it for a year if they like (and by then people can make up their own minds whether to continue something that is beneficial or go back to eating whatever they like and taking meds).

 

[Hiitsme]

Just saw the doctor with the results and I'm happy to report that my a1c is at 5.5! That's after 3 months of diagnosis. Must say LCHF is working for me. There is one problem. Both my HDL and LDL and total have all gone up a bit. My Total is a 5.4, LDL is 3.? can't remember and my HDL is 1.03. I'll see him again in a week or two after a 24 hour blood pressure monitor. So I may have to change what fats I am eating and/or get a few more greens in the diet.

Doc was really happy to see I'm taking charge of this. He even said that if I can keep my numbers at 5.5 or lower he'll take me off the metformin. He also didn't have any problem prescribing more test strips. I really haven't told him about the high fat part of the diet as I'm not sure how he'll take it. I think that if I can get my numbers in to the "normal" range he'll be happy. I'll be happy also. So he's not all about pushing pills but he also wants to make sure I don't fall back to my old habits. I told him if I can keep getting test strips it will help keep me honest.

I'm still not convinced he's all that knowledgeable about diabetes but he doesn't really need to be. He just has to sign the blood test forms and give me the results. I think I can handle it from there. Besides he's not the one telling me what to eat. The dietician is. So if I can get my HDL/LDL under control then she won't have anything to say about it either.

Thanks for all the support everyone. Thanks for keeping me honest. Most of all thanks for all the links to good recipes.

Hi @satkins That's a great result. Well done.
My suggestion on the fats is to look for healthy fats. Things like avocado.