• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

NHS Choices Dietary advice

Yes.
http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes_care/blood-sugar-level-ranges.html

These figures aren't far off.

However, a lot of sites do argue that 'normal' people don't have these spikes after carbs, and many low carb websites claim that in a normal population, carbs don't cause spikes, so it depends who you believe.
(phlaunt, and the dietdoctor I believe, argue against spikes, hence they seem to agree with the SACN, while NICE don't)
 
Last edited:
Daibell said:
it also concluded that there is no association between total carbohydrate intake and glycaemia (blood glucose level).
Click to expand...
This is just beyond belief! There's probably a thousand or more T2s who regularly test BG and monitor carbs intake who could demonstrate a very significant relationship.

Dave
 
miahara said:
This is just beyond belief! There's probably a thousand or more T2s who regularly test BG and monitor carbs intake who could demonstrate a very significant relationship.

Dave
Click to expand...
But there are over 3 million Diabetics in the UK, and half as many again not yet diagnosed. If those in power do not attend this Forum or get untold letters of complaint from those you have identified, then THEY will respond to the feedback they see in the media, which so far is a drop on the ocean. So your thousand T2's above currently represent a 'silent' minority. Sorry, but our message is obviously not carrying the weight needed to bring about change. Walls of Jerico. anyone?

At least @Southport GP has gained NHS recognition for his work in this field, and some professors and doctors here in the UK are releasing scientific papers into the media that do grab the occasional headline. Perhaps a poll on gov.uk is needed? Anyone know how to start one?
 
Most of the research we do at work involves measuring the blood glucose of non-diabetics age 18-25 prior to, during and following CHO consumption and/or exercise.

One study we did in summer involved feeding participants a popular fast food breakfast including muffins and hash browns (you know who I'm talking about ;) ) and measuring their blood sugar. It was not uncommon to see a starting blood sugar of 3.0-4.5 mmol/L rise to 10.0-13.0 mmol/L following consumption of the breakfast with a swift return to around 5.0 mmol/L within an hour.

It is simply untrue that non-diabetics do not have spikes in blood sugar, they may not be as spectacular but they're there.
 
1abRat said:
Most of the research we do at work involves measuring the blood glucose of non-diabetics age 18-25 prior to, during and following CHO consumption and/or exercise.

One study we did in summer involved feeding participants a popular fast food breakfast including muffins and hash browns (you know who I'm talking about ;) ) and measuring their blood sugar. It was not uncommon to see a starting blood sugar of 3.0-4.5 mmol/L rise to 10.0-13.0 mmol/L following consumption of the breakfast with a swift return to around 5.0 mmol/L within an hour.

It is simply untrue that non-diabetics do not have spikes in blood sugar, they may not be as spectacular but they're there.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've seen the same.
Sometimes these myths that 'normal' folk never spike need de-bunking properly.
 
We had breakfast at 9am wife had poached egg on one slice of wholemeal 15 carbs 1 hour after 7.2
2 hours 5.7
I had one Lidl high protein roll (2 halves) with a poached egg on each half 9.8 carbs 1hour 5.2
2 hours 4.5
 
Last edited:
1abRat said:
Most of the research we do at work involves measuring the blood glucose of non-diabetics age 18-25 prior to, during and following CHO consumption and/or exercise.

One study we did in summer involved feeding participants a popular fast food breakfast including muffins and hash browns (you know who I'm talking about ;) ) and measuring their blood sugar. It was not uncommon to see a starting blood sugar of 3.0-4.5 mmol/L rise to 10.0-13.0 mmol/L following consumption of the breakfast with a swift return to around 5.0 mmol/L within an hour.

It is simply untrue that non-diabetics do not have spikes in blood sugar, they may not be as spectacular but they're there.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that info, it is very interesting, and agrees with other info I have seen elsewhere.
But the huge difference between 'normal' and glucose intolerance, is the speed at which the blood glucose returns to around 5mmol/l

From all the reading I have done, 'normal' people start off lower, spike very briefly, and return to normal. The height of their spikes are rarely more than a few minutes, usually around 15 mins or less, then back to normal within the hour.

In comparison, we diabetics tend not to test until 90 mins or 120 mins (so most of us haven't got a clue how high we spike), and by then, even with medication, we find that our blood glucose is still higher that we started. Some of our tests are still rising at that point. So our peaks are longer, with proportional increases in damage to nerves and blood vessels.

And how many of us actually start off in the 3-4.5 mmol/l range? I certainly don't. So while 'normals' might peak quicker, they have very different insulin responses and other hormonal action.

So the comparison isn't really useful. We would need to do proper comparisons with a cross section of diabetics, with 15 minute timings for both groups (and factor in medication), to see the true picture.
 
Brunneria said:
So the comparison isn't really useful. We would need to do proper comparisons with a cross section of diabetics, with 15 minute timings for both groups (and factor in medication), to see the true picture.
Click to expand...

Hi @Brunneria I'm all for that,when I get some more strips I will test every 15 minutes,but every time I takes the wife's BG she keeps jumping saying it hurts,so I will have to wait until she nods off;)
 
1abRat said:
Most of the research we do at work involves measuring the blood glucose of non-diabetics age 18-25 prior to, during and following CHO consumption and/or exercise.

One study we did in summer involved feeding participants a popular fast food breakfast including muffins and hash browns (you know who I'm talking about ;) ) and measuring their blood sugar. It was not uncommon to see a starting blood sugar of 3.0-4.5 mmol/L rise to 10.0-13.0 mmol/L following consumption of the breakfast with a swift return to around 5.0 mmol/L within an hour.

It is simply untrue that non-diabetics do not have spikes in blood sugar, they may not be as spectacular but they're there.
Click to expand...

I also found this very interesting. The return to base at one hour (not 2 hours) after a double figure spike is the interesting part, when DCUK advises under 7.8 at at least 90 minutes is normal for non-diabetics. I wonder how many of those on here that have reversed their diabetes can claim those sort of results?

I also wonder why the research was limited to 18-25 year olds when it is known that glucose levels rise naturally with age. (making it harder for us oldies!)
 
Bluetit1802 said:
I also found this very interesting. The return to base at one hour (not 2 hours) after a double figure spike is the interesting part, when DCUK advises under 7.8 at at least 90 minutes is normal for non-diabetics. I wonder how many of those on here that have reversed their diabetes can claim those sort of results?

I also wonder why the research was limited to 18-25 year olds when it is known that glucose levels rise naturally with age. (making it harder for us oldies!)
Click to expand...

It's not a return to base, it was a return to 1.5 or 2 above the starting level.

'At least' is the minimum time not the maximum, an depending on what I eat, I can get below 7.8 again in faster than 90 minutes.

And as you say, the response becomes naturally worse with age.
 
wiseowl_123 said:
Hi @Brunneria I'm all for that,when I get some more strips I will test every 15 minutes,but every time I takes the wife's BG she keeps jumping saying it hurts,so I will have to wait until she nods off;)
Click to expand...

Its a pain, isn't it? (Pun!)
Mr B occasionally presents me with a stationary target, and has never been stabbed at higher than 6.6mmol/l at 30, 60 and 90 mins after his usual carb fests.
 
Daibell said:
The evidence considered by SACN for its Carbohydrates and Health report does not support using a low carbohydrate diet to reduce the risk of Type 2 diabetes. It also concluded that the hypothesis that diets higher in total carbohydrate cause weight gain was not supported by the evidence from the long term Randomised Controlled Trials considered; it also concluded that there is no association between total carbohydrate intake and glycaemia (blood glucose level).[/I]

It is absolutely unbelievably stupid and completely contradicts our own experience. We all know that, in the general population, higher carbs produce a greater insulin response; and that insulin is the fat storage hormone.

So, perhaps I should stop my insulin as there is no connection between total carbs and blood sugar level and/or I can pig out on carbs with no weight gain. BTW I looked at the SACN website and the list of members and their Register of Interests. Was I surprised to find that many of the Professor members are funded by food or pharma companies - No. So now you know officially that Carbs are good for us :)
Click to expand...
Criminal.
 
Dark Horse said:
"The evidence considered by SACN for its Carbohydrates and Health report does not support using a low carbohydrate diet to reduce the risk of Type 2 diabetes. It also concluded that the hypothesis that diets higher in total carbohydrate cause weight gain was not supported by the evidence from the long term Randomised Controlled Trials considered; it also concluded that there is no association between total carbohydrate intake and glycaemia (blood glucose level)."

Although the answer talks about carbohydrate and "the risk of Type 2 diabetes" it doesn't make any comment about carbohydrate and the risks of the complications of diabetes. This suggests the answer is discussing carbohydrate in the diet of people without diabetes. In people without diabetes, the statement "there is no association between total carbohydrate intake and glycaemia" is not unreasonable. Perhaps NHS choices misunderstood Daibell's point? Without seeing the email they were sent, it is difficult to judge.
Click to expand...
Maybe they deliberately misunderstood it
 
Bluetit1802 said:
Even if it is correct for non-diabetics, it is still pushed on diabetics on diagnosis, at courses, and anywhere else it can push it. That is what is wrong.
Click to expand...
I was told there was no special diet for diabetes. Luckily, I had already read enough beforehand to know that, at the very least, refined carbohydrates should be restricted.
 
douglas99 said:
It's not a return to base, it was a return to 1.5 or 2 above the starting level.

'At least' is the minimum time not the maximum, an depending on what I eat, I can get below 7.8 again in faster than 90 minutes.

And as you say, the response becomes naturally worse with age.
Click to expand...

It was a return to 0.5 or 2 above starting level. Within an hour.

Yes, the DCUK advice is at least 90 minutes, in other words higher than that at an hour is supposedly acceptable as long as it is no more than 7.8 at 90 minutes plus. This is nowhere near a return to "base" (1.9 to 3.8 above in fact).
 
Yes, some posters do seem to be hung up on that.
They state pre prandial can be 5.9, so if you start there, you can nearly keep your maximum at two I suppose.
I wouldn't want to try to raise my pre prandial just for that though.
 
Back
Top