Why Eat Carbs As A Type 2 Diabetic?

[first14808]

I lived as a kinder in Libya (pre Gaddaffi) and we had to boil the water so drank pop copiously ( in the 50's). So I am not surprised that even the island states listed in the top 10 places for PWD will have a ready supply to hand. Especially the Phillipines and other US interests abroad.

Yup. I think there's a strong dietary link, and probably also linked to post-WW2 dietary changes and influences. So there were wartime restrictions to diets, then post-war increases and perhaps more importantly, cultural influences like the rise in soft drink consumption, ie Coca Cola and Pepsi expansion. I remember as a kid, drinks were mostly water or water with some squash or cordial, so a lot less sugar because a bottle of Coke was expensive. Cheaper canning and plastic bottling lowered price and increased consumption. And along with that, the spread of other fast foods and junk foods.

Or just wider food availability. Again as a kid, I remember curry being a bit adventurous, now it's common. Also reading about how dietary changes have affected populations in places like Hong Kong and Japan, where higher protein diets have lead to an increase in average height, with a knock-on effect like traditional furniture was too small.

I also think food processing and food additives are behind a lot of diet-related issues like diabetes and some food intolerances. Previously we'd have eaten plain'ol sugar, now, it's inverse and maybe some of our livers don't like that kind of chemical engineering. Many of us have discovered going back to basics and eating more natural foods typical for an LCHF diet means we're demonstrably healthier.

 

[Crocodile]

I have been to the Nile regions of Egypt several times. Cokes and Pepsis were everywhere, presumably because the water was not the purest. Not only that, but the locals ate raw sugar cane, chewing on it all day. I was offered some once - I tried it and blimey, it was sweet.

Sometimes perceptions aren't always what they seem. Accordingly, the per capita consumption of soft drink from the Coca Cola company around the Nile falls a long way down the list.
https://www.statista.com/statistics...t-drinks-of-the-coca-cola-company-by-country/
This is what I was alluding to when pointing out the dangers of the relativist position. Naturally, there are other manufacturers but that doesn't change the point that casual observations are not reliable, especially in the face of statistics.

 

[lucylocket61]

I do not have soft fizzy drinks, I do not like them. Never have.

 

[derry60]

Diabetics CAN eat potatoes or anything else for that matter but how it affects there blood sugar levels has to be tested to see how it affects individual diabetics
Carol

I know this.

 

[Nad 2]

I hear what you say. But carbs are not required and they are lethal for diabetics. Not in a single meal but over time. If your diabetic you can thank carbs

Diabetes may be the least of your worries thanks to carbs

But you get families eating the same food i.e. cereal for breakfast, sandwich/crisps for snacks, potato at every meal, plus pasta/rice/pizza and just one, or even none, get diabetes.

 

[bulkbiker]

But you get families eating the same food i.e. cereal for breakfast, sandwich/crisps for snacks, potato at every meal, plus pasta/rice/pizza and just one, or even none, get diabetes.

Yet...

 

[Crocodile]

But you get families eating the same food i.e. cereal for breakfast, sandwich/crisps for snacks, potato at every meal, plus pasta/rice/pizza and just one, or even none, get diabetes.

Yes, not everyone has a propensity to acquire diabetes. Not everybody gets cancer, arthritis, hypertension or schizophrenia either. Guess it's just down to plain ol' bad luck.

 

[MrsGruffy]

Mum, at 93, is the poster child for the low fat, high carb diet. She has no health issues and takes only fish oil caps every day - no meds for anything. She eats bread and potatoes every day, low fat margarine and jam on her toast, low fat yoghurt, a couple of biscuits or a piece of cake each day. Breakfast is cereal and toast, lunch is meat and veg, tea is soup or something light with toast. She's in great shape for her age, and minimal cognitive decline (less than what one would normally expect for someone who is 93). So it's clear from this n=1 that you can't make blanket statements about anything really. This diet has served her well since it was advocated in the '70s. She's never been one for any sort of take away, although these days she will have a bit of the white breast meat from a bbq supermarket chicken.

You know, we are all living longer, but a lot of us are living quite sick for decades. My ambition at 52 is to live well until I die in a skydiving accident at 87 or 88 (I'd say longer, but I smoked for over 30 years, so I've no doubt lost a few years). I have no interest in a long life of chronic illness. Hopefully it's not too late for the lifestyle overhaul. I think if I ate like Mum, I'd be dead in a year or 3 (or wish that I was!). Keeping my carbs to a minimum and eating one meal a day seems to be doing the trick right now, but my weight loss is very very slow, and I still have about 30kg to lose. I have lost 25% of my excess weight so far, and largely it's down to the one meal a day regimen. I'm starting to mix it up with some longer fasts but I find them quite tough mentally.

I have a feeling that it's the mix of high fat and highly processed carbs, and particularly the types of fats that have been recommended in the last 50 years - polyunsaturates, hydrogenated and trans fats: cheap, nasty fats, that will eventually be found to blame for the trifecta of health burdens of our age: T2 diabetes, dementia and disproportionate weight:height ratio (obesity). Have you looked in the freezer section of the supermarket lately? Practically everything in there is protein coated in carbohydrate intended to be fried in oil or already pre-soaked in oil ready for the oven. I also think that you have to have a predisposition to get 'lucky' with the trifecta - you have to have a ticket. The ticket could be nature or nurture, genetic or lifestyle or a combination.

I don't think eating a lot of carbohydrates causes T2 diabetes. Not eating them certainly seems to help with BG control once you have it though. The best I can figure out, there is an association between T2 diabetes, obesity and a high (unhealthy) fat, high (processed) carbohydrate diet. It's a very exciting time we're living in, now that the low carb diet is starting to get recognition as a means to T2 diabetes reversal. The evidence of the long long term impact of tight BG control through diet won't be apparent for another decade or so. Have to remember that when they tightened BG control with medication in RCTs, people started dying prematurely. We need really long term data on what happens to us lot who are maintaining strict dietary control long term to see if this one factor alters the prognosis of the disease - because that's the ultimate test, isn't it? It's whether we live long and healthy lives and die of old age, rather than from comorbidities associated with or derived from T2 diabetes.

 

[Moggely]

I have so few carbs I may as well go all meat, eggs fish extra. Except the few carbs I do it I really enjoy so they are stayin

 

[Hoping4Cure]

This nugget of information I read when I was first diagnosed really explained things to me
“Modern research has shown that insulin resistance can be combatted by treatment methods that reduce how much insulin the body is producing or taking via insulin injections or insulin pumps.

Reducing insulin resistance can be achieved by following low-carbohydrate and ketogenic diets.”

The vast majority of the replies to the question "why eat carbs" isn't simply "because I like them", it should be properly said thus: "I prefer eating carbs to curing my type 2 diabetes and living a long, healthy life".

As a type 1 diabetic, I shake my head at the blithe way many seem to deliberately be choosing to remain with their condition, despite knowing the way out of it, thereby wasting finite medical resources and drug insurance coverage in the process, preferring to eat their cake and stay diabetic, too (so to speak).

I find this type of mentality frankly selfish and irresponsible. 90% of diabetics are type 2 and it can be reversed through low-carb diet alone in many (most? all?) cases. Regardless of anecdotal evidence presented here in this forum, large scale studies shared on this very website show that low-carbing works and denying that is pointless.

The tax money that goes towards treating these patients is taken away from more serious incurable diseases, for whom adequate resources are already unavailable. GCMs aren't free and given to every type 1, and type 2 drugs like GLP-1 which help type 1s tremendously are out of our reach in most cases, because without an indication for its use, insurance won't cover it, and we can't afford e.g. 1400$ a month for semaglutide (which is a WONDERFUL type 2 drug for type 1 diabetics. 1.5% A1C drop, lower sugar variance and insulin requirements). This is besides the countless billions that goes into type 2 drug research that companies invest in due to the demand, which could otherwise go to other diseases. Funding for healthcare is a zero-sum game, since budgets are limited and finite. And insurance is a zero-sum game too, since pooled risk is increased when many more people are sick. Many recent Type 2 meds are ridiculously expensive considering the low, low cost of low-carbing. It's self-indulgent in the extreme.

 

[Oldvatr]

The vast majority of the replies to the question "why eat carbs" isn't simply "because I like them", it should be properly said thus: "I prefer eating carbs to curing my type 2 diabetes and living a long, healthy life".

As a type 1 diabetic, I shake my head at the blithe way many seem to deliberately be choosing to remain with their condition, despite knowing the way out of it, thereby wasting finite medical resources and drug insurance coverage in the process, preferring to eat their cake and stay diabetic, too (so to speak).

I find this type of mentality frankly selfish and irresponsible. 90% of diabetics are type 2 and it can be reversed through low-carb diet alone in many (most? all?) cases. Regardless of anecdotal evidence presented here in this forum, large scale studies shared on this very website show that low-carbing works and denying that is pointless.

The tax money that goes towards treating these patients is taken away from more serious incurable diseases, for whom adequate resources are already unavailable. GCMs aren't free and given to every type 1, and type 2 drugs like GLP-1 which help type 1s tremendously are out of our reach in most cases, because without an indication for its use, insurance won't cover it, and we can't afford e.g. 1400$ a month for semaglutide (which is a WONDERFUL type 2 drug for type 1 diabetics. 1.5% A1C drop, lower sugar variance and insulin requirements). This is besides the countless billions that goes into type 2 drug research that companies invest in due to the demand, which could otherwise go to other diseases. Funding for healthcare is a zero-sum game, since budgets are limited and finite. And insurance is a zero-sum game too, since pooled risk is increased when many more people are sick. Many recent Type 2 meds are ridiculously expensive considering the low, low cost of low-carbing. It's self-indulgent in the extreme.

I am equally surprised at the number of Type 1's who use insulbulemia as a means of weight control. Of course, there are many T2's on this site who also place weight loss as a priority over bgl control, which I find difficult to comprehend.

I think the modern thinking on diabetes being caused by obesity is causing many to worry more about avoirdupois than mmol/l, and it saddens me that even when good evidence is presented that certain diet therapies can alleviate both weight and bgl together that people still want their snax and sins.

It is holiday season, and it is not unusual for some to take a trip down De Nile. But that is the wrong sand to stick your head into.

 

[Lally123]

The vast majority of the replies to the question "why eat carbs" isn't simply "because I like them", it should be properly said thus: "I prefer eating carbs to curing my type 2 diabetes and living a long, healthy life".

As a type 1 diabetic, I shake my head at the blithe way many seem to deliberately be choosing to remain with their condition, despite knowing the way out of it, thereby wasting finite medical resources and drug insurance coverage in the process, preferring to eat their cake and stay diabetic, too (so to speak).

I find this type of mentality frankly selfish and irresponsible. 90% of diabetics are type 2 and it can be reversed through low-carb diet alone in many (most? all?) cases. Regardless of anecdotal evidence presented here in this forum, large scale studies shared on this very website show that low-carbing works and denying that is pointless.

The tax money that goes towards treating these patients is taken away from more serious incurable diseases, for whom adequate resources are already unavailable. GCMs aren't free and given to every type 1, and type 2 drugs like GLP-1 which help type 1s tremendously are out of our reach in most cases, because without an indication for its use, insurance won't cover it, and we can't afford e.g. 1400$ a month for semaglutide (which is a WONDERFUL type 2 drug for type 1 diabetics. 1.5% A1C drop, lower sugar variance and insulin requirements). This is besides the countless billions that goes into type 2 drug research that companies invest in due to the demand, which could otherwise go to other diseases. Funding for healthcare is a zero-sum game, since budgets are limited and finite. And insurance is a zero-sum game too, since pooled risk is increased when many more people are sick. Many recent Type 2 meds are ridiculously expensive considering the low, low cost of low-carbing. It's self-indulgent in the extreme.

That is a very black and white view. Yes it makes sense for no type 2 diabetic to ever eat carbs but I don't think it's fair to class all type 2 diabetics as selfish and irresponsible for eating them. There is a myriad of reasons why people prefer to continue eating some carbs maybe lack of education, dietary intolerance, culture, choice. Also there is no one size fits all because we are all human and thus wide variance in our levels of intelligence, our lifestyles, our dietary preferences.

 

[zand]

The vast majority of the replies to the question "why eat carbs" isn't simply "because I like them", it should be properly said thus: "I prefer eating carbs to curing my type 2 diabetes and living a long, healthy life".

As a type 1 diabetic, I shake my head at the blithe way many seem to deliberately be choosing to remain with their condition, despite knowing the way out of it, thereby wasting finite medical resources and drug insurance coverage in the process, preferring to eat their cake and stay diabetic, too (so to speak).

I find this type of mentality frankly selfish and irresponsible. 90% of diabetics are type 2 and it can be reversed through low-carb diet alone in many (most? all?) cases. Regardless of anecdotal evidence presented here in this forum, large scale studies shared on this very website show that low-carbing works and denying that is pointless.

The tax money that goes towards treating these patients is taken away from more serious incurable diseases, for whom adequate resources are already unavailable. GCMs aren't free and given to every type 1, and type 2 drugs like GLP-1 which help type 1s tremendously are out of our reach in most cases, because without an indication for its use, insurance won't cover it, and we can't afford e.g. 1400$ a month for semaglutide (which is a WONDERFUL type 2 drug for type 1 diabetics. 1.5% A1C drop, lower sugar variance and insulin requirements). This is besides the countless billions that goes into type 2 drug research that companies invest in due to the demand, which could otherwise go to other diseases. Funding for healthcare is a zero-sum game, since budgets are limited and finite. And insurance is a zero-sum game too, since pooled risk is increased when many more people are sick. Many recent Type 2 meds are ridiculously expensive considering the low, low cost of low-carbing. It's self-indulgent in the extreme.

Hey who said anything about cake? The question is about carbs, all carbs, not just cake, pie and chips etc. I eat carbs because I like them and my gut definitely needs carbs! I know there are some on this site who don't need veg, but I do. I eat them to save myself alot of pain and embarrassment ( and visits to the doctor) . Thanks for making me feel bad about having 17g carbs today. How many have you had?

Carbs cause inflammation in the body regardless of whether you are diabetic or not and cutting carbs can reduce problems associated with arthritis. Maybe you could go onto an arthritis forum and tell those folks they are deliberately remaining with their condition too? T2 cannot be cured and to say it can is just wrong. It can be controlled/managed just like T1, but that's all.

Frankly I don't understand your mentality either. I didn't cause my T2 just like you didn't cause your T1.

 

[zand]

Of course, there are many T2's on this site who also place weight loss as a priority over bgl control, which I find difficult to comprehend.

Well I am one of them at the moment. The reason weight loss is more important to me than BGs is that my weight is doing more damage to my health than my BGs. I am taking blood pressure tablets and would like to stop taking them. I believe that losing weight will help me with that aim and so it is my number one priority right now. My mental health is next, my BGs come a poor third. Should things change then BGs will once again be top priority.

 

[Guzzler]

This blame culture has to stop.

 

[bamba]

By definition facts cannot be wrong.

Not True
The words "Data" and "Fact" derived from Latin

Datum => that which is given.
Factum=> that which is made.
As a "made thing" an inferance on Data (and every one knows you can get bad data) a "fact" can be wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

A fact is a statement that is consistent with reality or can be proven with evidence.

( the question here is whose "reality" )

 

[lucylocket61]

some type 2's (including me) have more than diabetes to deal with and we have to weigh up the overall impact on our bodies, health, and medications when choosing how to balance our health in numerous ways.

I guess that makes me one of those selfish type 2's then ; )))

 

[lucylocket61]

90% of diabetics are type 2 and it can be reversed through low-carb diet alone in many (most? all?) cases.

got any facts to back that up?

The tax money that goes towards treating these patients is taken away from more serious incurable diseases, for whom adequate resources are already unavailable.

Here we go again with the undeserving and deserving ill. I had hoped we had moved beyond that on here.

If only treating and curing type 2 was that simple.

 

[DavidGrahamJones]

I don't think eating a lot of carbohydrates causes T2 diabetes.

Depends on the individual. I started gaining weight when I got married to a lady who insisted that I would no longer be eating unhealthily and insisted I had toast for breakfast, more bread at lunch time and spuds or rice or pasta for dinner. Something I hadn't done in my unhealthy bachelor days. I actually gained 3 stones in 3 months. The hospital dietician blamed the salt content of WW frozen meals which we were adding carbs to.

I don't know the answer but in the same way that some are lactose or gluten intolerant, some of us can't handle carbs the same way as everyone else. Just a theory of mine.

 

[Hoping4Cure]

got any facts to back that up?

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/reversing-diabetes.html