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

Low carb high fat. Anyone been Type 2 for more than a few years?

Daphne917 said:
I was diagnosed in 2012 and have been diet only apart from a couple of months when my hba1c rose quickly and I was prescribed sitogliptin (sp) for a while until we realised it was the statins that has caused the rise. I don’t think it is a cult at all but people learning what foods they maybe able to or should not eat. Within my own family there are various allergies including fish, dairy, nuts, eggs etc and, at one stage, there were 3 cealiacs including my aunt and brother - preparing foods for a family get together can be a nightmare!

I am lucky in that I seem to be more carb tolerant that many diabetics and average between 100 - 130g carbs per day (although I have been known to have more) and my hba1c has been within non-diabetic levels for approx 5 years. I also eat full, as opposed to low fat, yoghurts, milk etc. This is a useful forum with a lot of good information, links and experiences for those newly diagnosed however, and I am going to put my head above the parapet here and this is purely my interpretation, reading some of the posts there seems to be an underlying trend of people becoming afraid of food to the extent that they seem to need to ask the forum permission to eat it when all they need to do is test and make their own mind up. We are all individuals and, as such, react differently to food and, in the case of Diabetes, carbs.
Click to expand...

Regarding posts from those who ask permission (almost) to eat certain foods, you will, I am sure, see comments suggesting that posters test or check the nutritional values. Some people require a little more hand-holding than others but the majority get it that they themselves must learn to make their own decisions on whether to eat or to avoid certain foods or just cut back on amounts. It is a learning curve that we all go through but there are a few people who feel the need to abrogate responsibility which is not conducive at all.
 
You don't have to eat saturated animal fats if you don't want to. There are lots of other healthy fats recommended by the British Heart Foundation for good heart health, avocado both as it is or oil, sesame oil, extra virgin olive oil, oily fish like salmon, mackerel etc, tree nuts and their oils. Protein doesn't have to be eaten in large amounts, I don't eat loads of protein as a rule, you don't have to go extreme low carb and you can get most of your carbs from above ground veggies. (My brother is very similar to you and he eats like this with maybe a few more carbs although he doesn't have diabetes and his health is doing very well on it)

You certainly have a lot to contend with and I agree you have to look at your lifestyle holistically- you're profile says you are on insulin so can you balance what carbs you eat with your insulin or are you on fixed doses? (sorry my knowledge is minimal)

As to length of time I'm coming up to my tenth anniversary and I've been doing low carb at various amounts all that time, the change in my health is amazing to be honest, I started off on maximum gliclizide and metformin now on metformin only - the rest of my stats you can see in my signature,

Although the majority of us here are enthusiastic about low carb high (or healthy) fats it's basically because it's what works for the majority of us, to be called cultish and to say we blindly follow is a bit unfair - I never just take anyone's word for it and make my own decisions- i.e. A good few on here do fasting for various lengths of time - I admire their commitment but that route is definitely not for me so will never do it - you have to choose your own path - hope you find something that suits you :)
 
Roseanne01 said:
I'm amazed at the cultish fervour on here for LCHF. I’ve never seen anything about the risks or anyone saying it doesn’t work, might be dangerous for some people? So is this purely a beginners forum?
Click to expand...
I’m not cultish. I don’t display fervour. I don’t do fads. I don’t do diets, as such.

I have gone moderately low carb high fat and watched the weight drop. My blood sugars are lower. That’s it.

What works for others doesn’t necessarily work for me and vise versa. I would never tell anyone to do what I do because I’m not intimately familiar with their other medical conditions or their metabolism. They know their bodies better than I do. They know what they need and how they will cope.

I can only speak from personal experience.
 
Also, and at the risk of droning on and on, it may be worth considering that many of the diseases and ailments that may [legitimately] make LCHF/keto difficult or unworkable for some individuals, might themselves be caused by metabolic dysfunction just the same as diabetes. It’s sometimes surprising to learn how many problems are linked to hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycaemia. This is often why this dietary approach is sometimes miraculously successful in vastly improving the health of those who choose it.

Really though, we - the cult - shouldn’t have to defend our lifestyle choices in order to appease those who disapprove or cannot participate for whatever reason. I’m a firm believer in people being able to speak freely and enthusiastically about their own personal choices. I don’t ever see anyone forcing LCHF upon anyone else, but I guess it’s a matter of perception.

:)
 
Roseanne01 said:
I'm amazed at the cultish fervour on here for LCHF. I’ve never seen anything about the risks or anyone saying it doesn’t work, might be dangerous for some people? So is this purely a beginners forum?
Click to expand...
Looking at your avatar @Roseanne01 , you remain unconvinced :D. Just joking.

But on a more serious note, as far as I can make out the whole thing does not have to be switched on/off like a light switch. It can be staged up (or is it down) in a controlled way where you can pause and monitor at any stage. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.
 
@Roseanne01 looking in from the outside I can see the "cult" aspect, most of us are believers to varying degrees and there have been some who have got into some tasty exchanges over same. It's done a job for them and for myself I am thankful for it.
Collateral damage. I'm sorry to read about your numerous medical issues, any one of them would be bad enough, together they must be greater than their individual parts. You make a link with low carb and kidney though state that your kidney disease was not related to low carb... I believe my diabetes was brought on by use of statins, which did affect my kidney function, not in a good way. My blood pressure is much better, possibly too low and so I've reduced my perindopril but not stopped it as it is meant to have properties that help support damaged kidney function.
I wish you well and hope you get some help/answers.
 
Jim Lahey said:
Just to add, with added fervour, that if low carbohydrate eating was dangerous per se, every human in the northern hemisphere would have died millennia ago during their first winter. That’s not to say that it’s suitable for everyone, of course, but things that make humans into a glowing picture of health in the intermediate term, are not bad for them in the long term. Life just doesn’t work that way :)

Only in my opinion, of course.
Click to expand...
Don’t get me wrong Jim, I find this a very useful way of viewing the whole thing.

But did you mean northern latitudes rather than northern hemisphere?
 
Oh, and one more thing...low fat high carb...anyone tried that for more than a few years? I did. Most of my adult life. That’s why I’m here now :nurse:

Just a bit of friendly banter. No ill will intended ;)
 
Listlad said:
Don’t get me wrong Jim, I find this a very useful way of viewing the whole thing.

But did you mean northern latitudes rather than northern hemisphere?
Click to expand...

I dunno. Just the north. Anywhere that has a cold winter incapable of sustaining fruits and crops year round.
 
If I drift in to higher carbs (because, {darn?}, they taste so good) then I put on weight and my BG control gets worse.

I then have to go low carb AND low calorie to get myself back under control.

I do have a low eGFR but this hasn't so far been linked to LCHF. I think too much protein is a possible risk factor.

A web search for links to low carbohydrate and kidney damage reveals the usual conflict of personal agendas, but one limited study (of overweight and obese with no kidney problems) seems to show an improvement of eGFR on a low carbohydrate diet.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27346534

I find eating mainly protein and fat very easy, and I should probably make a point of eating more above ground vegetables to fill me up. The 80/15/5 ratio sometimes seems very hard to achieve.

Edited by moderator for language
 
Last edited:
On low carb information:
https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/controversies tries to counter many of the adverse suggestions about low carbohydrate eating.
However to me it undermines the whole page by saying that the brain does not require carbohydrates which I find misleading. The brain does require glucose because there are some membranes which will not allow ketones to pass. It isn't clearly stated that the brain does require glucose (which is a carbohydrate) but it doesn't require DIETARY carbohydrate to supply this.
 
LittleGreyCat said:
On low carb information:
https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/controversies tries to counter many of the adverse suggestions about low carbohydrate eating.
However to me it undermines the whole page by saying that the brain does not require carbohydrates which I find misleading. The brain does require glucose because there are some membranes which will not allow ketones to pass. It isn't clearly stated that the brain does require glucose (which is a carbohydrate) but it doesn't require DIETARY carbohydrate to supply this.
Click to expand...

There is no requirement for carbohydrate to be metabolised into glucose, as the liver can manufacture its own glucose from amino acids, and even fatty acids if necessary. I get your point, but I think their description is fundamentally sound. There is only dietary carbohydrate. The liver does not secrete pasta, it secretes glucose :)
 
Jim Lahey said:
There is no requirement for carbohydrate to be metabolised into glucose, as the liver can manufacture its own glucose from amino acids, and even fatty acids if necessary. I get your point, but I think their description is fundamentally sound. There is only dietary carbohydrate. The liver does not secrete pasta, it secretes glucose :)
Click to expand...

Glucose is, however, a carbohydrate.
 
LittleGreyCat said:
Glucose is, however, a carbohydrate.
Click to expand...

That may be so, but the brain requires glucose, which can be supplied by the liver irrespective of exogenous glucose being fed into the body. I understand what you mean, but the message is that there is no requirement to consume carbohydrate in order to supply the brain with glucose. Personally it makes sense to me and is not misleading, but you’re free to disagree of course :)
 
Roseanne01 said:
It’s actually dangerous if you have kidney disease. Just saying this to see if others like me just drop out because everyone is focused on a single solution. I’ve been Type 2 for over thirty years and plant based worked for me for about fifteen years. But then the carbs caught up, I developed a range of chronic problems and high blood pressure caused kidney failure (not diabetes). Mostly through a very high stress work environment, I’d love a dietary solution but I can’t find one that’s low carb (which I am because I can’t tolerate it, even tomato raises my bsl), low fat because I have heart failure, and low protein because of kidney disease. And like most on here the only advice from dietitians is the standard same old same old. And from endo - here’s a wonderful new med to make you sicker and tireder. Or n the case of insulin -fatter.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if you had tried LCHF when you were first diagnosed your health would be much better now.
 
Jim Lahey said:
That may be so, but the brain requires glucose, which can be supplied by the liver irrespective of exogenous glucose being fed into the body. I understand what you mean, but the message is that there is no requirement to consume carbohydrate in order to supply the brain with glucose. Personally it makes sense to me and is not misleading, but you’re free to disagree of course :)
Click to expand...

I think you and @LittleGreyCat are on the same page when the latter quoted "
but it doesn't require DIETARY carbohydrate to supply this. "......​
 
Jim Lahey said:
That may be so, but the brain requires glucose, which can be supplied by the liver irrespective of exogenous glucose being fed into the body. I understand what you mean, but the message is that there is no requirement to consume carbohydrate in order to supply the brain with glucose. Personally it makes sense to me and is not misleading, but you’re free to disagree of course :)
Click to expand...

You are, of course, well versed in the subject and are capable of looking beyond the written words. It is clear to you (with your knowledge) that they are (hopefully) talking about dietary carbohydrate.

For the average lay reader there is considerable scope for confusion.

As there would be if someone posted that the body cannot survive without essential carbohydrates, without mentioning that the body can manufacture them so you don't have to eat them.

It is true that the body cannot survive without carbohydrates. Even on a nil carbohydrate diet your blood glucose level needs to stay above 4 mmol/L or you are in hypo territory and your brain can start to do strange things.

So context is everything. You can honestly and accurately argue that the body doesn't need (dietary) carbohydrates and also honestly and accurately argue that (self generated) carbohydrates are essential to survival.

Thus you can state two apparently diametrically opposed views which are both accurate as long as you include the source of the carbohydrates.

IMHO leaving out a clear qualification of the source of the carbohydrate can lead to no end of confusion. Again I say that glucose is a carbohydrate.
 
Back
Top