NEWS: More weight loss operations for diabetes

[Sunnie]

Why ? Because I don't read those books lol ! Never heard of them, not interested in them ! Thanks for your concern and I'm glad you place such importance on them

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

I haven't read all of the books either, but as a person that previously had 'pre-diabetes', I do make it a point to read all the newest info on diets and nutrition; as a caregiver of my body and longevity.

 

[Pipp]

But as patients, isn't that all we can do? Doctors and public health experts base their views on statistics relating to wide populations to advise what is most likely to work for the average person. I base my diet on my meter readings, which is subjective in that it applies only to me but objective in that it is an unbiased measure of my body's response. We aren't experts; all we can do is say "this worked for me, and if you try it it may work for you".

Kate

Totally agree but there are a few on the forum that don't say "this worked for me.....", some here believe their particular diet/lifestyle is the ONLY way and will push it all day long. Don't ask me who lol ! Just look for yourselves ! It's out there

Oi, @mo1905 . We have the same script writer on this one.

 

[mo1905]

I haven't read all of the books either, but as a person that previously had 'pre-diabetes', I do make it a point to read all the newest info on diets and nutrition; as a caregiver of my body and longevity.

That's fine but just don't accuse others of burying their heads in the sand because they don't
I also take very good care of my body, without the need to read every diet book on the market

 

[noblehead]

I haven't read all of the books either, but as a person that previously had 'pre-diabetes', I do make it a point to read all the newest info on diets and nutrition; as a caregiver of my body and longevity.

The trouble is Sunnie, if we were to read every diet book that came on the scene we would be heavily out of pocket and wouldn't have time to do much else, lost count of how many diets have been mentioned on this forum over the years and I'm sure there's many more out there that don't get mentioned, what I'm saying is you don't need to read endless diet books to find a diet that works for you.

 

[phoenix]

Understood, but we are talking multi-national dogma (based on Keye's 'cherry picking') that has changed the world's health. That's a pretty big deal.

You say that you read all the latest diet books but have you read the actual papers concerned with the so called cherry picking?
The allegations of cherry picking usually revolve around a graph published in 1953,
Here is the original paper
http://www.epi.umn.edu/cvdepi/wp-co...clerosis-A-Problem-in-Newer-Public-Health.pdf
Here is the one critical of the original graph, comparing it with 22 countries of a later date. http://thescienceofnutrition.files....he-diet-and-mortality-from-heart-disease1.pdf You may note that the correlations are still significant even with 'all' the countries.
. ( it is an important paper on the methodology of this type of research; it started the discussion leading to guidelines on what defined causation and hence for example pronouncements on smoking and cancer * )

Here a blogger (with post grad qualifications in nutritional science , a researcher at one of the most important labs for cancer research) explains and shows how a lot of people have just copied this idea without reading the papers. (the internet echo chamber)
http://thescienceofnutrition.wordpress.com/tag/ancel-keys/

Note this was not the Seven Countries study which started later and is still being reported.

Over the years Keys tested, and refined his hypotheses . this is how the scientific method works(did you realise that he said that trans fat was a problem many years ago?) At no time did he advocate a diet of pastries, doughnuts and pies nor even low fat cookies, highly sweetened yoghurts or magarines containing trans fats
. He advocated a Med type diet based on the Cretan diet made of fresh natural foods. high in fruit, veg, fish , small amounts of meat, some dairy, whole grains and monounsaturated fat. Is that diet the one that led to increased obesity?
Perhaps this video of Keys at work will show something of the man rather than the myth. This was just one of his studies starting in the late 1940s . It's worth noting that this was the impetus for other similar studies worldwide; in the UK , the Whitehall study. A lot of the popular books hail from the US and don't look at the evidence produced in the UK and elsewhere.

*http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/11/19/aje.kws374.full

 

[zand]

The trouble is Sunnie, if we were to read every diet book that came on the scene we would be heavily out of pocket and wouldn't have time to do much else, lost count of how many diets have been mentioned on this forum over the years and I'm sure there's many more out there that don't get mentioned, what I'm saying is you don't need to read endless diet books to find a diet that works for you.

But I did read endless diet books to find the right one for me! ......in the end I discovered low carbing on my own, by mistake, without a book, and made up my own rules to start with, then found a book about it, then this forum. So I suppose I'm agreeing with you really @noblehead but I probably wouldn't have got there without reading all those books which were wrong for me?? Or would I??

edit: looking back now, I would have been better off leaving the books on the shelf, because all the wrong diet advice did was to make me fatter. So yes I'm agreeing with you.

 

[noblehead]

Pleased we agree Zand

 

[zand]

Pleased we agree Zand

lol - Is that a first?

 

[noblehead]

lol - Is that a first?

I'm sure it isn't, didn't we agree on the World Cup thread

 

[Sid Bonkers]

Sid, you DID read enough of Keys to realize that he cherry picked what countries' data on cholesterol and morbidity...to use on his report? (that was the basis for all the low-fat nonsense?)

As I said to the last person who flippantly suggested that Keys (a noted scientist not some diet guru who wrote books for profit) cherry picked data, he did not and neither did he cherry pick the countries in his 50 years study to give any preconceived answers.

Quote:
His interest in diet and cardio-vascular disease (CVD) was prompted, in part, by seemingly counter-intuitive data: American business executives, presumably among the best-fed persons, had high rates of heart disease, while in post-war Europe CVD rates had decreased sharply in the wake of reduced food supplies. Keys postulated a correlation between cholesterol levels and CVD and initiated a study of Minnesota businessmen (the first prospective study of CVD). At a 1955 expert meeting at the World Health Organization in Geneva, Keys presented his diet-lipid-heart disease hypothesis with "his usual confidence and bluntness". He was severely criticized and this may have stimulated him to develop the Seven Countries Study.

The Seven Countries Study.
The Seven Countries Study was formally started in fall 1958 in Yugoslavia. In total, 12,763 males, 40–59 years of age, were enrolled as 16 cohorts, in seven countries, in four regions of the world (United States, Northern Europe, Southern Europe, Japan). One cohort is in the United States, two cohorts in Finland, one in the Netherlands, three in Italy, five in Yugoslavia (two in Croatia, and three in Serbia), two in Greece, and two in Japan. The entry examinations were performed between 1958 and 1964 with an average participation rate of 90%, lowest in the USA, with 75% and highest in one of the Japanese cohorts, with 100%. The Seven Countries Study has continued for more than 50 years. The above reference summarizes its principal findings.

Now to me that sounds as though he picked a very varied selection of Countries and diets, assuming your referring to the seven Countries study, please do tell me who you think he should have included, who you think he purposely left out?

I am genuinely interested?

 

[Sid Bonkers]

I haven't read all of the books either, but as a person that previously had 'pre-diabetes', I do make it a point to read all the newest info on diets and nutrition; as a caregiver of my body and longevity.

Then perhaps you might like to read this
http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/big-fat-fake

Just answer the silly question to prove you are a human and not a bot and all 6 pages will be revealed for you to read.

 

[zand]

Then perhaps you might like to read this
http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/big-fat-fake

Just answer the silly question to prove you are a human and not a bot and all 6 pages will be revealed for you to read.

Thanks Sid, I've read it. I found most of it interesting. I'd just like to comment on a couple of points. My comments are in relation to myself and my weight only. I will try to give a balanced view of parts of my own life.

"The Fat Shall Set Ye Free?
In Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution, Robert Atkins claims that by simply minimizing your carbohydrate intake you can quickly lose massive amounts of weight, even while pigging out daily on fatback, pork rinds, and lard. He also claims his diet will relieve "fatigue, irritability, depression, trouble concentrating, headaches, insomnia, dizziness, joint and muscle aches, heartburn, colitis, premenstrual syndrome, and water retention and bloating."
Claims like those should make anyone suspicious, even those who have barely scraped through high school biology."

Well, I haven't done the Atkins diet as such, but LCHF has certainly relieved me of all of the above symptoms except colitis and heartburn which I never had. Now this may not be true for anyone else in the world, but it is true for me and therefore Robert Atkins claims don't seem suspicious to me at all, because I have seen the change in my own life. I don't need science to prove it to me, I proved it to me. LCHF may work for others, it may not, but I tend to tell people about it so they can at least make up their own mind about it - especially if the person has been struggling to lose weight for many years. Most people look to mainstream advice first and only turn to alternatives when mainstream advice fails them. Yes, this scientifically proven mainstream advice also fails some people, just like the very faddy diets which seemingly work for some and not for others.

"According to Taubes, Endocrinology 101 "requires an understanding of how carbohydrates affect insulin and blood sugar and in turn fat metabolism and appetite." In brief, it says there are aspects of a high- or low-carbohydrate diet that affect both how much we want to eat (referred to as "satiety") and how efficiently the body converts the various nutrients into body fat. And the theory says an Atkins-like diet is both more satiating and less efficient in converting calories to fat.
Yet the published literature that Taubes ignored says otherwise."

Again, I found out quite by accident one day that eating carbs made me hungrier. I have said this story this a few times already on the forum, but I need to repeat myself to explain my point. My son and I were in the habit of having bacon butties for breakfast, at around 7 .30 a.m. I was always starving hungry by 10 a.m. So I snacked, sometimes healthily (fruit, nuts) usually not healthily (crisps). One day I ran out of bread, so I gave my son the butties and I just had the same amount of bacon on its own. I didn't even think of food until 1 p.m. This was a first. I had usually had 2 snacks and lunch by 12. So I experimented and gradually cut out bread altogether, then pasta, then crisps and cereal. I never ate rice much anyway and as a failed dieter, sugar itself didn't feature highly in my diet at that time (maybe an occasional bar of chocolate, but that was easy to forego) I stuck with potatoes as my main high carb item as they seemed 'least worst' to me. So my weight started to stabilise because I wasn't so hungry and therefore wasn't eating as much.

Then I bought a book about metabolic syndrome and low carbing - I bought the book because I had seen the benefit of cutting carbs in my own life already and wanted to pursue it further. I added more tasty foods and ate only three meals a day, no snacks - I ate as much as I liked, but now kept potatoes to a minimum. I left out mashed potatoes and jacket potatoes because I became fatigued after eating them. A small portion of chips or boiled or roast potatoes didn't make me tired so they remained in my diet occasionally. I started to lose a pound a week and was never hungry during the 2 months that I followed this way of eating. Unfortunately I got ill after this with high blood pressure and stopped the diet as I was having problems with water retention. Yes, the diet I was on probably caused this, as I said at the start, I am trying to give a balanced view. I was eating a lot more protein and fat, but the important bit is that I was not drinking enough water. This was the main failing of the book I read. It said it was important to drink when you were thirsty, but that the modern day habit of carrying water around with us was just a fad. I didn't realise that I had forgotten how to notice that I was indeed thirsty, so I damaged my body and had to have drugs to bring down my blood pressure. There was a genetic tendency towards high blood pressure on my mother's side of the family. If I had kept going as I was before I bought the book I may have lost weight as I brought more exercise into the equation, but I may not. I can't know that for sure. What I do know for sure is that carbs do make you hungry, so I can't agree totally with the article you quoted no matter whose science explains it. I believe what I have seen with my own eyes before I believe any scientist. Yes it's anecdotal evidence to you, but it's mine and therefore 100% relevant to me.

I am not posting this to be argumentative, my own cynical view is that all science can be flawed, including Taubes', so I prefer to test something for myself. People like me would be less inclined to listen to the likes of Taubes if the mainstream listened to us. One size does not fit all and that is why people are left at the mercy of charlatans when they are left adrift when mainstream views and science don't work for them.

 

[Pipp]

I think some of us are believing that scientific studies "prove" a theory. They don't. They either demonstrate support for a hypothesis, or show that the hypothesis is not supported.

 

[Pipp]

I am impressed with @zand's post. Only thing I would add is that if we wait until we feel thirsty to have a drink we are leaving it late as we are already dehydrated when we feel thirst.

 

[donnellysdogs]

Another good thing to do is to actually drink something when you feel hungry.. And prior to eating...it lowers the wanting to fill with food, and hydrates at the same time.


Loving life