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

LCHF diet to help you lose weight, not diabetes

As Jack412 says, that's the recognised term for it....'LCHF'. We didn't make it up here on this forum, just like we didn't make up the term 'Newcastle diet.' I joined this forum around a year ago and I'm sure I remember it being mentioned then, because I remember thinking "Wow that's basically what I do, so I was right". I had made my own discoveries as to what helped and what didn't before joining
 
zand said:
As Jack412 says, that's the recognised term for it....'LCHF'. We didn't make it up here on this forum, just like we didn't make up the term 'Newcastle diet.' I joined this forum around a year ago and I'm sure I remember it being mentioned then, because I remember thinking "Wow that's basically what I do, so I was right". I had made my own discoveries as to what helped and what didn't before joining
Click to expand...
Further in the spirit of avoiding 'usandthem', I disagree with zand, but in a friendly way.:)
 
equipoise said:
In the spirit of avoiding 'usandthem' I will agree to believe that it was a blip, and was not reported by anyone. I hope this is true
Click to expand...

In which case admin will of course realise their error and reinstate it.

If they don't then what are we to think?
 
douglas99 said:
Without arguing as to whether or not you advise cutting down on carbs, as I'm sure that would get into a 'quote me' scenario, you have not really answered the question though, both me and Kat asked for what you would advise the newbie to replace the calories with?

Your words, and you haven't said what you would advise yet?
Myself, and others suggest eating to our meter, whereas you, very specifically said

'For me, the issue is how everyone chooses to make up the calories they ditch when giving up the bread, spuds, past and sugars.'

How do you advise others make up the calories?

That was the question asked?
Click to expand...
FAT
 
this is too difficult two said:
What part of it do you disagree with in a friendly way?:)
Click to expand...
'RCIF' describes what virtually everyone in control of diabetes here actually does, and gets the right message and priorities across. The 'HF' bit of LCHF will always be controversial, and for some health conditions is inadvisable. And there is sometimes a problem that people grasp the HF bit but not the LC bit, which is disastrous if they're trying to lose weight. Just my opinion. On a purely pragmatic level, if 'LCHF' is preventing a sensible discussion of the value of reduced carbs and the acceptability of moderate increase in fats on this forum, then why not adjust the terminology, if it helps avoid knee-jerk reactions?
 
equipoise said:
'RCIF' describes what virtually everyone in control of diabetes here actually does, and gets the right message and priorities across. The 'HF' bit of LCHF will always be controversial, and for some health conditions is inadvisable. And there is sometimes a problem that people grasp the HF bit but not the LC bit, which is disastrous if they're trying to lose weight. Just my opinion. On a purely pragmatic level, if 'LCHF' is preventing a sensible discussion of the value of reduced carbs and the acceptability of moderate increase in fats on this forum, then why not adjust the terminology, if it helps avoid knee-jerk reactions?
Click to expand...
Hmmmm, trying hard to argue with this! It sounds reasonable and would stop a lot of discussion and confusion. ........Ah got it!.....I'd have more time to eat if there were less 'discussions' on here and then I'd never lose weight, so RCIF wouldn't be good for my health.;):)



edit: a rose by any other name.............
 
zand said:
Hmmmm, trying hard to argue with this! It sounds reasonable and would stop a lot of discussion and confusion. ........Ah got it!.....I'd have more time to eat if there were less 'discussions' on here and then I'd never lose weight, so RCIF wouldn't be good for my health.;):)



edit: a rose by any other name.............
Click to expand...
Fair enough!
 
This forum has a huge membership, but not so many posters. This suggests to me that newbies lurk for a while rather than jumping in feet first. If someone asks for advice on how to manage their diabetes, we should give it to them. Practical advice that will help them and not just hugs and sympathy. Advice that we have personal experience of that may help them. Pussyfooting about won't help their bg levels.
 
I read this forum for some time before I posted.
Previously I had met rabid anti-low carbers on forums, and since I AM a low carber, I simply wasn't prepared to go through that silliness again.
Here, at least there is discussion.

And the fact that so many people post to say 'it works for me' does kinda say it all. ;)

This place gives out fabulous info.
Most (all?) of us post from personal experience.
If we post stuff that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, we get critiqued (well, that's one word for it)
There's a range of perspectives, diets and opinions

I think newbies get a fantastic welcome, a variety of information, and a strong sense of support.

There is only one thing that bothers me in newbie threads:
- derailing, arguments and diet turf wars

My contribution used to be pro low carb, but I'm shifting now to suggest a gentle carb reduction and eating to your meter. I'm still low carb. I just don't think shoving it down their throats helps. Likewise ANY particular eating regime. If they get a meter, and eat to it, they will lower their carbs. And they will either lose weight or have to up fat and/or protein to stay a stable weight.

I am convinced that pushing the words High Fat is a negative move and drives people away. So I don't use it, dislike it, and actually wince whenever I read it, particularly in newbie threads.

And don't get me started on people using confusing jargon and acronyms to newbies. I mean, what on earth makes someone think that using 'LCHF' to a newbie is going to help? Or OGTT. Or HCP?

I have lost count of the plaintive 'what does ____ mean?' by a new poster.

Oops. That seems to have turned into a bit of a rant.
Clearly time for bed.
Goodnight All.
 
Brunneria said:
I read this forum for some time before I posted.
Previously I had met rabid anti-low carbers on forums, and since I AM a low carber, I simply wasn't prepared to go through that silliness again.
Here, at least there is discussion.

And the fact that so many people post to say 'it works for me' does kinda say it all. ;)

This place gives out fabulous info.
Most (all?) of us post from personal experience.
If we post stuff that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, we get critiqued (well, that's one word for it)
There's a range of perspectives, diets and opinions

I think newbies get a fantastic welcome, a variety of information, and a strong sense of support.

There is only one thing that bothers me in newbie threads:
- derailing, arguments and diet turf wars

My contribution used to be pro low carb, but I'm shifting now to suggest a gentle carb reduction and eating to your meter. I'm still low carb. I just don't think shoving it down their throats helps. Likewise ANY particular eating regime. If they get a meter, and eat to it, they will lower their carbs. And they will either lose weight or have to up fat and/or protein to stay a stable weight.

I am convinced that pushing the words High Fat is a negative move and drives people away. So I don't use it, dislike it, and actually wince whenever I read it, particularly in newbie threads.

And don't get me started on people using confusing jargon and acronyms to newbies. I mean, what on earth makes someone think that using 'LCHF' to a newbie is going to help? Or OGTT. Or HCP?

I have lost count of the plaintive 'what does ____ mean?' by a new poster.

Oops. That seems to have turned into a bit of a rant.
Clearly time for bed.
Goodnight All.
Click to expand...

My feelings exactly, especially derailing newbie threads with arguments - or anything else come to that. This breaks all the rules of forum etiquette.

Any advice given should be accompanied by a reason. No use saying "cut carbs" if a reason isn't given. How many of us knew that carbs turn to sugar? I didn't. The term LCHF should not be used in my opinion, unless explained properly and fully what it really means and how to do it sensibly..

Time for bed for me, too. Nighty night.
 
phoenix said:
I do feel that people jump in with links to sites that advocate very specific ways of controlling diabetes right at the start I think that Daisy's opening post is reasonable though I actually don't agree with it's description of the glycemic index (no wonder people don't think it works, wholegrain flour may have just as high a GI as white)
If I jumped in then I would like to talk about the diet I used successfully for my 3 years prior to insulin(LADA) or even more so the diet that I see working well and as advocated by the dietitian here (I have been involved helping with translation; unfortunately a lot of the newly diagnosed T2s here are Brits)

On a personal level , perhaps I would tell everyone to increase their green veggies......... great idea unless they happen to be taking warfarin
I'd say eat a wide variety of veggies of all colours but the amount I mean would definitely amount to more carbs than would be allowed on a very low carb plan like Bernstein........ But then it depends how we count.
I saw a thread elsewhere yesterday, one person counted 22g another counted 6g (I counted 18g)

I might suggest legumes ( but oh heck someone's just told them that all carbs are evil, every starch turns to sugar and the glycaemic index doesn't work) .

I would really like to mention exercise because it is so important for increasing insulin sensitivity
(but maybe I should do it carefully because not all people can exercise)

Fat is very contentious particularly as to the roles of the various types of fat in the development of heart disease . It is not straightforward. Its certainly too complex to discuss in a newcomers thread yet we have people making broad statements dismissing fat playing any role .In my opinion, it is important because although people worry about losing legs, CVD is the complication that will affect far more of us than any other (and most amputations occur because of circulatory problems coupled with neuropathy).

On fat though, we might all agree that foods containing omega 3s so oily fish a couple of times a week, even nuts as a snack rather than biscuits could be helpful (I certainly don't think that there is any evidence to the contrary and the NHS agrees)

As has (I think ) been pointed out, the term high fat is capable of multiple interpretations; if someone is only eating 1200cal a day then 70g of fat a day is 52% of calorie intake, so high-ish fat, however 70g is also the GDA for women.
On the other hand people who have a higher carb intake don't necessarily all get it by eating lots of pies, pastries, pasta , desserts or bread (if they have good control that is; even when they take insulin;) (sorry I get the impression sometimes that people believe this to be the case)



I no longer put anything on an introductory thread. To be honest, I'm intimidated, I certainly don't want to start an argument on a beginners thread so I don't.
Maybe Daisy's thread could be revised, I've already mentioned one thing I think is wrong, others may have other points.
Click to expand...
does anyone doesn't know that before embarking on a diet, you see your Dr?
it we had to take into account every potential medical condition or drug, there can never be an opinion and that includes "health plate" because everyone cant eat that

it seems telling someone to eat more omega 3, ..it's isn't as black and white as we all think
http://www.professional.diabetes.or...=DP&s_src=vanity&s_subsrc=nutritionguidelines
Evidence does not support recommending omega-3 (EPA and DHA) supplements for people
with diabetes for the prevention or treatment of cardiovascular events.
A
As recommended for the general public, an increase in foods containing long-chain omega-3
fatty acids (EPA and DHA) (from fatty fish) and omega-3 linolenic acid (ALA) is
recommended for individualswith diabetes because of their beneficial effects on lipoproteins,
prevention of heart disease, and associations with positive health outcomes in observational
studies.
B
The recommendation for the general public to eat fish (particularly fatty fish) at least two times
(two servings) per week is also appropriate for people with diabetes.

where as
Evidence is inconclusive for an ideal amount of total fat intake for people with diabetes;
therefore, goals should be individualized; fat quality appears to be far more important
than quantity.

In people with type 2 diabetes, a Mediterranean-style, MUFA-rich eating pattern may benefit
glycemic control and CVD risk factors and can therefore be recommended as an effective
alternative to a lower-fat, higher-carbohydrate eating pattern.
 
Chris P Bacon said:
Hello

It strikes me that you are trying to fix something that isn't broken, the advice new people get is terrific.

Far better than the advice myself and others seem to have received from their doctors on diagnosis.

I am confused why a well controlled diabetic would be discouraged from sharing their methods, regardless of what it may be?

Sorry for my comments if they are misplaced.
Click to expand...
they aren't misplaced, as a new person here, you know what you want to get from the forum and it had advantages over just googling up a free online diabetic book to read
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kat100 said:
Yes , I believe people need time to settle in , they maybe battling with other health conditions as well , also on medication or taking new medication , I certainly would not be comfortable in giving advise that involves someone's medication with a diet that says reduce medication for example ..suggestions and personal experiences are one thing , when people speak purely from own experiences is fine , but anything else may be dangerous if an individual is feeling vulnerable ...This could be very dangerous indeed...but support is great and valuable at any stage ...
This subject is so big I don't think there will ever be an answer ...to suit all ...and a lot of people don't stay around on forums for very long , people change with their needs ...getting people to feel,comfortable and settled in is a nice welcome ..
Click to expand...
you may not have read the ..I was just told I'm diabetic and my dr wants me to take statin and metformin...posts, they are fun and bring out all sorts stuff. mainly a list of people telling the OP not to take them, some with false info and junk science links

most people want to know something..when the know it..they get on with their lives..it might take one post...it might take 3 months...they has been a hell of a lot of turn over of the people on the forum ...they all aren't forum junkies like we are
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LCHF is LCHF, then there are a lot of different varieties of low carbing.

I do LCHF, so I eat around 25 grams of carbs per day. I also eat protein but not too much. The rest of my energy I get from fat. That is high fat. I eat a lot of fat.

If you don't eat high fat you don't do LCHF.

I really don't understand why so many people find fat problematic. Is is dangerous?No. Is in nice? Yes. Does it make you fat? Most certainly not! Is it filling? Yes. Does it contain essential nutrients? Yes.

LCHF is one way. It seems to me there are only a few on here that actually do LCHF while a lot are low carbing in a gentler way. Noting wrong with that, but don't call it LCHF.
 
Back
Top