Dec 2014 update: New research on the Low Carb Diet in general practice

[sanguine]

The problem with the low carb diet is how easy is it to follow for the long term. For a few months it might be possible to 'cut out sugar, bread, pasta, rice and potatoes altogether' but I am certain that I could not do so for the rest of my natural.

Objective 1 - control blood sugars
Objective 2 - avoid drugs if at all possible
Objective 3 - live long enough and healthily enough to do the stuff I want to do

I take it you don't do low carb. I've found that once stopping I don't feel I need to eat them, the alternatives are fine. The increasing drug-dependence and storm clouds of complications otherwise make it a no brainer for me. If you're certain you couldn't what's your plan?

 

[Chris P Bacon]

I think that the report of @Southport GP emphasises that in many (NOT ALL) cases weight loss is the most important factor in treating T2 diabetes. As weight loss is a direct consequence of calorie restriction it follows that a low carbohydrate diet should be as successful as the conventionally advised low fat diet favoured by the NHS and BUPA to name just a couple of organisations, provided the calorie consumption is the same.

The problem with the low carb diet is how easy is it to follow for the long term. For a few months it might be possible to 'cut out sugar, bread, pasta, rice and potatoes altogether' but I am certain that I could not do so for the rest of my natural.

Another point is that the diet is referred to as low carbohydrate, whereas many on here abbreviate this to LCHF with the addition of high fat. There is then the question as to whether high fat incorporates saturated fats. There is a diet website frequently linked to on here that advises a diet of unrestricted saturated fats, in that one can eat as much as one wants but one would never over eat. Want a bet?

I assume you have never tried it? If that is the case, why would you be negative about how hard it is to stick to?

For many, including myself, it has proved to be very easy to stick to and turned all my health issues around.

I understand and respect your decision not to want to try it, I do not however understand your negativity towards LCHF when we see so many success stories from people that have taken the leap of faith.

 

[Brunneria]

I've just had a very interesting 3 months.

Went very low carb. Thought it was fantastic. Felt better than I have for years. Never hungry. No cravings. Always comfortable. Weight loss (not very fast).

But I did get bored. Very bored. Same old food choices. Boooorrrrriiiinnnngg.

Then I upped my carbs again. A bit.
Didn't feel so well. BG rose.
And all those 'lovely' carbs I've been looking forward to?
They were sooo disappointing.
I found myself considering carbs v cheese, and choosing cheese. The bread ruined my appreciation of the cheese.
Sugar snap peas won out over potato. Better texture, flavour and crunch.
Berries won out over rice. Flavour, tang and all that lovely double cream!

The return-to-carb-experience (to my total surprise) has been bland, dissatisfying and... claggy. And I want to return to my flavourful, textured, sensual, rich LC foods. So I'm drifting lower carb again, with the addition of even more explosive taste sensation - spices, herbs and seasonings - and food is fun again. I will never be bored again.

Then add in the wonderful improvement of my blood glucose (100% normal levels, 24/7, no medication)
And I am delighted to say that this is a diet for life. And I'm so happy about it, I could dance.

I'm personally convinced that the reasons low carb weight loss diets are reported to 'fail' long term*, is that

1. People don't go low enough carb to escape the desire (cravings) for carbs
2. The studies are usually not done on diabetics, armed with blood glucose meters. Because, with the fantastic evidence the meter provides, it really is a no brainer.

* and please note 90%+ of weight loss diets fail (click here for a frivolous but sadly accurate explanation). It is the one consistent feature of all weight loss diets.
But low carbing is, at root, about making sustainable changes to daily eating.

 

[tim2000s]

Once you start to experiment with flavours you soon realise that actually you don't need to have carbs in the diet as they don't actually add anything. Spices and herbs are great.

 

[Lamont D]

I've just had a very interesting 3 months.

Went very low carb. Thought it was fantastic. Felt better than I have for years. Never hungry. No cravings. Always comfortable. Weight loss (not very fast).

But I did get bored. Very bored. Same old food choices. Boooorrrrriiiinnnngg.

Then I upped my carbs again. A bit.
Didn't feel so well. BG rose.
And all those 'lovely' carbs I've been looking forward to?
They were sooo disappointing.
I found myself considering carbs v cheese, and choosing cheese. The bread ruined my appreciation of the cheese.
Sugar snap peas won out over potato. Better texture, flavour and crunch.
Berries won out over rice. Flavour, tang and all that lovely double cream!

The return-to-carb-experience (to my total surprise) has been bland, dissatisfying and... claggy. And I want to return to my flavourful, textured, sensual, rich LC foods. So I'm drifting lower carb again, with the addition of even more explosive taste sensation - spices, herbs and seasonings - and food is fun again. I will never be bored again.

Then add in the wonderful improvement of my blood glucose (100% normal levels, 24/7, no medication)
And I am delighted to say that this is a diet for life. And I'm so happy about it, I could dance.

I'm personally convinced that the reasons low carb weight loss diets are reported to 'fail' long term*, is that

1. People don't go low enough carb to escape the desire (cravings) for carbs
2. The studies are usually not done on diabetics, armed with blood glucose meters. Because, with the fantastic evidence the meter provides, it really is a no brainer.

* and please note 90%+ of weight loss diets fail (click here for a frivolous but sadly accurate explanation). It is the one consistent feature of all weight loss diets.
But low carbing is, at root, about making sustainable changes to daily eating.

From my own experience and the deep seated fear of fluctuating BSLs I don't go even low carbs now, 1 piece of Burgen and carbs from veg only daily. I don't need nor want carbs! I have started with different curries and having different meats with salad. I am eating regular snacks rather than meals. Low carbing has been so beneficial to my well being and health and the response I get from friends and family is just reward from all the battles which preceded my diagnosis. I honestly believe that if someone doesn't agree with a low carb lifestyle then they haven't stuck with it or haven't had the will power to follow it through and took the easy option of eating carbs again. I know we are human and temptation is really difficult. But we are talking about somebody's life!
I am now going to have my yoghurt and choc for supper!

 

[douglas99]

From my own experience and the deep seated fear of fluctuating BSLs I don't go even low carbs now, 1 piece of Burgen and carbs from veg only daily. I don't need nor want carbs! I have started with different curries and having different meats with salad. I am eating regular snacks rather than meals. Low carbing has been so beneficial to my well being and health and the response I get from friends and family is just reward from all the battles which preceded my diagnosis. I honestly believe that if someone doesn't agree with a low carb lifestyle then they haven't stuck with it or haven't had the will power to follow it through and took the easy option of eating carbs again. I know we are human and temptation is really difficult. But we are talking about somebody's life!
I am now going to have my yoghurt and choc for supper!

No, it just didn't work for me.
And then I decided to go back to one that did.

 

[Lamont D]

I again did some research after posting on this thread, maybe because I felt that I was mistaken about my flushing insulin. It got me thinking that, if I flush insulin and T1s and T2s inject insulin why was it that all diabetics can't go hypo after injecting as it would be extremely dangerous. So after a look again it is the glucagon, that causes the problem as it causes the liver to produce more glucose. Hence high blood sugar levels, then for me hypo!
My inhibitor increases insulin and reduces glucagon. So no hypo!
I hope thats right without all the chemistry!
So by my deduction and reasoning, that RH is a liver condition rather than a pancreatic condition.

 

[douglas99]

The liver and pancreas are an interactive pair, so it's very possible.

 

[robert72]

I again did some research after posting on this thread, maybe because I felt that I was mistaken about my flushing insulin. It got me thinking that, if I flush insulin and T1s and T2s inject insulin why was it that all diabetics can't go hypo after injecting as it would be extremely dangerous. So after a look again it is the glucagon, that causes the problem as it causes the liver to produce more glucose. Hence high blood sugar levels, then for me hypo!
My inhibitor increases insulin and reduces glucagon. So no hypo!
I hope thats right without all the chemistry!
So by my deduction and reasoning, that RH is a liver condition rather than a pancreatic condition.

Glucagon is produced by the alpha cells in the pancreas

 

[Brunneria]

I again did some research after posting on this thread, maybe because I felt that I was mistaken about my flushing insulin. It got me thinking that, if I flush insulin and T1s and T2s inject insulin why was it that all diabetics can't go hypo after injecting as it would be extremely dangerous. So after a look again it is the glucagon, that causes the problem as it causes the liver to produce more glucose. Hence high blood sugar levels, then for me hypo!
My inhibitor increases insulin and reduces glucagon. So no hypo!
I hope thats right without all the chemistry!
So by my deduction and reasoning, that RH is a liver condition rather than a pancreatic condition.

I have wondered that - whether my original RH problem was not the insulin, but rather the glucagon. But there is no way to go back and find out, 40 years later...

 

[douglas99]

Glucagon is produced by the alpha cells in the pancreas

True, but Glucagon causes the liver to convert stored glycogen into glucose, which is released into the bloodstream.
Out of balance, and too much is released.

 

[Lamont D]

Glucagon is produced by the alpha cells in the pancreas

The pancreas produces insulin and glucagon. The glucagon Causes the liver to produce glucose that enters the bloodstream. Is that right?

 

[robert72]

True, but Glucagon causes the liver to convert stored glycogen into glucose, which is released into the bloodstream.
Out of balance, and too much is released.

True, but the process starts in the pancreas

 

[Brunneria]

The pancreas produces insulin and glucagon. The glucagon Causes the liver to produce glucose that enters the bloodstream. Is that right?

I thought (but I can't remember where I 'learned' it), that glucagon 'switches insulin off'.

I've always assumed that the truth is much more complex. but also that my reactive hypoglycaemia may have been inadequate glucagon, rather than excessive insulin.

Please, let me know if that is wrong... anyone?

 

[robert72]

I thought (but I can't remember where I 'learned' it), that glucagon 'switches insulin off'.

I've always assumed that the truth is much more complex. but also that my reactive hypoglycaemia may have been inadequate glucagon, rather than excessive insulin.

Please, let me know if that is wrong... anyone?

It could be a signalling problem - I'm sure you'd have a good store of glycogen in liver and muscles. I believe the human body can store the glycogen equivalent of around 500 grams of glucose.

 

[Lamont D]

I thought (but I can't remember where I 'learned' it), that glucagon 'switches insulin off'.

I've always assumed that the truth is much more complex. but also that my reactive hypoglycaemia may have been inadequate glucagon, rather than excessive insulin.

Please, let me know if that is wrong... anyone?[/QUOTE

From my research it is too much glucagon that causes mine,hence why my inhibitor works.
Yours may have been different as there are many types of diabetics as there is of RH!

 

[Lamont D]

Too much glucagon is the root cause of my RH. Yours could be different as there are different types of RH as with diabetes!

 

[robert72]

Too much glucagon is the root cause of my RH. Yours could be different as there are different types of RH as with diabetes!

If you had (released) too much glucagon, wouldn't that stop you from going hypo? It certainly would in me as a Type 1.

 

[tim2000s]

It could be a signalling problem - I'm sure you'd have a good store of glycogen in liver and muscles. I believe the human body can store the glycogen equivalent of around 500 grams of glucose.

It can however, this is stored 80% in the muscles and 20% or so in the liver, with the liver tarbes designed to up the blood sugar when necessary, while the rest provides energy for the muscles.

 

[donnellysdogs]

I think that the report of @Southport GP emphasises that in many (NOT ALL) cases weight loss is the most important factor in treating T2 diabetes. As weight loss is a direct consequence of calorie restriction it follows that a low carbohydrate diet should be as successful as the conventionally advised low fat diet favoured by the NHS and BUPA to name just a couple of organisations, provided the calorie consumption is the same.

The problem with the low carb diet is how easy is it to follow for the long term. For a few months it might be possible to 'cut out sugar, bread, pasta, rice and potatoes altogether' but I am certain that I could not do so for the rest of my natural.

Another point is that the diet is referred to as low carbohydrate, whereas many on here abbreviate this to LCHF with the addition of high fat. There is then the question as to whether high fat incorporates saturated fats. There is a diet website frequently linked to on here that advises a diet of unrestricted saturated fats, in that one can eat as much as one wants but one would never over eat. Want a bet?

Low carb all my life.. Bar 2 months of trying to eat bread or grains for breakfast or brunch. At 50 I remain a size 10. On diagnosis I had lost so much weight T1 that I was just about a size 6....

Only time I eat different is a meal out when I have a pudding or a very, very rare takeaway.

My diet and size been the same for 30+ years now and no way do I wish to have carbs as a must for every meal..

Lower carbs ... 60ish carbs a day is sustainable....