Counter to anti low-carb stance in NSW

[sanguine]

Need some text or cogent arguments to back LCHF? Read this ...

http://vernerwheelock.com/?p=868

 

[Indy51]

Great read, @sanguine

 

[Indy51]

I've left a comment on his blog suggesting a Change.org petition

 

[Bluetit1802]

Excellent read @sanguine and excellent idea @Indy51

.

 

[TorqPenderloin]

There's two sides to every story: http://daa.asn.au/for-the-public/public-statements/

The link directs to a statement from the DAA and cites their reasons for her dismissal.

Sounds like a complaint was brought against her from a former patient. She chose not to defend herself so the DAA was forced to dismiss her.

Furthermore, the DAA does offer their opinion on LCHF diets: http://daa.asn.au/for-the-media/hot...low-carbohydrate-high-fat-diets-for-diabetes/

I particularly agree with their statement that "Low carbohydrate is poorly defined" within a low carb diet. There are many different types of LCHF diets: some are sustainable and very effective, while others have a very low success rate and long-term sustainability.

The central theme behind their position is that a LCHF diet works in the short-term, but there is conflicting evidence to support it's effectiveness in the long-term (which is true).

They also note the low-likelihood of sustaining a LCHF diet in the long-term especially for those who live with others (it often requires everyone in the household to adapt a LCHF diet).

Long story short- It sounds to me like the DAA has a very valid stance on LCHF diets. It also sounds like Jennifer Elliott was collecting a paycheck from a patient and failed to "Demonstrate entry level competence."

 

[SunnyExpat]

There's two sides to every story: http://daa.asn.au/for-the-public/public-statements/

The link directs to a statement from the DAA and cites their reasons for her dismissal.

Sounds like a complaint was brought against her from a former patient. She chose not to defend herself so the DAA was forced to dismiss her.

Furthermore, the DAA does offer their opinion on LCHF diets: http://daa.asn.au/for-the-media/hot...low-carbohydrate-high-fat-diets-for-diabetes/

I particularly agree with their statement that "Low carbohydrate is poorly defined" within a low carb diet. There are many different types of LCHF diets: some are sustainable and very effective, while others have a very low success rate and long-term sustainability.

The central theme behind their position is that a LCHF diet works in the short-term, but there is conflicting evidence to support it's effectiveness in the long-term (which is true).

They also note the low-likelihood of sustaining a LCHF diet in the long-term especially for those who live with others (it often requires everyone in the household to adapt a LCHF diet).

Long story short- It sounds to me like the DAA has a very valid stance on LCHF diets. It also sounds like Jennifer Elliott was collecting a paycheck from a patient and failed to "Demonstrate entry level competence."

There is no definition, and indeed the link makes a sweeping statement, with no assessment or knowledge of anyone reading.

'There is absolutely no doubt that reducing carbohydrate consumption (coupled with an increased intake of healthy fats….low carb/high fat (LCHF)) is extremely successful in the treatment of T2D in very many people.'

Really?
So even though, in hindsight, I was massively overeating, I actually should have increased my calories by eating even more fat than I was before?
With some targeted advice, what I did was simply decrease my carbs, that increased my fats ratio by more than enough.

It will be interesting to see the Health Ministers response to such untargeted advice, as in my case, in would have been very inappropriate simply to increase fats regardless, and it's a shame an otherwise good letter is spoilt in this way.

 

[sally and james]

There are many different types of LCHF diets: some are sustainable and very effective, while others have a very low success rate and long-term sustainability.

Perhaps you would like to elaborate, or indeed justify this statement. I suppose if you just cut out the odd bag of chips, success rates will be low, but if you genuinely and properly reduce your carb intake to a low level - I would say no more than 50g per day, though some may have success with higher amounts - blood sugars will be greatly reduced, as will medication and health will improve.

The central theme behind their position is that a LCHF diet works in the short-term, but there is conflicting evidence to support it's effectiveness in the long-term (which is true).

I thought the usual excuse from the various diabetes and diet organisations was that there was no long term research, but now we are told that there is long term evidence, of which some, it is implied, supports the effectiveness of LCHF

hey also note the low-likelihood of sustaining a LCHF diet in the long-term especially for those who live with others (it often requires everyone in the household to adapt a LCHF diet).

I have read somewhere that people who live with diabetics are more likely to become diabetic themselves, so everyone in a family cutting down on the carbs may improve the health of more than one person. Households often eat in the same way, vegetarian, kosher or whatever. There is no problem in a household doing this.

Sally

 

[TorqPenderloin]

Perhaps you would like to elaborate, or indeed justify this statement. I suppose if you just cut out the odd bag of chips, success rates will be low, but if you genuinely and properly reduce your carb intake to a low level - I would say no more than 50g per day, though some may have success with higher amounts - blood sugars will be greatly reduced, as will medication and health will improve.

You provided a perfect example to help me elaborate.
Let me first start by asking how you arrived at the 50g of carbs/day figure?
For someone like me, that would likely yield incredibly poor results. I’ll explain why:
1.) 50 grams of carbs would not be low enough to bring my body into ketosis (one of the most common sub-groups within LCHF dieting). I say from experience, I had to eat less than 30-35g of carbs to keep my body in ketosis. That was easily quantifiable using ketosticks and tracking my macronutrients each day.
2.) My maintenance level is around 300g of carbs per day. That sounds like lot for some, but my daily total caloric maintenance is around 3400 total calories.
3.) A moderate reduction in carbohydrate intake is a proven approach, but (for me) anything more than a 30-40% reduction started to affect my energy levels as my metabolism slowed.
Conclusion:I either needed to eat less than 30 grams of carbs (ketosis) or between 200-300g (portion control) to yield successful results.

Of course, I know you had good intentions, but I'm a perfect example of how a 50g diet could be downright dangerous. I'd run the risk of passing out (which would be true even if I didn't have diabetes).

Either way, I appreciate the thought provoking discussion,
Mark

 

[reidpj]

You provided a perfect example to help me elaborate.
Let me first start by asking how you arrived at the 50g of carbs/day figure?
For someone like me, that would likely yield incredibly poor results. I’ll explain why:
1.) 50 grams of carbs would not be low enough to bring my body into ketosis (one of the most common sub-groups within LCHF dieting). I say from experience, I had to eat less than 30-35g of carbs to keep my body in ketosis. That was easily quantifiable using ketosticks and tracking my macronutrients each day.
2.) My maintenance level is around 300g of carbs per day. That sounds like lot for some, but my daily total caloric maintenance is around 3400 total calories.
3.) A moderate reduction in carbohydrate intake is a proven approach, but (for me) anything more than a 30-40% reduction started to affect my energy levels as my metabolism slowed.
Conclusion:I either needed to eat less than 30 grams of carbs (ketosis) or between 200-300g (portion control) to yield successful results.

Of course, I know you had good intentions, but I'm a perfect example of how a 50g diet could be downright dangerous. I'd run the risk of passing out (which would be true even if I didn't have diabetes).

Either way, I appreciate the thought provoking discussion,
Mark

Hi Mark

Sally and James posted re. blood glucose levels, but you argued from a weight loss standpoint.

 

[TorqPenderloin]

Hi Mark

Sally and James posted re. blood glucose levels, but you argued from a weight loss standpoint.

I may have misunderstood, but I thought Sally was discussing more than just glucose levels: "blood sugars will be greatly reduced, as will medication and health will improve."

My points were meant to address the discussion from a general health standpoint. I see no reason why other aspects of your health need to suffer in order to achieve consistent glucose levels.

 

[reidpj]

You provided a perfect example to help me elaborate.
Let me first start by asking how you arrived at the 50g of carbs/day figure?
For someone like me, that would likely yield incredibly poor results. I’ll explain why:
1.) 50 grams of carbs would not be low enough to bring my body into ketosis (one of the most common sub-groups within LCHF dieting). I say from experience, I had to eat less than 30-35g of carbs to keep my body in ketosis. That was easily quantifiable using ketosticks and tracking my macronutrients each day.
2.) My maintenance level is around 300g of carbs per day. That sounds like lot for some, but my daily total caloric maintenance is around 3400 total calories.
3.) A moderate reduction in carbohydrate intake is a proven approach, but (for me) anything more than a 30-40% reduction started to affect my energy levels as my metabolism slowed.
Conclusion:I either needed to eat less than 30 grams of carbs (ketosis) or between 200-300g (portion control) to yield successful results.

Of course, I know you had good intentions, but I'm a perfect example of how a 50g diet could be downright dangerous. I'd run the risk of passing out (which would be true even if I didn't have diabetes).

Either way, I appreciate the thought provoking discussion,
Mark

Re metabolism slowing down while in ketosis, you may find the following interesting: http://www.ketotic.org/2014/12/the-effect-of-ketogenic-diets-on.html

Personally, my experience is the direct opposite of yours. After being hypothyroid for the last 10 years, I have recently, due to being in deep ketosis, been able to come off my thyroid medication - my thyroid problem may have been due to: High carbs = high triglycerides = hypothalamus becoming leptin resistant = reduced TRH = reduced TSH = reduced T4 and T3 secretion.

Cheers

 

[tim2000s]

It's interesting isn't it. I've spent most of the past year eating on average <100g of carbs a day. My bg levels are much more controlled and when I was eating 80g a day and exercising I lost loads of weight. Even when undertaking strength training and eating 3000 calories a day, I didn't need additional carbs and felt fine.

As ever, we are all individuals!

 

[sally and james]

Let's return to the subject of the link in the original post: A Dietician. A dietician's job is to understand all the ins and outs of various approaches to eating and then give the best possible advice to her/his client. For very large numbers of T2 diabetics the best possible advice will be to cut down on carbs, maybe to under 100g a day or to a truly low intake of around 30g (i.e. "Bernstein", 6 + 12 + 12g). The exact guidance will depend on many things: other health issues, financial, social, religious, education etc. and, of course, what actually works for the client. Every now and again the dietician will meet the truly unusual client, someone like the poster above, who, by their own account, has a danger zone between 36g and 299g of carb per day. A challenge indeed.

The fact that a definition of Low Carb, in terms of grams per day or proportion of energy intake has not been laid down on a tablet of stone or defined in similar terms to the metre and held in a secure vault, does not mean that the approach is invalid. Who, for goodness sake, would like to tell me in clear and precise terms what the Mediterranean Diet actually is and yet it is now being bandied around as the source of all well being. And Low Calorie, one man's low calorie diet is someone else's weight gain plan. Diets have to be tailored, either by a professional or by the person eating it. We sorted out our own diet, almost two and a half years ago, roughly 30g carbs per day, and the evidence I see every morning for Low Carb is two happy, healthy people.
Sally

 

[TorqPenderloin]

Diets have to be tailored, either by a professional or by the person eating it. We sorted out our own diet, almost two and a half years ago, roughly 30g carbs per day, and the evidence I see every morning for Low Carb is two happy, healthy people.
Sally

I think this is the most valuable statement in this thread.

We have a very wide range of people on this forum: kids, elderly, underweight, overweight, etc. Not only that, but each of us reacts to this disease differently. As a result, we each require our own nutrition and health plans and rarely should two be the same.

I believe information is the most valuable resource to combat this disease. Part of that is seeking information about your own body and customizing a plan built for you (and only you).

Cheers

 

[Indy51]

I think this is the most valuable statement in this thread. Unfortunately, I haven't seen it enough on this forum.

We have a very wide range of people on this forum: kids, elderly, underweight, overweight, etc. Not only that, but each of us reacts to this disease differently. As a result, we each require our own nutrition and health plans and rarely should two be the same.

I believe information is the most valuable resource to combat this disease. Part of that is seeking information about your own body and customizing a plan built for you (and only you).

Cheers

That's why a lot of us follow the "eat to your meter" protocol to work out the level of carbs we can tolerate - it makes tailoring your diet very easy.

 

[SunnyExpat]

That's why a lot of us follow the "eat to your meter" protocol to work out the level of carbs we can tolerate - it makes tailoring your diet very easy.

Also the type of carbs vary enormously, certainly in the way our bodies process them, it's not quite as simple as all carbs turn to sugar.
The right level of the right carbs is easy to ascertain.

 

[Indy51]

And another article asking similar questions, this time of Diabetes UK:

http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/09/...nd-to-chorus-of-disapproval-demanding-u-turn/

 

[Brunneria]

And another article asking similar questions, this time of Diabetes UK:

http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/09/...nd-to-chorus-of-disapproval-demanding-u-turn/

More positive publicity for @Southport GP
Wonderful!

 

[SunnyExpat]

And another article asking similar questions, this time of Diabetes UK:

http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/09/...nd-to-chorus-of-disapproval-demanding-u-turn/

Certainly better advice, simply low carb, which is good advice for people like me initially, simply eat less, no need to replace the calories I didn't need in the first place.

 

[Indy51]

And a nice plug for this site