Search Results

Steady, might be a real name................... :wave:

I'm going to use a four letter word and get the thread locked. then I'll have been the last poster. CARB

Don't disagree with most of what you've said benedict, but I can see a couple of problems if mods, or anyone, takes this too literally. For example; If we were saying "you must eat low carb" or "you must avoid bananas", then I agree, but it's a bit different when you say something like "you...

These people aren't hung up on carbs, just trying to find ways of enjoying the things they like whilst keeping carbs down to a level they can tolerate. Remember, you use an amount of insulin to cover the level of carbs you eat. A lot of people try to stay off insulin, and other strong meds, and...

It depends on how high your blood sugar levels are, and how well your pancreas is in managing to produce it's own insulin. quite a few T2s go onto insulin, some initially and some after a period of time. some people even start on insulin as a type 2, but with a change in diet have come off it...

Great result Roy. Couldn't have a better set of figures.

Good point! Think its a statement, not a question. Point is though that much of the alarmist stuff that was posted about "frightening poor scared newbies who are already terrified" hardly applies to Sarah, does it? Patently someone who was quite blasé about it all, so the statement was fine and...

Well done Jo, and welcome back

100% from me.

Brave move Benedict. And a correct one may I say. Well done. And welcome back Jo!!

Sorry, not practical. Threads morph. They start off discussing losing weight for example, then someone pops in "lost weight but BGs still high", and before long you're discussing high BGs and that moves on to complications. Titles of threads rarely give an insight as to the final content. You...

Come on. If they are really like that, then it means they already know about complications, otherwise they wouldn't be so terrified. What they need is the message that yes, that is a possible outcome, but if you get your BGs under control you have an excellent chance of avoiding it. That is...

Sadly, you're wrong. She didn't do any of that. Was judged as too blunt apparently, in warning someone of complications if they didn't get their BGs under control. As I understand it! (Don't want to get banned myself; have to be careful.......)

Excellent point. They don't worry about "scaremongering" smokers, do they?

Good point. It was used by people trying to suggest that some were scaremongering.

WHAT! That's a perfect example of the OPPOSITE! One person had reservations, every other person was in favour of bluntness! That's a terrible example to make your point. It's actuaslly the very example that should be used to demonstrate why we SHOULD be blunt.

Sorry, but I really feel that's wrong. She doesn't believe that at all, nor have I EVER seen her say that. What she, and many others, talk about is the effect of poorly controlled BGs on complications, NOT the effect of carbohydrates per se on complications. It's not even implied. The line most...

You obviously take the actions you do in the best interests of the members, rather than from a personal stand. In which case, it is surely worth reading the threads on here such as "grim reaper", grim reaper part two", "censorship" etc, and you'd see what those very members think about such...

Pretty conclusive all round findings on this thread I believe!

It is called moderation when the "dangerous" posts you refer to are pulled. It's called censorship when perfectly rational and sound discussions are pulled