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

And so it begins: Eat less meat or we’ll make you.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Member496333
  • Start Date Start Date
And so it begins: again. Yet another thread devoted to the topic of whether or not meat will be on the menu sometime in the future.

I can completely understand why this topic is of such importance to many people, if you love your meat then it is perfectly understandable that you would be upset about having it taken from you. I expect I would feel the same if chocolate or beer were banned.

However what I do not understand is what useful purpose it serves to endlessly discuss it here on a diabetes forum. I get that there may be many valid reasons why meat is good for diabetes management for some people, I wouldn't doubt that, but will debating the possibility of a future cessation of eating meat, on a diabetes forum, actually do anything to prevent it from happening? It’s a diabetes forum intended to offer support and guidance to diabetics rather than a lobbying platform after all.

It seems to me that the only real outcome achieved here, by debates such as this, is to further polarize opinion so that people become more irrevocably entrenched in their own meat or no meat camp. Surely this can only foster and nurture an 'us and them' environment. Is that something we want?

Obviously I cannot know for sure any persons actual intention or desire when they post here; but given that forum rules prevent anyone from actually coming straight out and saying, 'I don’t like or I have issues with such and such a person or their choices because of x y z etc. etc', then I am left wondering, is a debate of this nature the next best thing? An implicit message, though less obvious, is as much a message as an explicit one.

The majority of posts I read around here are by people who eat a meat based LCHF diet, and yes I also get that this is most likely because that is the diet that most people find best for their own needs, and I have no issues with that at all. It makes sense. However having a large majority of one kind of viewpoint can leave other people with more of a minority viewpoint feeling pushed out or trampled over by what can seem like an oncoming stampede! I can't help but wonder if everyone is even aware of that, or if they care about that?

I have no idea whether or not meat will be on the menu in the future, that’s something I wouldn’t even try to predict, but if things carry on as they have been doing so on this forum then I predict that the Diabetes.co.uk forum will eventually become less of a diabetes support forum and more of a meat based LCHF diet forum and anyone who does not fit this profile will not feel welcome. I have already read posts from some people saying they feel like this now. I fear we may be in danger of making this forum a rather toxic environment in which only one kind of viewpoint is tolerated. Is that something we really want?
 

That's called stifling debate AND opinions. You don't have to read it, do you.
 
@Little Bird For many T2s diet is the best treatment there is. For T1s the treatment is insulin. When the Brexit vote happened there were threads about the threat to insulin supplies when we leave the EU. T1s were worried about the possibility of their treatment not being available.

T2s are worried about their treatment not being available so we talk about it here so that other T2s know what is planned in the not too distant future. We cannot lobby our MPs etc unless we are informed. We cannot sleepwalk into this...our health is at risk.

The threads about insulin supllies were allowed and so should the ones about meat be allowed too...otherwise it would feel like T1s are valued more highly than T2s. I believe all forumites are of equal importance. If they aren't then there really is an 'us and them' mentality.
 
So when someone posts on here that diet xyz is the only one to cure Type 2 Diabetes, or is the best at losing weight, or is the healthiest diet for all or even the best diet to save the planet, do you not think it right that we should question their statements and subject the claims made in their supporting video against known science? Or should we cheer them and encourage others to sign up to this new diet, even if we suspect the claims are not substantiated, and that the diet itself may be nutritionally deficient?

What I do here i did also for LCHF, and even just plain LC before i found there was supporting scientific studies that backed up the claims being made. I also did my own (n=1) trials and also found the claims were valid. There are some diets here that do not hold the basic requirements for evidence, even though I have on numerous occasions asked the posters what thay used, and so far I have been sent glossy sales videos on youtube, and offered expensive books written by people that are held up to be super experts (aka guru) and an almost religious zeal, which to me is just candy floss.

You ask why bother. A) my life will depend on it, my future treatment options will become very singular, and I will lose my current happy state of control. B) there are others who read this forum who are influencers in the big wide world outside this portal. I recognise some of them that I have had conversations with on the forum, but there are probably some silent ones too. There may be a possiblity that an ex prime minister and a deputy leader of a political party may have ventured through some of these threads.

Lastly, by examining the validity and safety of a diet is necessary to protect others being presented with a sales pitch that could lead to long term harm. We can examine nutrient deficiencies and interactions, and work out how best to circumvent any long term effects on health, just as we do with medicines. Diet is not just eating. It is existance.

For instance, some 30% of the world population is actually harmed by soya bean, Do you see the papers taking this up and warning. No? Why not? They are too interested in cows being fed soyabean that humans should be eating instead. The fact that ruminants cannot eat soy, and it is very toxic for them is ignored becaiuse no one seems to be questioning that. We are being blindly led down a path by slogan, and false science claims. That is why I speak out against it.
 
For me and my health access to dairy protein is essential.

Not a 'want' like chocolate or beer, but a vital component of successful nutrition while also treating my type 2 diabetes.

I don't know why some on here have a problem understand this.

It's not just about meat, it's about dairy products too.

Quite apart from the huge increase in microfibres everywhere if there is no wool, suede, leather etc

Surely people on this forum have read enough about LCHF and the importance of low carb protein to understand concerns around the threat of stopping access to red meat and dairy.

I noticed yesterday how little protein and calcium there is in vegan cheese, for example. I can't eat nuts, seeds or soy so I am in big trouble without access to as much dairy products as I require nutritionally.
 
As I said in my earlier post I do understand that there are very good reasons for many people following a meat based LCHF lifestyle, I have no issues with that.

What I was trying to say is that the endless exchanges about it are having a polarizing effect.

I had to look up the TKO acronym as I'd not come across it before but now I have I think it highly apt and relevant to the point I was trying to make. Sometimes it can feel more like a boxing match than a debate and if you happen to have a minority viewpoint then you have two choices, keep silent or get knocked out by the majority. That can make some people feel very unwelcome here.
 
80-90% of diabetics are type 2, so it follows that a diet suitable for them will be a majority of the discussion on the forum.

Especially as, for type 2 diabetics, diet is our primary means of control.

It's just a case of the number of type 2.

I don't know what type you are, or what treatment you have, as your profile in inaccessible.
 
What is TKO?
 
So you have no issues with the need for us to have meat but you would like us to keep quiet about it? ie become a 'silent majority' and suffer in silence whilst the powers that be plough ahead with the planned slaughter to near extinction of farm animals?
 
This thread is discussing the Global diet to Save the Planet, There are no subthreads dedicated to it. It is not vegan, its not vegetarian, and definitely anti-animal. There is nowhere else where we T2D can diacuss the future effects it will have except here, and so far we have generally stuck to topic. This diet will have far reaching consequences for mankind and the animal kingdom if it is implemented in its proposed form. It is an elephant in the room that people try to keep us from mentioning. We are being asked to stick our heads in the sand and swap recipes instead. Sorry if I have offended you, but I don't do recipes.
 
Being concerned about our treatment is not the same as being against those that use other treatments. It is a simple fact that the vast majority of posters are type 2. It is a simple fact that the vast majority use meat and animal products to treat their type 2. It’s not anti type 1 nor is it anti vegetarian or vegan, who are factually in the minority.

If the sheer fact that there are persons choosing to read such threads (which probably aren’t all that relevant to their personal treatment) who are in said minorities means we have to avoid all majority discussion then we really are in trouble.
 

There's enough irony in this post to sink a ship
 
Jim Lahey said:
There's enough irony in this post to sink a ship
Click to expand...
Too much iron is an ovedrdose that can kill since the body cannot excrete the excess any other way than blood letting or leeches. I fear for the new Heme iron being added to vegetarian products since the dosage is higher than the RDI (RDA) for most of us , so daily double [fake] whoppers is not so healthy after all.
 
Jim Lahey said:
There's enough irony in this post to sink a ship
Click to expand...
I think that some don't realise our need to treat our condition with animal protein is not a preference, it's essential.

Perhaps people don't understand how vital reducing our carb intake is, and how relatively small amounts of carbohydrates affect us.

It's a lot to get our heads round in the beginning. And the reduction of carbs in our diet means we have to source proteins which are low or no carb. And eat more fats and proteins from animal sources for the same reason.
 

I think it's clear that some people just object. Plain and simple.

We will be be moderated if this continues, so I will attempt not to respond further to posts that clearly cause the very phenomenon they propose to be discouraging.
 
Well, I expressed what seems to be a minority opinion and I think it is quite interesting that some (but not all, fairs fair) of the responses to it actually seem to illustrate my point far more vividly than I ever could have done so myself.

Is it really such a big ask that the majority be mindful of the fact that in being the majority their voice is the loudest, and that other quieter voices can very easily be drowned out? And that can make the forums seem unfriendly and unwelcoming or intimidating even to some people. Because that’s basically all I’m really trying to say.

Anyway, I've said my piece so I will leave it at that. I am mindful of the fact that this is going off topic and in danger of derailing the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…