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

Conflicting

rosgrech

Active Member
Messages
41
Location
Gloucestershire
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
Only diagnosed six weeks ago (when my bs was 31.8!) and have doing quite well bringing that down to single figures (just). I had lost my appetite and 10kgs in weight (down to 70) prior to diagnosis so I am pleased that I have gained 3kgs again but don't want it to escalate.

As my weight seems to be increasing literally daily but my bs staying on the single/double figure borderline I am thinking of giving the lowcarb diet a go - however I have high cholesterol (brought down to 3.8 with statins but still want to be wary) so the lc diet conflicts with the low-fat diet I have been following for many years.

I know I will benefit from following the lc diet but am concerned that increasing fats as an energy substitute may be detrimental to my cholesterol level.

Opinions please?
 
One of the curiosities of life/metabolism and the Universe, is that it's carbs that cause cholesterol NOT fats.
LC is good for lowering LDL and increasing HDL
Hana
 
I quite happily low carb with only a moderate amount of fat intake.It can be done ,you just have to plan what you like to eat and work from there.
 
It boils down to "eat sparingly"
Hana
 
Hi rosgrech.

I too am very wary of using high fats because of Cardivascular issues. Therefore my diet has remained stubbornly LOW FAT and I have just reduced my carbs down to around 60g per day. This does fluctuate. Since doing that I have lost nearly 4 stone since January. My Bg levels remain good.
My eyesight has improved to the extent I no longer need glasses for distance. All because of the reduced carbs and diet regime.

So if anybody tells you it must be HIGH fat, it is not necessary. You can remain low or moderate.
 
Hi rosgrech,

I have followed a low carb diet for 9 years now. I've restricted carbs more as time has gone on, but never restricted fat consumption. My cholesterol at my last checkup was 4.9.
It's a myth that fat consumption raises cholesterol, and in fact that raised cholesterol is a significant risk factor for heart disease.
Besides which, it's carbohydrates and insulin which combine to both lower HDL cholesterol and raise triglyceride levels. You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who has adopted a low carb diet who hasn't also reported significant improvements in both of these lipids.

All the best,

fergus
 
Hi Fergus.

I know that you and other low carbers do eat more fats. I don't, as you well know, because I had a Coronary Artery By-Pass Graft in 2004. When you have had a warning and your arteries are furred up with plaque, then you might just decide it isn't a myth. I am not going to go against the advice given to me by the emminent Cardiac Surgeon in Birmingham who sorted all my problems out. I am sure he knows a lot more than me.

Please don't tell me that there is much evidence to support your views, I can find as much if not more to support mine. so we will just have to differ on this one. At least people can see both sides of the argument.

High fat works for you, it does not always work for some others of us on here, for various reasons. I agree about the reduction of carbs though. Great idea.
 
Hi Ken,

I hear what you're saying.
There is are alternative hypotheses re. furry arteries which seem to fit the facts more closely. Dr Malcolm Kendrick is very good on the subject. In essence, he explains that excess arterial plaque is a consequence, not of excess fat consumption, but of excess production of cortisol and insulin.
Physical and emotional stressors cause a dysfunction in the hypothalmus-pituitary-adrenal axis leading to excess cortisol production which damages endothilial cells. Cholesterol is sent to repair the damage, but the stressors keep exaccerbating it. The results are a buildup of deposits within arteries caused not by fat but by hormonal dysfunction.
I have a Professor friend who runs a clinic in London and tells me that cardiologists are deserting the low-fat idea in droves now.
As you rightly say, we each need to decide which hypothesis best accords with our own understanding and act accordingly.

All the best,

fergus
 
Hi Fergus.

This is the 'emminent' Dr Malcolm Kendrick. Here is a short extract of a review of his book,
The Great Cholesterol Con: The Truth About What Really Causes Heart Disease and How to Avoid It
August 22, 2008
Reviewed by Chris Masterjohn

If you want a few good laughs, read this book.

Malcolm Kendrick's 2007 book, The Great Cholesterol Con, is full of sarcastic humor. It parodies some of the most outrageous scientific absurdities ever to find their way into print, and it is impossible not to laugh out loud while reading it. Although it makes a number of excellent serious points, readers with a background in the relevant science might also laugh at some of the egregious scientific errors in the book and some of Kendrick's poorly conceived speculations - or at least find themselves scratching their heads.
(End quote)

If you want a few more laughs here is a link to the full review.
http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/M ... l-Con.html

I understand he is a great mate of Dr Bernstein et al ? Well, frankly I prefer to listen to the Cardiologists, the real experts, which by the way I haven't noticed deserting in droves to the Kendrick camp. In fact in one of the videos to the BMA in Leeds you ccould actually see people laughing at the good Dr when he was 'explaining' his hypothesis. Now Fergus, I am no expert - I do listen to some real ones. I also question what I read and am told. So, as you say, we have to make our choices. I've made mine. I did that by listening to the men who saved my life, I owe them that.

Cheers.
Ken. :D
 
Hi Ken,

Dr Kendrick fully expected his theories to be attacked, but the argument really centres not on whether his own theories are correct, but whether the conventional wisdom stands up to scrutiny.
I don't think it does. Even the reviewer in the link you posted states:

I do not believe that "high cholesterol" levels cause heart disease.

Which leaves us wondering how it is that statins supposedly reduce the risk of heart disease?
Anyway, it's late and the stilton is calling to me :lol:

All the best,

fergus
 
Hi Ferg.

It's not Stilton I want, it's my bed.......night night. :D

Ken.

BTW.
Forgot to mention before, my Cholesterol level was 3.2 at my last check up. Not bad for a low fat person ??
 
I have never jumped on the low-fat bandwagon - I was deeply suspicious of it right from the start, and still am. How can anything 'man-made' be better than the good natural substances that our ancestors have been eating quite happily, and healthily for thousands of years?

What has changed?

What has radically changed in our diet overall is that whilst fat consumption has gone down, carb consumption has soared, and particularly processed carb consumption. Yes, some people still eat fatty foods, like chips, crisps et al, but the fat is eaten with carbohydrate.

Cooked breakfasts were blamed for cholesterol deposits, but if you really analyze the classic cooked breakfast - especially the 'greasy spoon' cafe types, they are constructed of cheap sausages which are probably mainly rusk - wheat, and soya with often as little as only 30% meat or less (and even that is of dubious quality), bacon, usually cured with sugar and laced with nitrites, etc., hash browns - potato and goodness knows what else, cheap battery produced eggs from grain-fed chickens who have never seen the light of day and who produce nutritionally-deficient anaemic yolks, baked beans - packed full of sugar and other rubbish, and if that was not enough, a round or two of toast.

Is it any surprise they are blamed? Guilty as charged.

Like I said, it's not the fats on their own but what they are eaten with that is the main problem. Of course those kind of foods cause problems - they are predominantly carb.

A REAL cooked breakfast, made with REAL food cannot conceivably create the same problems.

If fats were the issue then the Inuit and other cultures on a high-fat diet would have died out by now from heart disease, let alone been hale and hearty, full of energy, and able to withstand the extreme temperatures they live under.

Personally, I treat everything the 'experts' tell me with a pinch of salt. They think they know everything, yet they really know nothing at all. All our 'Western' diseases are escalating by the second. If they were THAT expert, we'd all be well. Every week yet another possible 'cure' potential is splashed across the news. Where do they all go???

Give me good old common-sense anyday.

PS. A good friend of ours was badly damaged by Statins. He lost his memory - didn't even recognise his wife. He's back with us now, but it was touch and go, and he still isn't right. Anyone who trusts drugs (and those who are nothing more than glorified drug-pushers) need their head examined in my view.

We get sick because we are enslaved to this Western diet, then we obediently trot along to the Doctor to get a 'pill to end all ills'. Sorry, they haven't got any this week - or any other for that matter.

Yes, I have to take some of their medication, but, like the others I have already dumped, my goal is to get off them completely.
 
Hi rosgrech.

As you can see there are conflicting opinions. We have had them many times before and I have no doubt if we are still around we will probably go over the same ground again. I have saved my answers for the next time.

So, as with the rest of us, it's down to you to read what you can and make your own decisions. This 'debate' could go on and on and on........ :arrow:

Tough life isn't it. Some things are easy to answer, others, well they 'aint. :D :roll:
 
just to add my tuppenceworth, I have been low carbing six months now and my cholesterol has lowered from high to good level (sorry don't have the exact figs) and I have been eating plenty of cheese, meat, nuts, oil etc. I'd say my diet is about 50% fat, 40% protein and 10% carbs.
 
Good for you Anticarb, you have found what works for you. I can't eat that amount of fat so I find what works for me and stick to it.
 
Personally, I think that whatever your cholesterol reading is, it is only that level at that point at that time. Had it been taken an hour before, or an hour after, it might have been totally different.

The body is moving cholesterol around all the time to wherever it is needed at any given time. If the arteries are 'furred up' that is likely because the body has had to do 'emergency' repairs to plug damage. And damage can very much be driven by the food we eat.

As someone who is very gluten intolerant, I know first hand the damage that food can do to our bodies, and I am in contact with many, many others who have also been damaged by it. That is why I feel that we are all being damaged by it to a greater or lesser degree.

Gluten intolerance and Celiac Disease often present with symptoms, that to the 'trained' eye are recognisable. Unfortunately, by the time the symptoms manifest, the damage is already done - its the insidious damage, or damage that presents as seemingly unrelated symptoms that is the worst of the bunch.

There are close links between Diabetes and Celiac/GI, especially type 1. My Mum was type 1 from the age of 16 and died at the age of 64 from multiple organ failure. Four weeks before she died, the Hospital suspected that she had Celiac Disease. Knowing what I now know, and considering her symptoms through the years, I am convinced that she had Celiac Disease. She was put on to a Gluten-free diet, but it was all too little too late.

That Doctor that picked it up was one of the very few who understand it. Sadly those that don't are way in the majority. Most think that it is a childhood illness that is 'grown out of'. They could not be further from the Truth.

Estimates of those with Celiac Disease (both known and unknown) range between 1:100 and 1:3. My take on it is that Celiac Disease is just gluten intolerance at its worst, and that the 1:3 is actually much nearer the mark.

Anyway, back to cholesterol. When I was offered Statins, my cholesterol was 3.8. Go figure.

By the way, I told the Diabetic 'Specialist' that he could keep his Statins, thank you.
 
I always find it amazing that people cite humanities ancestors as having a good diet. Go back before we figured out how to farm grains (carbohydrates) and it was pretty much whatever we found lying on the ground. Maybe that explains that prior to agriculture, life expectancy was about 30. Now my generation is being predicted to be able to hit 120, if we do things properly.

And to insinuate or state that we're 'supposed' to eat a certain thing and 'not supposed' to eat another is just silly. Anyone who states that has completely misinterpreted the human gut. It's not as if we were designed to eat only specifics. It's not like buying a diesel car and filling it with petrol (which WILL ruin the engine). That's simply not the way organisms work. We adapt. To anything and everything so long as there isn't excess.

And that's the best advice anyone can give you: don't go high carb, don't go high fat, don't go high protein. Take them all in moderation.
 
Back
Top