Diabetics are carb intolerant

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
I inject insulin because my body doesn't produce it. The body produces sugar even on a 0 carb diet, which is why background insulin is needed for type 1s,

It's one reason yes. Though actually the background insulin is more to inhibit the glycogen release than to metabolise the sugar. It is also needed to suppress gluconeogenesis and lipolysis, which otherwise run all the time whether appropriate or not, and to clear ketones generated by lipolysis and ketosis. Each of these processes in their own right would be fatal if not downregulated by injected insulin.

and when the body is pushed too hard it uses the background even better needing carbs without qa.

Not sure what you mean here ?

If I did not have insulin id be dead by now with or without them, not because I was carb intollerant but because my body didn't produce insulin.

Because your body doesn't produce insulin, your body is (severely) carb intolerant.

If someone loses their legs, we say they are disabled. If we give them crutches, or even high tech prosthetic legs, we still say the person is disabled. Type 1 diabetes is the same thing. Injected insulin is a pair of crutches, not a pair of legs.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Spiker · May 18, 2014

phoenix said:
another copy and paste : Food Intolerance
We have evolved to eat starches and metabolise them. We produce amylase , we even produce it in our saliva (unlike our chimpanzee and bonobo 'cousins' who have the gene but it doesn't work properly) and we also produce amylase from the pancreas Those few of us who have diabetes caused by removal of the pancreas do indeed have a problem in metabolising starch without taking enzymes.

The same guy who did the amylase research you are referring to calls diabetes "carbohydrate intolerance"

Both in T1 and T2 the fasting glucose level, which is diagnostic for diabetes, is determined by the amount of glucagon released . Without adequate insulin then glucose levels will rise.
It's not a carbohydrate intolerance, it's beta cells killed off or resistance resulting in a need for more insulin to get the messages through or something wrong with the signalling system.

I think you are confusing the condition with the cause. Yes the cause is beta cell destruction in autoimmune T1 and insulin resistance in T2. They are still all functionally carb intolerance (as well as other issues). The cause doesn't matter, there are dozens of distinct causes. It could be caused by evil magic pixies, the condition arising from the cause would still be carb intolerance. This is pathology not etiology we are talking about.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
You haven't got a carb intolerance because you need insulin, you need insulin either way

Type 1, pumping nova rapid

No and yes. No, you are carb intolerant precisely and only because you lack your own insulin. Yes, you would need injected insulin even if somehow this didn't make you carb intolerant, because lack of insulin causes problems worse than carb intolerance, problems that would kill you.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
What do you have to treat a low or prevent one happening. if you were carb intollerant it wouldn't.be carbs

Type 1, pumping nova rapid

Carbs for a hypo are an antidote for an insulin overdose and we don't tolerate them well even when using them as an antidote.

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
if I had a hyper would mean I didn't have sufficient insulin on my body, the carbs I ate however would of been digested and used by the body to put in the blood ready to use

Type 1, pumping nova rapid

The carbs you ate would be in your blood making your blood toxic and causing damage to every cell in your body.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Jamrox · May 18, 2014

Ashlie said:
I'm sorry but this has completely angered me!! If it was as simple as being intolerant then we would just have to cut it out not take life saving medication!! It's not like being lactose intolerant is it!! Background insulin keeps us alive, we do not produce it, even if we didn't eat carbs n didn't have to take quick acting we would still need background because our pancreas has destroyed itself! T2 not so much, most T2 are diabetic due to poor lifestyle, poor diet, no exercise and being over weight, they still produce insulin just not enough to go round their bodies, thays why they take a tablet it's like a top up of insulin, so yes exercising n eating right may improve T2 but to say a type 1 is "carb intolerant" is ludicrous, even when I go on a low carb diet my levels are still high! Plus we need carbs to survive!! Diabetes causes so many complications in life n health because once one organ has started attacking itself others can too, ketones are dangerous n even having the flu can cause them not just eating carbs, using lactose intolerance as an example that doesn't cause health problems n doesn't threaten your life every day! Silly silly people agreeing with this!

Ashlie , you have really upset me.
I totally agree that type 1&2 are totally different conditions and should never be classed together. That said it is wrong to say that type 2 is due poor lifestyle. Yes some type 2 may be poor lifestyle but not all.
I control mine through diet and exercise . My father and grandma had type 2 and they were not fat or unhealthy. Its comments like yours that stop people going to their gp when they get symptoms. Blame game isn't helpful

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
I'm not carb intolerant but am instead insulin lacking.

This is exactly like saying "I'm not short, I'm just lacking in height."

Jamrox · May 18, 2014

Scandichic said:
No this is not the case. It is impossible to cut out carbs completely but it is often rice, bread, pasta and potatoes which cause the issue for a lot of diabetic t2. I cannot comment on t1. I have cut out carbs apart from green veg and very limited fruit. Only berries. I am no longer very fat or constipated which I was when I was eating those things. My bs goes through the roof when I eat those things. As a consequence, I'd have to have no access to other food before I put them in my mouth again. My understanding is that carbohydrate is a source of energy therefore you can easily swap it out for fat. I eat and need far less food now I don't eat much carb.

Im diet controlled type 2 :
I control mine the same way as you Scandichic...Most of the time....sometimes I go off the rails like today.
As I said earlier I think both types are very very different .

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Jamrox · May 18, 2014

Andrew Colvin said:
I have read this thread over the last few days and have resisted replying because I have not understood what you are all arguing about. For me I treat carbs as a poison and have done so since about 3 weeks after diagnosis and completed my research. I can now tolerate quite high levels and also high GI ones but they are still a poison to my system that my body has to clear out. My body does need a very small amount (brain cells use it for energy) and my other cells but it really doesnt need the amounts (we well I before diagnosis) used to stuff down my throat pre-awakening.

Am I intolerant to carbs, yes after I have more than a certain amount. Is that amount a lot lower than it used to be, yes; so you could actually almost say I have developed some level of allergy.

Ok so flame on; I am wearing my asbestos pants

I agree. Have to say that I tolerate more carbs now that I exercise more.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
Calling insulin poisen, and carbs poisen, when a good combo of the 2 keep me alive, well and healthy just doesnt make sense to me. Would rather have them than not or else I would not be here now.

No. It is not the combination of the two that keep you alive, well and healthy. It is only the insulin that keeps you alive, well and healthy. Insulin is necessary for life, well-being and health. Dietary carbs are optional, a non-essential nutrient, for the general population. And for diabetics they are harmful, and for Type 1 diabetics, consuming them requires injecting additional insulin, which means incurring additional risks from hypoglycemia and hyperinsulinemia.

Spiker · May 18, 2014

doommoose said:
but the body will only burn fats in the abscense of carbs

Not true. Typically both are metabolised side by side. It's insulin not carbs that inhibits fat burning. But it's a slider, not an on/off switch.

and cutting out one major food group will indominably damage you for example if you said you were proteins or fats from your diet you would do yourself more damage than if you where consuming all three.

Carbs are not an essential food group. No one can survive without fat and protein in their diet. Anyone can survive without carbs in their diet. Carbs are optional. And not very desirable.

also carbs massivly help the body maintain normal bowel movement that reduces risk of constipation, hemorrhoids, diverticulosis and colon cancer.

You are thinking of fibre, not carbs. Fibre does this, carbs are irrelevant.

By increasing excretion of cholesterol, fiber may decrease risk of heart disease

Since cholesterol can't enter the bloodstream from the gut, this, like all statements made against dietary cholesterol, is wrong.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

doommoose said:
i have to consume upto 400g of carbohydrate a day

Why ? Substitute 180g of fat instead. No effect at all on your blood sugar. Your power (VOx) will remain the same, and your endurance will increase massively.

Spiker · May 18, 2014

noblehead said:
Then we have an intolerance to protein and fats

Why fats ? We are totally tolerant of fats. It never raises blood sugar and never requires insulin.

Why protein ? It only raises blood sugar in very low carb diets and then only to a mild degree. But it's not protein we are intolerant of, it's the conversion of protein into glucose that we are (mildly) intolerant of.

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
You would have to inject on 0 carbs though. Not injecting not eating carbs you would stilll die.

This is like arguing that you are not intolerant of a bullet to the head, because you can also be killed by a chainsaw in the ribs. Guess what, you can be intolerant of more than one thing! A bullet to the head AND a chainsaw in the ribs. Carbs AND terminal diabetic ketoacidosis AND runaway gluconeogenesis AND runaway lipolysis.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Spiker · May 18, 2014

brett said:
But that adverse effect would happen with or without carbs, caused by lack of insulin.

No it wouldn't. There is a different adverse effect that happens regardless of whether you eat carbs, and a specific adverse affect that is only caused by carbs, and which doesn't happen in the absence of carbs.

If I match my insulin, injected (cause.my body can't make it) I tolerate carbs very well with no adverse affects. if I couldn't tolerate the carbs the injected insulin wouldn't be much use.

Other way round. You can only tolerate the carbs moderately well because of the artificial intervention of injected insulin.

Do you match your injected insulin well enough to your dietary carbs so that you run blood sugars all the time in the non-diabetic range? If not, then you are suffering an adverse effect from carbs.

Mrs Vimes · May 18, 2014

Is this still going? Well after much reading and knowing I'm right cos I'm me - I have been persuaded by a new argument I hadn't considered before.

I'm going to do more research into the 'evil pixie' hypothesis put forward by Spiker cos if it's true I can find the little f@@@er and batter it into submission.

Off I go - do I use google or yahoo?

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

ElyDave · May 18, 2014

@Spiker I thought you were leaving this alone now?

How this hasn't got locked yet is beyond me.

Bebo321 · May 18, 2014

Spiker said:
It's one reason yes. Though actually the background insulin is more to inhibit the glycogen release than to metabolise the sugar. It is also needed to suppress gluconeogenesis and lipolysis, which otherwise run all the time whether appropriate or not, and to clear ketones generated by lipolysis and ketosis. Each of these processes in their own right would be fatal if not downregulated by injected insulin.

Not sure what you mean here ?

Because your body doesn't produce insulin, your body is (severely) carb intolerant.

If someone loses their legs, we say they are disabled. If we give them crutches, or even high tech prosthetic legs, we still say the person is disabled. Type 1 diabetes is the same thing. Injected insulin is a pair of crutches, not a pair of legs.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Hmmm Spiker, I like your thinking.
If somebody lost their sight though, would you say they were blind or visually impaired?

I think most people would agree that in common parlance it makes sense to say that anyone with diabetes is carb intolerant. That doesn't mean it is an entirely appropriate statement however, and I would dispute that for someone with T1 it is a sensible statement.

Perhaps it is the definition of 'food intolerance' itself that is the root of the heated debate here?

When considering the various forms of adverse affects around food intolerance, I haven't come across death as one of the side effects (not one that is directly attributable to the food group - and appreciating the difference between allergy and intolerance)

My understanding of an 'adverse affect' is an uncomfortable side effect that is not terminal. It may lead to death eventually, but not as a direct result of the offending food group.
Surely if the definition of 'food intolerance' was meant to cover all things, the definition would include 'including death' at the end of it?
(Just playing Devil's advocate here)

an inability to eat a food or take a drug without adverse effects.
"young children with lactose intolerance"

noblehead · May 18, 2014

Spiker said:
Why fats ? We are totally tolerant of fats. It never raises blood sugar and never requires insulin.

Why protein ? It only raises blood sugar in very low carb diets and then only to a mild degree. But it's not protein we are intolerant of, it's the conversion of protein into glucose that we are (mildly) intolerant of.

A high fat diet can cause insulin resistance Spiker, I thought you would know that as there's been a few low-carbing type 1's on the forum who have experienced this first-hand.

Protein (in the absence of carbs) converts to glucose by around 50-60%. As said earlier there's no such thing as a free meal when it comes to type 1 diabetes, from experience I need nearly as much insulin eating a very low-carb meal as I do eating one with moderate amounts of carbs, that is the reason why I don't exclude carbs and eat them as part of a healthy balanced diet.

With or without carbs bg will rise if we didn't have insulin in our bodies, that is a fact no one can deny

Spiker · May 18, 2014

ElyDave said:
@Spiker I thought you were leaving this alone now?

How this hasn't got locked yet is beyond me.

Oh I got dragged back in coz some bu**er asked me a direct question.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Diabetics are carb intolerant

Are diabetics just carb intolerant?

Yes

No

I abstain!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Guru

Well-Known Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency