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

Diabeties is progressive.

to Diabetes UK,
Progressive - B@LLOCKS
I've gone:
Insulin
Tablets
D&E
Of course I've not followed my HCP's diet recommendations.
Instead, I've cut back on starchy carbs and upped my green veg & good fats.
 
Dentists are the worst. But still we're better off with them than without.

Was this your DESMOND class?

I went from tablets to diet and tablets then off tablets. No plans to go on insulin. Hopefully things are different here in Canada. Sounds bloody awful in the UK.

Take it easy.
 
For sure it's progressive if you eat lots of carbs and very little fat as they recommend. I won't argue with that.
 
douglas99 said:
So, do you still reckon you'll be here, off insulin in 2114?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what your point is Douglas. Life is progressive from birth to death. You manage it your way, others will manage it theirs, despite what Diabetes UK might have to say.
 
Did they mention Taylor at all? Given they are funding his research , and he seems to be saying it isn't necessarily progressive, and is indeed reversible in many instances , I'd be interested on their take on that.
 
And the purpose of this thread ? FergusCrawford has already gone from insulin to dietary control ! What is the message you're trying to put across ?
 
douglas99 said:
@NoCrbs4Me No offence, guessing you are merely repeating the party line without actually listening to them?
Shame really, as it doesn't make you look good after what they actually said.

Back to you.

What carbs do you, personally, and give a number, not waffle about it, state you would stand up in front of a room and say, 'that's your maximum, per day, and per meal'

Back to you.


Money where your mouth is, go for it, now's the time to stand up and be counted.

I'll tell you thier answer, after your response.
Click to expand...
I don't eat waffles - too many carbs. But anyway, are you asking me how much carbs I eat per day and per meal? And what do you mean about their answer? Answer to what? And what "party line" am I repeating?
 
This thread is just an attempt to start another pointless argument IMO.
 
douglas99 said:
I can see why Diabetes UK were pleased to see a room full of people, readings some of the comments on this thread.
Understanding diabetes is progressive is one of the key facts they convey to people as the first step, and then understanding the end results of not controlling it.
They will fight with you for the 15 step plan you should receive from you health care team, and advise the starting points for you to manage it.
They will help you avoid seeing those complications for as long as you can, and their aim is to help you in not seeing them until beyond your own lifespan. But they can't make you do it if you don't want to, or refuse to believe it will ever happen to you.

So it is a great shame that some seem to disbelieve the statement, either because Diabetes UK have said it, or because they personally control it, and simply see the first half of the message, stop reading, and prefer to take the glass half empty approach.

But, the message is, even for those with good control like me, you would be expected to get complications, at some period in the future.
I didn't stand up and abuse them, because I understand the message they are giving.
To repeat it.
The glass half full approach, is, if you put those complications back by a hundred years, it's not going to impact on you as much as ignoring it, and getting the complications in ten years.
I, personally, found it a reassuring message, at an age of 150, a bit of neuropathy, or retinopathy isn't going to worry me as much, as the lack of pulse for several decades before.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with their notion that type 2 diabetes is always progressive. I believe that if it discovered early when there has not been too many beta cell destruction and the insulin resistance is reversed by weight loss, then it won't progress. I also believe that their advice for type 2 diabetics to eat the same official government diet of high carb/low fat that is advised for healthy people is wrong for the vast majority of us. For many of us that is too much carbohydrate. Type 2 diabetes is, by definition, having an impaired ability to keep our blood sugar at normal safe levels with our own insulin. I refuse to take their advice to eat 45% or more of my calories as carbs. That would most certainly cause my diabetes to rapidly progress.
 
i dont get any strips from the docs and had to buy codefree tester from amazon out of my own money and ive given up sugar and bread and cireals but im wasting my time as ill end up on injections anyway so you say so thanx for nothin douglas:grumpy:
 
Let's see now, if I have not misunderstood the debate on this thread, it involves two conflicting assertions.

The first assertion is that if you can keep tight control on your glucose levels, within the non diabetic range, diabetes need not be progressive and may even be reversible.

The opposing assertion is that even if you keep your glucose levels within the normal range diabetes is progressive and complications should be expected in the future BUT by maintaining glucose within the normal range one could in effect postpone the onset of these complications, ideally past one's own lifespan.

Forgive me but to me this is a purely academic argument, as both assertions lead to the identical recommended action for diabetics - keeping glucose level under control.

I hope the non progressive theory is correct but believe that from a motivational point of view the diabetes is progressive assertion may be slightly superior, as it carries a lower risk of the diabetic becoming disillusioned if the expectations raised by the first assertion fail to materialize.

But as I said, fine details.

Either way the message is clear - maintain good glycemic control to stay healthy.

Pavlos

And just below the surface,the same old to low carb or not to low carb divisive lines
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Diabetes complications ie. Nerve damage or organ damage is caused by too much glucose in our blood, correct?
If so then by keeping that excess glucose out of our blood ie. Keeping good control, how can we be prone to complications caused by it?
 
Chris P Bacon said:
Diabetes complications ie. Nerve damage or organ damage is caused by too much glucose in our blood, correct?
If so then by keeping that excess glucose out of our blood ie. Keeping good control, how can we be prone to complications caused by it?
Click to expand...
If excess sugar in our blood causes the complications then by keeping our glucose as close to non diabetic levels at all times we would reasonably expect not to develop complications.

But what if the excess sugar is only another symptom rather than the cause of the complications, the underlying cause of both being our diabetic condition. Our body is too complicated a mechanism even glucose regulation involves a lot of procedures and hormones not just the release of insulin.

Certainly it is accepted that high glucose levels accelerate the onset of complications.
 
I suppose the issue is that I live in Canada where they tell you to follow the government healthy eating guidelines, which is low fat and 45 to 65% of your calories from carbs (whole grains and starchy veg) and actively discourage a low carb high fat diet and they may or may not discourage/encourage self testing. From what I've seen others post about your DESMOND course, it appeared to me that advice there was similar. I don't dispute that keeping your blood glucose levels under control will prevent complications - is there anyone on this forum that doesn't believe that?. The problem is that their dietary advice will not lead to good control for everyone, which they define as an HbA1c below 7% (at least in Canada). The diabetic nurses and dieticians are happy with my lab results but horrified at my diet. They don't seem to quite believe that my diet is healthy, despite the numbers. Maybe someday this will change, but until it does I will ignore most of their advice. Also, I disagree with a minimum amount of carbs. All my carbs are from fresh veg, so it's difficult to get much below 50 g a day unless I cut those out. Could I do as well on 140 g carbs a day? I tried that for a week while on vacation and my fasting blood glucose started going up to prediabetic levels, although my post meal levels were not all that high. I went back to <75 g and my my fasting levels went down immediately back to nondiabetic levels.

If you are getting official government advice there to eat to your meter, then that is fantastic and sounds like a bit of a change. I suppose we may be behind the times here in the colonies. When lunch time came at my diabetic management course they recommended the nearby Pizza Hut and McDonalds. I ate the salad and roast chicken I brought.

If you are eating 800 calories a day, are you eating 140 g carbs (whole grain/rice/starchy veg) a day as recommended?
 
Back
Top