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

evening snacks

Once again, carbohydrates greatly increase triglyceride levels but fats do not.
Click to expand...
Hi Eric,
Whilst Fergus feels that triglycerides are not increased by fat ingestion, this is what the American Heart Association says . http://www.americanheart.org/presenter. ... ifier=4778
I think you will find a similar message from all mainstream sources.
 
Dear Pheonix as a T2, I for one have to agree with Fergus and my last 3 hba1c`s would seem to back this up as Lipids are down, HDL up and LDL down. True i lo carb but dont hold back on any of the "fats" . My diabetes Nurse dosnt believe it either so wants to see me in 3months which i am more than happy to do.

Dave P
 
Phoenix,

If you listen to all the mainstream sources they will tell you to do all the things that we know, and have proven, are bad for us as diabetics. The mainstream sources tell us that we must eat a high carb diet, and to ensure that each meal contains "plenty of starchy carbohydrates". If you follow that mantra, and millions do, then yes, it is essential to eat less fat because it is the combination of high carbs and fat that does the damage, not fat on its own. Even many members of the medical profession are now realising that the advice they have been told to give to patients is plainly flawed, and an increasing number are risking censure by following common sense instead of governmental dogma.

Much of the research that has now disproved the theories of Ancel Keys, on which most western government heath recommendations have been based, was actually funded by the American Heart Association and the American Medical Association, and both bodies are finding it enormously difficult to come to terms with the fact that the advice that they have been giving for decades was probably responsible for millions of early deaths. In 2006 the AMA ditched the "food triangle", describing it as "no longer appropriate", and came out with new guidelines based not on pictures but measured amounts of carbs, protein and fats in a diet, expressed in ounces per day. The ADA followed suit by changing the recommended daily carb intake for diabetics from 280g per day to "between 135g and 185g per day as appropriate to the needs of the individual". This was a brave reduction but even then only half the reduction that had been recommended by Stanford University, who had carried out the AMA/AHA research.

If you wish to risk your own health by following government dietary advice then that is your choice. But please do not try to convince others that they should risk their health, when the mainstream advice is plainly wrong and is at last being recognised as such by at least some of the more enlightened medical professionals.
 
"Most diabetics consume very little dietary fat - they've been conditioned to fear it.
High lipid profiles are a symptom not of excess dietary fat, but of high blood sugars.
Indeed, even in most nondiabetics, the consumption of fat has little if anything to do
with their lipid profiles."

~Doctor Richard K. Bernstein.

Also, whilst there is no clear connection between high cholesterol levels and heart disease
risk, there is a connection between high insulin levels and heart disease risk.

Regards,
timo.
 


My opinion, is just as valid as yours Dennis. I was answering the question from Eric , it is up to him to decide what he wants to do with his diet.. People need to be aware of alternatives and the views as perceived by the majority of professionals . Fergus gave one opinion, ie that trigs are formulated from carbs with fat playing no part , I gave another... If you read the original link, t part of the advice is to eat cut down on excess calories, eat selective, unsaturated fats, over saturated ones, eat fruit and veg and to exercise. This is not actualy incompatible with a low carb diet.
Obviously you feel that this message board should only contain views which conform to yours! As this is a message being put by a moderator, I must assume that only certain views are acceptable.

As to damaging my own health. My own Hb A1c is in the low fives and my trigs at the lower end of the normal range. I also have a very personal reason for being aware of a good diet for high trigs. My husband is non diabetic but he has familial hypertriglyceridaemia, which sadly has resulted in the early death of his father, his sister and several other near relatives. He eats the same diet as me and with the help of a reasonably low dose of fenofibrate has been able to keep his trigs under control. We will continue to both avoid saturated and transfats and include monounsaturated and omega 3s in our diet. I fail to see how this tyoe of information can be considered to be risking anyones health.

(edited for addition)
 
phoenix said:
since my own Hb A1c is in the low fives and my trigs at the lower end of the normal range, I will continue to eat a healthy diet.
Click to expand...

I think what Dennis means is that a lot of us on here have tried the reccommended approach without any real success but having switched to a low carb high fat diet and have seen results, my own BG dropped from 13+ to under 7 without actual carb counting brcuase of this I am prepared to believe that the effects on lipids/cholesterol will also work.

No one disputes that your own diet is obviously successful - might I respectfully suggest that you give us some idea of what your diet is ( apologies if you 've done this elsewhere ).

Everyone has to find what is best for themselves your solution might be a step in the right direction for some of the other diabetics in this form.
 

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. "Triglycerides are made from Fat and/or carbohydrates"??? That only leaves Protein not to balme for Triglycerides. And what happens if you eat TOO MUCH Protein? It gets turned into carbohydrate in your body!!! So according to the AA, EVERYTHING you eat gets turned into Triglycerides.

AHA are talking BS here.
 
Phoenix,

Can I just differentiate between fact and opinion here? The information that Fergus and I have provided is not opinion, it is fact and based on recent research. What the official guidelines (the "mainstream sources") tell us are also fact, but based on research that the more recent research has now proven to be totally flawed. Facts are either right or they are wrong. Medical advice can only ever be based on the best information that is available at the time and, as information changes, then so should medical advice. It is unfortunate that man's natural resistance to change tends to mean that changes in medical advice often lag well behind the science that shapes them.

Where opinion comes into the equation is that in my opinion, and that of Fergus, we should follow what the recent research shows us. Your opinion is that we should follow the mainstream sources. All we can both do is express our respective opinions and let people make up their own minds whether to follow either opinion or to plough their own furrow.

Every member of this forum is allowed to hold and express an opinion. If you believe that moderators should not be allowed to express theirs, then I am sorry but that is not what I understand the ethos of the forum to be.
 
I thought it might be worth posting a comment from one of the mainstream sources themselves.
Ronald Krauss, one of the USA's foremost researchers into heart disease and nutrition and who once chaired the AHA's nutrition committee.

I am now convinced it is the carbohydrate inducing this atherogenic profile (the production of triglycerides) in a reasonable percentage of the population. We see a quite striking benefit of carbohydrate restriction.
Click to expand...

In my own experience, he's quite correct. On a diet low in carbohydrate and high in fat, my last 4 triglyceride results have been 0.7, 0.5, 0.6 and most recently 0.5 again.

Even the mainstream sources get it right occasionally!

All the best everyone,

fergus
 
Dennis, My objection was to being told that I was careless of my own health and causing others to risk theirs by giving a link to an alternative view was .I thought this nasty and quite uncalled for. When I feel that advice is wrong I try to offer a sourced alternative, rather than simpy make assertions.

I do feel that you misinterpret mainstream dietary advice. In your first posting you once more put up the Aunt sally of 'low fat diets' That is not what the link said. It did sugest replacing some saturated with non saturated fat and increasing omega 3.

Here is an editoral comment from the American Journal of Cardiology which gives a very good summary of more recent views. (based firmly upon research)http://content.onlinejacc.org/cgi/content/full/j.jacc.2007.04.027v1


The following are type of evidence used to formulate the various guidelines, and contain copious references to recent research. They are from reputable sources rather than internet blogs or diet gurus.

http://content.onlinejacc.org/cgi/content/full/45/9/1379#BIB35
http://www.adaevidencelibrary.com/vault/editor/file/van Horn et al 2008 (JADA).pdf
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_916.pdf
http://content.onlinejacc.org/cgi/content/full/51/3/249
 
Oooookay. Deep breaths, everyone.

In response to Dan's request for views on the way forward, I did ask if we could have a seperate section to discuss fats, their effects and relevant research. I'd start a thread but unless it was made a sticky, it would get lost in the white noise.

Any chance, mods and admin? People are clearly in need of solid advice.
 
Thirsty I think that's a very good idea and would help to separate the myths from the facts.
 
If you want a stickie on fats can you post it in the food section please? Discussions already has more than enough stickies.
 
It's not just diabetics, I think William Davis (a cardiologist) recently quoted another cardiologist as pointing out the inadequacy of telling people to eat less palmitic acid (fat) and more carbs when the liver converts the excess carbs into . . . palmitic acid

The majority of mainstream research is done with high carb diets, and as a recent paper shows when the carbs are high enough it makes little difference how many and what kind of fat you eat. This was what the data showed but not how the study was interpreted: all the news headlnes said things like "Low carb diet no better than any other diet"
 
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.…