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

How Media Sees T2s, And Low Carb Lifestylers


from the article. This is true. Not because carbs dont play a major role, but because one has to have a pre-disposition to type 2 diabetes in the first place. Proof that carbs dont, in themselves, cause type 2.

In a typical meal, the meat provides the protein, the vegetables provide the vitamins and minerals, and the carbs provide the calories (plus fibre, protein, B vitamins and flavour).
Click to expand...

I dont think the author knows how calories work........................no cals in protein or veg?


this joker has no idea where glucose comes from, does he? its like the 'magic money tree' ideas.

I will stop there. The bolding is my work.
 
I don't consider such codswallop as being worthy of wasting an opinion on, but I have to admit that I'm quite taken with the idea of being a "keyboard warrior" instead of a rather overweight diabetic low carbing OAP

Robbity.
 
It's the Spectator, which has much in common with the Daily Fail.
 
Interesting. I saw the program in question. (Yep, as a diabetic.) & saw a completely different show to what was reviewed in the article..
... Even the "colon camera segment" suggested the right type of carbs in fibre foods, digested lower in the gut, helped lessen the chances of bowel cancer. Which is common knowledge.
 
Zilsniggy said:
he's expertly qualified to spout his drivel at us all.
Click to expand...
I stoped reading once I got down to this comment.
" If van Tulleken had acknowledged the laws of thermodynamics he would have debunked his own programme."

The minute some one starts trying to explain how the body works by with the laws of thermodynamics it's clear they haven't got a clue what there talking about. "drivel" is right.

So it begs the question why are you giving this guy the time of day and sending internet traffic "us" to his article making it seem more relevant than it is?

You need to learn to just ignore idiots.
 
There is no Spoon said:
So it begs the question why are you giving this guy the time of day and sending internet traffic "us" to his article making it seem more relevant than it is?
Click to expand...
I think its important to see all sides of the argument and know what is being said out there. the good, the bad and the barking mad.
 
Indy51 said:
He's a well-known "think tank" (ie. special interest funded) shill for tobacco, so I don't place much value on his opinions, to put it mildly
Click to expand...

Me neither, but this is what 'informs' public opinion.........
 


Oooh sorry, aren't we allowed to have a little rant? So sorry to waste your time. Perhaps I was interested in what others thought, because sometimes I doubt that my impressions of something are shared with everyone? Don't like it, fee free to scroll on by.......
 
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/06/...ttee-nutrition-sacn-declarations-of-interest/

Re the SACN referenced in the article. Quite a lot of conflicts with big food/pharma although the author may accuse me of being a paranoid keyboard warrior.
Evidence of lack, is not lack of evidence too.
The move towards non processed foods implies going low carb and having a vicious opinion piece like this with little discussion of the facts causes confusion at best and firmly positions the low carb diet as a fad being pushed by extremists whereas obesity is to be solved by common sense and knwledge of the laws of thermodynamics. I hope someone more knowledgable and erudite than I complains on Dr David Unwin's part!
 
Good grief. It's drivel.
 
Think I'll take my own advice here.
 
lucylocket61 said:
I think its important to see all sides of the argument and know what is being said out there. the good, the bad and the barking mad.
Click to expand...
I can see where your coming from here,
but I was alluding more to the "click bate" or "shared" aspect of an article like this one, it gets lots of hits so the publisher mistake that for popular or relevant and produce similar articles which are not properly researched in the aim to attract advertising revenue.

The quality, content and subject are of no importance only the number of views.
 
I used to subscribe to an eZine like this, but it soon became clear that it lacked integrity, so I have stopped reading it altogether, even though Dr Jason Fung has a regular blogspot in it, I cannot feel it has any authority,
 
'Dr. David Unwin ..... widely criticised by scientists....' oooh, I wonder why our NHS has given the go ahead for low carb and didn't I read somewhere about Low carb being given the CE label, too? I must retrace my steps.... Not!
 
Obviously the editor agreed article for press too.
I have no time for such rubbish and cheap writing.
End.
 
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.…