Huge Contradictions about low carb from other Diabetes site ... help!

[Bluetit1802]

So my partner was diagnosed type 2 yesterday ...and we are floundering a bit

We've spent all day on here trying to sort out the Keto / low carb diet, cutting carbs and sugars and planning what we can eat from now on.

We've been planning on cutting out carbs by getting rid of cereals, breads, pasta, rice etc and going for alternatives like keto bread, shirataki noodles and making sure to go for full fat options instead.

Only to stumble across diabetes.org which is telling you to eat cereal for breakfast ,low fat yoghurt and brown bread. Not to mention some of the recipes on there have 80g of carbs....

It seems to go against everything I've read for the last 24 hours, but seems to be a legitimate site.

Now I'm torn , and don't know what to do....help?

I see from another thread that you now have a meter. This will very quickly tell you which organisation is the correct one.

 

[Pinkorchid]

Diabetes.org is a legitimate site and it is a large contributor to Diabetes research but when it comes to carbs they follow the NHS/PHE/NICE guidelines which many of us feel are extremely outdated. There is a growing group within .org that are low carb and .org are not averse to LCHF but are geared more towards the NHS pathway. D.Org was the first site I came across after being diagnosed but I did not sign up specifically because it did not make sense to me to eat carbs at such levels when I had just been diagnosed with a condition of dysfunctional carb metabolism.
I kept going back to the site to try to understand their stance but one time I accidentally typed UK instead of .org and arrived at this site. That was a lucky mishap in my opinion.

Isn't Diabetes.org the US diabetes web site. They do actually have a list on there of the best foods to eat that are low carb so they do not entirely dismiss low carb for diabetics

 

[Oldvatr]

When I started my recovery for T2D, I signed up to both forums. And I also discovered the Low Carb approach and interesting research on this site, but when I started asking questions and sharing links to that research on the other site I was moderated off it and my account was closed down. When I contacted the main site for explanation, the first thing they sent me was an email asking how much I wanted to donate...... I donated a raspberry free and gratis.

This is what 'the others' have as a policy statement on Low Carb diets
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/resources-s3/2017-09/low-carb-diets-position-statement-May-2017.pdf

This advice is apparently evidence based.

Apparently they feel that "
There is currently no consistent robust evidence to recommend the ideal amount of carbohydrate for everyone with diabetes

By robust they mean RCT trials, so they seem to have ignored all those scientific studies that have been officially published and archived in the last 3 years that I know of.

This is their evidence based report 2011
https://diabetes-resources-producti...utritional-guidelines-2013-amendment-0413.pdf

A quick readthrough shows their independant sources for evidence are NICE and ADA with no other references made.

 

[Rachox]

Isn't Diabetes.org the US diabetes web site. They do actually have a list on there of the best foods to eat that are low carb so they do not entirely dismiss low carb for diabetics

No Diabetes.org is the website for Diabetes UK, who on the whole recommend ‘Eatwell’. However they did put out a statement about low carb last year, but it stops short of recommending it completely and still has hints of Eatwell therein, encouraging pulses and whole grains and less red meat

 

[kokhongw]

You don't have to believe anyone, you can just buy a meter end test before and two hours after eating to see what different foods do to your blood sugar. It'll give you solid proof of what is sensible and not sensible to eat.

Is it possible that doing this will cause confusion and anxiety when following the "Eatwell" plate? So it is not recommended to measure your glucose regularly

 

[Oldvatr]

No Diabetes.org is the website for Diabetes UK, who on the whole recommend ‘Eatwell’. However they did put out a statement about low carb last year, but it stops short of recommending it completely and still has hints of Eatwell therein, encouraging pulses and whole grains and less red meat

And to cut the fat especially those pesky SAFA's

 

[Oldvatr]

Is it possible that doing this will cause confusion and anxiety when following the "Eatwell" plate? So it is not recommended to measure your glucose regularly

I would have ticked Funny too, but actually this is a serious point that we often overlook. Many diagnosed with diabetes, esp T2 and T1.5 types, are of advancing years, and so things like crab counting, using a meter, logging results etc become a challenge to some, and yes, confusion can cause anxiety when high bgl values are measured. This is often put forward as the reason why SMBG is not supported as a general guideline, whereas we all know the real reason is cost. Eating to meter is an effective tool, but not a one size fits all solution.

Again, it is also easy to become quite anal and obsessive about metering, which can be counter productive. Trips down De Nile are not unheard of even among those following a lifestyle change.

 

[Guzzler]

Isn't Diabetes.org the US diabetes web site. They do actually have a list on there of the best foods to eat that are low carb so they do not entirely dismiss low carb for diabetics

The OP is referring to the British site, as am I.

 

[Oldvatr]

The OP is referring to the British site, as am I.

It is diabetes.org.uk, which is as it suggests the UK site.

 

[Guzzler]

It is diabetes.org.uk, which is as it suggests the UK site.

Aye, I have not seen the US site so would hardly be commenting on it. Apart from the fact that they use American measurments which I would then have to convert I have heard enough from the US boffins to know not to bother.

 

[Oldvatr]

Aye, I have not seen the US site so would hardly be commenting on it. Apart from the fact that they use American measurments which I would then have to convert I have heard enough from the US boffins to know not to bother.

The USA site is for the ADA. I just searched their site for LCHF and there was not one single hit. Low Carb came up as Low Calorie, so again no hits. Finally I found this guideline news feed announcement
http://www.diabetes.org/newsroom/pr...clinical-practice-recommendations-122807.html

 

[Guzzler]

The USA site is for the ADA. I just searched their site for LCHF and there was not one single hit. Low Carb came up as Low Calorie, so again no hits. Finally I found this guideline news feed announcement
http://www.diabetes.org/newsroom/pr...clinical-practice-recommendations-122807.html

Yeah.... They start off playing it safe don't they? They then do the 'Protein will kill your kidneys' line and finish with what is basically CICO model. And what is a "disaster kit" I wonder.
I will leave the whole cholesterol bit for a different thread.

 

[Antje77]

I would have ticked Funny too, but actually this is a serious point that we often overlook. Many diagnosed with diabetes, esp T2 and T1.5 types, are of advancing years, and so things like crab counting, using a meter, logging results etc become a challenge to some, and yes, confusion can cause anxiety when high bgl values are measured. This is often put forward as the reason why SMBG is not supported as a general guideline, whereas we all know the real reason is cost. Eating to meter is an effective tool, but not a one size fits all solution.

Again, it is also easy to become quite anal and obsessive about metering, which can be counter productive. Trips down De Nile are not unheard of even among those following a lifestyle change.

Which is why I don't go throwing 'use your meter' in everybody's face. For instance, apart from suggesting to cut a bit of carbs I leave my 73 year old aunt and her diabetes alone, as I know she doesn't want to be that involved in her diabetes.
In @MoroFenrir 's case it might be a very helpful tool, as they have let us know they want to know who or what to trust to do something about their diabetes.

Is it possible that doing this will cause confusion and anxiety when following the "Eatwell" plate? So it is not recommended to measure your glucose regularly

I appreciate @kokhongw 's wink to official recommendations but I'm not sure a thread of a newly diagnosed, confused diabetic is the right place to post this.

 

[JAT1]

You don't have to believe anyone, you can just buy a meter end test before and two hours after eating to see what different foods do to your blood sugar. It'll give you solid proof of what is sensible and not sensible to eat.

I totally agree. The conflicting information had me thoroughly confused. Taking readings before eating, 2 hours after meals and often times in between and during the night in addition to keeping a detailed diary of what I ate and the exercise I did was what sorted it all out for me. We are all different and this way you know what's right for you.

 

[T2#Me]

Diabetes.org is a legitimate site and it is a large contributor to Diabetes research but when it comes to carbs they follow the NHS/PHE/NICE guidelines which many of us feel are extremely outdated. There is a growing group within .org that are low carb and .org are not averse to LCHF but are geared more towards the NHS pathway. D.Org was the first site I came across after being diagnosed but I did not sign up specifically because it did not make sense to me to eat carbs at such levels when I had just been diagnosed with a condition of dysfunctional carb metabolism.
I kept going back to the site to try to understand their stance but one time I accidentally typed UK instead of .org and arrived at this site. That was a lucky mishap in my opinion.

I was much luckier than thou ... I found this site first, and stopped searching