I don't get it..

[NewdestinyX]

My step dad went blind from type 1 at 50 and had so much pain from nueropathy that he regularly talked about shooting himself. He died at 58. I am quite aware of what may await me in my future.

Well only if you did nothing to control. I'm so sorry for your loss and the pain I'm sure it caused watching Dad battle and then die. But people only 'die' from diabetes because of doing next to 'nothing' to control it. He must have hated insulin and barely or never used it or it was in the 70's when they didn't have great meds or the better insulins. But people who 'take care of themselves' don't die from diabetes anymore - at least not prematurely. No matter how obese we are there is some level of insulin therapy that will, in every case, prevent death from diabetes or major complications. My heart so aches for watching some people who refuse to do anything about their diabetes.

But what happens next to individuals who choose the ultra low carb (no med/needles) regimen is what gets weird in some (not all) cases.

What weird thing happens?

The context of my statement, that you didn't quote here, was sufficient to answer your question. Read it again, please. What happens is people who choose the ultra lo carb way, and find it successful to control their BG levels (which it ALWAYS would, duh -- take away 'sugar intake' and BG levels will go down) what happens next is that they become 'purists' and tend to start talking crazy stuff - like "the medical establishment has been lying to us", etc., etc.. It's all in my 'long post'.

I notice that people who ultra lo carb/no meds or insulin an then find a level of success on it - they often turn into 'zealots' and 'conspiracy theorists'

oh dear, last week we were Calvinist "purists" and "elites"; this week we're Jewish fundamentalists-- I don't know where your going with this--what's next?--New Guinea head hunters?

:lol: - well done - sarcarsm wise.. You made me chuckle -- except of course I never accused anybody of any such thing. Purism is purism is all its forms. But I never accused anybody of religious zealotry which is another entire matter.

.. insulin therapy. It's people's 'misuse/overuse' of it that creates the only two potential complications; hypos/stopping weight loss/weight gain. As soon as you get the dose right and keep moderating the carbs you can do anything you want -....So if you eat 'too much' - you'll gain weight. .... -- especially if you set the basal insulin (slow acting - Lantus, Levemir, etc) too high.

This all seems like such a palaver to me, why not just ditch the carbs?
Also, for those who are not too far down the Dx road, reducing carbs can probably help your own hormones deal with things more accurately than dosing/injecting.

Well ditching carbs isn't good for your brain health - at least not at ultra lo levels. Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs so keep them in your diet. And surely you're not saying ditch green veggies - which are all carbs too? Right? Hormones don't have to do with pancreatic functions directly. You're sorta throwin' that out there without developing your argument well. I would need to understand what you mean by 'hormones dealing better'. Suffice it to say - carbs are the best source or 'ready energy'. Fat can not give you the energy level as efficiently. So people like me (athletic) who desire to keep vigorous exercise regimens need more carbs. No major athletic organization in the world espouse low carb diets for athletic people. There's a reason for that. It doesn't work. Then -- carbs are also a 'joy' of life. Do you know how many people end up on depression meds who are diabetics and try to manage all with next to no carbs. At several of the forums I've frequented where they use 'signatures' more 'telling-ly' than most do here -- you'd be surprised at how many people who low carb also take depression meds. Coincidence? I think not.

But I still advocate -- each to his own. I know what works for me and I have the same and better numbers, eating moderate carb, as any super low carber has. So as I've said many times - why the heck would I reduce carbs more if I don't need to? It's when people push the 'agenda' aspect of super lo carbing or push these doctors like Bernstein who get $ for the 'selling of their methods' that I just start to cover my ears and go 'la, la, la'. It gets old and preachy to me and frankly I'm sick of it.

 

[pianoman]

... No major athletic organization in the world espouse low carb diets for athletic people. ...

Journal of The International Society of Sports Nutrition - Metabolic Effects of the Very-Low-Carbohydrate Diets: Misunderstood "Villains" of Human Metabolism...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129159/
...a peer reviewed medical journal NOT an opinionated or agenda-driven blog.


To RE-reiterate Russ's post from earlier...

Advocate your own method, by all means, but not at the expense of anyone else's.

To my thinking that means: tell us about what works for you BUT please do so without trying to impress upon us why you think everyone else's approach is wrong.

 

[Carbdodger]

Grant
I don't get you. Before I went low carb I was very depressed. Now on few carbs (which come from green veggies in the main) I am thriving mentally having a love for life again. What's more I'm super fit. Just off for my morning run
cd

 

[reidpj]

Hi Grant

'Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' Are you sure that this is correct? It is my understanding that certain parts of the brain need glucose, not carbs, to function properly, and that this glucose can be synthesised in the liver from dietary protein.

Have a good day

Peter

 

[Daibell]

Grant

I note from your sig that you are on a low level of insulin with meals? With insulin you can match carbs to some extent to the level of insulin taken and vice versa. For type 2s like myself who are only on tablets then there is no choice i.e. keep the carbs under control as needed to meet HBA1C or go onto insulin or one of the variants

 

[noblehead]

Thankfully I am well controlled as I was helped by good advice I received here on this forum before it descended to what it is now. I will still read some of the posts here but I think my posting days are pretty much over now.

Sid, you need to reconsider with reference to your posting days are over, the good advice you refer to in the above paragraph included your very own contributions!

As a experienced diabetic who has managed to achieve excellent diabetes control through your own experiences with diet and meds your input is greatly needed here, I for one enjoy reading your posts and consider that you make a valuable contribution to the forum and hope that this continues to be from here on.

Best wishes

Nigel

 

[Unbeliever]

I couldn't agree more Noblehead, with reference to Sid. I am already missing his posts.

His input is definitely needed here.

 

[carty]

Come back Sid we need you more now that some of the more experienced posters have gone.
CAROL

 

[NewdestinyX]

Hi Grant

'Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' Are you sure that this is correct? It is my understanding that certain parts of the brain need glucose, not carbs, to function properly, and that this glucose can be synthesised in the liver from dietary protein.

Have a good d

Though that's true - even the venerated (by many) Dr. Bernstein, in his book, refers to the process of gluconeogenesis [glucose from protein] as a very inefficient process and hard on the liver (wearing it out quicker). Carbs are still to be considered the most efficient source of glucose for the brain. Gluconeogenesis kicks in in the 'starvation' process according to scientists and medical professionals. Any medical text book points this out. If people on these extreme low carb diets want to continually stay in a state of starvation then the body IS amazing and will try to protect itself. Of course 'burning fat' is also a 'helpful' side effect of getting the body into ketosis (another state of starvation) and I myself have used 'extreme' lo carb as a weight loss plan with great success. But then after I reach my new plateau I give my body a break since I lose energy for exercise when I stay <70g of carbs for long periods. People who comment on this topic, I notice are usually doing it for less than 2-3 years and claim all sorts of 'wonderful feeling'. They're losing weight and that alone makes people feel better. Studies have shown you can lose just as much weight on low fat 'or' low carb' diets. And as you lose it slowly you'll continue to feel better from that. Then for us diabetics the controlled blood sugar makes you feel better too. The problem is what happens next - which is people concluding that a LIFETIME of extreme dieting (which is what less than 60g of carbs a day is - whatever your 'ketosis producing' level is) is even 'possible' of profitable - which the medical professionals will tell you is a bad idea. The 'boomer generation' (most of us) are wired as suspicious and we think 'the establishment' is out to keep us sick. So 'extreme low carbing' and it 'seeming to work' as a whole way of life - flys in the face of 'the establishment' and that can create a myopia. I eat 'balanced' low GI meals and minimize simple sugars to almost nothing (including most fruit). My A1c and all other numbers are perfectly healthy. The 'control' therapy with the greatest long term healthy results for T2's is insulin. Doctors will want Metformin first though even they're changing to insulin first + Met in response to 3 compelling Asian studies showing the best results on insulin first. I'm ok with super low carbing in 'spurts'. But I worry for those that think a 'lifetime' of that level of carbs is a good thing. There's no compelling study data to convince me that it's healthy long term.

Grant

I note from your sig that you are on a low level of insulin with meals? With insulin you can match carbs to some extent to the level of insulin taken and vice versa. For type 2s like myself who are only on tablets then there is no choice i.e. keep the carbs under control as needed to meet HBA1C or go onto insulin or one of the variants.

Oh I understand and respect that totally, Daibell. If your personal choice is to not use insulin or if you feel you can't afford it or your doctor won't prescribe it then you surely don't have other options but restricting carbs. I can't imagine any doctor, if you're self educated about it, denying a T2's request for it as part of the control regimen along with Metformin and diet and exercise. My doctor was thrilled I asked him. I asked him why and he said, "because most patients are scared of needles and have the incorrect view of insulin as a last resort and want to try everything else first." His assertion is that patients who think that way (denying insulin early) are often sealing their fate to being on insulin 'permanently' much earlier in their journey. When I reach my weight goal I'll likely no longer need insulin. Until then I use it to rest my pancreas and eat a more balanced, lo portion, low GI, diet. It really works. BUT -- each to his own. I'm good with that. I'm on forums to share with newbies an 'alternative' to the 'ultra low carb mantra' which too often 'preaches a purer path' that in my view won't "deliver" long term on front other than controlling BG levels. There's more to a diabetic's health than controlling BG levels.

 

[pianoman]

Hi Grant

'Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' Are you sure that this is correct? It is my understanding that certain parts of the brain need glucose, not carbs, to function properly, and that this glucose can be synthesised in the liver from dietary protein.

Have a good d

Though that's true - even the venerated (by many) Dr. Bernstein, in his book, refers to the process of gluconeogenesis [glucose from protein] as a very inefficient process and hard on the liver (wearing it out quicker). ...

So you accept (lack of apology notwithstanding) that you 'misspoke' or 'overstated' your position by asserting that "Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' "?

Are we really expected to trust anything else that you assert? For example exactly where (on what page in his book) does Dr Bernstein state what you claim above? I have the book in front of me so I'll gladly do a fact-check for you.

You love to set challenges for others don't you (although you never seem to follow up when they are answered) so here's one for you: see if once (just once) you can make a positive post about what works for you, WITHOUT comparing it to anyone else's approach or making any snide comments or pointing out the pitfalls (as you see them) about any other way of managing BGs.

Once again you have clearly missed the memo: Advocate your own method, by all means, but not at the expense of anyone else's. ... tell us about what works for you BUT please do so without trying to impress upon us why you think everyone else's approach is wrong.

 

[Daibell]

Grant, thanks for your reply. A bit off topic but interesting anyway, when I last visited my GP and said to her that the time has come for insulin she effectively refused saying it was a 'last resort and would need to be four times a day'. I was offered sitagliptin which has, for me as an underweight type 2, worked in reducing spikes so it has delayed the need for insulin but goes to show the variation within the NHS in the attitude to the use of insulin by the professionals; it's lottery out there.

 

[bowell]

can't imagine any doctor, if you're self educated about it, denying a T2's request for it as part of the control regimen along with Metformin and diet and exercise.

Grant
This is a UK site NHS Doctors work to PCT NHS guidelines
eg The map of medicine and treatment for T2
Insulin treatment comes in way down the list
see
http://healthguides.mapofmedicine.com/choices/map/diabetes1.html

Here in the UK also the EU if you use insulin ,Driving and some jobs can become a real problem
if you have the choice you may not wish move onto Insulin
Example driving license restricted to 3 years DVLA Can ask your consultant about your BG control
Bad BG control license can be Removed
If you have an accident While Hypo you will be charged with Driving under the influence of drugs
also dangerous driving

If someone is well controlled with Metformin or other tablets has a good hb1c Whats the problem

 

[NewdestinyX]

Hi Grant

'Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' Are you sure that this is correct? It is my understanding that certain parts of the brain need glucose, not carbs, to function properly, and that this glucose can be synthesised in the liver from dietary protein.

Have a good d

Though that's true - even the venerated (by many) Dr. Bernstein, in his book, refers to the process of gluconeogenesis [glucose from protein] as a very inefficient process and hard on the liver (wearing it out quicker). ...

So you accept (lack of apology notwithstanding) that you 'misspoke' or 'overstated' your position by asserting that "Your brain can ONLY survive on carbs' "?

Yes and no. I apologize for a lack of 'clarity' in my statement. The brain has portions of it that can ONLY survive on 'glucose': fact. Then -- medical science has not yet provided conclusive corroborated study proof that anything else (like ketones - suggested by some) can fuel the brain efficiently and for a lifetime hoped then by many very lo carbers that choose to live in lifelong ketosis. Gluconeogenesis can likely provide the brain with what it needs to at least 'survive' but it's an inefficient process thereby, in my self-educated conclusion 'inferior' as a substitute for glucose from carbs feeding the brain especially for the athlete. But I will 'die' fighting for the person who chooses to 'try it' - and feels the risk is low. More power to them. Truly! For me the risk is too high when I can control perfectly well without living in ketosis for life. To me 'the IDEA' lacks merit - FOR ME. And I explain why - often. But for another - the idea will HAVE merit. And I respect that. Do you see how that doesn't attack 'a person'? But casts a question on an 'idea'. That kind of time consuming 'caveat making' is what I do regularly and what others should consider who have come to the 'opposite' conclusion about 'regimen' than I have.

Are we really expected to trust anything else that you assert? For example exactly where (on what page in his book) does Dr Bernstein state what you claim above? I have the book in front of me so I'll gladly do a fact-check for you.

Anyone can go to his site and read the portions from his book I refer to. I read it a long time ago - and summarily dismissed about 80% of it as on the lunatic fringe as have most in the endocrinology community.

And I can also ask you, ye beg you, politely, to not sarcastically pick at me every chance you get. I find it interesting that you're usually the first to enter a thread I'm in and 'personally' attack my input. I don't mind disagreement but you 'denigrate me' in the process. I don't do that to you or anyone. I don't mind my ideas being challenged.

You love to set challenges for others don't you (although you never seem to follow up when they are answered) so here's one for you: see if once (just once) you can make a positive post about what works for you, WITHOUT comparing it to anyone else's approach or making any snide comments or pointing out the pitfalls (as you see them) about any other way of managing BGs.

Again. More agenda. I never do this. However you judge my approach all the time.I share my approach liberally here without any other comments. You just haven't read them all - I would guess. Pianoman - just put me on ignore. You'll feel much less stress. :roll:

Once again you have clearly missed the memo: Advocate your own method, by all means, but not at the expense of anyone else's. ... tell us about what works for you BUT please do so without trying to impress upon us why you think everyone else's approach is wrong.

There isn't a single post where I've called another person's approach wrong - 'for them'. I will challenge the 'idea' of a certain approach based on science I've read. But that's what forums are for. So I try to follow that paragraph daily. Do you?

Dead horse now well beaten.... :roll:

 

[NewdestinyX]

Grant, thanks for your reply. A bit off topic but interesting anyway, when I last visited my GP and said to her that the time has come for insulin she effectively refused saying it was a 'last resort and would need to be four times a day'. I was offered sitagliptin which has, for me as an underweight type 2, worked in reducing spikes so it has delayed the need for insulin but goes to show the variation within the NHS in the attitude to the use of insulin by the professionals; it's lottery out there.

I realize the 'lottery aspect' of what you're saying with docs. And for them to think of insulin as a last resort is akin to leaches/blood letting in 'stone aged' medicine. :shock: I know they want to avoid hypos at all cost - but rather than educating people so that a driving accident from a hypo would 'never' happen - they throw out the baby with the bath water. It's so distressing an approach if they're seeking 'good' medicine.

can't imagine any doctor, if you're self educated about it, denying a T2's request for it as part of the control regimen along with Metformin and diet and exercise.

Grant
This is a UK site NHS Doctors work to PCT NHS guidelines
eg The map of medicine and treatment for T2
Insulin treatment comes in way down the list
see
http://healthguides.mapofmedicine.com/choices/map/diabetes1.html

Here in the UK also the EU if you use insulin ,Driving and some jobs can become a real problem
if you have the choice you may not wish move onto Insulin
Example driving license restricted to 3 years DVLA Can ask your consultant about your BG control
Bad BG control license can be Removed
If you have an accident While Hypo you will be charged with Driving under the influence of drugs
also dangerous driving

If someone is well controlled with Metformin or other tablets has a good hb1c Whats the problem

You've posted this several times and now I've read it, Bowell. The issue is poor blood glucose control being at the center of getting yourself into trouble 'not just' having and using insulin. Otherwise T1 diabetics wouldn't be allowed to drive at all. Any diabetic 'well controlled' by 'any method' will not get into trouble just by using insulin. Quote for me the paragraph where you would conclude such a thing. People shouldn't be deterred from starting insulin because of fearing their license being taken. And I don't believe what you've cited is proof of that. What am I missing?

 

[angieG]

The issue is poor blood glucose control being at the center of getting yourself into trouble 'not just' having and using insulin. Otherwise T1 diabetics wouldn't be allowed to drive at all. Any diabetic 'well controlled' by 'any method' will not get into trouble just by using insulin. Quote for me the paragraph where you would conclude such a thing. People shouldn't be deterred from starting insulin because of fearing their license being taken. And I don't believe what you've cited is proof of that. What am I missing?[/quote]

If I got put onto insulin as the law stands at present I WOULD lose my job and 2 of my licences (Lorry and Coach) along with my Taxi Badge and so I would be very anti the idea until the law hopefully gets changed later in the year as T1s are at present not allowed to drive any of these category vehicles!!
Thus as long as I am able to control by diet and tablets I will.
Angie

 

[Unbeliever]

I'm sorry Grant but it seems o me that you may get a kick out of scaring people. Every time I read one of your posts there is a sentence or two obviously intended to scare others.

I try to keep amn open mind and find that even heated discussions can be very informative but many of your posts leave me feeling very uncomfortable.

Yes , I know I don't have to read them and won't do so again.

 

[ladybird64]

I know this is the discussion forum but it seems as I feared, this thread has strayed into the realms of unpleasantness, well away from my original topic and straight into very familiar territory.

I am guessing it won't be long before this thread is closed too. Thanks to those that addressed the topic though.

 

[NewdestinyX]

I'm sorry Grant but it seems o me that you may get a kick out of scaring people. Every time I read one of your posts there is a sentence or two obviously intended to scare others.

Oh I assure you, Unbeliever, I do not get a 'kick' out of any of this. WE have a serious disease, that, though very manageable, is often misunderstood and people provide simplistic answers that only focus on the D and not 'overall health, mental and physical'.

I try to keep am open mind and find that even heated discussions can be very informative but many of your posts leave me feeling very uncomfortable.

I guess I would ask, "In what way?". Most newly DX'ed T2's are only told about 'very low carbing' and rarely ever without the 'caveats' that go along with that particular choice. If my input is introducing those caveats to you for the first time maybe that could produce a fear if you've never heard about them before - which, sadly, wouldn't surprise me. General 'low to moderate' carbing is a must at some level for all diabetics. No one would argue that. Glucose from carbs is what sends our sugars up along with a 'dumping liver' or even too much protein (which can turn into glucose). By low to moderate I mean 60-150g of carbs.. I'm pretty sure there's no diabetic on this forum that eats the daily recommended input of 300g. It's the <60g of carbs a day regimens (ketosis producing - not to be confused with ketoacidosis which is something else all together) that aren't seen as healthy long term by most medical professionals. There's a reason they don't think so and it's just often ignored because people generally like the sense of empowerment they feel when they see a correlation between dropping carbs down, drastically, and the resultant lower numbers on their meters. I FEEL THAT TOO!!! But 'homeostasis' (true health physiologically speaking) requires, let's say, 'a few more tenets to your doctrine', than just simply saying -- get rid of the carbs and you'll beat this thing. I try to 'develop' the 'what's missing in very low carb regimens' aspect to making a decision for yourself about regimens.

The issue is poor blood glucose control being at the center of getting yourself into trouble 'not just' having and using insulin. Otherwise T1 diabetics wouldn't be allowed to drive at all. Any diabetic 'well controlled' by 'any method' will not get into trouble just by using insulin. Quote for me the paragraph where you would conclude such a thing. People shouldn't be deterred from starting insulin because of fearing their license being taken. And I don't believe what you've cited is proof of that. What am I missing?

If I got put onto insulin as the law stands at present I WOULD lose my job and 2 of my licences (Lorry and Coach) along with my Taxi Badge and so I would be very anti the idea until the law hopefully gets changed later in the year as T1s are at present not allowed to drive any of these category vehicles!!
Thus as long as I am able to control by diet and tablets I will.
Angie

Wow! Thanks for sharing your experience, Angie. Again in the linked document Bowell posted I don't see the legal standing for that. So I'm still wondering where I can read about it and see the exact wording. If it's law - then it's a silly law. But the US has some of those too. :-(

 

[ClaireG 06]

You are allowed to debate but please do so respectfully and remember what works for one does not work for all. We all have freedom of choice in how we treat our diabetes. I do not want to have to lock this thread.

 

[NewdestinyX]

I know this is the discussion forum but it seems as I feared, this thread has strayed into the realms of unpleasantness, well away from my original topic and straight into very familiar territory.

I know people lament this a lot, Ladybird. But the reason it's such a ubiquitous happening is because, if you think about it -- everything topic on a diabetes forum, every question, is related to and informed by a person's control regimen. So all topics will eventually lead there and 'ARE' related in my view. That's not to say 'hijacking' can't happen - and has - but this last several posts directly speak to the original topic as I see it.

Here's the opening statement of the thread:

Let me explain what I don't get.

Why the NHS is giving "lifestyle" advice for diabetics (talking of type 2's here folks) that is so blatantly wrong.

All of the last several posts, at least the points I'm trying to make - deal directly with trying to represent the 'opposing' point of view that "their" advice ISN'T BLATANTLY wrong. My points are 100% focused on the original poster's (your) assertions - which I believe to be incorrect, in part - not all. And I posted early 'echoing' some of your frustrations too. I often see both sides of this issue. Dietitians are telling people to eat TOO many carbs - for the most part - but they're not wrong to WARN people about 'very low carbing' in my views. These topics are multi-facetted and rarely 'simplistic' and yet simplistic solutions are often flocked to. Now 'THAT' worries me.