On a recent post the OP asked about introducing more carbs into a low carb diet if they were in remission.
It made me wonder what diet members would say they could have safely eaten before they were diabetic, for the diabetes never to have developed. Assuming that we are talking about Type 2, and assuming diet is a cause of diabetes. Of course people’s requirements for food are different; a petite lady in her 70’s probably needs less than a professional rugby player, to use two stereotypes, but there must be a general principle.
Let’s call this an “Ideal” diet for want of a better word. This is the diet we should have been eating, to avoid becoming diabetic; this is the diet we would recommend to normal healthy people if only they would take notice. More controversially this would be the diet we could eat if we wanted to, if we were truly in remission, reversed or “cured”, rather than controlled. Obviously some people have adopted diets like keto, carnivore or very low calorie and intend to keep to them, but these diets are adopted as a remedy rather than prevention and are unlikely to work as a blanket recommendation for the as yet healthy general public.
Many posters have said that they were eating what they were told was a healthy diet before they became diabetic and/or obese and often the Eatwell Guide, Five a Day and “eat wholegrain and avoid saturated fat” are quoted. So if you were going to recommend this “Ideal” diet instead of the Eatwell guide to the general public, some of whom have limited budgets, what would it consist of and in particular how many carbs?
Good question.
I just wonder that if the fit and well nation had stuck strictly to an Eatwell diet, that many may never have encountered Type 2 diabetes?
according to the latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey published in 2018 by Public Health England the actual diet the UK population are eating is incredibly close to recommendations.
With total carbohydrates intake at 48.5% compared to the recommended 50%, and total fat intake at 34.2% compared to the recommendation of no more than 35%.
Our fruit and vegetable intake is just 1 portion shy of the recommended 5.
Our average daily red meat intake is 4g under recommended amounts.
And our total calorie intake is, on average, 394 calories below recommended amounts
according to the latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey published in 2018 by Public Health England the actual diet the UK population are eating is incredibly close to recommendations.
With total carbohydrates intake at 48.5% compared to the recommended 50%, and total fat intake at 34.2% compared to the recommendation of no more than 35%.
Our fruit and vegetable intake is just 1 portion shy of the recommended 5.
Our average daily red meat intake is 4g under recommended amounts.
And our total calorie intake is, on average, 394 calories below recommended amounts
Draw your own conclusions but they are the official figures! Obtained by the same methods many studies use (self reporting) to assess the efficacy of various ways of eating and deciding what’s harm and helpful. If it’s good enough for one purpose.......Do you believe those figures? Not based on what we see on the supermarket shelves, what one sees in people’s shopping trolleys, what is being consumed in restaurants, fast food outlets and cafes...
I don’t know this to be true but I am surmising that the original Eatwell design didn’t have in mind the processed variants on the shelves/ freezers or the fast food variants etc designed around it. I am assuming it had the old home cooked meat and two vedge of my childhood in mind, followed by a home made pudding of yesteryear such as homemade rhubarb crumble and custard and all that good stuff of old. * That being the case I tend to think it was a good enough meal plan for a healthy population and a meal plan that I wish the schools would actually aim for instead of what the kids get now.Draw your own conclusions but they are the official figures! Obtained by the same methods many studies use (self reporting) to assess the efficacy of various ways of eating and deciding what’s harm and helpful. If it’s good enough for one purpose.......
Perhaps the problem isn’t that as a nation we fail to follow guidelines (on the whole) but that for the nation they are wrong, unhealthy and are a significant factor in the obesity and diabetes epidemic.
The supermarket shelves are obsessed with low fat, we are bombarded with anti (red) meat propaganda all the while stuffing away the “safe and filling” fibre filled carbs. Restaurant eating isn’t a widespread daily occurrence. Fast food outlets are highly processed and the much criticised saturated fats pretty much come wrapped in a huge amount of carbs so which part does the damage? We are a nation of constant grazers too, never allowing our bodies to rest, which isn’t accounted for at all in the eatpoorly plate. Look where these messages have got us in the last 40 years.
Thanks for that, could you supply a link to it, please? (Sorry, I've tried but I can't find it.) Interestingly, though, the project acknowledges that under-reporting of energy intake (EI) is a problem for all dietary surveys and has made an attempt to estimate the degree of under-reporting using doubly-labelled water (DLW) in sub-groups of the people surveyed. They found that, 'reported EI in children aged 4 to 10 years was on average 13% lower than TEE [total energy expenditure] measured by the DLW technique, 31% lower in children aged 11 to 15 years, 33% lower in adults aged 16 to 64 years and 28% lower in adults aged 65 years and over'. https://assets.publishing.service.g...ment_data/file/772434/NDNS_UK_Y1-9_report.pdfour total calorie intake is, on average, 394 calories below recommended amounts
Interesting, but if we look at the breakdown of those figures down, we see thatWith total carbohydrates intake at 48.5% compared to the recommended 50%, and total fat intake at 34.2% compared to the recommendation of no more than 35%
And you'd be wrong. Eatwell comes from Public Health England who rely for a lot of their info on SACN (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition) whose board is stuffed with Processed Food Industry representatives/scientists. They rely on the food industry for their wages..as uncovered by Dr HarcombeI don’t know this to be true but I am surmising that the original Eatwell design didn’t have in mind the processed variants on the shelves/ freezers or the fast food variants etc designed around it.
Is that a true and accurate summary of their strategy?And you'd be wrong. Eatwell comes from Public Health England who rely for a lot of their info on SACN (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition) whose board is stuffed with Processed Food Industry representatives/scientists. They rely on the food industry for their wages..as uncovered by Dr Harcombe
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2015/07/sacn-report-carbohydrates-health/
Look at the CoI's...Is that a true and accurate summary of their strategy?
Well I am inclined to agree with this which ties in to my earlier assertion that to eat a good diet or even low carb diet it incurs extra expense.My idea of the ‘best’ diet to avoid the onset of T2 is not, unfortunately, practical in today’s societies.
seasonal, unprocessed foods grown in nutrient rich souls. No farming techniques that deplete soils or use battery farms or similar. No fruit or veg (or animals) that have been so selectively bred or genetically modified away from their ancestral natures that they are pumped with sugar, flavour, incredible disease resistance or massive physical changes. No huge air mile count. No fertilisers that are damaging to the environment or that build up residues in plants, grazing animals or humans. Humane slaughter and transport.
obviously some of those conditions are a pipe dream nowadays, While other things I mentioned are only available to a privileged affluent elite. And yes, if you get to decide on organic v non-organic anything then I count you as being in that affluent elite.
I disagree with you that being active is more important than diet. Diet is key to prevention as well as maintenance. In terms of T2 Diet is key and exercise is secondary.Not just diet. But staying physically active is as important or more important.
Diet wise will be not excessive on anything.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?