Lchf or not during pregnancy

[azure]

i think there are two separate things @AndBreathe The role of carbohydrates in the diet of an expectant mother and the growth of the foetus, and the blood glucose level, and it's effect on the pregnancy.

For us lucky ladies with diabetes, it's a balance of both - sufficient carbs and protein, fat, etc, while maintaining good glycemic control.

That study and other papers/articles referring to it, as I mentioned above, are concerned with the effects of VLC on foetal growth and later development in childhood.

While LCHF is a perfectly reasonable choice when not pregnant or breastfeeding, not surprisingly there are other issues that come into play when you are pregnant and growing a whole new human being (or beings!)

 

[Brunneria]

i think there are two separate things @AndBreathe The role of carbohydrates in the diet of an expectant mother and the growth of the foetus, and the blood glucose level, and it's effect on the pregnancy.

For us lucky ladies with diabetes, it's a balance of both - sufficient carbs and protein, fat, etc, while maintaining good glycemic control.

That study and other papers/articles referring to it, as I mentioned above, are concerned with the effects of VLC on foetal growth and later development in childhood.

While LCHF is a perfectly reasonable choice when not pregnant or breastfeeding, not surprisingly there are other issues that come into play when you are pregnant and growing a whole new human being (or beings!)

Sorry, I think we still need to be very clear about this, because it is an important point:

No one on this thread has been talking about doing VLC while pregnant. It wasn't the question raised, and it isn't the question that we low carbing posters answered.

So in a sense talking about VLC and pregnancy is a red herring and may cause confusion.

On the other hand, we have been talking about Low Carbing, which for the purposes of this thread, pregnancy, and the research that you have quoted, covers the carb-zone around 100-130 g carbs a day. Or even higher. And is supported by the evidence as being a healthy option, while pregnant.

I wouldn't want anyone to confuse VLC with Low Carbing, especially while pregnant..

 

[SunnyExpat]

Sorry, I think we still need to be very clear about this, because it is an important point:

No one on this thread has been talking about doing VLC while pregnant. It wasn't the question raised, and it isn't the question that we low carbing posters answered.

So in a sense talking about VLC and pregnancy is a red herring and may cause confusion.

On the other hand, we have been talking about Low Carbing, which for the purposes of this thread, pregnancy, and the research that you have quoted, covers the carb-zone around 100-130 g carbs a day. Or even higher. And is supported by the evidence as being a healthy option, while pregnant.

I wouldn't want anyone to confuse VLC with Low Carbing, especially while pregnant..

Who'd take any risk over trying to define low carbing to few grams of carbs?
Is it really something to get hung up over?
Personally, it would look like you should have unarguable proof that any form of carb reduction won't damage the unborn baby, before taking any chance at all?

Can you provide the quote in the study that defined the 130g break point, I can't seem to find it clearly, and what the exact definition of the calorie intake, and weight of every mum to be is?

 

[Brunneria]

@SunnyExpat

As you know, i have you on IGNORE, so I have no idea why you addressed your post to me.
Please don't waste your time in future, because i won't be reading any more of them.

In this instance, i suspected that the post I couldn't see would belong to you and decided to have a look to see how you were attempting to derail this time.

As usual, i cannot be bothered to respond to the specifics of your post, since your comments demonstrate that you have mis-read or mis-understood previous posts in this thread.

Bye.

 

[azure]

Sorry, I think we still need to be very clear about this, because it is an important point:

No one on this thread has been talking about doing VLC while pregnant. It wasn't the question raised, and it isn't the question that we low carbing posters answered.

So in a sense talking about VLC and pregnancy is a red herring and may cause confusion.

On the other hand, we have been talking about Low Carbing, which for the purposes of this thread, pregnancy, and the research that you have quoted, covers the carb-zone around 100-130 g carbs a day. Or even higher. And is supported by the evidence as being a healthy option, while pregnant.

I wouldn't want anyone to confuse VLC with Low Carbing, especially while pregnant..

Which I did, Brunneria. I mentioned 100g one of my first posts and I also agreed with you when you mentioned a slightly higher figure than 100g.

I then went on to state that LCHF - which was mentioned in the OP's post - could be referring to a very low level of carbs (less than 50g) and so it was important to state specific numbers of grams meant, which we both did.

I'm not quite sure what we're arguing about. We both seem to agree that a figure of 100g+ fits with that study.

It is up to @RoseofSharon to read comments here and elsewhere, and that study and whatever other studies she can find, and then consult with her OB/diabetes team to work out what's best for her and her baby.

 

[AndBreathe]

I googled for the study and found this. It's very detailed but I've posted the Results and Conclusion below for you and anyone else interested This isn't the webpage I was remembering when I was talking to Brunneria above. That page took the study and extrapolated it to humans as it made recommendations of minimum carb levels. When I read about the study, I googled it and then checked other pages on obstetrics, nutrition, diabetes, etc, etc, etc! I had in mind eating the best diet for my baby in utero and to give them the best chance of good health in life, bearing in mind my own diabetes and recent advances in nutritional knowledge eg that fat isn't the evil it was made out to be, etc. All pregnant ladies have to,weigh the evidence for themselves, and act as they see best for their baby With the help of consultants, midwives and dieticians, of course.

Here's the link to the study:

http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2393-13-109

An anatomical comparison of the SD and KD embryos revealed that at E13.5 the average KD embryo was volumetrically larger, possessed a relatively larger heart but smaller brain, and had a smaller pharynx, cervical spinal cord, hypothalamus, midbrain, and pons, compared with the average SD embryo. At E17.5 the KD embryo was found to be volumetrically smaller with a relatively smaller heart and thymus, but with enlarged cervical spine, thalamus, midbrain and pons.

Conclusion
A ketogenic diet during gestation results in alterations in embryonic organ growth. Such alterations may be associated with organ dysfunction and potentially behavioral changes in postnatal life.

Admittedly, I have scan ready the study, so may have missed information that would have satisfied my query, but I'll ask away anyway. I'm good at asking questions.

Do we know what the normal range is for any of these measured organs, and whether the differences were within normal ranges.

Similarly, the proportional differences in the keto versus "Standard Diet" are extremely different, so if I were the interested party (from a gestational as opposed to educational viewpoint I would be considering whether I would be intending using a ketogenic during my pregnancy as opposed to one limiting my carbs, but not low enough to be keto adapted. As I understand it (and I have personally never chased it for myself) , ketosis usually comes into play (for humans) at less than 30gr per day, and for some people even lower.

Interesting topic.

I wonder if @Deakint or @Southport GP could suggest any reading for the OP. I 100% would not like to ask them to give professional advice, but it may be something they have explored along the way, and I'm guessing with his expanding population of reduced carbers, Soutport GP may have pondered this, hence increasing the chances of the question being raised.

Fascinating subject

 

[azure]

As I said @AndBreathe I read a lot about diet and this study was one that I remember because of the cognitive development issue. That shocked and surprised me because I wasn't looking for that, I was more looking for evidence of physical growth and future health of the child. One of the references to this study extrapolated the data to humans, and in that was the recommendation of not less than 100g. This figure was also verified for me by my DSN (she said 150g) and my OB.

I didn't perform or have any part in that study. It's conclusion is clear. If you have an issue with it or further questions then maybe you could contact the authors. I believe it contains all relevant information if you read it thoroughly.

The OP will be able to discuss her personal diet with her team, as I said above.

 

[SunnyExpat]

@SunnyExpat

As you know, i have you on IGNORE, so I have no idea why you addressed your post to me.
Please don't waste your time in future, because i won't be reading any more of them.

In this instance, i suspected that the post I couldn't see would belong to you and decided to have a look to see how you were attempting to derail this time.

As usual, i cannot be bothered to respond to the specifics of your post, since your comments demonstrate that you have mis-read or mis-understood previous posts in this thread.

Bye.

I assume you still decided it was worth a reply, so if I am on ignore, that does seem a tad pointless. However the main thrust of the response was to the op, you seem to have read it as addressed to you in some way.
However, the op has good information, and will do the best they can for their child, and I wish them all the best for this.

 

[RoseofSharon]

Thank you everyone who has answered on this thread. Your answers and outlooks all help to give a rounded picture. At this moment in time my intention is simply to gather information not to cause arguments. Let me clarify my question: on average my carb intake is less than 100g per day (throwbacks from the less than 30g per day days I think, also I don't get hungry very early in the day anymore lol). So although I am not really a very low carber, I tend to be a little dynamic in how much I consume in a day.

@azure the points brought up by the study are curious, however due to several reasons I'm hesitant in how far it is applicable to humans, although I still have more to read...

@SunnyExpat life is a risk! I'd prefer to know what is best for me and my babe than I would eat in a way that is healthy for both me and my babe than I would have my sugars go out of control because I don't ask the right questions and get the right advice at the beginning.... I'm not risk averse, nor do I believe anyone else here is either. Some risk is inevitable, and needs to be balanced with with the right thing to do for all.

 

[azure]

@RoseofSharon You're doing the right thing. It's your baby and you are the one to make decisions. I have no doubt you'll do lots of reading and googling, and then decide what's best for you and your precious baby

My top tips for pregnancy are to test lots, and be aware that hormones can be unpredictable and can affect your blood sugar in weird ways. It's a journey that needs more thought and planning when you have diabetes, but it's still an amazing journey so enjoy every minute

 

[SunnyExpat]

Thank you everyone who has answered on this thread. Your answers and outlooks all help to give a rounded picture. At this moment in time my intention is simply to gather information not to cause arguments. Let me clarify my question: on average my carb intake is less than 100g per day (throwbacks from the less than 30g per day days I think, also I don't get hungry very early in the day anymore lol). So although I am not really a very low carber, I tend to be a little dynamic in how much I consume in a day.

@azure the points brought up by the study are curious, however due to several reasons I'm hesitant in how far it is applicable to humans, although I still have more to read...

@SunnyExpat life is a risk! I'd prefer to know what is best for me and my babe than I would eat in a way that is healthy for both me and my babe than I would have my sugars go out of control because I don't ask the right questions and get the right advice at the beginning.... I'm not risk averse, nor do I believe anyone else here is either. Some risk is inevitable, and needs to be balanced with with the right thing to do for all.

It's very difficult, I agree, but as you say there is a balancing act to be done.
Having read the links, it does seem to be sensible, and a properly carried out study.
There are other ways to control BG, apart from LC, and your care team will at the end of the day provide good advice tailored for you, and you know what you're doing with your BG, so you'll know if it's working or not.
All the best.

 

[RoseofSharon]

Thank you @azure. As I've said before it's very early days for me so I'm go using on the nutrition right now, as I know that later on other things will need to be covered/thought about/done. Another reason I'm trying to get that right now (aside from the obvious of giving the babe the best start I can) is that I've noticed a drop in my blood glucose in the evenings/night for several days on the trot and want to keep that in check as much as I can.