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

Low carb diets and Diabetes UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
not trying but am obviously lol

see i wasn't lying when i said i was dumb
 
Pompeygirl said:
Im confused .. Sorry if im being stupid. Isnt this diabetes uk forum?


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
Click to expand...


You are posting on DCUK http://www.diabetes.co.uk/

DUK is an entirely separate entity. It is a charity that effectively our government listens too for setting its advice regarding diabetes care. Their web site is here http://www.diabetes.org.uk/

If you look here http://www.diabetes.co.uk/about.html you will find this

 
Ok sorted. DUK ia the charity tesco currently supports. I will remember that! Im shocked at how they can simply ignore the information and the voice and experience of so many. Bizzare


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 
hehe yes i have my other eye in my pocket, thankfully that one seems ok
 

Its worth looking at what the people actually ate on the 2 diets.
The people on the 'paleolithic' diet actually ate fewer calories than those on the consensus Med diet. (1344v1795)
Both groups ate about the same amount of protein
Those in the P diet ate about 134 g of carb compared to 231 in the 'Med' group
Those in the P diet ate 42g of fat compared with 50 in the Med group.
So the P diet in this case was lowish carb, lowish fat and hence low calorie. The 'Med like' diet was higher carb, higher fat and higher calorie.
There is no justification to say that the P diet was somehow better than a low fat diet since it was actually lower in fat than the diet eaten by the other group.

There are some surprising differences in the 2 groups as to types of food eaten. For example those in the P group ate almost double the amount of fruit to those in the Med group, they ate a third more veg and 20% more fish and more nuts. Those in the P diet even drank more wine!(the 'Med' group seemed to drink 'lite' beer.)
As you can probably gather I don't think that this is anything like a Med diet as described by most people. http://oldwayspt.org/resources/heritage-pyramids/mediterranean-diet-pyramid/traditional-med-diet so I don't think that it really compares the 'P' diet it to a Med diet There are a lot of studies that show good results from more truly 'Med like' diets

Nevertheless the diet worked well (though only a few subjects and a short time) However, there is no consensus on what a Paleo diet really is (except for avoiding grains and dairy) You will find lots of people claiming they are eating paleo with very different proportions of protein/fat/carbs to the ones this diet uses.
This is the website of Cordain, who is the so called founder of the Paleo diet... His diet is high-protein, high-fruit and veggie diet with moderate to higher amounts of fat, http://thepaleodiet.com/paleo-diet-faq/
 
The more I read about DUK and the NHS on diabetes the more thankful I am for this site and each other. All I was told was to stop eating too much sugar, and of course told no need to test .
 
Douglas, I don't know much about the Newcastle Diet but isn't it very close to a vanilla low-carb diet anyway? BTW my much earlier point about having a degree or whatever in the Care Team at DUK was making a point about Scientific Method. I studied a Science discipline for my degree many years ago and one of the key points throughout and subsequently in my engineering career was to always take account of the scientific approach to analysing data. That means being logical and open-minded and researching as many sources of information as you can. When DUK ignores some data in preference to other sources it is a poor approach to analysing data and a true professional would not do that.
 
It bothers me - I was given DUK info at diagnoses & I was crippled in about 7 years. A further 6 years on LCHF & I am well. How many out there are suffering from the DUK diet - a diet that DUK folk KNOW results in ever-increasing medication & complications.

Cut the carbs & get your life back!
 
I fortunately found this forum very soon after DX The advice from the GP was eat lots of fruit and veg but not melons or mangoes take 1 metformin a day for the first week and 2 for the second ,and I would have an appointment at the DB clinic .That was March when I asked in June about the clinic the receptionist rang Pauline upstairs! who said I should have been sent for but I would have to wait til July My first HbA 1c was 15 but the next one 3 months later was 7 .9 I think I was lucky that the advice I took was on here and I think that we post on here to help others not to take the opinion I am ok let them look after them selves
CAROL
 
carty said:
I fortunately found this forum very soon after DX
CAROL
Click to expand...

I think you were extremely lucky to have found so much good information straight off. I knew nothing about T2 whatsoever and tried hard to follow my gp advice for 3 years. It wasn't until I had to increase my meds that I began to research what I was actually taking and found this forum. I immediately lowered my carb intake with stunningly good results so that is what works for me but I hope I am not so hidebound that I would think it was the only way to go. It seems hard to understand why DUK wouldn't at least research all the evidence for low carbing. At least look at it, go into it, publish the found results THEN reject or accept it on that.

Maybe I am naive, in fact I know I must be, I followed my docs advice blindly for 3 years, but it seems glaringly obvious to me that if evidence, in any field, is presented to a body that purports to support a certain group of people and that evidence would help that group, surely to goodness that body has a moral right to at least investigate!
I have read all kinds of reasons on here as to why they maybe don't do this. I would give my eye teeth to know what the correct reason is.
 
its not naive to listen to you hcp, its natural, until you realise that they can be wrong, i certainly never considered it, i would have done the same, i found this forum whilst in the hospital bed in a&e i think hehe it meant i knew the truth before i heard the lie (lucky)
 
I found this site almost straight away, although did ring duk about being told to go on statins and l refused. The lady l spoke to first time was fine very helpful sadly my next query was taken by a jobsworth, never needed them again l come here,
With how much my parents went through with the nhs l treat the whole lot as having something very toxic about it with a few good people but the majority......

 
I have come very late to this thread but would like to add my thanks to sam for hs efforts and congraulate him on his success in bringing T!s and T2s together to cooperate in finding information for is approach to DUK. That is certainly the way to go.
Sam did all the right things and approached DUK in a reasonablle fashion armed with studies to back up his points..
His efforts deserved better.
Unfortunately,, it seems to be the case that it matters very little how DUK are approached. The response is the same. Sam, in fact had some success
As desidiabulum and a few others, pointed out earlier DUk do indeed have the power. Not only are they the UKs biggest diabetes charity they are regarded by the Government as our unelected representatives. The Voice of diabetics. In this case don't they owe us a least a little transparency? How many organisations these days refuse to give a mname to callers or correspondents?
I think it is probably very true that there are some very caring and helpful people at DUK.. These are the people whom most of us would deal with.
i understand that , as in many other organisations ,there are a number of temporary staff or indeed unpaid 'internists. These are the pleasant people who interact with the public but have no power to influence policy or decisions.
Forming good relationships with them helps not one iota .
I find, and have always found it disturbing, that an organisation like DUK can have such power over government policy and people's lives
wihout being n the least accountable to those same people.....i hope all other large Health charities are not run in this fashion.
Iff DUK won't listen to representations , will not give individual names or disclose how and by wom hey are run then perhaps these issues should be addressed. It is hardly surprising that this behaviour gives rise to conspiracy theories.
Perhaps whoever overseest hese matters in government could be asked for an opi.nion.

In the meantime - thanks once again Sam for all your hard work and efforts on our behalf.
 
Look at the end of the day, it suits us, worked and the real results are US, without swearing and help, support when we can, xxxxx em, if they don't listen or another option comes along we just keep fighting and pushing forward. We might not win the battle but this could end up the end game!!!


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 
DUK do publish documentation on diet. Their "Position Statement" can be read on line. Seems as if the DUK website is off line at the moment so I can't link. They also publish a comprehensive documentation of studies.

I have previous noted:

I know of at least two long term studies of low carb:

A 44 month (& ongoing) Swedish study, (citation 13 in D UK Position Statement) which states: “ the present high-carbohydrate dietary advice resulting in unnecessary hyperglycemia and insulin resistance seems difficult to support and for diabetes patients, current dietary recommendations seem to be a major part of their problem rather than being part of the solution. Carbohydrate restriction, however, reverses or neutralises all aspects of the metabolic syndrome.”


Dr. Mark Daly, Consultant diabetologist, the MacLeod Diabetes and Endocrine Centre, Exeter responded to my query:

“We have presented our results at 3 national and 1 international meetings.

We found no serious adverse effects over 2 years but not everyone is as good at sticking to low carbohydrate diets as you.”​

Deep in their website is a link to a comprehensive “Evidence-based nutrition guidelines” document which includes on P. 17:

“Low-carbohydrate diets have created some controversy, but both a recent review and meta-analysis suggest that they are associated with significant reductions in body weight and improvements in glycaemic control.......

Concern has been expressed about the potential adverse effects of these diets, especially on cardiovascular risk, but there remains no evidence of harm over the short term.”​

I have the 2003 issue of "Balance" which issued dire warnings against low carb, specifically Atkins. These warnings have been forgotten except for "Concern has been expressed ..." but it is now evident that such concern is spurious. My notes from that follow:

.... warnings of the dangers of "breakdown of vital muscle & body tissues" or "increased risk of heart disease, cancers & bowel disorders" or "the risk of kidney disease." Such a diet may be "suitable ... with medical supervision & with guidance from a state-registered dietitian."

A key paragraph is: "Research into the long-term effects of low-carb diets is now required. And in response to this, Diabetes UK is funding such research." ​

Eight years on we have the 2011 D UK “Position Statement” where we read:

"More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of varying degrees of low-carbohydrate diet on weight, glycaemic control, hypertension and lipid profile in people with Type 2 diabetes as well as to investigate the long term effects of these diets."​

I can't wait for yet more long term studies - I've too much to lose. I followed their "healthy diet" for 7 years & was crippled by the complications. My low-carb diet started in May 2008. The complications disappeared in 3 months. Six years on I am well & active.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…