Pneu said:What shouldn't be allowed is personal attacks or purposeful thread derailment a tactic that is all to often employed when people begin to lose the argument.
Mileana said:The low carbers have a right to give the information they have found to be very helpful to them. The problem only comes once someone goes blind to the fact that others may have good control doing something else than what worked for them.
As I said - put the information where it can be found and give your input, then leave the sensible people that we have to assume posters and readers are, to make the decision that they think will work for them.
-M
Pneu said:Well let's hope that the admin listen to the community.. After all they are here to serve us not the other way around.
benedict said:Just bear in mind that when paul_c first posted on the forum he did so in the 'non-low carb' forum and had borofergie and xyzzy trying to convince him that low carb was the way to go.
So, paul does have a point here.
Benedict
benedict said:Just bear in mind that when paul_c first posted on the forum he did so in the 'non-low carb' forum and had borofergie and xyzzy trying to convince him that low carb was the way to go.
So, paul does have a point here.
Benedict
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=29820&p=279127#p279152Well Paul, I think that GI and especially GL are great ways to go about treating your diabetes, but I strongly suggest that you read more widely. These reports are basically cynical marketing propaganda aimed at selling grain products to diabetics. It's a bit like believing a report saying "Fructose is good for you" by the National Sugar Council, or "Smoke more Fags" by the National Tobacco Council.
You're definitely on the right track, but hopefully someone will be able to suggest a better founded reference for you on GI and GL.
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?