Oh dear! You've pushed a number of buttons, but I'll try to be brief!
First - I'm a professional archaeologist, now semi-retired, with a particular interest in prehistory - which is the period of human development I was talking about, from about 100,000 years ago to the development of agriculture about 7000 years ago in the Near East (the Neolithic period). Before then we were hunter-gatherers, and would have gathered grains as we gathered other foodstuffs, seasonally when they were available. These were the very meagre forerunners of our present cereal crops - more like glorified grass seeds. Obviously greens would be available in the spring & summer, fruit, nuts etc in the autumn, but preservation and storage was difficult, and much of the food that got them over the long glacial-period winters would have been what they could hunt.
There is evidence from more recent hunter-gatherer societies that fatter animals were targeted in the hunt. Fat was valued. Oh, and hunter-gatherers behave like other predators eg lions - lots of lying around conserving energy, with bursts of high-level activity when required.
Potatoes didn't enter the western european diet until the 17th century as a staple food - less than 500 years ago. By that time, yes - you could say that the peasantry lived on bread, potatoes and beer, certainly in towns. I could expand on that - but I'm really talking about how long we've been eating meat and animal fat as opposed to basing our diet on carbohydrates. We haven't, in evolutionary terms, really had time to adapt to a high-carb diet. Some of us may have adapted; others get diabetes!
Second - I am not a scientist, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the reason diabetics are considered to be more susceptible to heart disease etc is because the studies have looked at diabetics
over the last 4 decades , when the tools and drugs for good blood sugar control were not available, or were not as good as they are now. In fact, the studies were done on a population of what would now be considered
badly controlled diabetics - who (particularly the Type 2s)were following a lifestyle that would probably account for heart disease in anyone! They were encouraged to base their meals around carbohydrates.
I don't see why a well-controlled diabetic need have any higher risk of heart disease than anyone else - and if I'm wrong, you may say so on my tombstone :wink:
An extract from your post says:
It is the consistently elevated levels of blood glucose that contribute to the formation of atherosclerosis.
(my italics)
and I would completely agree with that! because elevated levels of blood glucose come from being unable properly to metabolize the carbohydrate in one's diet. The implication of the quote is that if we can keep our BGs low, our arteries won't thicken.
The theory I am working to, as a Type 2 diabetic, is that as I am unable to process carbohydrate properly, the best thing to do is to eat less of it. So I'm eating low-carb and as naturally as possible (Atkins, in fact), which I had done in my non-diabetic days, but sadly fell off it and ended where I am now.
On my first go at Atkins I was able to exercise, and was in fact walking at least 3 miles every day. I lost 5 stone in 16 months, have never felt better in my life, and had an excellent lipid profile with triglycerides at 0.65. That's all to do again now, and sadly I can't exercise much because I have finally (after progressing over 25 years) been diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis, which has lead to difficulty in walking more than 100m. I'm waiting now to see if it can be operated on; if not I'll have to work out an exercise programme by other means.
This time around I've lost 3.5 stone on the diet in roughly the same period. I put the slower loss down to less exercise and more insulin resistance. Also to me being less able to stay off the red wine

:lol: . However, the fat is still going. My next HbA1c is on 19th September, so I'll report weight loss, HbA1c, lipid profile etc when those results are back - and I'll be honest!
To finish - I will admit that what I have written may apply to Type 2s rather than Type 1s. After all, you have to run your BGs higher than we do in order to avoid hypos, so Type 1 may be more susceptible to artherosclerosis. I just think that a well-controlled Type 2 is not necessarily susceptible to these diseases, and that we can control our BGs very well with a lower carb, higher fat/protein diet.
Dr Atkins does say decrease the fat as you increase the carbs; the fat/carb combination does the damage.
Hope I haven't missed anything!
Viv 8)