Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Diabetes Soapbox - Have Your Say' started by zand, Aug 8, 2019.
Some CO2 lasts for 100’s.
And its not all from ruminants..
We will always be a product of our environment. Ref. The continent Africa. Only once mixed with our high carb diet do they start having diabetic complications. In their own enviroment they burn calories to offset carbs in rice etc. Especially in the absence of protein or any other food, for some. Loads of africans eat very very well but sugary meals are no good for anyone... longterm.
Ive learned from my 'neighbour' that the older generations who lived long had it right but pollutants like smoking and traffic kill. Less chemicals produced seemed the way forward (then) for healthy living.
My theory is overweight people do expel more than a thin person but if both diabetic and walking with high sugars they both sweat profusely into the atmosphere. Both hv the means to use pollutants BUT if they are taking wise measures to get their body to perform very well then in my eyes are achieving a cleaner environment by example too.
We can all do our bit to keep the environment healthy but not all as clear cut as knocking out meat from our diet.
I love fish and most meats (cooked).
I'm off now to chew on some meat and fish to help me lose weight.
What are the units for that table (and it is incomplete).
However methane levels in the atmosphere have been rising. Human activity is creating more methane than is being removed from the atmosphere. That is the problem. So both it and CO2 are having an impact. I can see how livestock has come under focus, even though I know it isn’t the real or only culprit. As a meat eater we cannot lay back and say don’t touch our source of food I.e., meat as we have to reign back elsewhere to compensate for having the benefit of having meat on our platters.
Looks like we should stop rice production and wetlands first...as well as gas extraction and fracking before we look at meat?
Still think it is avoiding the bigger issue of CO2..
But if you want to blame the cow burps then go with the flow...
If you read my posts carefully you will see I am NOT blaming cow burps.
But I would blame meat eaters if they did not contribute to tackling the other factors, where that is possible.
Read them carefully. Don’t speed read them.
Don’t read what you think I said. Read what I said.
“....we have to reign back elsewhere to compensate for having the benefit of having meat on our platters.”
I think I have posted that 3 times within this thread.
We had a milking cow that was fed on cabbages to supplement what little grass was available for a week, her belches were a nice clean experience, but the farts were pure methane.
Same for me if I eat cabbage.
It's surprising how far you can bury your nose into the side of a cow when your milking her when they fart.
I guess them having 2 stomachs doesn't help. Although I hv 2 now. Part and parcel of my op.
@ickihun: You will need to recount how many stomachs a cow does have, try four and you will be on the mark.
The figures below for the UK don't agree, notice the small fraction for agriculture. The worldwide figures for agriculture on "their" numbers are 15%, cognitive dissonance if ever I have seen it. The 15% can be reduced by African and Asian herds using efficiencies learnt in the West. The agriculture feed some say should be redirected from animals to humans, is not fit for human consumption (many of us want grass fed anyway).
The bottom line is that one side has been pushed, has momentum and now has the flame of climate change, so in general has been accepted as fact. We need to step back and hear the other side, and stop trying to extinct ourselves with a second wave of the 1980''s food debacle: Animals are required to maintain soil quality and even help the production of the plants being championed.
Zand, I'm surveying and reading through the report in the first link. I cannot believe what I'm reading.
When my husband is away, I eat chicken for six dinners in a row to eat the entire chicken. Each night, I prepare it differently, but I tire of it quickly. I believe chicken is also high in omega-6 fatty acids, as are a lot of the nuts and seeds.
Eggs on the other hand are nutrient dense and satisfying. I eat them 4 days a week.
The nutrition profile of grass fed beef is so much better.
It sounds like they want to move away from raising animals, chickens, and fish in their natural environment to an enclosed setting, feeding them a diet that's not natural for them. I thought we were trying to get away from doing that.
A lot of my protein and fat intake comes from meat, dairy, fish, nuts, avocado and olives. I don't eat industrial seed oils because they inflame my colon. And inflammatory bowel disease, like diabetes, is on the rise - (From the CDC: "In 2015, an estimated 1.3% of US adults (3 million) reported being diagnosed with IBD (either Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis). This was a large increase from 1999 (0.9% or 2 million adults"; that's a 45% increase increase in 16 years).
I greatly limit starchy vegetables, legumes, and beans, no more than 1 - 2 tablespoons in a meal. My body is too metabolically damaged to eat grains or sugars.
Also concerning is they mention switching to short wheat. That happened in the US back in the 40's, I think, then more changes were made in the 70's. Gluten intolerance is ridiculously common in the US, yet when Americans eat wheat in europe, many report being able to tolerate it.
The committee that put the report together appears to have limited knowledge and experience in farming, nutrition, health, and medicine.
We know from experience that the diet they're proposing doesn't work for diabetics. In the US, 1 out of 2 adults have pre-diabetes or diabetes. I just don't see how what they're proposing is going to work.
I really appreciate all the information you and others have provided here. Thank you.
That's one VERY strong claim.
I stand corrected. Not 50%, it's 43.3% (but that was in 2015).
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), 43.3% of adults (age 18 or older) in the US, have pre-diabetes (9.4%) or diabetes (33.9%)
I don't remember where the 52%, or 1 out of 2 adults statements, came from. I think it was Brian Mowll, who hosts the diabetes summit. Apologies...
Sorry ... I simply do NOT believe even that. The simple law of averages across developed countries makes it more than unlikely. Diabetic? Yep. Pre diabetic? No way.
And no need for apologies @Winnie53 ... ever
UPDATED TO INCLUDE VIDEO REFERENCE AT THE END:
I have also seen mentioned continually that circa 12 - 15% of Americans are insulin sensitive. I know many of the heavy weights in the LCHF mention the over 50% of Americans have diabetes or pre-diabetes (and circa 66% overweight or obese).
Even if these numbers were out by 50%, this would be a crisis in my view.
Dr Sarah Hallberg 52.4% of US adults are diabetic or have pre-diabetes - 14 mins 47 secs:
Some say that 80-90% of Americans are already into hyperinsulinemia, and well on their way to metabolic derangement and diabetes. Personally I do not find this very difficult to believe. If it's not true now, it most certainly will be sooner or later if we continue the current trend of consuming seed oils, wheat and sugar.