Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Diabetes Discussions' started by Squire Fulwood, Nov 6, 2012.
On BBC this morning
It keeps coming back to the dietary advice.
I have bought one of those books recently recommended to me: "Endocrinology and Diabetes", and while it has a lot of detailed information about the condition I was stunned to read:
"Patients with diabetes require active dietary management to help achieve good glycaemic control. ... are at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and therefore it is important to encourage patterns of healthy eating. Ideally, 60% of caloric intake should be provided by carbohydrates with no more than 30% coming from fat."
"Eating of complex carbohydrates such as potatoes ... should be encouraged."
"Complex carbohydrates cause a slower rise in blood glucose .."
And so on.
So the underpinning assumption for all of this appears to be that fat consumption increases cardiovascular risk. And the second one seems to be the one about complex carbs causing slower BG rises.
Dear God, they all to check me out after a jacket potato!
They just cannot have done any tests on this.
Just a casual Google turns up report after report to the contrary, such as:
Hi. The book is obviously rubbish. The main problem is no one knows what 'starchy' carbs means and these people who recommend 'starchy' or 'complex' carbs don't understand that cooking, mashing etc changes the GI level. This is why wholegrain flour is better for us that refined white flour; same start point but different treatment and end result. How do we stop authors writing technical nonsense? I have no idea and it's all very sad for those diabetics who rely on 'experts'.
Some years ago I was Hon. Sec. to the local Flat Earth Soc. (drinking section) who used to love to debate many things as meaningful as 'starchy carbs'. A few of them were:-
A balanced meal ..........a pair of scales were used.
Reasonable force ..........can't go into that since we might get arrested.
Fun sized Mars bars .......no, neither do I.
It's all smoke and mirrors put about by someone that does not want to make a decision based on measurement.
The link I gave at the beginning was indeed about diabetes care being depressingly poor. As for carbs ....you must be thinking of someone else.
Probably me causing confusion. I was talking about carbs and fats in the diet, but also about how quickly starchy foods turn into glucose. Then again, i was talking about the supposed link between fat intake and arterial disease.
Hi All, the book refered to by bellx15, whilst being very good at explaining the endocrine system and diabetes, it does fall short when it comes to diabetes management ideas, particularly with reqard to carb intake . Most of us on this forum are of the opinion the the high carb diet recommended by the NHS is causing many premature deaths.
The book is a standard medical text book, and when I reccomended bellx read it, I stated it would help him understand why your doctor makes the decisions he does. A medical student is trained and examined against the content of this book. Its not therefore surprising when they try to convince us that we should be eating large amounts of carb.
Until the whole concept of diabetes management is changed at the training stage, the establishment will continue to throw out new doctors , with dangerous ideas they believe are helping to save our lives.
The second book I recommended he read Daibetes management, gives a very similar picture, however this is a standard text for diabetes specialists.
I think that from the latest news , it would appear the they are starting to realise they are killing us, we are the lucky ones on the forum, just think of the thousands of diabetics who believe thier doctors and will never get the help they need
Yes - no problem with the recommendation. Thanks.
Does this latest news offer an opportunity to get the interest of the media?
I hope it does. Unfortunately the worse the news, the bigger the chance of someone taking notice. We can't forget the culture of Diabetes, I'm sure if you asked the majority of non diabetic they would still believe we inflict the condition upon ourselves.
There has been a number of similar debates on the forum before, my personal view is that we are few , with little or no voice, so will have great difficulty influencing change. We can however help everyone who finds the forum. In time we will grow
Pleeeeeeeeeeeease tell me you're joking? 60% of caloric intake should be carbs? WHAT? :shock:
You might want to re-read the quote and note that it says "slower"; a single measurement cannot logically disprove any such claim.
OK - here is the full quote: page 208.
Patients with type 1 diabetes (but in the following chapter of type 2 it refers back to this advice) require active dietary management to help achieve good glycaemic control. Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of vascular disease, and therefore it is important to encourage patterns of healthy eating. Ideally, 60% of total caloric intake should be provided by carbohydrates, with no more than 30% coming from fat. .... Eating of complex carbohydrates such as bread, potatoes, pasta and rice in moderate amounts with each meal should be encouraged. Complex and lower glycaemic index carbohydrates cause a slower rise in blood glucose concentration than simple sugars because of their slower rate of absorption."
As I mentioned earlier, there are several completely unfounded assumptions in here:
1. Fat consumption creates an elevated risk of vascular disease. No evidence for this.
2. Complex carbohydrates are processed slowly, rendering BG levels manageable. Nope.
3. Carbohydrate consumption creates less risk of vascular disease. Nope.
My Ukrainian wife told me how her grandmother used to say about their pig rearing: "We spend all our lives fattening pigs, and we don't do it by feeding them fat. They get potatoes and bread."
Ohhhh your Ukrainian wife's grandmother was soooooooooooooooooooooooo wise! My Polish father was full of that kind of wisdom too. We were talking about diet and nutrition and genetics many years ago and he pointed out the stature and physique of the average gorilla and the fact that it lives mainly on fruit and veg with the occasional bit of caterpillar thrown in for its protein content. Compare that to the average human diet of animal flesh, fish, fruit, veg, and look at our stature in comparison to a gorilla. You'd have thought it would be us that would be muscle bound and strong enough to be able to swing through trees wouldn't you?
The whole question of 'You are what you eat' comes into question when you look at various animals and what they eat. Gorillas don't exactly look like their bodies are designed or caused by eating vegetation do they.
My Dad wouldn't eat swede or parsnips because he considered those veggies fit only for pigs and very fattening.
and peas are for chickens.