Type 2 diet controlled false hypos ?

[IanD]

Hi Gezza - I thought of your experience & our PMs - & find you got here first

Other forum members may benefit from Gezza's experience & my comments.

IMO I still think your problem is being undernourished. 1500 kcals a day mainly from carbs means that your body cannot maintain a steady BG. Your figures show a spike after eating that falls to around 4 in about 2 hours. In my experience, carbs are fully digested in about 2 hours; proteins & fats take longer, so low BGs are less likely.

"carbs 58%, protein 24%, fat 18%, cals 1500" corresponds to weight (g) & energy:
carbs - 190 g, 760 kc,
protein - 80 g 320 kc,
fat - 60 g, 420 kc,
total 1500 kcal.

As I got back to your 1500 kcal daily, my algebra seems OK.

What does EMF mean? ElectroMotive Force or Eat More Fat.

If you are wary of increasing animal fats, try nuts particularly ground almonds or coconut - with your cereal, added to yoghurt, eaten as a snack. They are unlikely to raise your BG above your present levels, and as you've seen from my tests, are more sustaining, with a low spike of around 7-8, and a sustained reading around 5 for several hours.

You do not know when your tendency to low BG will be inconvenient or serious. An apple may take you back above 4, but is not sustaining.

Thanks. We must be using the same version of MyFitnessPal. I agree an apple is not sustaining but it works on the my "low sugar levels" (remember I can't use the word hypo). I would not like to wait for fat & protein to kick in. To be perfectly honest, post two-hours I am barely functioning at 5.0 on protein and certainly don't feel 'full of the joys of spring', don't feel particularly sustained, and would not like to have to run for a bus. There is, to me, a difference in what the bG meter says and how I feel physically. The meter is usually 'behind'.

No. I used algebra & the rough guide that carb & protein - grams x 4 = kcal, and fat - grams x 7 = kcal.

Have you tried increasing fat to provide EMF :?: I am wary of increasing protein significantly. I don't "suffer" low BG - I rarely drop below 5. I played 2 hours tennis last night, after a light meal.

 

[Anonymous]

What I was told on this site was that a 'hypo' is what real diabetics get and "low blood sugar" is what charlatans like me who are only here to cause trouble get. That's the difference.

Why is it so difficult to accept there is a difference? When you suffer your episodes they are likely unpleasant and have a real unpleasant physical effects yet do you run the risk of falling into a diabetic coma and actually suffering death or brain damage? That's the distinction I and many make.

Thanks for the explanation - it makes sense.

xyzzy ... I don't know if I run the risk of falling into a diabetic coma or even if I am suffering brain damage even now. How would I determine these things? The brain damage might just be a question of asking people who know me, of course. As for diabetic coma, I have no idea of how close I have got (does 2.9 count?) .

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Gezza - I thought of your experience & our PMs - & find you got here first

Other forum members may benefit from Gezza's experience & my comments.

IMO I still think your problem is being undernourished. 1500 kcals a day mainly from carbs means that your body cannot maintain a steady BG. Your figures show a spike after eating that falls to around 4 in about 2 hours. In my experience, carbs are fully digested in about 2 hours; proteins & fats take longer, so low BGs are less likely.

"carbs 58%, protein 24%, fat 18%, cals 1500" corresponds to weight (g) & energy:
carbs - 190 g, 760 kc,
protein - 80 g 320 kc,
fat - 60 g, 420 kc,
total 1500 kcal.

As I got back to your 1500 kcal daily, my algebra seems OK.

What does EMF mean? ElectroMotive Force or Eat More Fat.

If you are wary of increasing animal fats, try nuts particularly ground almonds or coconut - with your cereal, added to yoghurt, eaten as a snack. They are unlikely to raise your BG above your present levels, and as you've seen from my tests, are more sustaining, with a low spike of around 7-8, and a sustained reading around 5 for several hours.

You do not know when your tendency to low BG will be inconvenient or serious. An apple may take you back above 4, but is not sustaining.

Thanks. We must be using the same version of MyFitnessPal. I agree an apple is not sustaining but it works on the my "low sugar levels" (remember I can't use the word hypo). I would not like to wait for fat & protein to kick in. To be perfectly honest, post two-hours I am barely functioning at 5.0 on protein and certainly don't feel 'full of the joys of spring', don't feel particularly sustained, and would not like to have to run for a bus. There is, to me, a difference in what the bG meter says and how I feel physically. The meter is usually 'behind'.

No. I used algebra & the rough guide that carb & protein - grams x 4 = kcal, and fat - grams x 7 = kcal.

Have you tried increasing fat to provide EMF :?: I am wary of increasing protein significantly. I don't "suffer" low BG - I rarely drop below 5. I played 2 hours tennis last night, after a light meal.

I admire you for playing tennis for two hours in this heat and staying above 5 by the end of the game.
Yes, I have. I sprinkled some TRILL (or something very like it) on my weetabix. As I said in my PM (I think). I haven't had an episode since I increased my daytime carbs. I could, alternatively, schedule the dog walk at a time that matches my eating rather mid-way between meals, just as you played tennis after eating a light meal. That way, I'll have the energy for the dog walk. I don't need much energy two hours after.

 

[xyzzy]

xyzzy ... I don't know if I run the risk of falling into a diabetic coma or even if I am suffering brain damage even now. How would I determine these things? The brain damage might just be a question of asking people who know me, of course. As for diabetic coma, I have no idea of how close I have got (does 2.9 count?) .

Gezza can't really advise on that except to reiterate if you are worried about it go ask the doc. It sounds from my totally unprofessional opinion that you might be suffering from some form of reactive hypoglycaemia which may be related to the resolved db or not. Only a doctor can really tell you.

Like I said I don't believe for one moment that your symptoms aren't real and from the odd personal experience the effects can be very unpleasant. To be honest I don't particularly care if you want to call them hypo's or not. In reality the common word people would use would be hypo.

In the environment of posting on a diabetes self help forum where there is a mixture of insulin and non insulin using diabetics I just think its sensible to make the distinction between hypo's caused by an effective overdose of insulin that can and occasionally do lead to brain damage, coma and death and "hypos" that the rest of us can suffer (diabetic, diabetic resolved or non diabetics) which a) can occur over a wide range of BG's and b) would normally resolve themselves through a natural liver dumps glucose response when although you may feel some unpleasantness your body should resolve the issue in the end without intervention. Of course if you start to experience the "unpleasantness" there's nothing wrong with helping your body recover by eating a few carbs in some form or other. Not to do so would be silly.

I suppose to sum up we who can and do suffer from "low blood sugar" episodes and call them hypo's need to have a bit of humility and recognise the stress and potential life threatening danger of an insulin induced hypo in our insulin using friends.

 

[Anonymous]

xyzzy ... I don't know if I run the risk of falling into a diabetic coma or even if I am suffering brain damage even now. How would I determine these things? The brain damage might just be a question of asking people who know me, of course. As for diabetic coma, I have no idea of how close I have got (does 2.9 count?) .

Gezza can't really advise on that except to reiterate if you are worried about it go ask the doc. It sounds from my totally unprofessional opinion that you might be suffering from some form of reactive hypoglycaemia which may be related to the resolved db or not. Only a doctor can really tell you.

Like I said I don't believe for one moment that your symptoms aren't real and from the odd personal experience the effects can be very unpleasant. To be honest I don't particularly care if you want to call them hypo's or not. In reality the common word people would use would be hypo.

In the environment of posting on a diabetes self help forum where there is a mixture of insulin and non insulin using diabetics I just think its sensible to make the distinction between hypo's caused by an effective overdose of insulin that can and occasionally do lead to brain damage, coma and death and "hypos" that the rest of us can suffer (diabetic, diabetic resolved or non diabetics) which a) can occur over a wide range of BG's and b) would normally resolve themselves through a natural liver dumps glucose response when although you may feel some unpleasantness your body should resolve the issue in the end without intervention. Of course if you start to experience the "unpleasantness" there's nothing wrong with helping your body recover by eating a few carbs in some form or other. Not to do so would be silly.

I suppose to sum up we who can and do suffer from "low blood sugar" episodes and call them hypo's need to have a bit of humility and recognise the stress and potential life threatening danger of an insulin induced hypo in our insulin using friends.

Thanks for your advice. I did talk about the "low blood sugar" episodes when I went for my latest results. I was with my diabetic nurse for 40 minutes which was plenty of time to discuss a lot of matters. After 40+ years of these episodes, I don't worry about them. The only difference is that now I try to do something rather than nothing as I used to. You are right in that my liver will probably step in. I have deliberately sat through a couple of episodes recently and this did happen, although it takes a bit of willpower and 'wishful thinking' so I would rather step in than wait in hope.

As for humility, you are just one of two people who have suggested in open forum that I have been immodest or disrepectful to others who have more serious problems than me. No one else has, apparently, read my comments in the same way, or I would have heard about it. Many have disagreed with me but that is not the same thing.

My mother was diagnosed with diabetes around 30 years ago and put on insulin when things were different. She suffered retinopathy and finally registered blind, leg ulcers, kidney disease and a couple of strokes, one of which finished her off. She was someone who I consider to have been far worse off than me and an awful lot of other people on this site. After all, anyone on this site is still alive for one thing.

My eldest sister, who has never been ill in her life, went to her GP last year at the age of 69 because she was having serious trouble with her vision. Her bG was 19 but I don't have her HbA1C etc. She was put straight onto medication and her eyesight has improved since. Thankfully, she has cut out sweet things she so enjoyed, which is better than nothing, but I don't think that I have the influence on her and my brother-in-law to persuade her to do more.

So, although I have never seen anyone in a diabetic coma or treated them, I feel I have seen enough to have a good degree of empathy and, yes, understanding since I have lived with it 'by proxy' for 30 years. If I wasn't so thick-skinned I could have been offended by the abusive responses to my seemingly favourable progress, so humility could work both ways, I think.

 

[Thundercat]

I would just like to say that while your experience is different to most others it is no less valid. No one has a right to complain or worry about themselves if we use the yardstick that someone else suffers more. I personally have never read any disrespect to others in your posts. The written word is open to wide interpretation and misunderstandings do happen but I just wanted you to know how I interpreted it. BG readings below a certain level are called hypos regardless of whether someone has diabetes or not. The word is not exclusive to our band of brothers so you should feel free to use it at will:smile:

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

 

[Anonymous]

I would just like to say that while your experience is different to most others it is no less valid. No one has a right to complain or worry about themselves if we use the yardstick that someone else suffers more. I personally have never read any disrespect to others in your posts. The written word is open to wide interpretation and misunderstandings do happen but I just wanted you to know how I interpreted it. BG readings below a certain level are called hypos regardless of whether someone has diabetes or not. The word is not exclusive to our band of brothers so you should feel free to use it at will:smile:

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Thank you Thundercat. I think there are many, many people who suffer hypo symptoms and the medical fraternity does not differentiate between diabetics or non-diabetics. Many is the time I and my colleagues have had to rush to the sweet machine shaking and sweating and needing a Mars Bar or Twix NOW!! And it was not because we were 'chocoholics' .. we just 'knew' what would give us a quick fix. We were rather less sophisticated about it then and certainly hadn't heard of the word hypoglycaemia which I think means excessively low blood sugar no matter whose body we are talking about. Of course, we all know how dangerous it can be but I would not expect to be 'banned' from. say, referring to prostate cancer on the grounds that I have been given the all-clear and therefore know b.gg.r all about it.

On a different, but related note, I have observed recently that my bG meter readings tend to be behind the times. By that, I mean I sense a pending hypo before my bG readings say I am hypo (below 3.9 in my case typically). Maybe it's because the brain detects the 'danger' faster and sooner than the blood tests reflect the situation. I have taken a reading of, say, 4.2, and then 15 minutes later am, say, 3.5. So what I do now is to treat the symptoms when they start then look at my bG readings as the former is the highest priority to me. Of course, I could have misread the situation, in which case no harm done. I wonder if anyone else has noticed this as, perhaps, responding to the 'feeling' may be better than waiting for confirmation from a bG reading.

 

[xyzzy]

As for humility, you are just one of two people who have suggested in open forum that I have been immodest or disrepectful to others who have more serious problems than me. No one else has, apparently, read my comments in the same way, or I would have heard about it. Many have disagreed with me but that is not the same thing.

My comments on humility were for everyone who is a non insulin dependent diabetic not just yourself. I don't see what is disrespectful in pointing out that while everyone can be effected by the initial unpleasant consequences of low blood sugars or hypos (call them what you want) only insulin using diabetics ordinarily run the risk of brain damage or death as in others the body will compensate given time.

Every time an insulin using diabetic injects they run that risk of potential overdose and they have to take that risk everyday of their lives. I have the utmost respect for them which and is why I personally think those of us who are non insulin users should show a bit of humility and simply recognise the difference.

 

[Anonymous]

As for humility, you are just one of two people who have suggested in open forum that I have been immodest or disrepectful to others who have more serious problems than me. No one else has, apparently, read my comments in the same way, or I would have heard about it. Many have disagreed with me but that is not the same thing.

My comments on humility were for everyone who is a non insulin dependent diabetic not just yourself. I don't see what is disrespectful in pointing out that while everyone can be effected by the initial unpleasant consequences of low blood sugars or hypos (call them what you want) only insulin using diabetics ordinarily run the risk of brain damage or death as in others the body will compensate given time.

Every time an insulin using diabetic injects they run that risk of potential overdose and they have to take that risk everyday of their lives. I have the utmost respect for them which and is why I personally think those of us who are non insulin users should show a bit of humility and simply recognise the difference.

How about commenting positively on my success with reference to my normal diet and lifestyle changes as that would be more beneficial to others on this site rather than sermons on humility. There are many others on this site who may wish to comment or discuss matters without the fear of being jumped on. The stifling of debate and education is extremely sad, but I guess there are always going to be some 'holier than thou' people on any blog site.

This particular blog is now running the risk of being derailed along with others before it. As far as I am concerned the original title of the blog says 'Type 2' but I am perfectly happy for Type 1 people to comment.

 

[xyzzy]

the medical fraternity does not differentiate between diabetics or non-diabetics.

That may or may not be the case but the medical fraternity certainly differentiates between grades of hypos, there causes and there effects see http://www.jdcjournal.com/article/S1056-8727(05)00119-4/fulltext which comes from the large UKPDS study that a great deal of diabetes treatment in this country is based around.

The UKPDS figures divide hypo's into 4 strengths.

(1) transitory symptoms not affecting normal activity
(2) temporarily incapacitated but patient able to control symptoms without help
(3) incapacitated and required assistance to control symptoms
(4) required medical attention or glucagon injection

For diet only diabetics

8 in 1000 report a hypo of some description
1 in 1000 report a hypo where they actually needed to do something about it i.e level 2 to 4

For metformin diabetics

17 in 1000 report a hypo of some description
3 in 1000 report a hypo where they actually needed to do something about it. i.e level 2 to 4

How about commenting positively on my success

Why not have an adult debate rather than purposefully spinning everything into a personal attack and me, me, me.

 

[Anonymous]

the medical fraternity does not differentiate between diabetics or non-diabetics.

That may or may not be the case but the medical fraternity certainly differentiates between grades of hypos, there causes and there effects see http://www.jdcjournal.com/article/S1056-8727(05)00119-4/fulltext which comes from the large UKPDS study that a great deal of diabetes treatment in this country is based around.

The UKPDS figures divide hypo's into 4 strengths.

(1) transitory symptoms not affecting normal activity
(2) temporarily incapacitated but patient able to control symptoms without help
(3) incapacitated and required assistance to control symptoms
(4) required medical attention or glucagon injection

For diet only diabetics

8 in 1000 report a hypo of some description
1 in 1000 report a hypo where they actually needed to do something about it i.e level 2 to 4

For metformin diabetics

17 in 1000 report a hypo of some description
3 in 1000 report a hypo where they actually needed to do something about it. i.e level 2 to 4

How about commenting positively on my success

Why not have an adult debate rather than purposefully spinning everything into a personal attack and me, me, me.

OK so what do you have to say about any person who follows a normal diet and changes their lifestyle and benefits from it? I am sure there are people around who are in that position.

 

[CollieBoy]

OK so what do you have to say about any person who follows a normal diet and changes their lifestyle and benefits from it? I am sure there are people around who are in that position.

I don't tend to talk ABOUT people but what i would say TO them is "Congratulations! :thumbup: :thumbup:
Well done on the improvements! :clap: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

OK so what do you have to say about any person who follows a normal diet and changes their lifestyle and benefits from it? I am sure there are people around who are in that position.

I don't tend to talk ABOUT people but what i would say TO them is "Congratulations! :thumbup: :thumbup:
Well done on the improvements! :clap: :lol:

Thank you, I think??? :eh:

 

[LittleWolf]

I'm not type 1 as far as I know but my type 1 partner freaked and said I had a 'dangerous' hypo when I described hypo symptoms (heart racing, feeling sick, dizzy, cold sweat etc) and managed to test my blood after a Lucozade and potato chips and it was 3.1. But I'm not on medication nor do i have hypoglycemia because in the same day levels can be high. I dont know if that counts as a level 1 or 2 or whatever rebut it was scary and the edges of my vision were going black. Sometimes a pancreas still pumping does crazy things like that. I'm really feeling T2 is a nutso, broad spectrum kind of thing...

I still don't even know *** I am for sure, but the at least 2 factors lean towards T2. I don't know whether I should have just waited around for my liver to correct should supposedly happen in a T2 as opposed to a T1 on insulin. But the last time Mr Liver helped I ended up at 19.

I've seem T1s have a 'rebound high' like that especially if they went low in the night. We also see T2s go low but /usually/ this gets corrected, ne?

Could it be said that both T1s and T2s can have 'real' hypos but it is far more common that it would be /far more likely/ in a T1 and less likely to safely correct itself? But it can happen. A T2 is more likely to correct in the safe zone rather than randomly fall through the floor... But it /could/ happen.

Maybe?


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

 

[Giverny]

Let's get this back on track please. If you wish to debate with one another, please do it via PM.

 

[IanD]

Please folks treat Gezza as a serious contributor. You are helping no-one by an antagonistic attitude.

Hi Gezza - I note you have changed you diet significantly during the course of this thread:

Ian:
"carbs 58%, protein 24%, fat 18%, cals 1500" corresponds to weight (g) & energy:
carbs - 190 g, 760 kc,
protein - 80 g 320 kc,
fat - 60 g, 420 kc,
total 1500 kcal.

As I got back to your 1500 kcal daily, my algebra seems OK.

What does EMF mean? ElectroMotive Force or Eat More Fat.

Now your diet comprises: carbs 29%, protein 29%, fat 42%, cals 1500
Carbs - 83 g, 332 kc
Protein - 83 g, 332 kc
Fat - 120 g, 840 kc
Total - 1504 kcal

Welcome to the low carb, high fat fraternity.

Please let us know how that change of diet affects your low BG incidents. IMO it should be beneficial.

 

[Anonymous]

Please folks treat Gezza as a serious contributor. You are helping no-one by an antagonistic attitude.

Hi Gezza - I note you have changed you diet significantly during the course of this thread:

Ian:
"carbs 58%, protein 24%, fat 18%, cals 1500" corresponds to weight (g) & energy:
carbs - 190 g, 760 kc,
protein - 80 g 320 kc,
fat - 60 g, 420 kc,
total 1500 kcal.

As I got back to your 1500 kcal daily, my algebra seems OK.

What does EMF mean? ElectroMotive Force or Eat More Fat.

Now your diet comprises: carbs 29%, protein 29%, fat 42%, cals 1500
Carbs - 83 g, 332 kc
Protein - 83 g, 332 kc
Fat - 120 g, 840 kc
Total - 1504 kcal

Welcome to the low carb, high fat fraternity.

Please let us know how that change of diet affects your low BG incidents. IMO it should be beneficial.

Absolutely Ian. I believe I am following your advice and increasing my fat as you said that would benefit me and help to avoid hypos. I will be tracking very carefully and make sure I get blood results before I publish the outcome. Thanks for your advice. Much appreciated.

 

[Anonymous]

Please folks treat Gezza as a serious contributor. You are helping no-one by an antagonistic attitude.

Hi Gezza - I note you have changed you diet significantly during the course of this thread:

Ian:
"carbs 58%, protein 24%, fat 18%, cals 1500" corresponds to weight (g) & energy:
carbs - 190 g, 760 kc,
protein - 80 g 320 kc,
fat - 60 g, 420 kc,
total 1500 kcal.

As I got back to your 1500 kcal daily, my algebra seems OK.

What does EMF mean? ElectroMotive Force or Eat More Fat.

Now your diet comprises: carbs 29%, protein 29%, fat 42%, cals 1500
Carbs - 83 g, 332 kc
Protein - 83 g, 332 kc
Fat - 120 g, 840 kc
Total - 1504 kcal

Welcome to the low carb, high fat fraternity.

Please let us know how that change of diet affects your low BG incidents. IMO it should be beneficial.

Absolutely Ian. I believe I am following your advice and increasing my fat as you said that would benefit me and help to avoid hypos. I will be tracking very carefully and make sure I get blood results before I publish the outcome. Thanks for your advice. Much appreciated.

Ian, can you specify for me a breakfast and lunch I should have tomorrow so I know I am following you recommendations. You know, what, how much etc..... thanks. I was thinking 2 kippers for breakfast, chicken breast for lunch and pork loin for dinner. Is that enought fat & protein? I will add carbs to make up 30%

 

[IanD]

Ian, can you specify for me a breakfast and lunch I should have tomorrow so I know I am following you recommendations. You know, what, how much etc..... thanks. I was thinking 2 kippers for breakfast, chicken breast for lunch and pork loin for dinner. Is that enought fat & protein? I will add carbs to make up 30%

My daily b'fast is a nut porridge:
Total of 50 g of - ground almonds, coconut flour (or desiccated c'nut), and flax seed mix
That will provide about 25 g fat, with a further 25 g carb, protein & fibre.
I normally make it with boiling water, and m'wave for about 1 minute to thicken it. Fell free to use milk, and bring to the boil to thicken. Use a glass jug as it will boil over! I add about 10 ml double cream.

It's a long time since I had a kipper - suggest you top them with butter.
I sometimes have a two egg omelette, cooking bacon first and pouring in the beaten egg when its ready.

Lunch - about 150 g lean meat (chicken & pork loin are fine) and boiled veg - carrots, parnips, onions, green beans, tinned tomatoes, tomato puree, cooked in water with a stock cube; when the veg are cooked, stir in a cup-a-soup
Cook the meat by frying both sides in lard, butter or veg oil - then if you wish transfer to the grill - the oil/fat prevents it drying out, - or transfer to the veg mix.
pour the gravy into a mug to drink as soup - it avoids thickening.
As a carb substitute I make a cake with the same nut powders, eggs, butter and olive oil, to eat with my meal (it absorbs gravy) or as a nutritious snack. That's optional, but handy. I bake it 3 times a week.
It you want a sweet, berries and or low sugar jelly with cream.

For an evening meal, I have salad with cheese or ham.


Hope that helps.

 

[Anonymous]

Ian, can you specify for me a breakfast and lunch I should have tomorrow so I know I am following you recommendations. You know, what, how much etc..... thanks. I was thinking 2 kippers for breakfast, chicken breast for lunch and pork loin for dinner. Is that enought fat & protein? I will add carbs to make up 30%

My daily b'fast is a nut porridge:
Total of 50 g of - ground almonds, coconut flour (or desiccated c'nut), and flax seed mix
That will provide about 25 g fat, with a further 25 g carb, protein & fibre.
I normally make it with boiling water, and m'wave for about 1 minute to thicken it. Fell free to use milk, and bring to the boil to thicken. Use a glass jug as it will boil over! I add about 10 ml double cream.

It's a long time since I had a kipper - suggest you top them with butter.
I sometimes have a two egg omelette, cooking bacon first and pouring in the beaten egg when its ready.

Lunch - about 150 g lean meat (chicken & pork loin are fine) and boiled veg - carrots, parnips, onions, green beans, tinned tomatoes, tomato puree, cooked in water with a stock cube; when the veg are cooked, stir in a cup-a-soup
Cook the meat by frying both sides in lard, butter or veg oil - then if you wish transfer to the grill - the oil/fat prevents it drying out, - or transfer to the veg mix.
pour the gravy into a mug to drink as soup - it avoids thickening.
As a carb substitute I make a cake with the same nut powders, eggs, butter and olive oil, to eat with my meal (it absorbs gravy) or as a nutritious snack. That's optional, but handy. I bake it 3 times a week.
It you want a sweet, berries and or low sugar jelly with cream.

For an evening meal, I have salad with cheese or ham.


Hope that helps.

Thanks, I had already planned my day's food by the time I got round to reading this. I have completed one day.

This is not aimed at you personally in any way, but I was prepared to volunteer to switch my diet to a low-carb diet to see what difference it made and to publish my results. I thought that it was bold of me, as a 'diabetes resolved' person, to take a degree of risk in the hope that other T2 people may be interested in the results since we are all reliant on 'dubious' facts and figures from the internet and other media etc.

It has become clear to me that there is strong disagreement between people within the T2 'low-carb fraternity' and some people on this site have told me one thing publicy whilst saying another in private. They have even tried to ridicule me because I have achieved what they are unable to. What is their motivation to do this? I have no idea. I'm afraid I cannot afford to continue this experiment in these circumstances. So I am reverting to the diet and lifestyle which has stood me in good stead.

I wish all T2 'low-carbers' well in their quest to improve their well-being, free of bG testing and meds etc. if that is their aim.

I am happy to continue chatting with anyone privately if they wish provided that anything that is said in private remains private.