Type 2- I not, never have been Obese!

We can' win can we Viv? If we are overweight its our own fault { how could it possibly be the disease :lol: ]and if we are not overweight hen we are just being difficult . Why can't we all admit to overeating, drinking and smoking too much?

These issues can be addressed and patients maybe moved o other categories and he figures would instantly improve!

As you have said before ,and i otally agree, i think the term T" 2 is currently used to cover all sors of meabolic conditions and his will. one day become clearer.

I think it is fairly obvious that obesity alone oes not cause T2. It is far more likely o be a symtom .

I am sure many of us slim T2s have suffered from he sereoype also. In my case the dr laughed at me for even thinking I might have diabetes en years before diagnosis . After diagnosis i was old i had probably had it for the previous 40 years.

But at least we can look forward o puting on weight because of the medicaion and hus fitting the stereoype , Phew!

I can't seee anyone in the NHS wanting even to address your query in the present climate.
I do expect to find that the definitions diabetic and the point at which treatment will chnge
Hopefully the link between obesity and diabetes will not be given undue credence which musbe
to the advantage of everyone and migh allow people to be rated more appropriately.


I

Viv,
I found this in a French investigation into diets. They looked at 13 diets commonly used in France. The figures they use are taken from the the 2001, 4 diet study by Freedman, so I assume these are 'averages' of what people actually ate. I don't know what edition of the book they used. I've cut and pasted it a bit to get it small enough to post.
You can find it, and lots of other charts plus very good discussion . (it is in French though!)http://www.anses.fr/Documents/NUT2009sa0099Ra.pdf
The 3 rows are for each of the 3 stages. So Atkins 1 has 1152 calories and 294mg/d of calcium, Atkins 2 has 1627 calories and 1701mg/d calcium Atkins 3 has 1990 calories, 2013 mg/d calcium etc
The red cells are where the amounts in the diet are less than French recommendations. The Yellow cells where they are above it. The red sodium level is because it is above the WHO recomended max level. Oh glucides is carbs, lipids fats. I think the rest is self explanatory.

viviennem said:

Ka-mon,

His death certificate floating on the internet contradicts what was officilaly said to be the cause of his death. If it's true and the reason why he fell and knocked his head was really a heart attack then in reality his own diet was the reason for his death. It's one of those debates that could go on forever without the people finding out the real truth.

Click to expand...

As far as I am aware (and as you say, the debate could go on forever - who knows the exact truth?) he lived for a number of days after the fall, but never recovered consciousness. Did a heart attack cause the fall, or was it the icy pavement? Or did the shock of the fall cause the heart attack? I wasn't there, I don't know. The problem around Atkins death is that all his supporters will try to put a good 'spin' on it, while all the antis and vested interests - and there are many - will try to blame it on the diet. It's not impossible to fake a death certificate, particularly digitally!

Click to expand...

A full Autopsy would have shed light to the sequence of events that lead to his death whether any pre-exsisting medical condition even those that hadn't been diagnoised before death might have been a contributating factor.. This wasn't done in Dr Atkins case but a basic external visual examination only.

As there was no suspicious circumstances concerning his fall and he was under medical care for injuries sustained etc this allowed Atkins Widow to legally refuse the request from the coroners office to perform one which she did!

The copies of the death certificate and post-mortem report interesting one, legal perceeding surrounding these haven't been based on authenticity of the documents, but who and who leaked the these documents for the coroners office! And an damage limitation exercise in trying to claim what's written on them means something else!

So it's no suprise that the debate continues..

But in 2010 the Atkins diet was revamped and after the induction phase the carbohydrate content was upped to 90g of carbs per day! Not sure about the fat content though

Thanks for the charts, Phoenix, they are very interesting. I don't think my French will be up to the originals!

The only query I would have with them, is that no two people eat the same things on Atkins. As I said somewhere else, I calorie-counted myself for the first 4 weeks I did Atkins, back in 2004. Following induction exactly, I was eating between 1400 and 2100 calories per day, depending what I had on my menu. Usually it was around the 1500 cals mark, which is what Weight Watchers etc would have restricted me to, at 20 stone, had I joined a club.

Ironically enough, it was Slimming Club which very nearly turned me into an alcoholic, many years ago. I was on 1500 calories a day - so I worked out that I could eat 1000 cals of diet, and 500 cals of treats. A 100ml glass of red wine (one treat) contains 100 cals (the sort I was drinking then), so I had 5 glasses of wine a day! :shock: . I lost weight by eating breakfast cereal, potatoes and pasta, as well as veg/salads, very little fat, and protein twice a day - all weighed out on my dinky little calorie counter scales! I lost about 2 stone before I couldn't maintain the restricted food intake any longer, but unfortunately I didn't give up the 'treats' ! I'm surprised I still have a liver, but I have, and it's still healthy. I now limit myself to a bottle of red at the weekend, except for special occasions.

What I would really like to see is an independent follow-up trial on people who have adopted the Atkins 'lifestyle' and stuck to it, which I'm sure many people have. That's the only way we'll ever evaluate the diet properly. Meanwhile - it suits me! I had a small portion of granola for breakfast (fibre!), asparagus with soft-scrambled eggs in butter for lunch - followed by a couple of apricots! It will be 6 carbs of sausage for tea, with broccoli and cauliflower, and maybe a bit of Brie for afters.

At this time of year I do eat fruit, and my carb consumption goes up to between 30g - 70g daily.

At the moment I'm not obsessing about my weight, rather about my bg levels, which are all very good at the moment. Even my morning fasting levels are rarely over 6. Next HbA1c is June 20th - we shall see!

I was going to the gym every day, but I seem to have sciatica . . . first time ever!

Viv 8)

viviennem said:

As far as I am aware (and as you say, the debate could go on forever - who knows the exact truth?) he lived for a number of days after the fall, but never recovered consciousness. Did a heart attack cause the fall, or was it the icy pavement? Or did the shock of the fall cause the heart attack? I wasn't there, I don't know. Anyone can die of a heart attack, even when on life support - myocardial infarction is a frequent 'cause of death' on a death certificate, even for people with no history of heart disease and excellent lipid levels. I had a vegetarian acquaintance who never ate saturated fat (as far as I know - certainly no animal products) who died of a heart attack at the age of 38. Female. Not all heart attacks are caused by dietary fat.

Click to expand...

Very true, I have a friend who was rushed to hospital with blue lights and sirens with suspected heart attack, at the hospital the Doc told him he was having a heart attack but later if was found out that his hemoglobin was down to 6.5 and he was very close to massive heart attack due to his heart being deprived of oxygen.

The problem around Atkins death is that all his supporters will try to put a good 'spin' on it, while all the antis and vested interests - and there are many - will try to blame it on the diet. It's not impossible to fake a death certificate, particularly digitally!

Click to expand...

Yep, if it really was a heart attack his family would have a lot of explaining to do and if they weren't convincing enough the Atkins diet would have been buried with him and law suits would have bankrupted his business and his family.

I may very well die of a heart attack. Many people with 'good' levels of cholesterol die of heart attacks. But I shan't blame it on my diet. And I give everyone full permission to write "I told you so" on my tombstone - but you'll have to pay for the stone! :lol:

Click to expand...

If you do die of an heart attack you won't have time to complain about it. :lol:

PS did you know that lard (good old pig fat!) contains 45% monounsaturated fat; 39% saturated; and 16% polyunsaturated fat. 35% of the saturated fat is stearic acid, which metabolises to oleic acid, which increase HDL without affecting LDL levels. Source: USA National Nutritional Database. Sorry I can't give you the exact link.

Click to expand...

Still fat though and I couldn't eat it without gagging and throwing up. I don't mind a little bit of fat but I've never been able to eat the amount I've seen people eat, just not for me.

I'm in sympathy there, Ka-mon, even I couldn't slice off a chunk of lard and eat it! but it's my favourite illustration of why it's worth reading round the subject a bit instead of taking the media re-vamps of scientific press-releases as gospel. Lard = saturated fat, by popular definition. Well - no, actually, not strictly true, though it does contain some.

The great egg scare is the prime example. We were all told - don't eat eggs, full of cholesterol, they will kill you! Then, a few years down the line - oh, sorry, it's good cholesterol, you can eat them freely now. It hardly gives me confidence.

What really does scare me is when advice is dished out by professionals who obviously have not read round the subject. Okay, my doctor is probably too busy to have time to keep up with the journals (I don't keep up with archaeological ones, so I can't complain :lol: ). But someone, somewhere, should try to keep our HCPs up to date on all this. How - I don't know.

Anyone who gives an intelligent, educated woman internet access and plenty of time, deserves all they get :twisted: . Rant over!

Viv 8)

Hi VIV

tbh there is no reason really why they should not keep up to date - I get a couple of emails every day via various sources that give me details of new studies etc. No one would be able to read it all but at least you can get an overview. All HCP have a duty to attend study days etc so in theory it should not happen - I guess some are more interested than others

Ally