• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

What happens when our personal experiences disagree with research.

I think we all have to remember there are more solutions to the one label. Diabetes is a disease cause by too enriched blood sugars. We are still all trying to understand what causes Diabetes. Just like the general public thinks its sugar because Diabetes is labelled as too much sugar in our blood, I am starting to think there is another category of people that do not process fats too well either. There are many many reasons why people are diabetics. Some it is because their diet has too much sugar, others are finding its because there are too many carbohydrates. Personally I am starting to think I do not process fats well based on me cutting out sugar and cutting out carbohydrates but getting high BG readings. We are all different. The key is to keep trying and eventually we will find a solution that fits us. I do not believe there is a 1 solution that fits all people.
 
Oldvatr said:
Yor stated that we should not be discussing fat in that forum
Click to expand...

No I did not, can you not read ?.

I said that there is too much EMPHASIS ON FAT

I know you like to go around the forum disagreeing with people, but please choose somebody else.

It is tiresome and pathetic.

Low Carb Full Fat is exactly how I consider my diet, and in this you are agreeing with me. I know you don't want to, but unfortunately you are.
 
Maybe we need another acronym the VLC diet. Dropping the HF content altogether. People would be able to see the difference when discussing diets. Personally Ive never liked the HF standing for High fats. I dont go over board with the Fats as I watch my Low Carb diet with calorie control. I appreciate there are people controlling blood sugars via Low carb diet but do not wish to lose weight. I am trying to lose weight therefore watching the fats too.
 
britishpub said:
I've found that the less I think about Fat, and just concentrate on LC the more weight I lost and the better my BG control became.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I was eating too much fat and started gaining. I cut back on fat and started losing again. I have always been VLC and moderate protein. BS is even better (and it was already great) with less fat as it can make us IR.
 
I stand corrected. But you also wrote, as your last line <<We have a Low Carb Diet forum, but all too often the main topic of conversation is Fat, which shouldn't happen.>> and this gave me the impression you were LC only. You have now clarified, and so you actually agree with me (LCFF)~whether you like to or not,
 
The original academic paper does not include the word 'paleo' a single time, yet the newspaper articles state the study was about a paleo diet. Where did they get the idea it was a paleo diet study?
 
Oldvatr said:
but what i was discussing was there are those of us who do not need or want to lose weight, but want to use an LC based diet for bgl control. A pure LC diet does not do that for us.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that it is not LC that controls blood glucose? In my experience it is the LC, and only the LC, that is the essential part of the diet for control of blood glucose.

The fat content in my diet is high, and I am losing weight, but as someone with diabetes whose primary goal is to control my blood glucose levels by diet - the elevated fat content is a consequence of the two realities that (1) I have to limit my carbohydrate intake, and (2) there are only two calorie sources other than carbohydrates. It is not kidney-friendly to eat a high protein diet (the other alternative to replace the calories that would otherwise come from carbohydrates). But high fat isn't (and won't be once I reach my maintenance weight) a dietary goal. My goals are low carb, and a protein target. Anything else I eat is just filling the calorie gap.

As to what you, or anyone else, want to call the way you eat (or whether you talk about it in the low carb forum) - I don't care. But you appear to be speaking for me when you assert that "for us" a pure LC diet not control blood glucose levels. Posting just to clarify that "us" does not include all people with diabetes who are using low carb diets (of whatever flavor) for control of blood glucose levels.
 
The US I used was referring to a subset of diabetics who do not want to or need to lose weight. Simply that. That is why this subset needs to use their fat intake to keep their BMI at optimum for them. This is what the HF component of LCHF is about. That and being the main source of energy for the ketogenic portion of LC. The two have to go together and have to be discussed. This is what LCHF stands for.

there are many other low carb, low fat diets to use for controlling bgl. For me I need LCHF since losing weight is not where I want to go. HF is an essential part of the diet, and is not there by accident.
 
NoCrbs4Me said:
The original academic paper does not include the word 'paleo' a single time, yet the newspaper articles state the study was about a paleo diet. Where did they get the idea it was a paleo diet study?
Click to expand...
Its the same reporters that think Sugar when they see blood sugar in diabetics. Simply people dont understand where Blood sugars come from.
 

As long as you are speaking personally (I, rather than we/the subset of diabetics who do not want to or need to lose weight)) - I have no problems with what you said. I reacted because you generalized it to a category of people I will be in soon - and the limitation to "neither want to or need to lose weight" has no relation to whether high consumption of fat is a personal goal.

When I lower my carbs, I have to replace them by something else in order to have sufficient calories (whether that is to eat at a deficit or not). There are two options to replace the calories that come from carbs: protein and fat. Because people with diabetes are already at risk for kidney disease, I chose not to replace the carbs with excess protein - so I have a protein target - the level of protein consumption I need to support my lean body mass, but not more. The only things that are goals for me are (1) a carb cap, (2) a protein target, and (3) a calorie cap. For me, the fat level in my diet is solely a side effect of the goals I do have- and it will stay that way even once I reach my maintenance weight. My fat consumption will increase at that time - since the increase in calories only has one source that is consistent with the things I do care about. So my description of what I eat is LCMP (low carb, moderate protein), because, aside from targeting calories to either loss or maintenance, those are the two macros I focus on.
 
This seems to have got a bit personal .
Well personally I try most of the time to watch my carb intake and be active . I personally don't think about the fat or the protein levels , although I don't eat to much get because it makes me feel sick if I do.
I'm 5"7' 155lb and BM of 24.3.
(I lost 2st low carbing .) my diabetes is genetical.
One size doesn't fit all.
 
For me fat is a vital part of my very low carb diet as it replaces energy I require but am no longer getting from carbs. It doesn't have to be excessive or extreme but it IS important that enough is available either from dietary or bodily fat for me to continue functioning. Certainly if you need to lose weight you have an existing bodily fat source to use, but if you don't, you either have to eat adequate fat or carbs or may end up cannibalizing your body for fuel. Maybe this is why the fat part of LCHF tends to be emphasised.

Robbity
 
My usual diet when I'm not doing the 800 calories 8 week think is a bit like this
Greek yogurt , berries and either a sprinkling of cereal or walnuts

Lunch is a salad and either cold meat or coronation chicken

Dinner is whatever I want but the pasta , rice , etc is only a very small portion and more of whatever the meat , sauce etc is .

About 8pm I have some dark chocolate and a cuppa.

I'm not a saint and go off the rails sometimes but it works for me .
 

Crikey... I'm totally in between lower carb, some fat and full fat! But being lactose and gluten free and low FODMAP too I still find it relatively easy to keep at a size 8. I think this is due to a lean and skinny gene though more than anything else. Although saying that I did go up to size 12/14 when advised to have breakfast, bread, cereal etc..ditched that after 6 months...not long after I got slow colonic transit which I have discovered is helped enormously by changing foods (again!)

I have previously been very active as a gardener...doing this at least 6 hours per day and then doing my own!

Exercise was always balanced with background insulin... Not food...

Probably different for me as a T1.

Being far less active now but I am eating more. I was definitely low carb for 25 years at least...lower carb for at least 5 years off and on. Only in past two years thanks to advice from here that I added healthy fats in to my diet-avocado, olives and lashings (drowning) of olive oil....

I personally think low/lower carb definitely helped my diabetes bg levels..
 
The OP was to a discussion in Diabetes Discussion thread, and concerned an article on research of the LCHF diet, and its effect on mice in New Zealand. Here is the link (my attempt to bring things back on topic):
- https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/paleo-diets-weight-gain
This is not the Low Carb Forum and i apologise for falling into the Pooh trap for Heffalumps.
 
Haha@donnellysdogs I love the phrase slow colonic transit !!!
 

Sorry.. I am a big mouse being running away for fear of being stomped on... Squealing.....
 
donnellysdogs said:
Sorry.. I am a big mouse being running away for fear of being stomped on... Squealing.....
Click to expand...
Far from it. I can give as good as i get, but it would be a waste of time and energy and achieve nowt. And its in the wrong place. i understand how LCHF works, so i am not afraid to discuss it sensibly. it is the sensibly bit that will fall off the rails first if we continue.
 
I am new to this forum and have read through this thread and find of full of personal attacks most which don't make any sense.

If this is a thread for outliers they do not seem to be represented
Marley
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…