They are moving with the times. If you watched the Panorama program on Diabetes, which they were heavily involved in then you will know that the only cure for T2 diabetes they recognise is bariatric surgery or amputation, It is where they see the future for us T2D, and they are like the 3 monkeys when it comes to possible alternatives.Behind the times, i feel. It is good to question their future intentions for diabetics. All diabetics!
I agree that diabetes now affects so many people and more are being diagnosed. They have to move with the times. For sure.
"Most diabetics would find very low carb dieting very difficult, for some it may not work, for others it may not be recommended for medical reasons. Others may choose a more "normal" diet plus medication to keep glucose levels stable."I agree with you. I think it would be very difficult for them to put their weight behind very low carb diets as a recommendation simply because there is NO long term evidence that a low carb diet is any more beneficial than any other. If that data becomes available at some point in the future then I'm sure their advice will change accordingly. It may turn out that depriving the body has significant negative long term effects who knows? And the other point, as you said, is that they offer general advice. Most diabetics would find very low carb dieting very difficult, for some it may not work, for others it may not be recommended for medical reasons. Others may choose a more "normal" diet plus medication to keep glucose levels stable. We are all different and DUK sticks with recommended dietary advice which would suit the majority of people which will be updated in line with updated evidence. I think it's unfair to criticise they are a charity and they provide huge benefits advice and support to an ever increasing number of diabetics.
Do they want us all dead? That would be killing off the goose that lays the golden eggs. No. T2D's tend to take a while to succumb, and we tend to do it a bit at a time (or limb at a time) Thus prolonging the gravy train. My experience of DUK is that they hounded me consistently for a donation after I had registered with them as needing advice and assistance, I have never in my 12 years as T2 had a positive communication from them. I have not seen a spokesperson of theirs that talked to me sensibly.But should that allow their for the most part appalling dietary advice for the majority of the people they are there to help?
if 90% of diabetics are Type 2 then maybe 60-70% of them could be helped with a low carb diet. So why will they only admit through gritted teeth that they aren't totally opposed to it. Could it maybe have something to do with the major contributors or do they just want us all dead?
All the more reason why we need independant studies such as ND and the work done by Dr Unwin in Southport to demonstrate that some diabetes can be revesed by diet alone. Once there is proper scientific evidence supporting the anecdotal evidence, then those pulling the purse strings will have to take notice. At the moment the common mantra is Its Progressive and irreversible, and those in power hide behind that because it works for them and protects them. But does not work for me!"Most diabetics would find very low carb dieting very difficult, for some it may not work, for others it may not be recommended for medical reasons. Others may choose a more "normal" diet plus medication to keep glucose levels stable."
I read recently that 37% T2 diabetics don't take their medication. General advice to follow a low carb diet might be taken up by even fewer as it takes a lot more effort than to swallow a pill. Perhaps the NHS advice to treat T2 with drugs is the best for the general population , many of whom would not be capable of counting carbs effectively. We have to remember that the people on here are computer literate and generally appear to have a high level of literacy , numeracy and education. Not everyone has.
I think it would be very difficult for them to put their weight behind very low carb diets as a recommendation simply because there is NO long term evidence that a low carb diet is any more beneficial than any other.
Over 7 years, 1.47 percent of the entire group had a partial remission, 0.14 percent had a complete remission, and 0.007 percent had a prolonged remission. Overall, 1.60 percent of the entire group (4.6 percent of those who had been diagnosed for less than 2 years) had some sort of remission. People who were older than 65 years of age, were African American, had been diagnosed for less than 2 years, had an A1C of less than 5.7 percent at the start of the study period, or were taking no diabetes medicines at the start of the study period were more likely to have a remission.
Im not saying that a low carb diet is wrong, on the limited short term evidence available it clearly works. I was merely pointing out that DUK do an awful lot of good work within the diabetic community and do not deserve the 'hate' they are getting from some on this site. As a national.charity they would simply be unable to offer recommendations on a diet that has no long term research done. When that changes I have no doubt their advice will change. As for the conspiracy theories about DUK being in the pockets of supermarkets and food producers that is absolute rubbish, pure speculation and unfair. Think of all the good work they do, the summer camp's for young type 1s, the clinical champions improving health care all over the country, the support and education they give. Where else would they get their money to pay for it all?After 40yrs, the clear long term evidence is that the current Low Fat Low Calorie, eat less move more dietary advise and "a more "normal" diet plus medication to keep glucose levels stable approach has proven to be rather dismal, especially when many here have been able to achieved remission levels within 3-6 months of diagnosis.
http://www.diabetes.org/research-an...ss-to-research/type-2-diabetes-remission.html
Oh my goodness!In a recent post on that site a well known and frequent poster said that it was not healthy for a t2 to fast. And that we should eat 3 meals a day plus snacks.
Gez. That is very heavy political corruption. Or course money will be the real issue. Always is!They are moving with the times. If you watched the Panorama program on Diabetes, which they were heavily involved in then you will know that the only cure for T2 diabetes they recognise is bariatric surgery or amputation, It is where they see the future for us T2D, and they are like the 3 monkeys when it comes to possible alternatives.
That said, they are sponsoring the Newcastle diet, but originally it was intended to provide a simple pre-op diet as preparation for bariatric surgery, and not intended to find a cure for T2D at all. This surprised them, which is why they are unable to provide correct press releases for the ND diet,
They cannot read the report from Newcastle ac and deliver a simple, correct, interpretation, No, they have to corrupt the message Why? So that they can later turn round and show that the study results were flawed and unreliable.
Can you then please lead me to the studies that are supportive of the "Eatwell Plate"? They have no trouble in advocating that way of eating with little supporting evidence apart from the flawed seven countries study (where the ones that didn't fit the conclusion were ignored).As a national.charity they would simply be unable to offer recommendations on a diet that has no long term research done.
Seems to me that this is not true, and a simple search could suffice to prove that there's no problem on talking about that.I'd never be able to post that on DUK. They wouldnt get it. The posters I mean. Or at least not respond as if they did due to pressure from its politics. (I feel)
Interesting to see however that quite a few of the people in the posts are also members here.. or have been in the past..Seems to me that this is not true, and a simple search could suffice to prove that there's no problem on talking about that.
https://forum.diabetes.org.uk/boards/search/9801849/?q=lchf&o=relevance
On the other hand I find that on this forum al lot of people is heavily biased about going low carb and don't consider other options, sometimes largely sounding like anti vaccines people with their distrust of medical science and plain advices to lie to their GPs.
Some peoples are on ketogenic or Atkins diet and is working. Good for them, other people are following a reduced carb diet, like me, and works for them.
So what? Everyone is different.
Sorry my last post meant to reply to this oneCan you then please lead me to the studies that are supportive of the "Eatwell Plate"? They have no trouble in advocating that way of eating with little supporting evidence apart from the flawed seven countries study (where the ones that didn't fit the conclusion were ignored).
Haven't looked tbh was just explaining to someone why DUK wouldn't be able to read something untested long term that deprived the body of a major macronutrient. Am sure you are a committed low carber and wish you well but for one low carbers there are hundreds more type 2s who cannot or wouldn't want to low carb. It's just not for everyone. You may think it's the only way forward. From my point of view I found it hard and repetitive and simply couldn't bear the high fat content to stop you feeling hungry. Plus it really wasn't working well enough. Now on low dose gliclazide plus moderately low carb around 150g a day. No lows or highs but stable glucose levels and no less.of weight either which is good for me as I am not overweight. Works for me and I feel so much better than I did when low carbing. Not looking for an argument here just wanted to stick up for DUK because they do some amazing work.
I see that the list of current sponsors funding DUK has already been posted in this thread. This is listed on their main site, so they are proud of their connections to the food and drug companies. They are funded by these interested parties, You seem to be living in La-La Land if you think that there really are no strings attached to that funding.Im not saying that a low carb diet is wrong, on the limited short term evidence available it clearly works. I was merely pointing out that DUK do an awful lot of good work within the diabetic community and do not deserve the 'hate' they are getting from some on this site. As a national.charity they would simply be unable to offer recommendations on a diet that has no long term research done. When that changes I have no doubt their advice will change. As for the conspiracy theories about DUK being in the pockets of supermarkets and food producers that is absolute rubbish, pure speculation and unfair. Think of all the good work they do, the summer camp's for young type 1s, the clinical champions improving health care all over the country, the support and education they give. Where else would they get their money to pay for it all?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?