Sugars
Replies
-
Okay. So if someone has a malfunctioning pancreas and isn't releasing enough insulin and that person eats the cake, it's a problem, isn't it?
It is a problem only in the context of the overall diet (for T2D). A piece of cake will spike the glucose, but it will fall rapidly too. It is when there is constantly heightened glucose in the bloodstream that damage occurs. This is why diabetics live and breathe by their A1C numbers. Taken every 3 months, this lab blood test shows the average glucose in the bloodstream.
Blood glucose tests, taken with a meter, will tell you what is happening at a specific point in time and are helpful to see how certain foods affect the glucose. Many who are on medications or controlled with diet and exercise will test once in the morning, known as a fasting glucose, to see if the glucose is lowering when not eating. Others will test after a meal to see how high that particular food will make the glucose rise, then test again about 2 hours later to see how much it fell. This is all helpful information, but the A1C is the most informative.
A piece of cake isn't a problem for T2D if it is balanced out by lower carb foods the rest of the day.
Thanks!
Can a person wear out her pancreas faster by constantly consuming really unhealthy amounts of sugar and carbs? The risk factors posted don't say that can happen, but if not, that person will still end up obese most likely, but how does obesity cause diabetes if it has nothing to do with the quality of the foods eaten?
Edit: Does the actual stored fat mess up the pancreas somehow?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
No. The burden of proof is on you actually. Nowhere does it day sugar causes diabetes. There you go again with the donut stuff. It's getting old. It's a lame debate by you.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
Please please please show us actual evidence, science, not some blog that says sugar specifically causes diabetes.prettykitty1515 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
So no fruits, vegetables, brown rice, oatmeal or whole grain bread?prettykitty1515 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Does anyone still think PrettyKitty is a genuine account?
Seriously?
I actually do. I really think she actually believes the things she writes. It goes with the first thread she made when she came here and it was a disaster.
Yes, I do believe what I write. Pre-diabetic? ZERO SUGAR!
Vegetables are fine. And this is not a change for the rest of your life, it's a change to hopefully have your doctor tell you that you are no longer pre-diabetic. Once your OK, eat fruit, brown rice, oatmeal and whole grain bread. And yes, I am basing this on anecdotal evidence.
From this article: http://ask.metafilter.com/237108/How-to-Get-Rid-of-Prediabetes
"Today, you begin a life with very very little bread. And very little pasta, rice, and crackers. Today you stop eating cookies, and for God's sakes please put down the donut and the cake and basically anything that comes in a shiny brightly colored bag that you can buy at the pharmacy or gas station."
"Eat nuts, eat lean meats, eat all the vegetables (besides potatoes) that you want. Eat plain yogurt with berries. Eggs are good for you. Get used to Truvia, Splenda, erithryitol if you simply must have something sweet. AVOID all the crappy "sugar-free" candies that use sugar alcohols, as stuff like Maltitol has about the same glycemic impact as table sugar."
Now let the attacks from the usual suspects begin.
PK,
Come on, any "attacks" are in your perception only, just as the "usual suspects" are. Nobody here is out to get you.
That said, what you've posted is a link to someone's blog entry. There are no links to peer reviewed studies.
If you are diagnosed as pre-diabetic, which I'm not even sure I believe in because sugar does not cause diabetes, why would you not make carb/sugar moderation a lifetime goal? Why just do it for awhile? It seems to me that if you are indeed pre-diabetic and you control your glucose levels through diet but then go back to eating in a way you did before, wouldn't you end up having high glucose levels?
Saying you can be cured of pre-diabetes is like saying you can be cured of diabetes. There is no cure for diabetes, though it can be controlled through sugar/carb moderation, exercise, and insulin pills or injections if needed.
By the way, this is not an attack, it is engaging in conversation based on something you wrote.
Sugar doesn't cause diabetes? Then what does, sautéed chicken breasts? Broccoli?
If I'm ever diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my sugar and grain consumption will immediately get down to as close to zero as possible, and my consumption of sautéed chicken breasts and broccoli will double.
Just do a little on-line search and you will find so many pre-diabetics who ended the problem with a change in diet. I am not making this up, and have no reason to make this up.
Show me some science where it says it doesn't. Burden on proof is on you, not me. Diabetes = too much blood sugar. What has sugar, a donut or broccoli?
With your logic I can aliens exist and you have to prove to me they don't
For the other user:
http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/causes/
An imbalance between caloric intake and physical activity can lead to obesity, which causes insulin resistance and is common in people with type 2 diabetes. Central obesity, in which a person has excess abdominal fat, is a major risk factor not only for insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes but also for heart and blood vessel disease, also called cardiovascular disease (CVD). This excess “belly fat” produces hormones and other substances that can cause harmful, chronic effects in the body such as damage to blood vessels.
The DPP and other studies show that millions of people can lower their risk for type 2 diabetes by making lifestyle changes and losing weight. The DPP proved that people with prediabetes—at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes—could sharply lower their risk by losing weight through regular physical activity and a diet low in fat and calories. In 2009, a follow-up study of DPP participants—the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS)—showed that the benefits of weight loss lasted for at least 10 years after the original study began.0 -
From Lehninger's Principles of Biochemistry pg 939prettykitty1515 wrote: »I think I understand. Doesn't matter what you eat, as long as you have a calorie deficit. You will lose weight and your pre-diabetes may or will disappear. Is that what I'm hearing?
"Studies show that three factors improve the health of individuals with type 2 diabetes: dietary restriction, regular exercise, and drugs that increase insulin
sensitivity or insulin production. Dietary restriction (and accompanying weight loss) reduces the overall burden of handling fatty acids.0 -
Thought this was interesting, throwing it in there. Because I'm learning a lot from this thread and would like to give some information back!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23984417
Vitamin C intake reduces the cytotoxicity associated with hyperglycemia in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.
Abstract
Hyperglycemia leads to the formation of free radicals and advanced glycation end-products (AGEs). Antioxidants can reduce the level of protein glycation and DNA damage. In this study, we compared the levels of vitamin C intake, which is among the most abundant antioxidants obtained from diet, with the levels of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycated hemoglobin (A1C), DNA damage, and cytotoxicity in prediabetic subjects and type 2 diabetic subjects. Our results indicated that there was no significant correlation between FPG or A1C and DNA damage parameters (micronuclei, nucleoplasmic bridges, and nuclear buds). FPG and A1C correlated with necrosis (r = 0.294; P = 0.013 and r = 0.401; P = 0.001, resp.). Vitamin C intake correlated negatively with necrosis and apoptosis (r = -0.246; P = 0.040, and r = -0.276; P = 0.021, resp.). The lack of a correlation between the FPG and A1C and DNA damage could be explained, at least in part, by the elimination of cells with DNA damage by either necrosis or apoptosis (cytotoxicity). Vitamin C appeared to improve cell survival by reducing cytotoxicity. Therefore, the present results indicate the need for clinical studies to evaluate the effect of low-dose vitamin C supplementation in type 2 diabetes.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
prettykitty1515 wrote: »
No. The burden of proof is on you actually. Nowhere does it day sugar causes diabetes. There you go again with the donut stuff. It's getting old. It's a lame debate by you.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
Please please please show us actual evidence, science, not some blog that says sugar specifically causes diabetes.prettykitty1515 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
So no fruits, vegetables, brown rice, oatmeal or whole grain bread?prettykitty1515 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Does anyone still think PrettyKitty is a genuine account?
Seriously?
I actually do. I really think she actually believes the things she writes. It goes with the first thread she made when she came here and it was a disaster.
Yes, I do believe what I write. Pre-diabetic? ZERO SUGAR!
Vegetables are fine. And this is not a change for the rest of your life, it's a change to hopefully have your doctor tell you that you are no longer pre-diabetic. Once your OK, eat fruit, brown rice, oatmeal and whole grain bread. And yes, I am basing this on anecdotal evidence.
From this article: http://ask.metafilter.com/237108/How-to-Get-Rid-of-Prediabetes
"Today, you begin a life with very very little bread. And very little pasta, rice, and crackers. Today you stop eating cookies, and for God's sakes please put down the donut and the cake and basically anything that comes in a shiny brightly colored bag that you can buy at the pharmacy or gas station."
"Eat nuts, eat lean meats, eat all the vegetables (besides potatoes) that you want. Eat plain yogurt with berries. Eggs are good for you. Get used to Truvia, Splenda, erithryitol if you simply must have something sweet. AVOID all the crappy "sugar-free" candies that use sugar alcohols, as stuff like Maltitol has about the same glycemic impact as table sugar."
Now let the attacks from the usual suspects begin.
PK,
Come on, any "attacks" are in your perception only, just as the "usual suspects" are. Nobody here is out to get you.
That said, what you've posted is a link to someone's blog entry. There are no links to peer reviewed studies.
If you are diagnosed as pre-diabetic, which I'm not even sure I believe in because sugar does not cause diabetes, why would you not make carb/sugar moderation a lifetime goal? Why just do it for awhile? It seems to me that if you are indeed pre-diabetic and you control your glucose levels through diet but then go back to eating in a way you did before, wouldn't you end up having high glucose levels?
Saying you can be cured of pre-diabetes is like saying you can be cured of diabetes. There is no cure for diabetes, though it can be controlled through sugar/carb moderation, exercise, and insulin pills or injections if needed.
By the way, this is not an attack, it is engaging in conversation based on something you wrote.
Sugar doesn't cause diabetes? Then what does, sautéed chicken breasts? Broccoli?
If I'm ever diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my sugar and grain consumption will immediately get down to as close to zero as possible, and my consumption of sautéed chicken breasts and broccoli will double.
Just do a little on-line search and you will find so many pre-diabetics who ended the problem with a change in diet. I am not making this up, and have no reason to make this up.
Show me some science where it says it doesn't. Burden on proof is on you, not me. Diabetes = too much blood sugar. What has sugar, a donut or broccoli?
With your logic I can aliens exist and you have to prove to me they don't
From the ADA - "Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes, a condition characterized by high blood glucose levels caused by either a lack of insulin or the body's inability to use insulin efficiently. Type 2 diabetes develops most often in middle-aged and older adults but can appear in young people, and the American Diabetes Association recommends that people limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes."
Hey, it's the ADA. What the heck do they know?
I wonder if this is based on the Lustig research. I found it fascinating that Frank Hu, who argues this research isn't a smoking gun says:
"I don't know why this happened, because we know other foods are associated with diabetes risk – like highly refined grain products, white rice, bread, and other starchy foods. Those foods are not very different from sugar. But maybe sugar is a better indicator of certain dietary habits of a population."
Source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/02/28/173170149/sugars-role-in-rise-of-diabetes-gets-clearer0 -
OP I will tell you this. When I weighed 173 pounds I was diagnosed diabetic. For years I tried low fat, low carb, low sugar, and my numbers were still terrible.(and I did not lose weight)
When I began eating everything in MODERATION, I began to lose weight. After losing 45 pounds my A1c is normal and my cholesterol is better than it has been for years. I eat whatever I want, I just track my calories and make sure I do not gain weight. Good luck!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
prettykitty1515 wrote: »
No. The burden of proof is on you actually. Nowhere does it day sugar causes diabetes. There you go again with the donut stuff. It's getting old. It's a lame debate by you.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
Please please please show us actual evidence, science, not some blog that says sugar specifically causes diabetes.prettykitty1515 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
So no fruits, vegetables, brown rice, oatmeal or whole grain bread?prettykitty1515 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Does anyone still think PrettyKitty is a genuine account?
Seriously?
I actually do. I really think she actually believes the things she writes. It goes with the first thread she made when she came here and it was a disaster.
Yes, I do believe what I write. Pre-diabetic? ZERO SUGAR!
Vegetables are fine. And this is not a change for the rest of your life, it's a change to hopefully have your doctor tell you that you are no longer pre-diabetic. Once your OK, eat fruit, brown rice, oatmeal and whole grain bread. And yes, I am basing this on anecdotal evidence.
From this article: http://ask.metafilter.com/237108/How-to-Get-Rid-of-Prediabetes
"Today, you begin a life with very very little bread. And very little pasta, rice, and crackers. Today you stop eating cookies, and for God's sakes please put down the donut and the cake and basically anything that comes in a shiny brightly colored bag that you can buy at the pharmacy or gas station."
"Eat nuts, eat lean meats, eat all the vegetables (besides potatoes) that you want. Eat plain yogurt with berries. Eggs are good for you. Get used to Truvia, Splenda, erithryitol if you simply must have something sweet. AVOID all the crappy "sugar-free" candies that use sugar alcohols, as stuff like Maltitol has about the same glycemic impact as table sugar."
Now let the attacks from the usual suspects begin.
PK,
Come on, any "attacks" are in your perception only, just as the "usual suspects" are. Nobody here is out to get you.
That said, what you've posted is a link to someone's blog entry. There are no links to peer reviewed studies.
If you are diagnosed as pre-diabetic, which I'm not even sure I believe in because sugar does not cause diabetes, why would you not make carb/sugar moderation a lifetime goal? Why just do it for awhile? It seems to me that if you are indeed pre-diabetic and you control your glucose levels through diet but then go back to eating in a way you did before, wouldn't you end up having high glucose levels?
Saying you can be cured of pre-diabetes is like saying you can be cured of diabetes. There is no cure for diabetes, though it can be controlled through sugar/carb moderation, exercise, and insulin pills or injections if needed.
By the way, this is not an attack, it is engaging in conversation based on something you wrote.
Sugar doesn't cause diabetes? Then what does, sautéed chicken breasts? Broccoli?
If I'm ever diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my sugar and grain consumption will immediately get down to as close to zero as possible, and my consumption of sautéed chicken breasts and broccoli will double.
Just do a little on-line search and you will find so many pre-diabetics who ended the problem with a change in diet. I am not making this up, and have no reason to make this up.
Show me some science where it says it doesn't. Burden on proof is on you, not me. Diabetes = too much blood sugar. What has sugar, a donut or broccoli?
With your logic I can aliens exist and you have to prove to me they don't
From the ADA - "Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes, a condition characterized by high blood glucose levels caused by either a lack of insulin or the body's inability to use insulin efficiently. Type 2 diabetes develops most often in middle-aged and older adults but can appear in young people, and the American Diabetes Association recommends that people limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes."
Hey, it's the ADA. What the heck do they know?
Let me see where you did a cut and paste for that quote. I'd also like to see the research that led to that.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
No. The burden of proof is on you actually. Nowhere does it day sugar causes diabetes. There you go again with the donut stuff. It's getting old. It's a lame debate by you.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
Please please please show us actual evidence, science, not some blog that says sugar specifically causes diabetes.prettykitty1515 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
So no fruits, vegetables, brown rice, oatmeal or whole grain bread?prettykitty1515 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Does anyone still think PrettyKitty is a genuine account?
Seriously?
I actually do. I really think she actually believes the things she writes. It goes with the first thread she made when she came here and it was a disaster.
Yes, I do believe what I write. Pre-diabetic? ZERO SUGAR!
Vegetables are fine. And this is not a change for the rest of your life, it's a change to hopefully have your doctor tell you that you are no longer pre-diabetic. Once your OK, eat fruit, brown rice, oatmeal and whole grain bread. And yes, I am basing this on anecdotal evidence.
From this article: http://ask.metafilter.com/237108/How-to-Get-Rid-of-Prediabetes
"Today, you begin a life with very very little bread. And very little pasta, rice, and crackers. Today you stop eating cookies, and for God's sakes please put down the donut and the cake and basically anything that comes in a shiny brightly colored bag that you can buy at the pharmacy or gas station."
"Eat nuts, eat lean meats, eat all the vegetables (besides potatoes) that you want. Eat plain yogurt with berries. Eggs are good for you. Get used to Truvia, Splenda, erithryitol if you simply must have something sweet. AVOID all the crappy "sugar-free" candies that use sugar alcohols, as stuff like Maltitol has about the same glycemic impact as table sugar."
Now let the attacks from the usual suspects begin.
PK,
Come on, any "attacks" are in your perception only, just as the "usual suspects" are. Nobody here is out to get you.
That said, what you've posted is a link to someone's blog entry. There are no links to peer reviewed studies.
If you are diagnosed as pre-diabetic, which I'm not even sure I believe in because sugar does not cause diabetes, why would you not make carb/sugar moderation a lifetime goal? Why just do it for awhile? It seems to me that if you are indeed pre-diabetic and you control your glucose levels through diet but then go back to eating in a way you did before, wouldn't you end up having high glucose levels?
Saying you can be cured of pre-diabetes is like saying you can be cured of diabetes. There is no cure for diabetes, though it can be controlled through sugar/carb moderation, exercise, and insulin pills or injections if needed.
By the way, this is not an attack, it is engaging in conversation based on something you wrote.
Sugar doesn't cause diabetes? Then what does, sautéed chicken breasts? Broccoli?
If I'm ever diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my sugar and grain consumption will immediately get down to as close to zero as possible, and my consumption of sautéed chicken breasts and broccoli will double.
Just do a little on-line search and you will find so many pre-diabetics who ended the problem with a change in diet. I am not making this up, and have no reason to make this up.
Show me some science where it says it doesn't. Burden on proof is on you, not me. Diabetes = too much blood sugar. What has sugar, a donut or broccoli?
With your logic I can aliens exist and you have to prove to me they don't
From the ADA - "Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes, a condition characterized by high blood glucose levels caused by either a lack of insulin or the body's inability to use insulin efficiently. Type 2 diabetes develops most often in middle-aged and older adults but can appear in young people, and the American Diabetes Association recommends that people limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes."
Hey, it's the ADA. What the heck do they know?
I wonder if this is based on the Lustig research. I found it fascinating that Frank Hu, who argues this research isn't a smoking gun says:
"I don't know why this happened, because we know other foods are associated with diabetes risk – like highly refined grain products, white rice, bread, and other starchy foods. Those foods are not very different from sugar. But maybe sugar is a better indicator of certain dietary habits of a population."
Source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/02/28/173170149/sugars-role-in-rise-of-diabetes-gets-clearer
Lustig is a fear mongering king...
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
I'm actually more interested in Hu's assertion regarding highly refined grains, white rice, bread, and other starchy foods.
More on Professor Hu:
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/frank-hu/0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Type 1 diabetes occurs when the immune system mistakenly attacks and kills the beta cells of the pancreas. No, or very little, insulin is released into the body
Type 2 diabetes occurs when the body can’t properly use the insulin that is released, or releases too little insulin.
About 90% of diabetics are type II. It is possible to have both types.
In both types of diabetes, prolonged high circulating blood sugars can cause damage to various body systems - kidneys, vascular/cardiac, vision.
For some diabetics, taking insulin allows normal metabolism of sugars.
Others can control their diabetes through diet, exercise, or other medications.
Many things cause insulin spikes (including protein and exercise), and naturally-produced insulin spikes do not appear to cause harm to the body in healthy individuals (although diabetics taking insulin must calculate their dosage carefully). Hypoglycemia is a topic for another thread.
Other things can be converted to sugar in the blood, like high intakes of protein. Getting a handle on insulin resistance, through managing weight, exercise, diet, tracking/limiting carbs (for some), and sometimes medications, is key to managing type II diabetes, not the complete elimination of carbs, which can have problematic side effects.
Low-carb diets work for some, but not all.
Source for some info used: http://www.diabetes.ca/about-diabetes/what-is-diabetes
Thanks! So low carb could work for some, others might do better controlling their blood sugar other ways and can do so. Regardless, avoiding insulin spikes is good, right?
Exercise, though? Seriously? I didn't want to learn that one! (Diabetes runs heavily in my family, I'm doing my best to stay off that road, so this subject is important to me.)
I'm not sure why you think insulin spikes are dangerous, when naturally produced by the body. Some people find it easier to manage cravings when they avoid glucose spikes (eat fiber, pair carbs with protein, switch in lower GI foods for higher GI foods), but that is a separate issue. Insulin helps regulate blood sugar levels in healthy people, and controls amino acid uptake by cells (can increase protein synthesis). If you have research supporting that insulin spikes produced by the body are dangerous, I would be interested in seeing it. All evidence points to exercise being beneficial for insulin sensitivity.
Because of abstracts like this:
"Increasing evidence suggests that the postprandial state is a contributing factor to the development of atherosclerosis. In diabetes, the postprandial phase is characterized by a rapid and large increase in blood glucose levels, and the possibility that the postprandial “hyperglycemic spikes” may be relevant to the onset of cardiovascular complications has recently received much attention. Epidemiological studies and preliminary intervention studies have shown that postprandial hyperglycemia is a direct and independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Most of the cardiovascular risk factors are modified in the postprandial phase in diabetic subjects and directly affected by an acute increase of glycemia. The mechanisms through which acute hyperglycemia exerts its effects may be identified in the production of free radicals. This alarmingly suggestive body of evidence for a harmful effect of postprandial hyperglycemia on diabetes complications has been sufficient to influence guidelines from key professional scientific societies. Correcting the postprandial hyperglycemia may form part of the strategy for the prevention and management of CVDs in diabetes."
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/54/1/1.short
But maybe I'm failing to understand something?
This is talking about hyperglycemia - high blood sugar - which is definitely linked to health problems.
Insulin spikes are not, as far as I know, unless a diabetic has miscalculated their bolus, and ends up hypoglycemic - dangerously low blood sugar. The spikes of insulin from protein intake or exercise pose no risks to health that I'm aware of.0 -
Type 1 diabetes occurs when the immune system mistakenly attacks and kills the beta cells of the pancreas. No, or very little, insulin is released into the body
Type 2 diabetes occurs when the body can’t properly use the insulin that is released, or releases too little insulin.
About 90% of diabetics are type II. It is possible to have both types.
In both types of diabetes, prolonged high circulating blood sugars can cause damage to various body systems - kidneys, vascular/cardiac, vision.
For some diabetics, taking insulin allows normal metabolism of sugars.
Others can control their diabetes through diet, exercise, or other medications.
Many things cause insulin spikes (including protein and exercise), and naturally-produced insulin spikes do not appear to cause harm to the body in healthy individuals (although diabetics taking insulin must calculate their dosage carefully). Hypoglycemia is a topic for another thread.
Other things can be converted to sugar in the blood, like high intakes of protein. Getting a handle on insulin resistance, through managing weight, exercise, diet, tracking/limiting carbs (for some), and sometimes medications, is key to managing type II diabetes, not the complete elimination of carbs, which can have problematic side effects.
Low-carb diets work for some, but not all.
Source for some info used: http://www.diabetes.ca/about-diabetes/what-is-diabetes
Thanks! So low carb could work for some, others might do better controlling their blood sugar other ways and can do so. Regardless, avoiding insulin spikes is good, right?
Exercise, though? Seriously? I didn't want to learn that one! (Diabetes runs heavily in my family, I'm doing my best to stay off that road, so this subject is important to me.)
I'm not sure why you think insulin spikes are dangerous, when naturally produced by the body. Some people find it easier to manage cravings when they avoid glucose spikes (eat fiber, pair carbs with protein, switch in lower GI foods for higher GI foods), but that is a separate issue. Insulin helps regulate blood sugar levels in healthy people, and controls amino acid uptake by cells (can increase protein synthesis). If you have research supporting that insulin spikes produced by the body are dangerous, I would be interested in seeing it. All evidence points to exercise being beneficial for insulin sensitivity.
Because of abstracts like this:
"Increasing evidence suggests that the postprandial state is a contributing factor to the development of atherosclerosis. In diabetes, the postprandial phase is characterized by a rapid and large increase in blood glucose levels, and the possibility that the postprandial “hyperglycemic spikes” may be relevant to the onset of cardiovascular complications has recently received much attention. Epidemiological studies and preliminary intervention studies have shown that postprandial hyperglycemia is a direct and independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Most of the cardiovascular risk factors are modified in the postprandial phase in diabetic subjects and directly affected by an acute increase of glycemia. The mechanisms through which acute hyperglycemia exerts its effects may be identified in the production of free radicals. This alarmingly suggestive body of evidence for a harmful effect of postprandial hyperglycemia on diabetes complications has been sufficient to influence guidelines from key professional scientific societies. Correcting the postprandial hyperglycemia may form part of the strategy for the prevention and management of CVDs in diabetes."
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/54/1/1.short
But maybe I'm failing to understand something?
This is talking about hyperglycemia - high blood sugar - which is definitely linked to health problems.
Insulin spikes are not, as far as I know, unless a diabetic has miscalculated their bolus, and ends up hypoglycemic - dangerously low blood sugar. The spikes of insulin from protein intake or exercise pose no risks to health that I'm aware of.
Thanks, someone helpfully straightened this out for me earlier. I think I have it sorted somewhat now. Much to my relief, as I'm currently a beef eating runner. Albeit a very slow runner.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Thanks, someone helpfully straightened this out for me earlier. I think I have it sorted somewhat now. Much to my relief, as I'm currently a beef eating runner. Albeit a very slow runner.
Jolinia, I just have to say I enjoyed discussing this with you. You had questions; did research, read other's research links, and tried to understand it; asked for clarification where you thought you might be misunderstanding something; and accepted correction when others pointed out that you were mixing a couple of things up. Not blindly accepting correction, but looking to see where you might be confused. If only everyone were like this!
0 -
Thanks, someone helpfully straightened this out for me earlier. I think I have it sorted somewhat now. Much to my relief, as I'm currently a beef eating runner. Albeit a very slow runner.
Jolinia, I just have to say I enjoyed discussing this with you. You had questions; did research, read other's research links, and tried to understand it; asked for clarification where you thought you might be misunderstanding something; and accepted correction when others pointed out that you were mixing a couple of things up. Not blindly accepting correction, but looking to see where you might be confused. If only everyone were like this!
Thanks, I've appreciated you helping me out with some of it, too! I've learned lots in this thread, though I still don't have the full picture. But then again, neither do the PhD experts from what I'm reading. They're still learning, so I should keep struggling along to learn, too.
0 -
prettykitty1515 wrote: »Maybe people become pre-diabetic because they're eating half a container of Ben and Jerry's every night or guzzling Coke, for goodness sakes. Get your sugar levels down to normal levels, and enjoy some oatmeal.
Is this what you did?
I continue to think that your constant assumptions that we are all gorging ourselves on sweets and soda (no one recommends drinking sugary soda around here that I've ever seen, at least not unless you really love it and in limited quantities) and that we need to be hit over the head with how bad it is must be a form of projection. Is that what you want to do or did until recently? If so, maybe you should stop assuming that everyone else suffers from the same lack of restraint or lack of common sense.
Either that or you just really buy into the disgusting assumptions that all overweight or formerly overweight people spend every free moment stuffing their faces with stereotypically high calorie foods and never eat vegetables. Very nice.
Maybe one day you will move away from the weird stereotypes and assumptions and extreme hypotheticals and have a real discussion.
Yeah, I'm not holding my breath.
0 -
prettykitty1515 wrote: »Where did PrettyKitty go?
Still here. I agree with you now. If you are pre-diabetic, drink as many sugary drinks as you want, so long as you don't go over your calorie limit. Enjoy a donut too. Sugar makes no difference in a disease that is caused by too much blood sugar. It's all about calories. Calories In, Calories Out.
One more time: diabetes is not CAUSED by too much blood sugar. It is caused by an underperforming pancreas which makes the body not deal with carbs very well. Too much blood sugar is the main SYMPTOM of the disease. Since it cannot be cured, all one can do is treat the symptoms, which means controlling blood sugar.
0 -
prettykitty1515 wrote: »Where did PrettyKitty go?
Still here. I agree with you now. If you are pre-diabetic, drink as many sugary drinks as you want, so long as you don't go over your calorie limit. Enjoy a donut too. Sugar makes no difference in a disease that is caused by too much blood sugar. It's all about calories. Calories In, Calories Out.
One more time: diabetes is not CAUSED by too much blood sugar. It is caused by an underperforming pancreas which makes the body not deal with carbs very well. Too much blood sugar is the main SYMPTOM of the disease. Since it cannot be cured, all one can do is treat the symptoms, which means controlling blood sugar.
I think it's pretty clear that kitty doesn't care. They're being deliberately obtuse for their own amusement. I can agree that it's always nice to make things clear for the lurkers, though.
0 -
prettykitty1515 wrote: »Hey, it's the ADA. What the heck do they know?
I notice you ignored the fact that the ADA's advice on how to eat directly contradicts your own insistence that one must drop fruits and starches, as I pointed out above.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
-
QFT! So many terrible misconceptions debunked!prettykitty1515 wrote: »Where did PrettyKitty go?
Still here. I agree with you now. If you are pre-diabetic, drink as many sugary drinks as you want, so long as you don't go over your calorie limit. Enjoy a donut too. Sugar makes no difference in a disease that is caused by too much blood sugar. It's all about calories. Calories In, Calories Out.
One more time: diabetes is not CAUSED by too much blood sugar. It is caused by an underperforming pancreas which makes the body not deal with carbs very well. Too much blood sugar is the main SYMPTOM of the disease. Since it cannot be cured, all one can do is treat the symptoms, which means controlling blood sugar.
I think it's pretty clear that kitty doesn't care. They're being deliberately obtuse for their own amusement. I can agree that it's always nice to make things clear for the lurkers, though.
0 -
herrspoons wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
No. The burden of proof is on you actually. Nowhere does it day sugar causes diabetes. There you go again with the donut stuff. It's getting old. It's a lame debate by you.prettykitty1515 wrote: »
Please please please show us actual evidence, science, not some blog that says sugar specifically causes diabetes.prettykitty1515 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »
So no fruits, vegetables, brown rice, oatmeal or whole grain bread?prettykitty1515 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Does anyone still think PrettyKitty is a genuine account?
Seriously?
I actually do. I really think she actually believes the things she writes. It goes with the first thread she made when she came here and it was a disaster.
Yes, I do believe what I write. Pre-diabetic? ZERO SUGAR!
Vegetables are fine. And this is not a change for the rest of your life, it's a change to hopefully have your doctor tell you that you are no longer pre-diabetic. Once your OK, eat fruit, brown rice, oatmeal and whole grain bread. And yes, I am basing this on anecdotal evidence.
From this article: http://ask.metafilter.com/237108/How-to-Get-Rid-of-Prediabetes
"Today, you begin a life with very very little bread. And very little pasta, rice, and crackers. Today you stop eating cookies, and for God's sakes please put down the donut and the cake and basically anything that comes in a shiny brightly colored bag that you can buy at the pharmacy or gas station."
"Eat nuts, eat lean meats, eat all the vegetables (besides potatoes) that you want. Eat plain yogurt with berries. Eggs are good for you. Get used to Truvia, Splenda, erithryitol if you simply must have something sweet. AVOID all the crappy "sugar-free" candies that use sugar alcohols, as stuff like Maltitol has about the same glycemic impact as table sugar."
Now let the attacks from the usual suspects begin.
PK,
Come on, any "attacks" are in your perception only, just as the "usual suspects" are. Nobody here is out to get you.
That said, what you've posted is a link to someone's blog entry. There are no links to peer reviewed studies.
If you are diagnosed as pre-diabetic, which I'm not even sure I believe in because sugar does not cause diabetes, why would you not make carb/sugar moderation a lifetime goal? Why just do it for awhile? It seems to me that if you are indeed pre-diabetic and you control your glucose levels through diet but then go back to eating in a way you did before, wouldn't you end up having high glucose levels?
Saying you can be cured of pre-diabetes is like saying you can be cured of diabetes. There is no cure for diabetes, though it can be controlled through sugar/carb moderation, exercise, and insulin pills or injections if needed.
By the way, this is not an attack, it is engaging in conversation based on something you wrote.
Sugar doesn't cause diabetes? Then what does, sautéed chicken breasts? Broccoli?
If I'm ever diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my sugar and grain consumption will immediately get down to as close to zero as possible, and my consumption of sautéed chicken breasts and broccoli will double.
Just do a little on-line search and you will find so many pre-diabetics who ended the problem with a change in diet. I am not making this up, and have no reason to make this up.
Show me some science where it says it doesn't. Burden on proof is on you, not me. Diabetes = too much blood sugar. What has sugar, a donut or broccoli?
With your logic I can aliens exist and you have to prove to me they don't
From the ADA - "Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes, a condition characterized by high blood glucose levels caused by either a lack of insulin or the body's inability to use insulin efficiently. Type 2 diabetes develops most often in middle-aged and older adults but can appear in young people, and the American Diabetes Association recommends that people limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes."
Hey, it's the ADA. What the heck do they know?
Oh wait, what's this.........I found it myself!!! Please note the web site, the link and the title of the article.
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/myths/
Diabetes Myths
Myth: Eating too much sugar causes diabetes.
Fact: The answer is not so simple. Type 1 diabetes is caused by genetics and unknown factors that trigger the onset of the disease; type 2 diabetes is caused by genetics and lifestyle factors.
Being overweight does increase your risk for developing type 2 diabetes, and a diet high in calories from any source contributes to weight gain. Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes.
The American Diabetes Association recommends that people should avoid intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes. Sugar-sweetened beverages include beverages like:
regular soda
fruit punch
fruit drinks
energy drinks
sports drinks
sweet tea
other sugary drinks.
These will raise blood glucose and can provide several hundred calories in just one serving!
See for yourself:
Just one 12-ounce can of regular soda has about 150 calories and 40 grams of carbohydrate. This is the same amount of carbohydrate in 10 teaspoons of sugar!
One cup of fruit punch and other sugary fruit drinks have about 100 calories (or more) and 30 grams of carbohydrate.
- See more at: http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/myths/#sthash.sHaCrNIB.dpuf
So, to be clear, the ADA are saying that sugar does not cause T2 diabetes, being overweight may cause T2 diabetes, and that sugary drinks should be avoided because they contain a lot of calories?
Or, in other words, some people get T2 because they eat too much, not because of sugar.
Looks like old Kitty poo just got declawed.
Where sugar gets the rap with diabetes is through it's contribution to visceral fat (VAT) and abdominal subcutneous fat (SAT). Visceral fat is associated with diabetes and metabolic disease. Certain foods are more likely to contribute to visceral fat, like sugar-sweetened beverages. That is why diabetes health authorities recommend limiting SSBs. Visceral fat also predicts other health problems.
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/52/10/2490.full.pdf
Exploration of relationship of VAT, SAT, insulin resistance, secretion, and the ability to compensate for both (DI) "Johnson et al. (34) have shown that subcutaneous adipocytes of women with visceral adiposity exhibit insulin resistance and an increased rate of lipolysis. This would contribute to increased peripheral insulin resistance. Finally, both SAT and VAT secrete a host of factors that could induce or worsen insulin resistance, such as tumor necrosis factor-interleukin-6, or resistin"
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/5/1212.full
VAT predicts diabetes
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/33/11/2477.full
"individuals in the highest quantile of SSB intake (most often 1–2 servings/day) had a 26% greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes than those in the lowest quantile (none or <1 serving/month)"
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/144/8/1283
"Abdominal adiposity, particularly visceral adipose tissue (VAT), is independently linked to the pathogenesis of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases."
Study shows link between sugar sweetened beverages and VAT
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0057873
The Lustig study, linking availability of sugar over time in a country to diabetes rates
The problem with added sugars is the fructose. Fructose gets through the digestive system faster than glucose, and can be added to visceral fat by the liver without being changed into glucose first, like other carbs are. Fructose does not downregulate DNL.
There are other dietary habits that increase VAT/SAT, or increase diabetes risk.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24522441
Study showing foods that increased risk of high visceral fat, including higher intake of fried foods, over 35% of calories from fat, and carbohydrate and SSB intake. Intake of fiber was associated with less VAT.
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic835338.files/Hu-_DIET.LIFESTYLE.DIABETES.PREVENTION.pdf
"In conclusion, our findings suggest that the majority of cases of type 2 diabetes could be prevented by weight loss, regular exercise, modification of diet, abstinence from smoking, and the consumption of limited amounts of alcohol." Study showed GI (gylcemic index) of food and consumption of trans fat linked with increased rate of diabetes, consumption of cereal fibers was protective.
Some foods are more likely to increase the risk of developping diabetes than others, others are protective.0 -
^^^^^
"Fructose is the devil" studies called into question
http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(14)00357-8/fulltext
"In conclusion, one cannot infer that fructose uniquely affects most components of the metabolic syndrome (fasting blood glucose, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and blood pressure) from the present systematic review and meta-analysis of uncontrolled comparisons. The adverse signals disappear in the appropriate controlled comparisons with other carbohydrates under calorie-matched conditions. The implication remains that fructose is no worse than other carbohydrates likely to replace it and that any adverse effects are explained by an imbalance in calories."0 -
I want to see a study attempt to tease apart excess body fat from types of food consumed. If one doesn't exist, I volunteer to be tested for insulin resistance/pre diabetes. If I'm unfortunate enough to qualify, I volunteer to eat 4000 calories of prime rib, olive oil, cheese, and coconut oil every day to see what happens to my insulin sensitivity. It's for science. It has nothing to do with the cost of prime rib, believe me. But the researchers will be buying. For science.
Sadly the body's ability to turn extra protein into glucose might throw a monkey wrench into my plan to get free food. Or does that happen to everyone? I volunteer to test this, too, if there is any argument about it among researchers. Kindly house me comfortably for any highly controlled feeding study. I don't do the roommate thing, and I definitely need internet access.0 -
Where sugar gets the rap with diabetes is through it's contribution to visceral fat (VAT) and abdominal subcutneous fat (SAT). Visceral fat is associated with diabetes and metabolic disease. Certain foods are more likely to contribute to visceral fat, like sugar-sweetened beverages. That is why diabetes health authorities recommend limiting SSBs. Visceral fat also predicts other health problems.
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/52/10/2490.full.pdf
Exploration of relationship of VAT, SAT, insulin resistance, secretion, and the ability to compensate for both (DI) "Johnson et al. (34) have shown that subcutaneous adipocytes of women with visceral adiposity exhibit insulin resistance and an increased rate of lipolysis. This would contribute to increased peripheral insulin resistance. Finally, both SAT and VAT secrete a host of factors that could induce or worsen insulin resistance, such as tumor necrosis factor-interleukin-6, or resistin"
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/5/1212.full
VAT predicts diabetes
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/33/11/2477.full
"individuals in the highest quantile of SSB intake (most often 1–2 servings/day) had a 26% greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes than those in the lowest quantile (none or <1 serving/month)"
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/144/8/1283
"Abdominal adiposity, particularly visceral adipose tissue (VAT), is independently linked to the pathogenesis of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases."
Study shows link between sugar sweetened beverages and VAT
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0057873
The Lustig study, linking availability of sugar over time in a country to diabetes rates
The problem with added sugars is the fructose. Fructose gets through the digestive system faster than glucose, and can be added to visceral fat by the liver without being changed into glucose first, like other carbs are. Fructose does not downregulate DNL.
There are other dietary habits that increase VAT/SAT, or increase diabetes risk.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24522441
Study showing foods that increased risk of high visceral fat, including higher intake of fried foods, over 35% of calories from fat, and carbohydrate and SSB intake. Intake of fiber was associated with less VAT.
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic835338.files/Hu-_DIET.LIFESTYLE.DIABETES.PREVENTION.pdf
"In conclusion, our findings suggest that the majority of cases of type 2 diabetes could be prevented by weight loss, regular exercise, modification of diet, abstinence from smoking, and the consumption of limited amounts of alcohol." Study showed GI (gylcemic index) of food and consumption of trans fat linked with increased rate of diabetes, consumption of cereal fibers was protective.
Some foods are more likely to increase the risk of developping diabetes than others, others are protective.
The bottom line is they don't KNOW exactly what causes diabetes to develop. They know obesity is correlated, but if obesity directly caused diabetes every obese person would develop it and the majority don't. The same goes for the various lifestyle factors, the genetic component, age, etc.
There are many THEORIES on what causes it. None have been proven. One theory...which my doctor believes and makes sense to me (I care very much about this because both of my parents developed it so I worry about my risk) is that that it is a combination of factors. Some are genetically predisposed to get it. If they then make the wrong lifestyle choices....exercise, weight, food choices...over time they can increase the burden on the pancreas and diabetes will eventually develop because the pancreas will wear out as years of bad decisions and a genetic weakness take their toll. And yes...high glycemic index carbohydrates, including sugar, could very well play a part in this. Has this been proven? No. But is is untrue to say obesity "causes" it...that has never been proven either.
Frankly, if someone is worried about their risk, there is no harm in reducing certain foods. And it may help prevent actually developing diabetes down the road.
Science is still trying to understand what causes this. In the meantime, all we have is correlation.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions