News article: "Can a low-carb, high-fat diet help fight diabetes?"
Options
Replies
-
Dragonwolf wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »"Some people that try the rigorous diet find that sticking with it can be tough"
Really? Probably has nothing to do with carb addiction or not correcting for sodium loss huh?
And don't people find sticking to any new diet tough? This kind of language plants seeds that grow into "that sounds too hard" or "I could never go without bread".
I think it is tough. Then again, I think anything not involving as much cake and ice cream as I want to eat every day is tough. Even though I know it improves my energy and mood to avoid these foods.
And avoiding the cake and ice cream doesn't sound nearly as tough as going blind and losing limbs and then dying horribly and painfully from the effects of diabetes sounds.
Imagine if we still had the Fairness Doctrine and after every Nutella commercial we got to see what a gangrenous diabetic foot looks like?
That's what I mean though. No matter what, they tell you to change your diet and it's tough for pretty much everyone. And you're right, if someone thinks not having carbs is tough, well it's gonna be a sad day when life gets really tough because of disability.
I see this happening with my sister.
A few years ago it was "I'm just hypoglycemic, I just need to eat this high sugar/carb food and I'll be fine." Then it became "I've gained so much weight and I'm in a lot of pain from fibromyalgia and arthritis so I can't do anything about it". Then it was "I'm pre-diabetic and I don't want to take medicine because of the bad side effects so there's nothing I can do about it". Now it's "I'm diabetic and on medicine so I'll get better now, but I don't feel good and my pain is worse than ever and I just keep gaining weight. Pass me the sugar so I can put more in this sweet tea cuz it doesn't taste like it has any in it".
Her life is becoming increasingly difficult and painful and the hardest thing in the world she can think of doing is not having her sweets and satisfying every craving.
Sounds like my in-laws. It's so disheartening to have the solution to their problems and not being able to get them to even try for a month.Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »"Some people that try the rigorous diet find that sticking with it can be tough"
Really? Probably has nothing to do with carb addiction or not correcting for sodium loss huh?
And don't people find sticking to any new diet tough? This kind of language plants seeds that grow into "that sounds too hard" or "I could never go without bread".
I think they do it intentionally. They put out the headlines to get people to read and talk about it, because people are doing it and starting to talk about it anyway, but then plant the "but it's really hard (*whispering voice* and could be dangerous *end whispering voice*)" seed to keep people toeing the ADA/AHA/Pharma party line. They try to have their cake and eat it too, basically, so they can say "but see? We say it's a good thing (for the people that can stick with it)!"I love the fact that the doctor interviewed said that it boggles her mind that the diet and lifestyle change is ignored in favor of medication. Of course it would. A change in diet and lifestyle is more or less free. Medicine costs money. Medicine that manages a chronic condition instead of curing a disease costs money for life. Of course doctors/pharmaceutical companies would rather create repeat customers.
I'm starting to think it's a long game for population control while making bank off of the populace in the meantime. Get them fat and sick before they even hit puberty, and they'll die of it or the drugs at a younger and younger age. Picture what it will look like in about a century -- people die young enough, and you don't have this three-generation workforce, because two of the generations are dead, and you have a population a third of the size it is now (and no, birth rate isn't likely to go up drastically to compensate, with sickness comes reduced fertility and increased miscarriage rates).
OMG! I had this same discussion with my daughters yesterday! My younger one, a high school senior needs to present a paper about a current event and her sister was joking that she should talk about the health epidemic and how food relates and that with so much information supporting lchf diet being the solution, the government must simply be ignoring this information, but why?
I don't want any phone calls from school so I told her keep researching. lol0 -
On CBC Radio1 the other day, there was an interview with a scientist from a San Francisco University (prob there's more than one, I'm Canadian
) who was talking about old mice and young mice (relative human ages = 60's and 20's) who were surgically attached so that their blood would mingle and they could see any effects (looking at aging in the brain). Turns out the younger mouse began to get age related spatial awareness difficulties and the older mouse began to 'act' younger and had a better maze memory (spatial awareness). Anyhow, showing how much our blood affects what happens in our aging brains. As an aside they mentioned matter-of-factly that lowering carbs is a must for brain health, especially as we age. So many people (even docs) don't have a clue about this. 0 -
Dragonwolf if I could disagree with your take on things I would then call your last paragraph SICK.
I was asking myself the same thing this week. Seeing 10 year old boys and girls that look to weigh 200 pounds just makes me sick. I know a 30 year old that was put on statins 20 years ago.
How could this mess be a simple accident. Three were getting out of a car at a dental office and they were all exceptional large (hey I was there not long ago). The driver was about 20, front passenger was about 40 and the one in the rear seat was about 60. It was perhaps a mom, daughter and granddaughter. I am guessing the 20 and 40 year old ones were at risk from the get go due to the home environment.
The VA wanted me to go on statins with 115 triglycerides, 55 HDL because LDL is 316 but they will not test to see the size of the LDL particles. It is blowing their minds how LDL can be high when the other numbers have improved so much and are well within normal limits (WNL). They knew I weighed in 45 pounds less than than a year earlier and that I was LCHF.0 -
TerrierFriend wrote: »Many people forget or don't realize healthcare is a business.
I call it the Sickcare system. Seriously - hospitals, doctors offices, clinics, and especially pharmaceutical companies benefit from us being sick and needing more services/procedures/visits/medications. Its driven by our payment system (insurance). There is absolutely NO incentive for sick care (oops, I mean healthcare) providers to provide preventive care that would reduce the number of visits/procedures/medications. I worked for the last two years in an integrated (mental and primary) care clinic and it was horrifying to me to learn more about how the payment systems work. Until our insurance structure undergoes some serious changes (maybe a single payor system) people will continue to be misinformed and just put on loads of meds.
My mom is also very overweight and has diabetes (Type2). She gasped when I told her a few weeks ago that I was increasing my fat (can't wait to tell her I'm drinking cream in my coffee and putting butter on everything) because it helps with so many things, particularly depression. She doesn't do anything the doctors don't advise. Same with my husband, who (like me) also has a fair amount of body fat to lose. AAARGH!0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »"Some people that try the rigorous diet find that sticking with it can be tough"
Really? Probably has nothing to do with carb addiction or not correcting for sodium loss huh?
And don't people find sticking to any new diet tough? This kind of language plants seeds that grow into "that sounds too hard" or "I could never go without bread".
I think it is tough. Then again, I think anything not involving as much cake and ice cream as I want to eat every day is tough. Even though I know it improves my energy and mood to avoid these foods.
And avoiding the cake and ice cream doesn't sound nearly as tough as going blind and losing limbs and then dying horribly and painfully from the effects of diabetes sounds.
Imagine if we still had the Fairness Doctrine and after every Nutella commercial we got to see what a gangrenous diabetic foot looks like?
That's what I mean though. No matter what, they tell you to change your diet and it's tough for pretty much everyone. And you're right, if someone thinks not having carbs is tough, well it's gonna be a sad day when life gets really tough because of disability.
I see this happening with my sister.
A few years ago it was "I'm just hypoglycemic, I just need to eat this high sugar/carb food and I'll be fine." Then it became "I've gained so much weight and I'm in a lot of pain from fibromyalgia and arthritis so I can't do anything about it". Then it was "I'm pre-diabetic and I don't want to take medicine because of the bad side effects so there's nothing I can do about it". Now it's "I'm diabetic and on medicine so I'll get better now, but I don't feel good and my pain is worse than ever and I just keep gaining weight. Pass me the sugar so I can put more in this sweet tea cuz it doesn't taste like it has any in it".
Her life is becoming increasingly difficult and painful and the hardest thing in the world she can think of doing is not having her sweets and satisfying every craving.
Sounds like my in-laws. It's so disheartening to have the solution to their problems and not being able to get them to even try for a month.Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »"Some people that try the rigorous diet find that sticking with it can be tough"
Really? Probably has nothing to do with carb addiction or not correcting for sodium loss huh?
And don't people find sticking to any new diet tough? This kind of language plants seeds that grow into "that sounds too hard" or "I could never go without bread".
I think they do it intentionally. They put out the headlines to get people to read and talk about it, because people are doing it and starting to talk about it anyway, but then plant the "but it's really hard (*whispering voice* and could be dangerous *end whispering voice*)" seed to keep people toeing the ADA/AHA/Pharma party line. They try to have their cake and eat it too, basically, so they can say "but see? We say it's a good thing (for the people that can stick with it)!"I love the fact that the doctor interviewed said that it boggles her mind that the diet and lifestyle change is ignored in favor of medication. Of course it would. A change in diet and lifestyle is more or less free. Medicine costs money. Medicine that manages a chronic condition instead of curing a disease costs money for life. Of course doctors/pharmaceutical companies would rather create repeat customers.
I'm starting to think it's a long game for population control while making bank off of the populace in the meantime. Get them fat and sick before they even hit puberty, and they'll die of it or the drugs at a younger and younger age. Picture what it will look like in about a century -- people die young enough, and you don't have this three-generation workforce, because two of the generations are dead, and you have a population a third of the size it is now (and no, birth rate isn't likely to go up drastically to compensate, with sickness comes reduced fertility and increased miscarriage rates).
I've suspected something like this for awhile. Or at very least a deliberate national security move toward cheap, portable, tasty food that can be stored for a very long time. Who invented the K Ration? And who started this whole low fat nonsense? Maybe low fat processed crap is just K Rations for workers.
If it's true, though, it backfired. Because of chronic medical care costs. Unless medical care is simply going to be denied to most workers in the future. Wouldn't surprise me. I think it's most likely that the health care issue wasn't so much planned for as punted down the road for someone else to deal with. Then again, I'm often not cynical enough.
One issue that worries me, unless we've been completely lied to about that, too, is that there simply aren't enough natural resources to support a low carb nation and world. So now what do we do?0 -
I don't think there is a big conspiracy by big Arga/big Pharma/ Government to get/keep people fat, so much as there seems to be more profit in people being sugar addicted/fat/sick/unable to make clear-headed decisions. I also don't think the single-payer health insurance system will solve things - look at Great Britain. I think that human beings should be responsible for their own health, do the research, look for alternatives and treat their bodies the way they treat their cars - take care of them, fuel them right, keep them running, keep them clean, and take them for tune-ups when needed. Once we, the regular people, change, the system will change with us. If crappy carbage doesn't sell, no one will sell it anymore. There is no need to outlaw the 20 oz soda if no one wants it to begin with. It is up to us to be informed customers and human beings and vote with our wallets and brains. *Gets off the soap box.*0
-
I don't think there is a big conspiracy by big Arga/big Pharma/ Government to get/keep people fat, so much as there seems to be more profit in people being sugar addicted/fat/sick/unable to make clear-headed decisions. I also don't think the single-payer health insurance system will solve things - look at Great Britain. I think that human beings should be responsible for their own health, do the research, look for alternatives and treat their bodies the way they treat their cars - take care of them, fuel them right, keep them running, keep them clean, and take them for tune-ups when needed. Once we, the regular people, change, the system will change with us. If crappy carbage doesn't sell, no one will sell it anymore. There is no need to outlaw the 20 oz soda if no one wants it to begin with. It is up to us to be informed customers and human beings and vote with our wallets and brains. *Gets off the soap box.*
That is far more evil than just wanting people to be fat.
0 -
That is far more evil than just wanting people to be fat.
Unintended consequences. I don't like to put blame on people who are not trying to do anything bad, they're just not realizing what they're doing is bad. Food companies are giving the consumers what they want. The doctors are doing what they're taught in school. The government is trying to keep a large sector of the economy producing. The problem, from my point of view, is with us, not with them.0 -
Me too. And my country's government and corporations are my responsibility. And yours. And everyone's who doesn't live in a dictatorship. And for anyone who does live in a dictatorship (open or de facto), that's our/their responsibility, too.0 -
That is far more evil than just wanting people to be fat.
Unintended consequences. I don't like to put blame on people who are not trying to do anything bad, they're just not realizing what they're doing is bad. Food companies are giving the consumers what they want. The doctors are doing what they're taught in school. The government is trying to keep a large sector of the economy producing. The problem, from my point of view, is with us, not with them.
@Lillith32 I agree. While I run a software development firm today I did earn my OD degree 30 years ago before my health limits from Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) lead to major physical limitations and Rx med caused health issues.
In school we were thought what was known 20 years prior. While diet related health issues can be a leading cause of blindness that was not really covered in optometry school in a way I can remember. Yes we learned about Vitamin A use in third world countries but not how one needs to eat to prevent diabetes a leading cause of blindness for example. Macular degeneration and cataracts can be diet related.
allaboutvision.com/conditions/amd-prevention.htm
aoa.org/patients-and-public/caring-for-your-vision/nutrition/nutrition-and-cataracts?sso=y
In the software development business we only try to develop solutions that customers need/want that we can make a profit on by meeting those needs and wants.
0 -
I don't think there is a big conspiracy by big Arga/big Pharma/ Government to get/keep people fat, so much as there seems to be more profit in people being sugar addicted/fat/sick/unable to make clear-headed decisions. I also don't think the single-payer health insurance system will solve things - look at Great Britain. I think that human beings should be responsible for their own health, do the research, look for alternatives and treat their bodies the way they treat their cars - take care of them, fuel them right, keep them running, keep them clean, and take them for tune-ups when needed. Once we, the regular people, change, the system will change with us. If crappy carbage doesn't sell, no one will sell it anymore. There is no need to outlaw the 20 oz soda if no one wants it to begin with. It is up to us to be informed customers and human beings and vote with our wallets and brains. *Gets off the soap box.*
I don't think it was a conspiracy, it's just that there is so much invested in the status quo. A primary example of why you don't want the government involved in these issues. What possessed the government to give us dietary guidelines anyway?
Other examples of governmental involvement:
College financing, kids should not be in debt for 15 years straight out of college. Everyone doesn't need a college degree to be productive.
Healthcare, Medicare started our current reimbursement system to save money for the government. We now have the most expensive healthcare system in the world.
Education, Government fiddling with education is leaving the US far behind other countries in Match and science.
Social Security... If we were investing as much money in our own retirements as we send to the government we'd all retire as millionaires.0 -
Ideas matter.
Actions have consequences.
Usually unintended ones.0 -
I think the issues of responsibility vs. policy and other politics of food and their impact on our lives may be an interesting discussion, and one that needs to happen, but I don't think this is the forum for it.
@GaleHawkins, you sound like you've had an absolutely fascinating life so far.0 -
My morning sugars have been incredible since returning to the LCHF way...I was getting concerned with my morning highs and requested bloodwork...I haven't gotten it done yet but I know my A1C will be amazing. I have been back on track with the LCHF since the beginning of September and other than the first couple of weeks, I feel amazing. I forgot how good it feels to be in control...yes LCHF improves diabetes, there is no doubt in my mind.
0 -
One of my nieces developed gestational diabetes that become T2. He doctor didn't go for meds. He gave her a low carb high fat diet. Within 6 months her blood glucose and A1C were well within the normal range and she was no longer clinically T2.
But so many push drugs first.
I have a doctor that mention drugs for my 300 Trig score. But LCHF dropped it 75%, also raised my HDL, lowered LDL and lowered total cholesterol to well inside the normal range.0 -
LCHF seems to have stopped my prediabetes too.
I wish my old doctors had seem that. My endocrinologist told me to eat more fruits and veggies, leaner meat, and follow up with my GP. I never went back. LOL
My niece's endo did just the opposite. He was a big proponent of LCHF. She is no longer T2 diabetic.0 -
I think the issues of responsibility vs. policy and other politics of food and their impact on our lives may be an interesting discussion, and one that needs to happen, but I don't think this is the forum for it.
@GaleHawkins, you sound like you've had an absolutely fascinating life so far.
Shame there isn't an official forum for food policy. But of course the paid sock puppets would come flocking like they do to reddit. Oh well. Things will change.0 -
@Lillith32 thanks. My life has be fascinating. Before going in the Navy at age 22 I had training in farming, computer programming, and tool and die work. I studied electronic for two years in the Navy and got to live in Rota Spain and visit some of Europe. After the Navy I picked up a BA, BS then OD degrees. Post high school it totals 12 years of butt in seat classroom training and a lot of OTJ training on top of that.
What is strange is my Ankylosing Spondylitis has turned out to be more of a blessing than a curse. Being faced with starting Enbrel injections a year ago is how I found LCHF by accident to manage my pain by diet. A year later am in better health than 20 years ago and I have less pain than in 40 years.
I dated my wife for 10 years and got married just before I turned 30. I was 46 when the kids were born and they just turned 18 last week. The son just finished up all of his Eagle Scout requirements a few weeks ago and the daughter is working some as they finish their last year of high school. While we do not have a lot of money we have a lot of things of valuable people wise.
Saturday afternoon our former high school (now grades 1-6) is having an ad hoc reunion at a local greasy spoon and I am going.
MFP is a gold mine of info and ideals thanks to all of you.0 -
I don't think there is a big conspiracy by big Arga/big Pharma/ Government to get/keep people fat, so much as there seems to be more profit in people being sugar addicted/fat/sick/unable to make clear-headed decisions. I also don't think the single-payer health insurance system will solve things - look at Great Britain. I think that human beings should be responsible for their own health, do the research, look for alternatives and treat their bodies the way they treat their cars - take care of them, fuel them right, keep them running, keep them clean, and take them for tune-ups when needed. Once we, the regular people, change, the system will change with us. If crappy carbage doesn't sell, no one will sell it anymore. There is no need to outlaw the 20 oz soda if no one wants it to begin with. It is up to us to be informed customers and human beings and vote with our wallets and brains. *Gets off the soap box.*
My original statement was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but whether it's profit or control, I don't believe where we are now is an accident or entirely unintended. Frankly, at least the population control thing has an altruistic argument aspect ("the world's overpopulated!"). The more likely alternative (corporate greed) is far more sinister when you actually think about it.
If you follow the money, you find that government, when it comes to food policy (and several other sectors), is a puppet, and the large food producers are the puppetmasters via large sums of money thrown around in lobbying. You see it in telecomm, too. In both situations, you can find dozens of cases where the companies have thrown billions upon billions of dollars at the government, in lawsuits, lobbies, or both, in order to block any meaningful reform.
Even worse? The people running the marketing for the biggest food companies are the same people that ran the marketing for the tobacco companies back in the 90s. I kid you not, the exact same people. And that's if the tobacco company doesn't straight-up own the brand (Philip Morris owns Kraft, think about that one for a minute). They know damn well what they're doing (they've had a few decades of practice) and that they're denying the consequences they know for a fact are happening because of their stuff, and they don't care. (How much crap has "heart healthy whole grains!" or "5g fiber!" on it that's just glorified brownies or other dessert food, or sugary food that's even worse?)
They also spend untold amounts of money on finding that "holy grail" of super-palatability -- the just-right combination of fat, sugar, and salt, that keeps you hopelessly hooked, health consequences be damned. Then, they spend millions upon million promoting their stuff on every platform available to them to get you to buy that first package.One issue that worries me, unless we've been completely lied to about that, too, is that there simply aren't enough natural resources to support a low carb nation and world. So now what do we do?
Actually, a lot of the LCHF staples are more sustainable in the US ecosystem than the current agricultural staples. Bison are native to most of the country, and cows can be raised in a similar manner to bison, as well as on otherwise inariable land, allowing us to grow far more of them than we do currently, without destroying the natural habitat. The same goes for deer. The mountain regions are actually home to many native berries, and can support similar plants that aren't native (strawberries grow really well around here). Corn, wheat, and soy are actually insanely water-hungry, and don't grow well in most of the big "bread basket" areas, which are actually too dry for most of it during growing seasons (corn is a Central and South American grass, native to regions that got more rainfall during the growing season than the modern areas). The midwest isn't technically "dry," but most of our precipitation is in early spring and later fall (with dry-ish summers through most of the areas). When left to nature, the climate is more likely to drown the seeds and first sprouts, then dry out the more mature plants in a number of places (Nebraska tops the list for irrigation demand for corn, an area which would be better suited to growing its native plants and animals).
The problem with the numbers people like to throw around that claim meat-raising is inefficient ("it takes X amount of water/resources to make 1lb of beef") is that they're getting their numbers from conventional, grain-raised cattle. That number changes drastically when using sustainable practices and letting the animals live in native environments. The only reason corn-raising is cheaper in the US is because corn is so heavily subsidized that it's actually more expensive to not grow corn than it is to grow it. I kid you not, we have so much corn in this country that in some areas, burning it straight is one of the cheapest fuels with which to heat your house.
This all does assume, of course, that the human population hasn't already reached the point that any method of growing food is not sustainable. It could be easily argued that we are well, well beyond the planet's population limit, regardless of food-production method and now, it's more a debate between a large, sick population or a smaller, healthy population (and mass amounts of die-off in the transition if we switch from the former, which is what we have, to the latter), unless we manage to master space travel and extraterrestrial colonization of some form or another in the near future (which then starts up issues such as what Elysium addresses, where the rich get to go off-planet, and the poor suffer on a destroyed Earth). It's bleak just about any way you look at it, though, that's for sure.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »The more likely alternative (corporate greed) is far more sinister when you actually think about it.
If you follow the money, you find that government, when it comes to food policy (and several other sectors), is a puppet, and the large food producers are the puppetmasters via large sums of money thrown around in lobbying. You see it in telecomm, too. In both situations, you can find dozens of cases where the companies have thrown billions upon billions of dollars at the government, in lawsuits, lobbies, or both, in order to block any meaningful reform.
Even worse? The people running the marketing for the biggest food companies are the same people that ran the marketing for the tobacco companies back in the 90s. I kid you not, the exact same people. And that's if the tobacco company doesn't straight-up own the brand (Philip Morris owns Kraft, think about that one for a minute). They know damn well what they're doing (they've had a few decades of practice) and that they're denying the consequences they know for a fact are happening because of their stuff, and they don't care. (How much crap has "heart healthy whole grains!" or "5g fiber!" on it that's just glorified brownies or other dessert food, or sugary food that's even worse?)
They also spend untold amounts of money on finding that "holy grail" of super-palatability -- the just-right combination of fat, sugar, and salt, that keeps you hopelessly hooked, health consequences be damned. Then, they spend millions upon million promoting their stuff on every platform available to them to get you to buy that first package.
Agreed! Although I know many people out there are not aware of the connections between the government and food industry, I am. You are right - it is the big food companies (the big ten - see link below for visual image of who they are) that control the food supply for the world. Recently (within the last 1-3 months), I recall reading an online article about how Kraft foods was making their Macaroni and Cheese "healthier." They took out all the artificial colors and preservatives. Reading about their "healthier" version just made me laugh because while that's a small step in the right direction, Kraft Macaroni and Cheese is still not a viable choice for a person like me who is very sensitive to carbs and sugars.
https://www.google.com/search?q=illustration+of+the+big+ten+food+companies&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=679&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CCQQsARqFQoTCOLvvMDlocgCFdEsiAodIfoH-w&dpr=10
