In The News Today
julepige
Posts: 24 Member
Just read this and thought i will share it with you all.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45195474
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45195474
0
Replies
-
I've read it: to say that it is tenuous and based on incomplete and potentially utterly erroneous information would be putting it mildly! (IMO!!!)0
-
I'll take me chances...
So let me think... maybe I should go back on
Glipizide 8mg a day
Victoza 2 times a day &
80 more units of insulin a day
0 -
Based on eating questionnaires which makes any result from the study an absolute crap shoot - eating questionnaires are the most unreliable source of data in a study.0
-
...but you get to have bacon, isn't that worth it???
statistically lacto-ovo vegetarians live longer than any other "diet"
I don't even know why something where people guess what they ate and guess portions even counts as a study - that's not really a scientific study, it's more like a 25 year casual interview. Plus, the group of people all enrolled in a study for Atherosclerosis risk, which probably means they have either a diagnosis already, or a family history - this is not really studying the average population. It is interesting that carbs is the variable factor, it sounds like they were expecting it to be fat, but fat didn't matter as much.0 -
I'll continue on with my balance which is in the lchf range. Mostly fish and "above ground" vegetables with eggs, dairy, fruit, meat, nut/seeds/oils, "below ground" vegetables, legumes. None of that (that I can tell) has lead me to being face first into cake, cookies, ice cream, candy, Fritos, Cheetos or Doritos. I became obese with a diet heavy in the latter 7.
Fortunately I've not had to deal with diabetes, pre-diabetes, PCOS, etc. but sure as heck have personally dealt with a pleasure seeking (from food) brain. Had I continued on my previous course I may have found IR and diabetes. Knocks on wood.2 -
Live four years less than type II diabetics? I will bet the study didn't track that.0
-
Apparently they also excluded anyone from the study that had heart disease or diabetes.
Convenient huh?0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Apparently they also excluded anyone from the study that had heart disease or diabetes.
Convenient huh?
I didn't read the article completely but why would excluding those with heart disease or diabetes matter so long as they excluded them in ALL groups? Or did they just exclude them in select groups?0 -
I personally just think is another scaremongering on the loss.0
-
I read through this as well. For the most part it read like "let's affirm what we already know to be true."0