Official diabetes diet misinformation - any candidates for the Darwin Awards?
Options
Replies
-
It's really sad how many people are going to read that and believe it and turn to carbs possibly making their situation worse. This article popped up on my Flipboard new feed so you know it's getting tons of hits. I'm almost dropped my phone when I read the title.
I know since I've started LCHF, I've never had so much energy, mental clarity, my mood is better, and my weight is melting off. I just feel more healthy all around. Apparently all this awesomeness is gonna give me T2D. We shall see, my next A1C is in February.
0 -
He actually does have a couple of study abstracts linked in the article:
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/535594 (subscription only - I couldn't read the whole thing)
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/535594 (this one had 23 non-obese and non-diabetic participants)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC507380/ (this one doesn't list the number of subjects, unless I missed it)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10334314 (this one had 7 participants and the only conclusion was that high FFA values slowed the glucose transfer by 120 minutes).
The biggest problem with his whole line of reasoning (besides his obvious vegan/vegetarian bias) is that while the studies do show that fats can have an effect on insulin and blood sugar uptake, his entire conclusion is based on people still eating lots of carbs as part of their diet and depending on the body's energy coming from glucose and not from ketones. As long as the energy source is ketones, all of his arguments against fat fall flat (say that three times fast
).
edited to add the links.1 -
A recent theory I heard that was based on a study, which I didn't note down, as I was driving and podcasting, but they said that for some folks, insulin resistance develops not just from an overload of sugar in the bloodstream and diet, but from cellular energy overload - meaning that the cells ended up so stuff of energy, even of fat sources and such - and that OVERALL energy overload caused the cells to refuse not just glucose, but fat as well, and even some protein sources. And of course, the body then attempts to create more insulin to force the glucose in, generating insulin resistance from a position of cellular energy overload, not just glucose overload. It really made a lot of sense with the way my own IR developed...and why if I overeat calories, even on keto, I stay higher on the insulin side of numbers, with or without having added glucose in my system...2
-
KnitOrMiss wrote: »A recent theory I heard that was based on a study, which I didn't note down, as I was driving and podcasting, but they said that for some folks, insulin resistance develops not just from an overload of sugar in the bloodstream and diet, but from cellular energy overload - meaning that the cells ended up so stuff of energy, even of fat sources and such - and that OVERALL energy overload caused the cells to refuse not just glucose, but fat as well, and even some protein sources. And of course, the body then attempts to create more insulin to force the glucose in, generating insulin resistance from a position of cellular energy overload, not just glucose overload. It really made a lot of sense with the way my own IR developed...and why if I overeat calories, even on keto, I stay higher on the insulin side of numbers, with or without having added glucose in my system...
Interesting.
Now that you mention it, I recall Dr. Bernstein saying that meal size is can be an important factor in keeping BG under control - not from a calorie counting standpoint, but from volume. He explained that in diabetics, a glucose spike will result from a large portion of high-fiber carbs, protein, fat - or even gravel (!). If it's gravel, there's obviously nothing of nutritional value to dump into the bloodstream or force into storage, so the insulin produced after the initial glucagon surge presumably contributes to IR. (Moral - don't eat rocks. That much I'm pretty confident about......)
1 -
KnitOrMiss wrote: »A recent theory I heard that was based on a study, which I didn't note down, as I was driving and podcasting, but they said that for some folks, insulin resistance develops not just from an overload of sugar in the bloodstream and diet, but from cellular energy overload - meaning that the cells ended up so stuff of energy, even of fat sources and such - and that OVERALL energy overload caused the cells to refuse not just glucose, but fat as well, and even some protein sources. And of course, the body then attempts to create more insulin to force the glucose in, generating insulin resistance from a position of cellular energy overload, not just glucose overload. It really made a lot of sense with the way my own IR developed...and why if I overeat calories, even on keto, I stay higher on the insulin side of numbers, with or without having added glucose in my system...
Interesting.
Now that you mention it, I recall Dr. Bernstein saying that meal size is can be an important factor in keeping BG under control - not from a calorie counting standpoint, but from volume. He explained that in diabetics, a glucose spike will result from a large portion of high-fiber carbs, protein, fat - or even gravel (!). If it's gravel, there's obviously nothing of nutritional value to dump into the bloodstream or force into storage, so the insulin produced after the initial glucagon surge presumably contributes to IR. (Moral - don't eat rocks. That much I'm pretty confident about......)
I heard Dr Bernstein say this as well. It actually had me reconsidering my 16/8 IF schedule because I am cramming in 3200-3500 calories into such a small window. I was wondering if I would be better off going back to 3 meals a day to reduce the size of the meals. Or, I guess the other option is to figure out how to burn fewer calories. The problem is I don't sit still well, so even if on the weekend when I don't go to the gym and "take it easy" my fitbit still says I burn 2800+. I can't imagine getting to the point of only burning 2000-2500. Before finding out I was diabetic last year, I had just gotten my fitbit and quickly saw burning 4500 calories a day was about my minimum, so I have already cut activity way back. This may explain why so many endurance athletes end up with T2D without being significantly overweight - along with all those years of carb-loading for events.3 -
Seems there is much more to be learned which is one thing I heard repeated by many of the speakers of the keto summit.2
-
Credit where credit is due.....
From ADA's Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2016:Carbohydrates
Studies examining the ideal amount of carbohydrate intake for people with diabetes are inconclusive, although monitoring carbohydrate intake and considering the blood glucose response to dietary carbohydrate are key for improving postprandial glucose control.0 -
Credit where credit is due.....
From ADA's Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2016:Carbohydrates
Studies examining the ideal amount of carbohydrate intake for people with diabetes
are inconclusive, although monitoring carbohydrate intake and considering
the blood glucose response to dietary carbohydrate are key for improving postprandial
glucose control.
Sure, they are inconclusive, but the 60 g per meal they recommend is way outside of the results of any of the research.0 -
cstehansen wrote: »Credit where credit is due.....
From ADA's Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2016:Carbohydrates
Studies examining the ideal amount of carbohydrate intake for people with diabetes
are inconclusive, although monitoring carbohydrate intake and considering
the blood glucose response to dietary carbohydrate are key for improving postprandial
glucose control.
Sure, they are inconclusive, but the 60 g per meal they recommend is way outside of the results of any of the research.
This is not a plug for 50g/meal. It's "YMMV, use your meter!" That's pretty much my formula, too.
Sometimes (rarely perhaps) the glass is half full....0 -
But @RalfLott, is it half full of sugary soda??
1 -
Eww,@canadjineh. That would put the meter through its bloody paces, eh?
Actually, the old ADA medical books have spells of sanity; the stuff written for us uneducated diabetics, by contrast.....0 -
Dr Dumbass strikes again.
http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/11/22/how-a-low-carb-diet-is-metabolically-like-being-obese/
LCHF apparently makes us so obese, that we lose weight.
I think he thinks LCHF is bacon and butter all the time. That's ludicrous.0 -
I am not a scientist, however, when I look at the actual referenced study, it sounds like they jacked up the FFA & then jacked up the glucose at the same time and then were surprised the glucose was not burned as fast.
That is hardly the same as a low carb diet. That is a high fat, high carb diet equivalent. In that case, you are giving your cells the opportunity to have 2 fuel sources and the cells seem to be using both, but neither quickly nor exclusively.
In my mind, that is like saying here is some sausage and eggs. Hmm....for some reason when I give you both, you eat the sausage slower than if I only gave you the sausage without the eggs. The eggs must prevent you from eating sausage.
Here is the link to the actual study in case I am reading it incorrectly. I am not too proud to admit I am not perfect.
http://physiologyonline.physiology.org/content/19/3/92.long4 -
Reading further, they say they also tested in the equivalent of fasted state saying the blood glucose was not used when FFA were introduced. If it was a fasted state, then blood glucose would not need to be used by the cells as it would be lowered and if it were used, then hypoglycemia could result. Basically, it is saying what we want to happen is happening. When we get our BG into safe ranges, our bodies begin to burn fat instead of glucose because if it continued to burn glucose our liver would have to begin releasing glucose or our muscular glycogen would have to be tapped or we would become hypoglycemic.
EDIT - forgot possibility of gluconeogenesis - breaking down protein to create glucose - also not optimal.0 -
Dr Dumbass strikes again.
http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/11/22/how-a-low-carb-diet-is-metabolically-like-being-obese/
LCHF apparently makes us so obese, that we lose weight.
I think he thinks LCHF is bacon and butter all the time. That's ludicrous.
There is so much mis-information in that "article" it's not funny. I don't know if everyone is aware, but Michael Gregor is a full-time vegan/peta advocate - not a practicing MD.
He suggests Adults don't create new fat cells - based on one study - which has been disproven. http://preventdisease.com/news/15/090115_Contrary-To-Popular-Belief-Adults-Grow-New-Fat-Cells.shtml
There has never been any scientific evidence contrary to the theory that a high-fat/low-carb/moderate-protein diet is simply THE BEST for diabetics. Regardless of what that PETA advocate wants people to believe. 0 -
albertabeefy wrote: »Dr Dumbass strikes again.
http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/11/22/how-a-low-carb-diet-is-metabolically-like-being-obese/
LCHF apparently makes us so obese, that we lose weight.
I think he thinks LCHF is bacon and butter all the time. That's ludicrous.
There is so much mis-information in that "article" it's not funny. I don't know if everyone is aware, but Michael Gregor is a full-time vegan/peta advocate - not a practicing MD.
He suggests Adults don't create new fat cells - based on one study - which has been disproven. http://preventdisease.com/news/15/090115_Contrary-To-Popular-Belief-Adults-Grow-New-Fat-Cells.shtml
There has never been any scientific evidence contrary to the theory that a high-fat/low-carb/moderate-protein diet is simply THE BEST for diabetics. Regardless of what that PETA advocate wants people to believe.
Oh yeah, I'm aware this dude is a complete dumbass. I watched a documentary on Netflix where he was one of the interviewed and he doesn't sound any better than he writes.
His claims just don't make sense, logically. The studies he uses use faulty baselines which effect the results of the study making the information useless for his hypothesis .0 -
Given the enormous variations between individuals (even looking just at Type 2 diabetics), I'm surprised Dr. Greger doesn't naturally expect different people to have different nutritional needs and ideal diets. Of course, you can find personal testimonials on Greger's site by folks who attest to having achieved greater success in controlling their blood glucose and other conditions with Greger's approach than with whatever variant of LC they tried before; and Greger could find testimonials to the opposite effect here and on Dr. Bernstein's sites and elsewhere, yet I haven't noticed open acknowledgment of this fact on Greger's part. (By contrast, Phnney and Volek, among others, readily admit that a substantial minority of people respond better to LF diets.)
Still, I think there are significant areas of agreement between many folks in his camp(s) and ours (fresh foods, complex carbs, less refined & processed stuff, fewer chemicals, attention to micronutrients, etc.). Dr. Mercola's interview of Greger on YT is an example of someone with fundamentally different ideas managing to find some common ground with him.
As off-putting as it is to be pigeonholed as a bacon and butter apologist if you stray into Greger's community (drawing retorts such as: Krauss, Phinney, and Volek are on the meat and dairy payroll), I don't see the point in painting Greger with the PETA brush or calling him *kitten*. His filters and lenses may be completely different than most of ours, but I give him credit for trying to advance an approach he believes in, even if won't concede that it doesn't fit everyone.
0 -
Here's an interesting article from an MD who's been smoking everything but his shoes:
http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/11/17/fat-is-the-cause-of-type-2-diabetes/
It's not the carbs that's bad for you, it's the fat.....
because people are imagining their success on LCHF. Doctors.....
Yep, my Dad's doctor told him this, and he believed it right up until he died from diabetes complications 4 months ago.
2 -
@EbonyDahlia , I am sorry for your loss. It must have been hard having food arguments with your Dad when he was following his doctor's orders. I am very grateful that my DH doctor happened to go to a LCHF conference at the right moment for my husband's care. I don't think everyone at his office has quite got the High Fat part of the equation though so it is still a struggle with some confusing advice. However, at least LCHF has hit the radar for diabetic patients in that office. So sorry it did not happen for your Dad. Glad it is happening for you.0
-
Now this is a much better list of top diabetes influencers!
http://www.diaverge.com/blog/2016/12/5/low-carb-diabetes-influencers
Seeing this really made my day!2
