umayster Member

Maybe not as fast as 6 months, but eat a little bit wrong for decades and you will see bad results. CICO is always mentioned alone. It should always be paired with the words 'nutritionally balanced'

At this point none of the health issues I'm working to address have any ties (verified or speculative) whatsoever to saturated fat levels, so saturated fat levels have not been an area of concern. In my personal quest, I've never found a link between high sat fat levels causing or aggravating my issues. I've always eaten…

Thanks, forgot about how the devil fat figured into the equation. I have a senior parent who is deathly afraid of hypo's as she lives alone and pretty much stuck in a cycle of managing her drugs with carb dosage. It isn't really working well.

True, but from a patient perspective, being kept functional enough to keep shoveling money to pharmaceutical companies isn't really a valid treatment goal. Real health is of primary importance.

Do you think this is the only reason that diabetics on pharmaceuticals are told they must eat carbs? I have yet to figure out any other reason that a person who doesn't digest carbs well is told to eat carbs. Is it strictly to avoid a bad result from drugs dropping the blood sugar too low?

Extremist & not really practiced by many, ya think? Drinking bacon grease? It is solid at room temp and painful when hot enough to drink. :p

Don't hurt yourself rushing to discount the authors, you might miss the interesting and relevant content. Even the mainstream authorities are rewinding on the whole "evil fat, carbs are nutritionally glorious" detour we've followed for the last 40 years on our quest for nutritional understanding. Cheers!

Not me, I usually follow the links back to the sciency source.

This is the easy read, contains links to more credible opinions. http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2015/06/24/fat-is-back-experts-say-its-time-to-stop-limiting-our-total-fat-intake/

You are talking to a specific person who's doctor made a suggestion based on information that you do not know. You need to stop.

Not fat. anymore.

The science that has generally agreed that carbohydrates are not an essential nutrient and have established a lower limit of zero. I still eat some carbs, just not at the RDA levels that increased all my risk markers for metabolic disorders. The math is .. My total calories - 140ish calories of carbs = remaining calories…

Duplicate.

So rabbbit is trashing the doctors instructions while knowing no actual information about doctor or patient? Not cool.

I chose to eat based on science rather than RDA's which are hotly debated & discounted by science. It is nice that RDA's work for you, the carbohydrate RDA was making me unhealthy and I am reversing that now with a high fat diet.

Like nvmom says! Sodium, magnesium and potassium needs should be well covered while you transition!

It is yummy, healthy AND I'm losing a pound a week!

I did it by building a complete menu of protein and fat foods I love and along with minimal carbs I end up with a fully satisfying diet of foods I enjoy and almost no hunger or willpower issues. Search for low carb recipes and start developing a new list of go-to menu choices. You can do it & it will make your weight loss…

Rabbit, do you know OP's doc and OP's medical history? Or are you just making generalizations?

Not everyone, just those who are overeating because the composition of their diet leads to excessive hunger.

https://github.com/Surye/mfp-keto-userscript I installed this script and get net carbs column on non-mobile

Dried fruit packs carbs into a small package and may not be a good choice for a diabetic looking for control through diet.

Just a delicious fantasy. :'(

I thought that focusing on the assumptions would be productive also. This whole topic is a setup. I've found that belief in ones own expertise is typically a danger to ones actual expertise.

In the real world people do not trot off to the doc with a list of symptoms and get an accurate diagnosis, appropriate treatment and timely resolution - especially for endocrine problems.

Cool, last time I asked for any kind of actual study of moderation showing effectiveness, the response was completely devoid of science supporting the moderation advice offered here constantly and with great confidence. Less food diversity was associated with better weight and health outcomes. Or in other words, feel free…

Except.. most of our fruits and vegetables have been heavily manipulated by man and loosely resemble their original nature designed form. The natural form is not nearly so large and hyper palatable as the manipulated by man form.

Why? Well when you liberate the sugar from the structure nature packaged it in you change the digestion of it including increasing calories absorbed in some cases. Neither you nor I know the whole answer.

Got it, I've been trying to define my choices and beliefs on healthy food choices - with great difficulty. There isn't a great single term or rigid category, but I just read a term someone used - 'fractionated' - which seems to define foods I'm more careful about eating or even avoid entirely. It isn't really about added…

Do you mean 'address' in the practical sense? Like food choices?