[Gary_W]

Originally Posted by EdnBama

For clarity, a T2 does not necessarily have "loads of insulin floating around".

Remember, there are T2s that do not have sufficient insulin at all, and therefore require insulin injections similar to T1s.

It's a fair cop. I should have said 'many T2's'. Missing word aside, I think the spirit of the point was reasonable.

[EdnBama]

Originally Posted by fgummett

So you don't intend to read Taubes?

Are you now putting words into my mouth?

If so, at least they are both low-fat and low-carb!

[fgummett]

Read the whole article... and it agrees with what I already said... yes fat is stored in fat cells BUT it requires insulin and Glycerol to do so... where does the Glycerol come from..?

[EdnBama]

Originally Posted by Gary_W

It's a fair cop. I should have said 'many T2's'. Missing word aside, I think the spirit of the point was reasonable.

Well, I made the point of clarification for any newbies who might misunderstand.

[fgummett]

Glycerol phosphate is produced from Glucose when it is used for fuel in the fat cells and the liver. It is an essential component of the process that binds three fatty acids into a triglyceride.
For a review of this molecule, the triglyceride/fatty-acid cycle, and the glucose/fatty acid cycle, see Newsholme and Start 1973:214-34

or

Glyceroneogenesis and the Triglyceride/Fatty Acid Cycle -- Reshef et al. 278 (33): 30413 -- Journal of Biological Chemistry

What is the metabolic source of glyceride-glycerol needed to support the triglyceride/fatty acid cycle? There are three major possibilities: glucose, via glycolysis, glycerol after phosphorylation by glycerol kinase, or the conversion of pyruvate to glyceride-glycerol via a pathway to be discussed, termed glyceroneogenesis.

[EdnBama]

How Fat Enters Your Body

When you eat food that contains fat, mostly triglycerides, it goes through your stomach and intestines. In the intestines, the following happens:

1. Large fat droplets get mixed with bile salts from the gall bladder in a process called emulsification. The mixture breaks up the large droplets into several smaller droplets called micelles, increasing the fat's surface area.
2. The pancreas secretes enzymes called lipases that attack the surface of each micelle and break the fats down into their parts, glycerol and fatty acids.
3. These parts get absorbed into the cells lining the intestine.
4. In the intestinal cell, the parts are reassembled into packages of fat molecules (triglycerides) with a protein coating called chylomicrons. The protein coating makes the fat dissolve more easily in water.
5. The chylomicrons are released into the lymphatic system -- they do not go directly into the bloodstream because they are too big to pass through the wall of the capillary.
6. The lymphatic system eventually merges with the veins, at which point the chylomicrons pass into the bloodstream.

Source: HowStuffWorks "Body Fat Basics"

[fgummett]

I understand that any glycerol which comes from the breakdown of Triglycerides cannot be re-used for the same purpose... perhaps it is the same with any glycerol resulting from the breakdown of dietary fats.

I doubt that we are talking LEGO bricks here

[Gary_W]

Originally Posted by fgummett

The point of the article is that eating freely of carbs (especially highly -refined like HFCS) makes the fat storage process go into overtime.

That may be your interpretation. Another interpretation would be 'stay away from all carbs and eat as much fat as you like and you'll still lose weight'. Insulin is the enemy! Carbs are ALL bad! Stay away from carbs, avoid evil insulin, the world will be well and anyone that says otherwise is clearly a brainwashed fool who has been eating too much sugar.

If eating carbs is a dead cert to make you obese and unhealthy, I cannot work out why every person in this country is not obese and unhealthy. Many are, many more are not. Do all the people who are not obese eat low carb?

Regarding the article, I just object to the opening lines as previously stated. When an article starts with such blindingly sweeping statements which aren't exactly 100% true if applied in a real world situation then that pulls the rest of the piece into disrepute. And no-one has yet mentioned the 2nd part that I pulled them up on 'all carbs are digested within a few minutes'. Please, someone who is an avid low carb fan (and fair play to you, if it works it works) just stand up and say that this bit of the article is clearly misleading just so I can feel you're being honest with yourselves.

I'll be perfectly honest. When I first came to this forum, I thought the low carbers were all stark raving mad. I believed this for two reasons.

1. Because I didn't understand it all
2. Becuase many of those indulging in low-carbing are so defensive of it and so full of venom towards the 'fact' that carbs had ruined their life until they saw the light and that anyone else who doesn't see the light is missing out.

I do my best to keep an open mind. To this end, I've posted questions on this thread and others in an attempt to understand why people low-carb. I have a long way to go, but I'm getting there with point 1 and as such I now see the reasoning behind the low carb choice. It's not for me at this stage, but I 'get' why people do it now and see where you are coming from.

I suspect some of the strongest supporters of low carbing have no idea how offputting it is to a curious person who likes to understand to be faced with point 2. A lot of people will be turned off by the evangelical zeal and selective reading / blinkers and stay with the opinion that low-carbers are mad. Which you're not

It is hard for an moderate carb-muncher like me to take things seriously when the really silly statements in an article such as this are glossed over or ignored by people who are desperate to prove the point that low carbing is great. If we could at least be honest and say '2nd part of the article is interesting, but man alive this guy is coming out with some rot at the start just to reel in the audience' then I'd feel a little better and my quest to better understand the various faces of this disease and how people choose to treat it would go more smoothly.

[fgummett]

Thanks Gary I did not post the article and I actually agree with REDLAN that is was an amateurish re-hashing of the thesis which Gary Taubes puts forward in much more detail.

I really do get the point about how off-putting some of us over-zealous low-carbers can be... what I can offer in my defense is that I feel attacked pretty much every time I bring it up... even the weight of the media seems to be against the idea.. every other story is based on how eating fat makes you fat, so maybe it is natural for me to come out swinging... I sincerely mean no offense to anyone here

I expect that the low-carb line of reasoning makes much more sense for someone who is obese and Type 2 D, than for someone who is Type 1 and a healthy weight.

[Gary_W]

Originally Posted by fgummett

Thanks Gary I did not post the article and I actually agree with REDLAN that is was an amateurish re-hashing of the thesis which Gary Taubes puts forward in much more detail.

I really do get the point about how off-putting some of us over-zealous low-carbers can be... what I can offer in my defense is that I feel attacked pretty much every time I bring it up... even the weight of the media seems to be against the idea.. every other story is based on how eating fat makes you fat, so maybe it is natural for me to come out swinging... I sincerely mean no offense to anyone here

I expect that the low-carb line of reasoning makes much more sense for someone who is obese and Type 2 D, than for someone who is Type 1 and a healthy weight.

Thanks for this, Frank. It is the ability to look at all sides of an argument that will help everyone here I feel. I hate it when politicians tow the party line and defend something that everyone knows is wrong just because it's the position they are entrenched in. No-one respects them for it. Far better to take each new bit of this debate as it comes and say 'that bit makes sense' and 'that bit is complete hype'.

I agree that low carbing makes more sense for an obese T2 than it does for me, but I still like to understand the hopes and fears of those taking part. I am fortunate in being able to eat pretty much what I like whilst not spiking too badly, having a decent HBA1c and not putting on weight. For all I know, my insulin resistance may change as may my weight or other aspects of my control. Seeking to understand all sides of this is helpful as I rule nothing out in the future for controlling this condition. Keeping it relevant / balanced makes me take more notice of an interesting way of doing things that may appeal to me at some point but does not yet do so.

[matingara]

i am a slim Type X diabetic.

i do not make enough insulin. i have chosen to try to preserve my pancreas by quiescing it - letting it rest - by adding exogenous insulin.

my regimen says small inputs = small outputs = small changes = greater control. i do this by augmenting the insulin input with a lower carbohydrate input.

this is a work in progress.

at the moment it seems to be working quite well.



-- Joel.

[fgummett]

Originally Posted by Gary_W

It is the ability to look at all sides of an argument that will help everyone here I feel.

I couldn't agree more Gary!

It may be worth remembering that when I joined DF I was a staunch supporter or the balanced/moderate/low-fat eating plan and had indeed been following it for several years... look at my early posts At that time I still trusted that when an expert in a white coat said something it was based on scientific evidence. So I not only understand that way of eating but I have lived it... how many low-carb naysayers can claim the same?

Low-carb came as quite a revelation to me after posts by John (thanks) lead me to Gary Taubes first and then Dr Bernstein -- I only read the Atkins book quite recently and was not impressed with the hype. I was already "in the loop" with frequent blood profiles etc... and looking at my body, realised that I was a walking heart-attack, so what did I have to lose by trying something different. The changes I have noted were, and still are amazing.

There are some here who are quick to dismiss Taubes or Bernstein as "quacks" or "hacks" but I wonder how many of them have even read their books? I'd rather have all the facts in front of me before making a value judgment... and it is a fact that "eating fat makes you fat and leads to heart disease" is no more proven than the idea that "eating carbs makes you fat".

The biggest lesson for me has been that just because an expert says something you cannot take it at face value... seek out unbiased research and arm yourself with knowledge... many of our current health "truths" are not based on good science.

[matingara]

Originally Posted by fgummett

I couldn't agree more Gary!

It may be worth remembering that when I joined DF I was a staunch supporter or the balanced/moderate/low-fat eating plan and had indeed been following it for several years... look at my early posts At that time I still trusted that when an expert in a white coat said something it was based on scientific evidence. So I not only understand that way of eating but I have lived it... how many low-carb naysayers can claim the same?

Low-carb came as quite a revelation to me after posts by John (thanks) lead me to Gary Taubes first and then Dr Bernstein -- I only read the Atkins book quite recently and was not impressed with the hype. I was already "in the loop" with frequent blood profiles etc... and looking at my body, realised that I was a walking heart-attack, so what did I have to lose by trying something different. The changes I have noted were, and still are amazing. There are some here who are quick to dismiss Taubes or Bernstein as "quacks" or "hacks" but I wonder how many of them have even read their books? I'd rather have all the facts in front of me before making a value judgment... and it is a fact that "eating fat makes you fat and leads to heart disease" is no more proven than the idea that "eating carbs makes you fat".

The biggest lesson for me has been that just because an expert says something you cannot take it at face value... seek out unbiased research and arm yourself with knowledge... many of our current health "truths" are not based on good science.

Frank, Amen to that lil brother. i was the same as you. i had been on the low fat diet since i was 32 or so.

now you know i can be pretty convinced and strict in what i do. therefore, you can imagine that i was VERY VERY strict on the low fat stuff.

so, i have come to low carb via roughly the same route as you. though separate (that is QUITE important)..

so - yeah. Amen and all that.



-- Joel.

[fgummett]

Too true Joel

And in case anyone is interested, you can learn more about this exciting subject at your local library

You can even read whole chapters of Dr Richard Bernstein's Diabetes Solution book free, gratis, and for nothin' on-line.

Gary Taubes has a couple of on-line presentations so you don't even have to read for example: gary taubes - Google Video

[bunbury]

Originally Posted by fgummett

I couldn't agree more Gary!

... I was a staunch supporter of the balanced/moderate/low-fat eating plan ...

.... and looking at my body, realised that I was a walking heart-attack, so what did I have to lose by trying something different. The changes I have noted were, and still are amazing.

... many of our current health "truths" are not based on good science.

Agreed. Low fat was killing me. Low-carb has been an extraordinary discovery. The benefits are so many that sticking to it is, for me, a no-brainer. My diet is fresh, varied, tasty.

Low fat would have killed me off early - what's the benefit in that? I'm now, according to my doctor, healthier than I've been for decades (and that includes my pre-D life). And I feel better than I have for years.

I don't claim it's the answer for everyone, but I suspect that if some of its critics went low-carb for 6 months or so (to establish a base line) and then started to gradually introduce individual higher-carb foods while testing testing testing, they might have some food for thought.