Jump to content
Diabetes forums
  • Welcome To Diabetes Forums!

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today to contribute and support the site.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bishop

Neal Barnard, Joel Fuhrman, Mangoman, etc. - and their push....

Recommended Posts

OldTech

Bishop, thanks for the explanation.

 

I recommend that you follow the advice that most of us follow: eat to your meter. As to eating fruit try a small portion of fruit and test 1 and 2 hours after. My rule is that if a food spikes my blood glucose to more than 100 mg/dl - its out or the portion has to be reduced. Others use either 120 mg/dl or 140 mg/dl for decision points.

 

I for one cannot really eat fruit. A half an apple will spike my blood glucose over 140 mg/dl (last time it was over 200 mg/dl). I can however eat small servings of berries (generally served with a generous helping of whipped cream).

 

For me the decision now is that if a food contains more than 5 net grams of carbs I will not even bother to test. Sometimes I am surprised. The last time I was surprised was to find out that liver, unlike other meats, have carbs (about 1.5 grams per ounce) so when I did a random test that evening I found my blood glucose had exceeded my goals for the meal. Now when I have liver I reduce the portions of other carbs to compensate.

 

If you are thinking you need a balanced diet on low carb, I too have had the same thoughts. So I make sure to eat a variety of nuts (limited to 2 ounces per day), non starchy vegetables, a variety of cheeses and meats, bakers chocolate, and have added liver at least once a week. I also take a variety of supplements including magnesium and a B based multivitamin. Except for low sodium/chloride and low calcium (due to hypoparathyroidism) my lab results have been normal and I feel good. I have added additional salt and calcium to fix the deficiencies.

 

Other people may have other ideas for achieving a more balanced diet on low carb.

 

BTW: Based on the claim that the plant based hypocaloric New Castle diet 'cured' type II I gave it serious consideration. The New Castle diet is an attempt to emulate the results of bariatric surgery that was thought to cure type II as a side effect. However, it has now been shown that bariatric surgery does not cure type II and Dr Taylor no longer is no longer claiming a cure. He now says that it may lead to remission. And since I would argue that I am already in remission and have adjusted to my diet I see no reason to look for alternatives to my ketogenic diet.

 

Note. I use the word diet, but in reality it is a life style change for me. There is no going back to my former diet or even cheating if I want to have normal blood glucose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kit

If you are thinking you need a balanced diet on low carb, I too have had the same thoughts. So I make sure to eat a variety of nuts (limited to 2 ounces per day), non starchy vegetables, a variety of cheeses and meats, bakers chocolate, and have added liver at least once a week. I also take a variety of supplements including magnesium and a B based multivitamin. Except for low sodium/chloride and low calcium (due to hypoparathyroidism) my lab results have been normal and I feel good. I have added additional salt and calcium to fix the deficiencies.

 

 

Variety is the key to a balanced diet, no matter what kind of diet it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bishop

OldTech, thanks for sharing and those are some nice looking "normal" numbers there:  "Last A1c 4.5. Average postprandial 86. Very little variability. Very low carb and metformin (2x500mg). Two meals a day with no snacks."

 

And your PP rule about not going past 100 vs. the usual 120 or 140 I see a lot of, sounds like a decent contributor to that success, along with a number of other factors you call out.  I'm just starting out (and from a really bad, initial A1C number) and trying to keep things reasonable, but I've been hitting as high as 135 PP (1 and 2 hour checks) eating things with a bit more carbs, as I figure certain foods or food combinations out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bishop

 

BTW: Based on the claim that the plant based hypocaloric New Castle diet 'cured' type II I gave it serious consideration.

 

Yeah, starting to be mildly annoyed by those claims of a cure and then merely stating fantastic A1C numbers and the need to be on a given diet.
 
While it’s no small feat for a diabetic to remain on a diet/exercise regimen to hit an A1C number, that doesn’t translate to cure in my book given my current understanding.  More like a well managed successful (and hopefully sustainable) outcome, which is a great thing.
 
I’m not sure what the clinical definition would be, but I’d consider a cure more along the lines of being able to see OGTT or similar “glucose challenge + response” curves which were contained and normal.  Or in the Type 1 case, evidence that beta cells were regenerated somehow and the insulin was flowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwags

My definition of reversal of diabetes or a cure would be when you don't have to restrict your diet anymore and still get normal bgs. If you have to eat only raw veggies or even a 20 carb diet to get into the normal range I don't consider that a cure. I have done various levels of carbs over 8 years. I have added some non gluten grains back in but I have to eat them early in the day and exercise a ton to keep from spiking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
samuraiguy

I still have 2-3 fruit portions a day and keep this little list handy:

 

Fruit with Less Than 5 Net Carbs

1/2 cup of raw strawberries (3.3 net carbs)
1/2 cup of raw raspberries (4.2 net carbs)
1/2 of a medium peach (4.3 net carbs)
5 whole sweet cherries (5.1 net carbs)
1/2 of a kiwi fruit (4.3 net carbs)
1 medium apricot (3.2 net carbs)
1/2 medium Haas avocado (3.7 net carbs)

Fruit with less than 10 Net Carbs

1 cup of raw strawberries (6.6 net carbs)
1 cup of raw raspberries (8.4 net carbs)
1/2 cup of raw blueberries (8.6 net carbs)
1/2 cup of raw boysenberries (8.0 net carbs)
1/2 cup of blackberries (5.9 net carbs)
1/2 cup raw grapes (7.1 net carbs)
1/2 cup raw pineapple (8.7 net carbs)
1 raw plum (8.6 net carbs)
1 medium tangerine (9.4 net carbs)
1 raw lime (7.1 net carbs)
1/2 medium apple (9.0 net carbs)
1/2 Valencia orange (5.2 net carbs)
1/2 cup raw honeydew melon (7.8 net carbs)
1/2 cup raw cantaloupe (5.7 net carbs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bishop

Handy dandy list, thanks samuraiguy!

 

Funny how Google, Siri, etc. have a nice, clear, formatted nutrition table for a question like "how many carbs in xxx" but when I change that to "how many net carbs in xxx" it just returns the usual list of search results.  At least for me.

 

Also, for some reason, I didn't realize blackberries had more net carbs than strawberries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kit

When I do the look up I get (for 100g servings of each, too lazy to figure out cups, etc)

Strawberries - 8g carbs, 2g fiber

Blackberries - 10g carbs, 5g fiber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgepds

We were believers in a Diet for a Small Planet (a vegan manifesto from the early 70's). ... I now blame this diet for my diabetes and heart disease.

 

 

Could it just possibly be, that you got older ?

 

I'm quite sure aging is terminal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldTech

Could it just possibly be, that you got older ?

 

I'm quite sure aging is terminal

 

Diabetes, heart disease and obesity are not found in native populations that are not eating our western style diet. In fact these diseases were called the diseases of civilization back in the 1900s because native people introduced to the white man's diet quickly developed these diseases. So I do not think that diabetes is a natural result of aging.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwags

I guess we are all different. I have to limit fruit to 1/2 cup once a week or so. it seems to make my bga spike quite high the next day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seagal

I think a nice fruit cup would be a slice of peach, two strawberries sliced and another two berries, it would be a small, satisfying desert after dinner.  If I have apple, it is one thin slice and the dang apple will last weeks.  Anyway, I won't feel deprived in any way, knowing I can have a portion of fruit whenever I choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgepds

Diabetes, heart disease and obesity are not found in native populations that are not eating our western style diet. In fact these diseases were called the diseases of civilization back in the 1900s because native people introduced to the white man's diet quickly developed these diseases. So I do not think that diabetes is a natural result of aging.  

 

Good point.. but age does matter. The CDC keeps statistics on the percent of population with diabetes in different age bins ( back to about 1980) . A general rule is the older you get, the greater the % diabetic. They note "In 2011, the rate of diagnosed diabetes among people aged 65–74 (21.8%) was more than 13 times that of people younger than 45 years of age (1.6%)."

 

Now let's follow your point that it is diet and not age that explains diabetes. How do you account for the difference by age group? You'd have to posit that the young eat a different diet than the old for your statement to be completely true.  I'm not saying that diet is not a factor, I'm saying age is a major factor 

 

Wandering off point, things are getting worse. Interestingly enough, the % diabetic in each age bin has increased over the past 30 years . Back in 1980 only about 9% in the 65-74 age bracket had diabetes, but 2011 it increased to ~22%. The inflection point seems to be around 1995.

 

 

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figbyage.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwags

Most of my relatives lived well into their mid 80's without being diabetic. My dad did get prednisone induced diabetes after being on prednisone everyday for 15 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
miketurco

Good point.. but age does matter. The CDC keeps statistics on the percent of population with diabetes in different age bins ( back to about 1980) . A general rule is the older you get, the greater the % diabetic. They note "In 2011, the rate of diagnosed diabetes among people aged 65–74 (21.8%) was more than 13 times that of people younger than 45 years of age (1.6%)."

 

Now let's follow your point that it is diet and not age that explains diabetes. How do you account for the difference by age group? You'd have to posit that the young eat a different diet than the old for your statement to be completely true.  I'm not saying that diet is not a factor, I'm saying age is a major factor 

 

Wandering off point, things are getting worse. Interestingly enough, the % diabetic in each age bin has increased over the past 30 years . Back in 1980 only about 9% in the 65-74 age bracket had diabetes, but 2011 it increased to ~22%. The inflection point seems to be around 1995.

 

 

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figbyage.htm

 

 

It seems to me that many of the mistakes you make throughout life have a way of adding up. People don't get fat overnight, for example. Heart disease, kidney disease, cancer, etc. often take many years to set in. And these things aren't always discovered right away. I think that as the body gets older, it gets weaker and is less resistant to the hardships of life. So, sure, there's a strong correlation between age and diabetes, but that doesn't mean that age, in and of itself, is a causative factor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldTech

Good point.. but age does matter. The CDC keeps statistics on the percent of population with diabetes in different age bins ( back to about 1980) . A general rule is the older you get, the greater the % diabetic. They note "In 2011, the rate of diagnosed diabetes among people aged 65–74 (21.8%) was more than 13 times that of people younger than 45 years of age (1.6%)."

 

Now let's follow your point that it is diet and not age that explains diabetes. How do you account for the difference by age group? You'd have to posit that the young eat a different diet than the old for your statement to be completely true.  I'm not saying that diet is not a factor, I'm saying age is a major factor 

 

 

Yes, I agree that for our population (mostly eating a western style diet) do get diabetes as a function of age. It just takes years of abuse for the metabolic diseases to appear. Still it was rare or nonexistent for people eating a native diet regardless of age, so to me that says that our current epidemic of metabolic diseases has something to do with our lifestyle and diet. Personally I think that it is the high carb component of the western style diet that is most responsible along with manufactured foods including fats from plants, but of course most commercial, government officials, and especially the medical establishment would not agree. 

 

And to clarify yes it is possible that I got diabetes because of age (after all I was 68 when I was diagnosed), however since studies have shown that statins increase the risk of getting diabetes I still think the statins played a role. In addition the low fat diet is really a very high carb diet which is even worse for you than the more traditional western style diet that I grew up with. So I now blame both for my diabetes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.