Monday, 29 April 2013

Not exactly rocket science, is it? Part 2

If there is a deficiency in "X", taking supplement "X" will correct the deficiency in "X".
∴ If problem "Y" is caused by a deficiency in "X", taking supplement "X" will fix problem "Y".

If there's no deficiency in "X", taking supplement "X" won't make any difference.
∴ If problem "Y" isn't caused by a deficiency in "X", taking supplement "X" won't fix problem "Y".

If a person spends a lot of time outdoors in skimpy clothing in sun that's higher than 45deg in the sky, it's highly likely that they won't be deficient in Vitamin D3. Therefore, supplementing with 5,000iu/day of Vitamin D3 won't highly likely do anything.

∴ If the above sun-worshipping person has type 2 diabetes, supplementing with 5,000iu/day of Vitamin D3 won't highly likely make any difference.

Not exactly...
Rocket Science!
There will be some people for whom all of the supplements & exercises that I recommend don't make any difference to their type 2 diabetes. Sorry about that. A low-carb (but not very-low-carb) diet will minimise your serum glucose level fluctuations without increasing your serum NEFA level excessively. See The problem with Diabetes.

23 comments:

Kade Storm said...

I am of the opinion that some of these issues of progressive glucose intolerance & high fasting glucose in VLC adherents is possibly the result of going neurotically low on protein and almost ape-shit bonkers about carbohydrate.

I have heard of others, like Steve, who have managed to maintain the dietary strategy long term with very tight and stable glucose along with great A1C and decent lipids. They consume a largely low carbohydrate diet with random VLC days--intermittent ketosis of sorts. What they don't do, is intentionally restrict protein to the point of eye-twitching neurosis.

Blind Doggie said...

Hi KS nice to hear from you again.

Two things Nigel.

"Why is a self-confessed T2DM failure (who has to stay on a ketogenic diet for the rest of his life because he refuses to inject any insulin) advising people with diabetes on how to manage their condition? Diabetics are much better off going to Richard K Bernstein's site. People with T2DM don't have to go as low-carb as people with T1DM as they still have functioning beta cells ... "

In my and I suspect a lot of diabetics minds who follow keto , near keto or "low carb" regimes calling us failures is pretty insulting! We have simply chosen a valid and safe alternative, recommended by more enlightened health care regimes, than taking an escalator of drugs that will likely hasten our pancreas demise and make us gain weight. The insulin option is always available but any T1 will tell you it certainly isn't an easy option both physically or psychologically. T2 diabetics may well have some percentage of their beta cells functioning, that percentage varies from person to person and therefore kind of sets a limit on grams / day that each one of us can tolerate without taking some serious medications or going on insulin. In some T2 people that limit may well be Eddies sub 50g but in others it can be a lot higher. My limit is around 75g / day. In a GTT comparison test that some of us did a while back I found (and other T2's with varying daily carb limits) spiked in very similar ways within the first 60 minutes as a T1 diabetic who also did the test. The difference was of course after 60 mins my BG's began to come down as my second phase kicked in whereas our T1 friend had to inject insulin to recover.

I suppose what I'm getting at is you shouldn't confuse Eddies remarkably irritating intransigence that it has to be sub 50g or nothing (as well as his general anti meds stance) with the fact that many T2's do safely control their condition on ketogenic regimes for years. Some of them do ketogenic regimes because they need to, some do them optionally as they recognise they could eat somewhat above the "keto barrier" but prefer a keto diet. The vast majority that I have been in contact function perfectly normally and do not suffer from aggression or stupidity from not eating enough carbs! It is true the average brain needs around 120g carb / day but if you don't eat 120g / day then the body simply adapts and synthesises them from other sources.

You also may be missing the subtle differences as to why a T1 does low carb compared to a T2. My son is T1 and he low carbs because it allows him to use far less insulin (helping him stop weight gain) and also importantly using less insulin gives him a far smaller hypo risk. A T2 generally low carbs to simply control their BG's far more efficiently than any current medication except insulin.

Secondly you state

"Diabetes drugs can not cure type 2 diabetes. However, supplements and exercise can cure type 2 diabetes, (if the type 2 diabetes is caused by a deficiency in nutrients, and/or sedentary behaviour) provided that the pancreatic beta cells haven't been completely destroyed in the meantime. "

You seem to be misunderstanding what T2 diabetes actually is. If pancreatic beta cells haven't been destroyed in large amounts you can reverse the condition pretty much by losing insulin resistance. The best way of losing insulin resistance is to lose weight if you need to and exercise and supplements that help reduce insulin resistance can help. However in this case you DO NOT HAVE T2D because you haven't suffered a lot of beta cell loss. The definition of T2D IS when you have lost beta cells so that even if like me (and Eddie) you get rid of most of your insulin resistance you will not be cured in any shape or form. I would point out I went from that prediabetic fully reversible state to full on T2D in just 6 months after being told to adopt the NHS standard diet so by the time I was "newly diagnosed" it was too late to reverse.

Steve

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Hi Steve,

1) I was in "insult Eddie" mode, so anything went (and did!).

2) A diagnosis of T2DM is based on either fasting blood glucose >7.0mmol/L, or 2-hour OGTT result >11.1mmol/L. The state of the beta cells is irrelevant.

Cheers, Nige

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Steve,

Do NOT get involved in my slanging matches with Eddie. Things have been said and will be said on both sides that are intended to hurt. Accuracy of facts is irrelevant.

Please read my articles under the label Diabetes and comment on those, or any other non-slanging match articles.

Any further comments from you in slanging match articles will not be published.

Cheers, Nige

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Kade Storm said...
"I am of the opinion that some of these issues of progressive glucose intolerance & high fasting glucose in VLC adherents is possibly the result of going neurotically low on protein and almost ape-shit bonkers about carbohydrate.

I have heard of others, like Steve, who have managed to maintain the dietary strategy long term with very tight and stable glucose along with great A1C and decent lipids. They consume a largely low carbohydrate diet with random VLC days--intermittent ketosis of sorts. What they don't do, is intentionally restrict protein to the point of eye-twitching neurosis."
Steve Cooksey? We used to be friends on Facebook and even had a video chat on Skype, when Steve got a new mic to try out.

One day, I tried to point out to him that he had made a massive blunder regarding Methylglyoacal. He de-friended me!

VLC seems to make people rather, uh, tetchy! I wonder if it's due to chronic hypercortisolaemia + hyperadrenalinaemia?

Blind Doggie said...

KS said

"They consume a largely low carbohydrate diet with random VLC days--intermittent ketosis of sorts. What they don't do, is intentionally restrict protein to the point of eye-twitching neurosis."

Good summary Kade and I agree that fixating on protein is pretty pointless. The RDA for protein is around 16% (I think) so at 25% I'm above that. Going high on protein can give you a kidney damage risk but I get the GP to monitor my kidney function regularly for any signs of trouble. Carbohydrate is different and I very carefully watch how much I consume from the feedback I get from my BG readings and use that feedback loop to guestimate my safe levels of carbs at any particular time. I think my "fixation" is acceptable as it would be directly detrimental to my health to ignore it. Diana (contributor on Carbsane's blog) described it that "You have a metabolic disorder that requires a specialised diet" That is exactly how I see it and agree with her entirely.

Nige said

"A diagnosis of T2DM is based on either fasting blood glucose >7.0mmol/L, or 2-hour OGTT result >11.1mmol/L. The state of the beta cells is irrelevant."

Hmmm in that case I'm not a T2 diabetic as my fasting levels are rarely above 5.5mmol, my hBA1c is 4.8% and not above 6.5% (the other main diagnostic value) and I can pass a GTT test two days in a row ending up after 2 hours at 6.5mmol/l and 7.6mmol/l respectively so not even in the impaired bracket let alone the T2 threshold of 11mmol/l

Yet my GP also a local diabetes specialist says I am most definitely T2 as would the diabetes consultants at the UK's leading diabetes centre that is situated in my neck of the woods. The numbers you give may well be used to DIAGNOSE T2 but N.I.C.E defines T2 along similar lines as the WHO "The guideline recommendations were developed using the World Health
Organization (WHO) definition of diabetes, which requires a degree of high plasma glucose levels sufficient to put the individual at risk of the microvascular complications of diabetes" That certainly covers me if I were to stop my specialised diet.

I'm somewhat surprised that you wish to censor my comments on what appears to be a debate about VLC. Any particular reason or aren't diabetics who control their condition successfully with low carb (VLC or not) allowed to comment? All I am doing is trying to put the low carb viewpoint of the majority of T2's who adopt it as a balance against the very fixed and fundamentalist view that Eddie has. Claiming VLC'ers are generally "techy" does you no credit and could be construed as discriminatory which I'm sure is not your intention.

Steve

Nigel Kinbrum said...

"I'm somewhat surprised that you wish to censor my comments on what appears to be a debate about VLC. Any particular reason or aren't diabetics who control their condition successfully with low carb (VLC or not) allowed to comment? All I am doing is trying to put the low carb viewpoint of the majority of T2's who adopt it as a balance against the very fixed and fundamentalist view that Eddie has. Claiming VLC'ers are generally "techy" does you no credit and could be construed as discriminatory which I'm sure is not your intention.

Steve"
I'm just trying to stop pointless debate over insults between myself & Eddie. O.K?

As there is proper debate going on here, you can carry on posting comments in this thread as long as it's on-topic.

My personal experience is that people who are on VLC for a long tetchy are tetchy. I'm sorry, but that's my personal experience. Maybe it's Magnesium deficiency. Galina L mentioned Mg. I supplement with ~4g/day of Epsom Salts as it's cheap as chips and it also keeps me regular as clockwork (TMI!).

""A diagnosis of T2DM is based on either fasting blood glucose >7.0mmol/L, or 2-hour OGTT result >11.1mmol/L. The state of the beta cells is irrelevant."

Hmmm in that case I'm not a T2 diabetic as my fasting levels are rarely above 5.5mmol, my hBA1c is 4.8% and not above 6.5% (the other main diagnostic value) and I can pass a GTT test two days in a row ending up after 2 hours at 6.5mmol/l and 7.6mmol/l respectively so not even in the impaired bracket let alone the T2 threshold of 11mmol/l

Yet my GP also a local diabetes specialist says I am most definitely T2 as would the diabetes consultants at the UK's leading diabetes centre that is situated in my neck of the woods. The numbers you give may well be used to DIAGNOSE T2 but N.I.C.E defines T2 along similar lines as the WHO "The guideline recommendations were developed using the World Health
Organization (WHO) definition of diabetes, which requires a degree of high plasma glucose levels sufficient to put the individual at risk of the microvascular complications of diabetes" That certainly covers me if I were to stop my specialised diet."
If your fasting glucose is fine and you can pass a GTT test two days in a row , my opinion is that you are no longer diabetic.

"Specialised diet"? I beg to differ. It's a healthy way of eating. You're not going deficient in any nutrients and it's not making you IR. So you can't eat a pile of CIAB? So what? Nobody should be eating a pile of CIAB anyway!

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Hey Steve,

I'm guessing that your diet is LC but not VLC (as you can pass GTTs without any problems). Amirite?

I know that we haven't exactly got on like a house on fire, but when there are slanging matches going on with other people, there are usually casualties!

You seem like a very reasonable person, so is there any chance of you persuading Eddie to stop making himself look like The Village Idiot, as it's probably off-putting to people with T2DM and there is actually some useful information on his site.

Cheers, Nige

Nigel Kinbrum said...

"My personal experience is that people who are on VLC for a long tetchy are tetchy."
My personal experience is that people who are on VLC for a long time are tetchy.
Oops! Roll on Disqus!

Blind Doggie said...

Nige said

"I'm just trying to stop pointless debate over insults between myself & Eddie. O.K?"

Yes realise that but you see for a lot of us that trading of insults damages the more moderate low carb message that the majority of us follow and makes it difficult for that LC message to be taken seriously. It's been going on for years and it is totally pointless. The bottom line is I think Eddies sub 50g diet is perfectly safe and valid for treating his T2D however it's his fundamentalism and general anti healthcare, anti medication stance I object to. I strongly object to him attempting to force a singular politicised view of T2D treatment on everyone rather than just getting on and helping newly diagnosed T2's see that there are many alternatives to killing themselves following the classic NHS drugs esculator route. I have made that clear to him countless times but have concluded he will never change so debate with him is largely meaningless. A lot of people have come to the same conclusion over the years.

"Specialised diet"

Yes specialised. You are assuming I use to eat CIAB. I did not. I and my family always cooked from fresh , ate healthily and did moderate exercise. We rarely had sweets or puddings and ate very little highly processed foods. We were a classic healthy UK "5 a day family." I seriously doubt that I am unique in getting T2 from from following that diet but even so I have no particular problem with the UK NHS dietary guidelines (essentially minimal CIAB but low fat high carb) for non diabetics. My issue is with continuing to recommend that low fat high carb diet to diabetics who have broken metabolisms that cannot process that regime adequately. It is madness. There always use to be different "specialised" low carb dietary guidelines for diabetics in the past because it was obvious that is what was required. The current policy demonises many T2 (and T1) diabetics as being "fat and lazy" when effectively a lot of weight gain is caused by the drugs or insulin they are on. I was diagnosed T2 with a BMI of 28 so not obese. I admit I put 4 stone on over a 4 year period as I approached my 50th birthday but it certainly wasn't because I was eating CIAB or not exercising. My "theory" is that weight gain was caused by progressively raising insulin resistance i.e my body produced progressively more insulin which in turn aided weight gain. That is in reality no different to the weight battle my T1 son has on his insulin regime to avoid weight gain.

So I will defend Eddies right to eat sub 50g / day in the same way as I would defend my right to eat 75g / day or other T2 friends who can tolerate higher levels or use medication or insulin to control the condition. You see that's the point the consequences of uncontrolled diabetes go largely unmentioned by HCP's or in the press. Go read the Danish Steno study. It shows in a population of largely uncontrolled T2 diabetic that HALF DIE within 13 years of diagnosis and of the remaining half a good proportion are blind or lose limbs. So when you attempt to undermine Eddie's VLC you are in fact attempting to undermine his successful method of controlling a killer condition. Is it any wonder he will fight you back?

Blind Doggie said...

"I'm guessing that your diet is LC but not VLC (as you can pass GTTs without any problems). Amirite?"

Actually semi VLC. I show up mildly in ketosis on the rare times I pee on a ketostick. I couldn't give a hoot if I'm in Ketosis or not. Some people seem to worship the Ketosis state as a religion but thats seems particularly pointless. For the first six months I did pure VLC at around 40g / day just to give my pancreas a well deserved rest and get my BG's firmly under control. I was diagnosed with an HbA1c of 11.3% and dropped that on VLC to 5.3% in 3 months of VLC. Apart from a mild dose of Atkins flu at the start the lack of carbs has never caused me an issue. I don't claim anything for it except it works for me. Once I lost the weight and the associated insulin resistance I started upping carbs slightly as I am more tolerant to them nowadays. I would guess I could safely do 100g / day but still around 75g for those psychological control issues I mentioned. I know if I start introducing much more carbs back it would be a slippery slope.

No you will never change Eddie but I entirely agree his Taliban fundamentalist approach to T2D is particularly off putting to many people. Me change his opinion? I am not in his good books either at the moment so no chance but he knows I don't give a damn about that :-)

Nigel Kinbrum said...

I defend Eddie's right to eat whatever diet he wants that suits him best. I am not trying to undermine his diet. We are simply trading insults.

Eddie started the bullying and mud-slinging. I warned him what would happen if he persisted, but he's stubborn and as thick as two short planks. I've read about his "exploits" on http://carbophile.blogspot.co.uk/

Eddie's the one making it difficult for the LC message to be taken seriously.

I will not be bullied. Any snide remarks about me from Eddie on his site will be met by far worse back from me. This can go on indefinitely, as I will never back down from bullying.

What can be done to stop Eddie?

RE Healthy Eating Guidelines: I consider most breads & pastas to be CIAB. Burgen S & L bread is the least CIAB bread, which is why I eat a couple of slices a day of that on average.

Can you eat cold potatoes & cold rice? Those contain significant amounts of RS, so they shouldn't cause you any problems with your BG regulation.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Steve,

Have you read my posts on Diabetes, yet? I'm interested in your feedback. My blog isn't specifically about diabetes, but I have a few posts about it as I had "a close shave" with T2DM. I would like people with diabetes of any sort to be able to find good quality advice here.

"I would guess I could safely do 100g / day but still around 75g for those psychological control issues I mentioned. I know if I start introducing much more carbs back it would be a slippery slope."
Thanks for the feedback!

Nige

Blind Doggie said...

"I defend Eddie's right to eat whatever diet he wants that suits him best." Good! I was just making you aware that broad attacks against VLC are not just attacks against Eddie but against a significant proportion of the LC diabetic community who find it works really well.

"Eddie started the bullying and mud-slinging" - Eddie always needs someone to bitch about it's just your turn in the spotlight. You are the latest in a long line and my advice is just ignore it. I read Carbo's blog too. Be aware it has its fair share of vile idiotic extremists who think nothing of making very personal attacks on people mostly out of spite and jealousy as far as I can tell. Many in my opinion are far worse than Eddie although Carbo himself is a reasonable guy that you can disagree with and yet still have an adult conversation with.

I only eat Burgen bread. Since my IR dropped I can tolerate two slices a day. At diagnosis I couldn't tolerate any bread at all and gave it up for months.

The retrograding starch stuff is quite interesting and I have played around with it in the past. I found you could get up to around a 30% reduction in how much it raised my BG's. 30% sounds quite a bit but in the context of my tolerance to pasta, rice and potatoes it increases my safe portion sizes from around 50g (or two level tablespoons of rice or pasta) to two and a half so pretty pointless and I'd rather spend the calories on something nicer anyway. I do notice that freezing the Burgen then toasting it makes a difference either that or its the butter I then put on it that effectively reduces its GI :-) The far more effective way of stopping spikes is undoubtedly a nice strong G&T (slimline tonic of course).

I have begun to read through your db threads...

Blind Doggie said...

Nige said:

If your fasting glucose is fine and you can pass a GTT test two days in a row , my opinion is that you are no longer diabetic.

Just saw that and have to strongly disagree.

What you have to ask yourself is if I treated using insulin then I could achieve similar results as my (V)LCish "diet only" approach. Would you be questioning my diabetic status under that scenario? The two treatment methods are interchangeable but the condition they are treating is the same. I can take paracetamol or aspirin for a headache but I still had a headache!

Here's some more for you to consider. If I didn't eat my specialised diet then within days my FBG's would rise so that I would be "diagnosed diabetic" again. For example I did that over Christmas by relaxing my control for around 10 days partly because it was Christmas but also as a lead up to the GTT tests a group of us had decided to take and compare in the early days of January. For a GTT test to be accurate you must consume at least 150g / day for 3 days so that you get an accurate measurement of insulin responses. By the end of the 10 day Christmas period my FBG's were in the high 7's again and a pin prick test would have diagnosed me as T2. Interestingly the morning of the GTT test I also got my latest HbA1c so on one measure (FBG) I was diabetic but on another (HBA1c of 4.8%) I was entirely normal.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

""I defend Eddie's right to eat whatever diet he wants that suits him best." Good! I was just making you aware that broad attacks against VLC are not just attacks against Eddie but against a significant proportion of the LC diabetic community who find it works really well."
In my defence m'lud, I am a nerd and the thought never crossed my mind that insulting Eddie by attacking his diet might upset other people who are on the same diet.

Therefore, I will disengage with Eddie immediately. He will probably crow about his "victory", but disengaging makes me the better person, lol! To be honest, he was starting to bore me rigid with his predictable & weak attacks.

What I would like to happen, is for more diabetics to come here for advice rather than Eddie's site. Would you like to write some articles about diabetes for publication here, with full attribution? The more tags & labels for "diabetes" there are here, the higher the Google ranking my site will be for diabetes-related searches. For example, Google searches for PSMF (protein-sparing modified fast) give my blog a higher ranking (8th in 366,000) than the bloke who wrote a really good book about it (Lyle McDonald).

Nige

Nigel Kinbrum said...

""Nige said:
If your fasting glucose is fine and you can pass a GTT test two days in a row , my opinion is that you are no longer diabetic."
Just saw that and have to strongly disagree."
I disagree with your disagreement. You can pass fasting glucose & OGTTs without taking medications. Is your diet weird? Do people look at what you eat and say "what the hell is that?" You aren't currently diabetic but you have strong potential! Are your ancestors from a part of the world where the traditional diet was low-carb? Maybe you were exposed to some chemical years ago? When did your metabolism start to go haywire?

Nige

Blind Doggie said...

Managed to recover the post...

So here's the thing Nigel. I currently help run a UK diabetes support forum with a bunch of other moderately minded people. Our aim is to support people using whatever method works for them including VLC and insulin. We have a LC bias but not exclusively so. I am not doing that much posting at the moment for personal reasons that means I have very little time at present but I appreciate the offer. I engaged you on your blog simply because I could see you were unintentionally about to severely p*ss off a load of diabetics who LC or VLC like myself much to Eddies probable amusement and obvious goading. I am glad you have disengaged from Eddie as it truly isn't really worth your time and effort.

Eddie likes nothing better than for people to engage in combat with him as it raises his own profile.

Actually I do take medication for my diabetes. I take Metformin as it useful in calming spikes and lowers BG's by around 1 or 2 mmol/l overall so it is somewhat helpful. I primarily take it not as a BG reducing medication but for its proven benefits as a protection against heart disease which is what is was originally developed for I believe. I take other other medications that my GP prescribes for my diabetes as well. I regularly discuss my condition with my GP. He supports my lifestyle as he sees it works.

My diet is weird only in the sense that most people pick up that I avoid starch and sugar. I actually follow a pretty standard lchf regime as advocated by the likes of Dr Annika Dahlqvist. See her dietary guide here http://blogg.passagen.se/dahlqvistannika/?anchor=my_lowcarb_dietary_programe_in. She was taken through the Swedish legal system back in 2006/7 by dietitians who claimed her lchf regime was dangerous. She won her case and nowadays a lot of the Swedish healthcare advice for treating T2 (in a 2011 document called Kost Vid Diabetes) is based on her work and recommendations.

I don't think I am particularly different to a lot of people who develop diabetes except that there is a hell of a genetic tendency for diabetes in my family. I have a T1 son a slow burn progressing LADA son, a insulin using LADA nephew and many of my relatives including my blacksmith grandfather (certainly not fat and lazy!) were diagnosed T2.

I do not generally believe in the "fat and lazy" blame game. I believe that probably a majority of T2 people (not all) simply have a genetic tendency for weight gain brought about my increasing insulin resistance that in the end goes critical and causes full T2D. I strongly object to being told getting T2 was my fault and that hard physical exercise is a "cure". Did you know a 13 year US government backed study called the AHEAD trials was recently abandoned because it found making overweight T2D people do loads of hard exercise kills them quicker with heart attacks etc than not doing anything? What a surprise! What governments and health care services should be doing in my opinion is going back to advocating different dietary regimes for diabetics than those for the general population. Importantly they should take onboard the anecdotal evidence from the thousands of people like myself who have found that a carbohydrate restricted diet works ten times better than any diabetic drug except insulin. How many diabetes drugs do you know of that can reduce hBA1c by 6% in 3 months?

I will continue to disagree with you about my diabetic status. I have lost a good percentage of my beta cell mass caused by unknowingly running uncontrolled BG's for a six month period prior to my diagnosis. At diagnosis my BG's were in the low 20's. I now use a LC regime to treat for that loss as do many in the same position as me. I could use a range of stronger meds to try and achieve the same thing or go on insulin instead of the LC regime but fundamentally the cause is a physical one i.e. a permanent loss of beta cell mass. How it is treated doesn't effect the original diagnosis.

Steve

Nigel Kinbrum said...

"I engaged you on your blog simply because I could see you were unintentionally about to severely p*ss off a load of diabetics who LC or VLC like myself much to Eddies probable amusement and obvious goading."
I still don't see why I was about to p*ss off a load of diabetics. I goaded him into posting a load of deranged drivel on his own site. Would that not destroy his credibility? But anyway...

"Actually I do take medication for my diabetes. I take Metformin as it useful in calming spikes and lowers BG's by around 1 or 2 mmol/l overall so it is somewhat helpful. I primarily take it not as a BG reducing medication but for its proven benefits as a protection against heart disease which is what is was originally developed for I believe. I take other other medications that my GP prescribes for my diabetes as well. I regularly discuss my condition with my GP. He supports my lifestyle as he sees it works."
Fair enough. Metformin is pretty good stuff.

"My diet is weird only in the sense that most people pick up that I avoid starch and sugar. I actually follow a pretty standard lchf regime as advocated by the likes of Dr Annika Dahlqvist. See her dietary guide here http://blogg.passagen.se/dahlqvistannika/?anchor=my_lowcarb_dietary_programe_in"
I'm familiar with Annika Dahlqvist, via Ted Hutchinson. A diet of meat/fowl/fish/eggs/cheese/nuts/seeds & leafy green veg is pretty natural & healthy, so I wouldn't describe it as "weird".

"I don't think I am particularly different to a lot of people who develop diabetes except that there is a hell of a genetic tendency for diabetes in my family. I have a T1 son a slow burn progressing LADA son, a insulin using LADA nephew and many of my relatives including my blacksmith grandfather (certainly not fat and lazy!) were diagnosed T2."
You have some dodgy genes.

"I do not generally believe in the "fat and lazy" blame game. I believe that probably a majority of T2 people (not all) simply have a genetic tendency for weight gain brought about my increasing insulin resistance that in the end goes critical and causes full T2D. I strongly object to being told getting T2 was my fault and that hard physical exercise is a "cure"."
Who actually told you that?

"I will continue to disagree with you about my diabetic status. I have lost a good percentage of my beta cell mass caused by unknowingly running uncontrolled BG's for a six month period prior to my diagnosis."
Now that you have given me a more complete story, I agree with you. I'm still curious as to whether you have tried all of the supps mentioned in my IR post. You may have a genetic requirement for larger-than-normal amounts of "X". Or not.

Nige

Blind Doggie said...

Supplements eh?

Well I have a bit of a reputation as an uber supplement taker...

Supplements have their place but if you are a newly diagnosed "bog standard" T2 then I would recommend the top ten tips shown below. Supplements are never replacements for prescribed medications and most are probably pointless unless you also adopt other basic healthy lifestyle choices. For diet controlling T2D I would say most supplements are useless unless you also restrict your carbs. Use a BG meter to determine how much you personally need to restrict. Anyway in order of importance I reckon ..

No 1 - Don't be selfish. Take responsibility for your condition. Not just for you but for your family and loved ones sake.

No 2 - Get a meter to identify what makes you spike 2 hours after your main meal.

No 3 - Use your meter to meet the N.I.C.E guidelines for BG's. It will save you from blindness, amputation and an early grave.

No 4 - Reduce carbohydrates by cutting out sugar wherever possible.

No 5 - Reduce carbohydrates by moving your meal balance towards fats.

No 6 - Lose weight if you need to it will reduce your insulin resistance.

No 7 - Do some exercise. It doesn't need to be intense or formal so just go for a walk.

No 8 - Make sure you eat enough so that you are not hungry and make sure your regime can be continued long term.

No 9 - Avoid trans fats and highly processed foods, choose natural saturated fats over "low fat" products.

No 10 - Don't forget to have the occasional day off and have fun!

Onto supplements ...

Prior to diagnosis I had never taken any in my life but once diagnosed I researched what was supposed to help and took the lot. So for the few months I took.

A generic 50+ multi-vitamin.

Chromium (allegedly good for BG's)

Vit B12 (took it at super strength cos very little gets absorbed orally)

Vit D (didn't take enough as I was still diagnosed Vit D deficient later on)

Managanese (allegedly good for BG's)

Pottasium (was already diagnosed deficient)

Co-enzyme Q10 (to counter the alleged leeching effects of statins)

I gave them all up except the Vit D & Co Q10 when I later researched and found (much to my amazement) that the following worked really well at controlling post meal BG spikes.

Bitter Melon (is a diabetes prescribed medication in many countries). BM worked nearly as well as Metformin in controlling spikes. Buy it in tablet form as I defy anyone to actually eat it in its raw vegetable or powder forms. I took 2g a day. For those still skeptical I found an Indian company has had WHO accreditation for it BM based product.

Banaba - like BM had good BG spike control properties similar to Metformin. BM is far cheaper than Banaba. Again there is real scientific research on Banaba to be found.

Gymnema sylvestre - this became my supplement of choice. Had the same spike control as BM and acts as a decent appetite suppresent to aid weight loss. Works in three ways by blocking glucose receptors in the gut, increases the flow rate of insulin from beta cells and suppresses your "eat sugar" response. A lot of real research has been done if you hunt around. I took 1200mg / day. Highly recommended and cheap. Like BM in many countries is a prescribed diabetes medication.

Cinnamon - Has to be the cassia variety and don't take much more than 1.5g a day as otherwise it can cause stomach problems. Whereas Bitter Melon, Banaba and Gymnema only helped with meal spikes I found cinnamon was the only thing that actually reduced my average background fasting levels (FBG's) my around 0.5 to 1.0mmol/l. Again a load of real scientific research out there to show it does work.

So I took supplements and "herbs" as means of optimising by BG control. As I lost insulin resistance the need for them vanished and nowadays all I take is 5000iu/day Vit D & Co Q10.

Take care

Steve

Nigel Kinbrum said...

"Well I have a bit of a reputation as an uber supplement taker..."
You also have a bit of a reputation as an understatement maker... ;-D

Of the few supplements that I take, 5,000iu/day of Vit D3 is the one that made the biggest difference, as I was the "Prince of Darkness".

I cured osteoporosis (bone density by DEXA went from -2SD in 2003 to 0SD in 2006) using Ca, Mg, D3 & K2, so I will never stop taking Mg, D3 & K2. I refused to take Fosamax. My endocrinologist said that what happened was impossible. Miracles take a little longer!

K2 is also good for the brain & BG regulation.

As virtually everyone with T2DM is on a statin (I refused statins when I had dyslipidaemia), taking Co Q10 is a wise decision.

Cheers, Nige

Blind Doggie said...

"I do not generally believe in the "fat and lazy" blame game. I believe that probably a majority of T2 people (not all) simply have a genetic tendency for weight gain brought about my increasing insulin resistance that in the end goes critical and causes full T2D. I strongly object to being told getting T2 was my fault and that hard physical exercise is a "cure"."
Who actually told you that?

That appears to be the official UK government view. The classic stance is to come out with statements which include the phrase "the food in your mouth" i.e the implication is that overweight people do it to themselves because they eat too much and are lazy. That is a very easy message for politicians to sell as it neatly avoids addressing the real underlying issues that underpin the current obesity epidemic. That epidemic must fundamentally have a cause. What that cause is requires research and proof which those in the food and drinks industry obviously wish to avoid in case that research ends up proving the food we eat is all or at least a large part of the problem. So allowing the "fat and lazy" lie to become the official position is the easy way out for politicians and the food and drink industry to continue unchanged.

I personally do not believe that in the blink of eye in evolutionary terms that so many people have decided to opt for a fat and lazy lifestyle! That makes no sense. It is far more likely that there is some underlying environmental cause that is making people gain weight.

My unprofessional opinion is its all tied up with the swap to a low fat high carb culture back in the 70's and 80's but for governments to admit that is taboo because it would cost the food and drinks industry billions. Therefore I am just collateral damage of that low fat policy that I and my family religiously followed for 30 years. It also kind of accounts for why LC for diabetics is constantly resisted. Having a low carb diet described as "healthy" for a specific group is not what many with vested interests wish to hear. Why? Well when you low carb by definition you must high fat (no such thing as a lclflp regime and long term very high protein diets can cause kidney damage). To tell people eating natural saturated fats is fine so long as you cut out a lot of carbs is a message the food and drinks industry certainly doesn't want spread around. Is it any wonder that its only in countries like Sweden that have such strict food and drink safety laws that lchf is pushed as what the population should eat? Some research I did a while back showed that opening up the Sunday paper magazines in Sweden gave pages of lchf recipes being pushed to the population presumably with the governments approval.

Steve

Nigel Kinbrum said...

"I personally do not believe that in the blink of eye in evolutionary terms that so many people have decided to opt for a fat and lazy lifestyle! That makes no sense. It is far more likely that there is some underlying environmental cause that is making people gain weight."
See The Century Of Self Part 1 (of 4) Happiness Machines. I believe that marketing reached a tipping point in the 1970's and consumption of CIAB became the norm rather than the exception.

Exercise is of secondary importance to the obesity epidemic as it burns few calories, but it does has an effect on Insulin Sensitivity and therefore BG stability.

Unstable BG encourages over-eating. See Circulating glucose levels modulate neural control of desire for high-calorie foods in humans.