Diabetes

[dtuuri]

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Rich

That's what I thought, you got nothin'. Considering all the meat eaters dodging carbs in the name of low cholesterol, you'd think somebody actually can prove it made a difference in their disease instead of just their comfort. Tar me with religous zeal if you must, but I'm only seeking information and hoped you could provide it. In that same spirit, I mentioned the recent TMAO study. Perhaps some lurkers have benefited.

dtuuri

 

[ClimbnSink]

You are scared, your fear has blinded you and in your darkness you've hitched yourself to a Messiah for salvation. Belief is powerful medicine, good luck with it.

 

[RJM62]

That's what I thought, you got nothin'. Considering all the meat eaters dodging carbs in the name of low cholesterol, you'd think somebody actually can prove it made a difference in their disease instead of just their comfort. Tar me with religous zeal if you must, but I'm only seeking information and hoped you could provide it. In that same spirit, I mentioned the recent TMAO study. Perhaps some lurkers have benefited.

dtuuri

My friend, I can't cite studies one way or the other because I really can't be bothered looking them up. It's not important to me whether anyone else endorses my lifestyle. I frankly couldn't care less. My numbers have gone from abysmal to excellent doing what I'm doing, they get better every three months, and I have a diet I can stick to. That I care about.

If my numbers were going the wrong way, then I would do the research. But they're not, so I don't.

I also confess to some doubt about why the vast majority of peoples throughout the world are omnivores, and those who are vegetarians almost always have some religious basis for it (usually a karmic belief system), if meat is such a poisonous thing. That would make the most advanced specie on the planet the only one that has evolved to prefer foods that are poison for them. It just seems odd to me. Most animals won't eat food that isn't good for them unless they're literally starving to death. Why would we have evolved in the opposite direction?

That's not to say that I endorse the American diet, which is about as bad as it gets because of all the processed foods, chemical additives, and so forth. My theory is that the body has evolved to expect food in a form that's pretty close to how God or nature created it, and when food deviates too much from that state, the body doesn't quite know what to do with it. It's not even sure that what we ate is even food. It's just too different from what evolution has taught it to expect.

That's why a core tenet of my "diet," for lack of a better word, is to eat stuff that was very recently alive and hasn't changed much since it was, so it's in a form that my body expects and recognizes as food, and knows how to make use of.

But honestly, I have no studies to prove that hunch, either. It just makes sense to me to eat stuff that my body knows how to deal with, and it seems to be working for me.

May you live to be 100 and then some, my friend.

Rich

 

[dtuuri]

May you live to be 100 and then some, my friend.

My goal is to be 100% healthy, not live to 100. There's a difference. The odds are against us, so why not eat foods that are shown not to cause more disease and can even reverse the existing? I think that would be more in line with God's plan. Why would He put all the essential amino acids in vegetables otherwise? Maintain your weight with plant calories, and you've met all the protein requirements. Seems pretty darn elegant to me.

dtuuri

 

[SweetStuff]

OP Update

Thought I'd drop in now that it's been 6 weeks. What? Only 10 days?!
Ok, "feels like".

Some good: I have completely avoided cokes and candy bars, ice cream and almost all pastries. That is huge for me. Let's just sit here and focus on this for a while.

I have remained quite active (outdoor serious yardwork, and building cattle fence) also my job.

There is the tendency to compensate for the sugar void. I eat a bit of honey, not every day. I eat a lot of nuts; a variety. I am always 'looking' for something. Drank some beer (less than one per day) and wine (not a half bottle since last here).

I don't feel any better (joint aches etc) and don't sleep any better, but I am not more irritable.

The snack replacement is difficult. What snacks would be good in the interim. I want to lose sugar first, then work on losing snacks. I realize all carb snacks are bad (cookies crackers) but get tired of nuts. Tried some olives, doing a lot of cheese. Raisins are probably not ideal.

Thanks

 

[Circuit Flyer]

Tragically, the answer probably lies in more veggies. Tuna salad in lettuce leaves. Pickled turnips. Lean meats. Grilled salmon. Rotisserie chicken. I feel your pain. Keeping away from sweets is my hardest food challenge. Low-sugar jerky might help with the snack cravings. They will wane, BTW. Good luck!
Oh, and yes, raisins are bad. Concentrated sugar.

 

[dtuuri]

Re: OP Update

What snacks would be good in the interim.

Try sipping on a protein shake throughout the day. Blend pea protein powder with some unsweetened almond milk and your choice of strawberries, blueberries, and bananas with a few chopped walnuts and ice. Pour it in a thermos and pace yourself, so you don't drink it all up at once and look for a candy machine later. The protein and fats in the pea powder, almond milk and walnuts slow the absorption of the sugars in the fruit. Being a known volume, you can keep track of your caloric, fat, and carb consumption. The walnuts have a favorable omega-3/omega-6 ratio.

dtuuri

 

[overdrive148]

 

[bflynn]

Show me an Atkins or Paleo study that reversed CAD, or stopped it from progressing.

Why? You're not going to listen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html?_r=0

The opening sentence: "People who avoid carbohydrates and eat more fat, even saturated fat, lose more body fat and have fewer cardiovascular risks than people who follow the low-fat diet that health authorities have favored for decades, a major new study shows."

Yet, you're not interested in changing what you already know.

 

[dtuuri]

Why? You're not going to listen.

You've got some nerve saying I don't listen when you don't answer the question. I say again: "Show me your best one, 'shiny new' or old, that stops or reverses coronary artery disease."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html?_r=0

The opening sentence: "People who avoid carbohydrates and eat more fat, even saturated fat, lose more body fat and have fewer cardiovascular risks than people who follow the low-fat diet that health authorities have favored for decades, a major new study shows."

Where's the angiographs? Perfusion images? Blood flows? Lumen diameters? Before and after? Huh?

First, you grabbed a study of the safety of eating a ketogenic diet and tried to make it seem like a CAD reversal study. Now, you've pointed to a study of the differences a small reduction in dietary fat calories has on body fat and "risk factors".

I'll listen to real measurable results I can compare to Ornish's and Esselstyn's. Their diets are 10% fat not 30% and they measured the changes in coronary artery diameters.

Yet, you're not interested in changing what you already know.

Sounds like a self-indictment to me.

dtuuri

 

[Doggtyred]

Based on what science? So what if a synthetic substance has been added? I'm well aware that most processed foods are also extremely high in either sugar or sodium, which if you have a problem with hypertension or kidney stones is probably a good thing to keep down to moderate levels or lower. But other than that, and other than the in-vogue-today-discredited-tomorrow news flashes about this or that chemical being a possible carcinogen in rats when consumed at rates 15,000 times the amounts used in foods, I've never seen a peer-reviewed study attributing negative health effects to the preservatives and other chemical additives in processed foods. Other than the high sodium content, the main harmful added ingredient in processed foods isn't a synthetic but refined sugar, and there's a LOT of science implicating excess consumption of sugar, especially refined sugar, in the etiology of DM2. But chemicals? We and everything we consume are made of chemicals and actually many if not most naturally-occurring chemicals are harmful or even lethal. From what I can tell, almost all of the push today for fresh/organic/all natural everything is based on fuzzy thinking with little or no science behind it.

Personally I prefer fresh, unprocessed foods, mostly vegetables, fish, and chicken, some pasta, cooked with sparing amounts of olive oil, well seasoned but without excessive salt. But that's a matter of taste, I don't delude myself into thinking that it's necessarily healthier than eating frozen dinners and canned soup 5 nights a week, assuming you don't have a sodium or sugar-sensitive health problem.

Agreed.. the science is very fuzzy in all the ways you've identified.

And I will answer in a qualitative way that science has a hard time measuring.

That grass fed beef (and not rounded out on grain).. tastes different than a grain fed beef. Those fresh eggs from your own coop taste different than the ones in the grocery store. Those fresh veggies from your garden MAY or MAY NOT taste differently than what you get in the produce section at the store, depending on what the supply stream is for that store and that vegetable...

Im not going to spend twice as much at a grocery store for "fad" food styles. But I'm not above trying to grow or raise some of it myself...

 

[Doggtyred]

That would make the most advanced specie on the planet the only one that has evolved to prefer foods that are poison for them. It just seems odd to me. Most animals won't eat food that isn't good for them unless they're literally starving to death. Why would we have evolved in the opposite direction?
Rich

Dont ask me for a source, but i read/saw something once that said the brain was wired to REALLY REALLY like fat, sugar and salt... All three substances are relatively rare in prehistoric and even preindustrial diets. Things were bitter and bland... and spices were a relatively precious commodity to be traded for. With modern advances in production technology and supply/distribution we can add these very tasty substances to just about anything... and we do...

Thats why we eat things that are bad for us.. they TASTE GREAT and they are readily available. And because of our industrialization, processed foods of this nature are oftentimes cheaper than unadulterated foods that come from outside the processed chain.

Given that way way too many of us humans are functional drones (think Delta-minors in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World) or maybe a slight step above, we are (as a group) governed by our impulses.. tastes good, want, must have....

 

[Doggtyred]

Re: OP Update

Thought I'd drop in now that it's been 6 weeks. What? Only 10 days?!
Ok, "feels like".

Some good: I have completely avoided cokes and candy bars, ice cream and almost all pastries. That is huge for me. Let's just sit here and focus on this for a while.

I have remained quite active (outdoor serious yardwork, and building cattle fence) also my job.

There is the tendency to compensate for the sugar void. I eat a bit of honey, not every day. I eat a lot of nuts; a variety. I am always 'looking' for something. Drank some beer (less than one per day) and wine (not a half bottle since last here).

I don't feel any better (joint aches etc) and don't sleep any better, but I am not more irritable.

The snack replacement is difficult. What snacks would be good in the interim. I want to lose sugar first, then work on losing snacks. I realize all carb snacks are bad (cookies crackers) but get tired of nuts. Tried some olives, doing a lot of cheese. Raisins are probably not ideal.

Thanks

Raisins arent completely ideal but they have some fiber.. Carrots are starchy but have a bit of fiber.. My snacks are usually fresh fruit in a cup (strawberries, blackberries, melon, pineapple, oranges), Greek yogurt with no added sugar, Celery and carrot sticks dipped in hummus or guacamole... I've taken cucumber slices and used them as chips to dip in aforementioned guacamole and hummus.. Olives are actually pretty low cal... I get the queen sized ones, pimento or garlic or bleu cheese stuffed.. the big ones get a little pricey though.. Edemame/sugar snap peas are mostly fiber.. Nuts (with the exception of peanuts) are supposed to be good as well..

Get a food dehydrator and dry some banana chips or apricot/orange/pineapple slices.. Apricots are high in potassium too..

A rough non-scientific guide involves looking at the label.. Look at total carbs, then look at grams of fiber... If the fiber (in grams) is at least 50 percent of the total carbs then that is a more desirable snack food... Got that little tidbit from a diet seminar from a cardiologist I respect and like.

 

[SbestCFII]

Nothing to panic over. A1C of 5.7 is normal (non-diabetic). The 5.9 is mildly elevated (pre-diabetic) and likely indicates you could just modify your diet and drop some weight and you'll be fine. Your BMI is 28.7 and should be 25 or less. In either case, you're not yet diabetic (A1C >6.4%), but your risk of developing diabetes in the next 10 years is higher than average.

 

[Taiser]

Can be reversed, I'm living proof. Ate like a pig, was always in shape then I stopped working out in my 30's. Ate tons of pasta and bread. I was pushing 250 lbs, got my annual check up, BANG diabetic!!!! A1c over 7!!!

That woke me up, especially since I was building an airplane at the time. Changed my diet, still ate bread and pasta occasionally but switched to whole wheat. Crappy at first, now I love it, can't eat white pasta or bread anymore, no flavor or texture to it. Everything I eat now is measured portions on an actual scale! You have too measure stuff, you'd be amazed at how much a healthy portion actually is compared to what we are given.

Went back to my college weight lifting routine and added 1 hour of cardio a day for 3 months, 6 days a week. Now I'm down to 3-4 days a week for cardio on days I don't lift.

3 months later, at a follow up visit with my Doc, I was down to 185 lbs and my A1c was 4.9! Been like that now for over 2 years!!! I'm about 205 now, due to muscle growth. You are what you eat man, and in Canada (the states also I presume) we eat nothing but ****!!! I stopped eating "****" and it worked out well.

There is a website called "My Fitness Pal" that is super easy to use and can tracks all your food intake and macros. Look me up on there for info if you want. I have the same user name there. Good luck with it, diabetes sucks and even though I have no sign of it anymore it's on my file forever. Was a bit of a song and dance to get my flight medical back but I did. Don't get to the point were you get the "label"... it sucks!

 

[dtuuri]

I was hunting for news about Caldwell Esselstyn and stumbled onto an interesting article blaming a host of ailments on "oxidized dietary cholesterol". The author, Dr. Jennifer Rooke, has a blog with another interesting article turning conventional thinking upside down when viewed through the lens of oxidized dietary cholesterol. A few snippets from each post:

"Low density lipoproteins (LDL) carry cholesterol to cells. LDL have been demonized as “bad,” but in fact LDL carrying native cholesterol (NC) circulates in harmony with the immune system and does not cause inflammation or atherosclerosis. We know this with certainty from experimental animal studies and from epidemiological and post-mortem studies of people who eat little or no cholesterol-containing foods. Their cholesterol levels are rarely above 150 mg/dl and their arteries are clear with no signs of atherosclerosis. "

"Cholesterol in food is easily oxidized by exposure to air, heating, processing, and digestion to form a group of compounds called cholesterol oxidation products (ChOP). We know this with certainty because we can measure it. Raw chicken has about 2.8 to 4.5ug/g of lipids. Grilled and roasted chicken has 92.5 and 88.6 µg/g, respectively, after storage. Fresh raw meat has trace amounts of ChOP, cooked meat has 180 to 1900 µg/g, depending on the cooking method."

"The only cause of artery-clogging atherosclerosis is cholesterol in the diet."

"Sugar and carbohydrates do not cause atherosclerosis. The more cakes and cookies you eat the more atherosclerosis you will have because the cholesterol in butter and eggs clogs your arteries, not the “added sugar.” Refined sugar should be avoided because it has no nutrients. Fruits and vegetables are loaded with fiber and nutrients, they do not contain cholesterol and do not clog your arteries."

"Obesity does not clog arteries and weight loss does not unclog arteries".

"The only thing you have to do to prevent a heart attack is to stop eating cholesterol containing foods."​

Although it isn't about diabetes, those ditching carbs in favor of cholesterol containing foods might be interested. I thought her writing is provocative, whether you agree with her or not. Links to supporting studies are imbedded within the text. FWIW.

dtuuri

 

[SbestCFII]

5.6 is normal (non-diabetic) and 5.7 would be considered "Excellent control" under current guidelines, so no one need panic. Looks like your are going in the right direction. Watch the sweets, get some more cardio, drops a few pounds and you should be fine.

 

[SweetStuff]

Going well. Down 7lbs with little effort.
Had a sip of coke tonight, tasted blahh. Maybe the addiction is passing.
Still eating compensatory crap but its not a problem yet.
No cokes, no candy bars, little pastry & icecream. Avoiding bread. Hasn't been a huge deal.
Don't feel amazingly better but that's ok.

 

[RJM62]

Going well. Down 7lbs with little effort.
Had a sip of coke tonight, tasted blahh. Maybe the addiction is passing.
Still eating compensatory crap but its not a problem yet.
No cokes, no candy bars, little pastry & icecream. Avoiding bread. Hasn't been a huge deal.
Don't feel amazingly better but that's ok.

Keep it up. That's a good loss.

Rich

 

[mdo53]

I'm 62 and 6' and six months ago I hit 250 lbs and my A1C was in the mid 6 range. I was on Metformin 1000 mg x2 per day.... I decided to start walking 1-2 miles per day and change my diet. 60 days ago I was at 242 and 5.9 AIC. Today I weighed 227 and continue to walk each day. My Dr. decreased my Metformin to one 500 mg per day and said she will take me off Metformin in September if I drop 15 more lbs and continue with a healthy diet. I plan to continue and get back to 195 lbs.... and a healthy A1C without meds.

Spoke with the local Senior AME today concerning the A1C and other meds. He said that as long as I can produce a recent A1C within the past 30 days with a reading less than 6.5 and a statement from my physician that my blood sugar is ok and under control, no problem passing the exam whether I stay on Metformin or not, as long as that is the only diabetes med I take. He said 5.9 is not an issue.... 6.5 is the magic number....

 

[flyingron]

The FAA standards are one thing, but 6.5 is still bad for your long term health. You have the right goals in mind...do it before you do yourself damage.

 

[mryan75]

Cut back your sweets to basically none. Substitute Stevia in coffee if you can't deal with it unsweetened.

Just happened upon this, and I would not at all recommend stevia. Most commercially-available stevia powders are basically maltodextrin with a little bit of stevia. Maltodextrin acts in the body much the same way sugar does.

 

[RJM62]

Just happened upon this, and I would not at all recommend stevia. Most commercially-available stevia powders are basically maltodextrin with a little bit of stevia. Maltodextrin acts in the body much the same way sugar does.

Well, all I can say is that if I were to drink a cup of coffee with two teaspoons of sugar in it, my blood sugar would be in the 200 - 300 mg/dL neighborhood within a few minutes. But if I use Stevia, it doesn't budge.

YMMV.

Rich

 

[SweetStuff]

Down 10 lbs and one belt hole.
(Not dehydrated at weigh in, either.)
No huge interest in my former excesses (Coke, candy). Still go for ice cream 1-2x per week.

 

[RJM62]

Down 10 lbs and one belt hole.
(Not dehydrated at weigh in, either.)
No huge interest in my former excesses (Coke, candy). Still go for ice cream 1-2x per week.

Good for you on the weight loss!

If you're going to cheat once in a while, small doses of ice cream are probably the way to do it. Apparently the fat in the cream slows the absorption of the sugar.

Rich

 

[dtuuri]

Good for you on the weight loss!

If you're going to cheat once in a while, small doses of ice cream are probably the way to do it. Apparently the fat in the cream slows the absorption of the sugar.

Rich

I just bought a pint of ice cream, not for me (vegan dieter) for my dog. It's the easiest way to give her the vet's pills I've ever found. One teaspoon of ice cream with an embedded pill, tilt her head back and slide that baby straight into her stomach. One spoonful for her, two for me, sans pill of course. I hate myself in the morning.

dtuuri

 

[gkainz]

I just bought a pint of ice cream, not for me (vegan dieter) for my dog. It's the easiest way to give her the vet's pills I've ever found. One teaspoon of ice cream with an embedded pill, tilt her head back and slide that baby straight into her stomach. One spoonful for her, two for me, sans pill of course. I hate myself in the morning.

dtuuri

I guess as long as you don't screw up on which spoonful goes where ... and I assume different spoons?

 

[dtuuri]

I guess as long as you don't screw up on which spoonful goes where ... and I assume different spoons?

Hmmm... never thought to have her eat it with a spoon. You make a good point though, guess I should stop licking my fingers. :wink2:

dtuuri