ADA Diet Recommendations

3 views
Skip to first unread message

BJ in Texas

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 8:53:38 AM9/18/06
to
Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
the ADA recommends the diet they do.

http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697


--
--
"Government employees (Bureaucrats) like to solve problems. If
there are no problems handily available, they will create their
own problems." -- George Van Valkenburg

http://www.obsessionthemovie.com
http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/isacrime.html
http://home.swbell.net/bjtexas/SS/

Message has been deleted

Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 10:44:36 AM9/18/06
to
Alan S wrote:
:: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 12:53:38 GMT, "BJ in Texas"
:: <bjt...@hotmale.con> wrote:
::
::: Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why

::: the ADA recommends the diet they do.
:::
::: http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
:::
::
:: Although I agree with her point of view, I like to know
:: where such views come from, so I did a little searching.
::
:: Was anyone aware of the Wilshires, or the "Carbohydrate
:: Awareness Council"?
:: http://www.carbaware.org/about/team.htm

I wonder how many people have to lose, without the help of the established
medical community, shitloads of fat (142lbs in my case) and maintain normal
BG levels over extended periods of time with controled carb nutrition,
before the establishment will listen?


Peter C

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 11:09:27 AM9/18/06
to
Her biography, not a T2 apparently just a fanatic ....

"After losing 80 pounds by following a low-carb diet in 2001 and maintaining
her weight ever since with a controlled-carb approach, Regina Wilshire has
become a strong advocate of controlled-carb nutrition.

She meticulously researches and writes about the scientic evidence that
shows the low-carb lifestyle is a healthy and permanent way to lose and
control your weight.

Her enthusiastic passion about the low-carb lifestyle was what inspired the
founding of the Carbohydrate Awareness Council, a non-profit member
organization Regina created in 2003 along with her husband.

In addition to being a regular contributor to Low Carb Newsline, Regina also
maintains a blog called Weight of the Evidence to provide insight to her
readers about the science and issues in health, nutrition and diet. She has
also had numerous articles published in popular low-carb magazines such as
Low-Carb Living and CarbHealth.

Regina is also a contributing writer at BlogCritics.org and sits on the
editorial advisory board for Low-Carb Energy Magazine."


Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 12:34:35 PM9/18/06
to
Susan wrote:
:: x-no-archive: yes
::
:: BJ in Texas wrote:
::: Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why

::: the ADA recommends the diet they do.
:::
::: http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
:::
:::
::
:: Excellent piece, plainspoken.
::
:: "As Dr. Bernstein said in the recent debate, available for viewing on
:: dLife, after starting a low-carb diet, "when patients see the pay off
:: they stick with it."
::
:: The pay-off is improvement; often with reduction or elimination of
:: medication."
::
:: And the lack of such payoff on the ADA diet leads to non-compliance.
:: Why would anyone continue to eat a diet that deprived them of taste,
:: health *and* failed to improve their health?
::
:: I still reject the reasoning, though, since study after study has
:: found the same about low carb and DM; I think it's about
:: sponsorships. How else does one explain the ADA coming out in favor
:: of table sugar, since it's no worse for you than starches???
:: Anyone with any integrity would've limited starches because they're
:: just as bad as table sugar.


I think the ADA are mostly a group of professionals who probably don't have
and live with DM, have no experience or skill with a LC diet, and hence
can't envision how someone could be happy and healthy learning to eat
differently. "Let them enjoy the same eating pleasures that they are used
to, but tell them to exercise, lose weight, and take our expensive meds."
All based on science, too. The problem with this is, most of the general
population don't follow that advice, but those with DM are asked to do so.
Hence, they're hanging their hats on things that people aren't likely to do.
Dietwise, I think the fear of fat is crushing us. A good alternative to
starch & sweets is tasty meats and veggies. Either way, you need to not
overeat. Even if eating fat is unhealthy (it's not in the absense of
excessive carbs and calories), I think out-of-control diabetes is way more
harmful.


Kurt

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 2:20:17 PM9/18/06
to

BJ in Texas wrote:
> Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
> the ADA recommends the diet they do.
>
> http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697

This looked like an advertisement for Bernstein and Atkins rather than
an objective scientific article. The author had a chip on her shoulder
the size of a loaf of bread and drew the same convoluted and biased
conclusions that I see from some posters in here. Someone should send
the author an email and have her subscribe to a.s.d.... she would have
a whole gaggle of kindred spirits.

Kurt

rk

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 2:26:37 PM9/18/06
to
"Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158603616.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
:
:

LOL :)

I kinda thought the same thing.

--
Reisa, T1, Animas IR1250 Pumper
A1C: 6.2% (8/24/06)


Priscilla H. Ballou

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 2:25:48 PM9/18/06
to
In article <HEyPg.31515$G72....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
"Peter C" <peter...@europe.com> wrote:

> Her biography, not a T2 apparently just a fanatic ....

One person's fanatic is another's tireless advocate.

Priscilla

Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 2:43:09 PM9/18/06
to
rk wrote:
:: "Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

:: news:1158603616.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
:::
::: BJ in Texas wrote:
:::: Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
:::: the ADA recommends the diet they do.
::::
:::: http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
:::
::: This looked like an advertisement for Bernstein and Atkins rather
::: than an objective scientific article.

Why would you expect something on www.commonvoice.com to be a scientific
article.
Also, many so-called scientific articles are far from objective.

::: The author had a chip on her


::: shoulder the size of a loaf of bread and drew the same convoluted
::: and biased conclusions that I see from some posters in here.

Hopefully, when more people see the plain, clear sense of it all people will
start gaining better control.

::: Someone should send the author an email and have her subscribe to


::: a.s.d.... she would have a whole gaggle of kindred spirits.

:::

Yeah, a gaggle of T2DM in control.


Peter C

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 3:13:55 PM9/18/06
to

"Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:vze23t8n-FC4A2A...@individual.net...

yes - and you have to feel sorry for those people who confuse the two.


Michelle

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 5:32:59 PM9/18/06
to
Thanks for posting the article BJ. Very interesting..., but not funny.
(Any
former Laugh-In watchers in the group?) Hmmph inconvenience! I can't
imagine anything more inconvenient than being blind, crippled or on
dialysis. While it may be true that some people simply will not heed
the
need to follow a lower carb regimen, at least the information should be

available to those who would.
--
Michelle, T2
diet & exercise

Nicky

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 5:56:25 PM9/18/06
to

"Alan S" <loralgtwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:52btg2t8ikituc1ko...@4ax.com...

> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 12:53:38 GMT, "BJ in Texas"
> <bjt...@hotmale.con> wrote:
>
>>Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
>>the ADA recommends the diet they do.
>>
>> http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
>>
>
> Although I agree with her point of view, I like to know
> where such views come from, so I did a little searching.
>
> Was anyone aware of the Wilshires, or the "Carbohydrate
> Awareness Council"?
> http://www.carbaware.org/about/team.htm

Well, I think they've got their work cut out, opposing the ADA SAD. Good
luck to them. Scary woman - wouldn't like to meet her across a boardroom
table : )

Nicky.

--
A1c 10.5/5.3/<6 T2 DX 05/2004
No Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine
95/72/72Kg


Alan S

unread,
Sep 18, 2006, 7:07:06 PM9/18/06
to

Her husband does appear to have reasonable credentials if
his bio is accurate. He may be a fanatic. He is also an
endo who has lost 125 pounds practising what he preaches.

"Gil Wilshire, MD, FACOG
President & Chief Scientific Officer

Dr. Wilshire is a Reproductive Endocrinologist with
expertise in diabetes and metabolism. He has first-authored
scientific research in such journals as Clinical
Endocrinology and Metabolism and Fertility and Sterility.

He earned his bachelor's degree in chemistry from the
University of Michigan and is M.D. from the Robert Wood
Johnson Medical School. He did his sub-specialty Fellowship
in Reproductive Endocrinology at UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical
School. He also serves as the Medical Director of
Technology Catalysts International Corporation.

Dr. Wilshire is passionate about controlled-carb nutrition
from both a medical standpoint and personal experience.
Since April 2002 he's followed a diet low in carbohydrate
and to date lost 125 pounds of fat while increasing lean
body mass through weight-training."
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.

Message has been deleted

Chris Malcolm

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:30:21 AM9/19/06
to

The establishment is obsessed with averages. So the answer is probably
enough people to significantly affect the average in a population
study of diabetics and to be identified as a signficant subgroup in a
preliminary population study of 100 or so, where "significantly" is a
strong enough result to counteract the well known medical fact that
"we know very few people can stick to diets".

IMHO they're much more likely to recommend stomach stapling than a
diet. We have a very long way to go before the establishment will
agree to take its blinkers off. I think the process by which it will
happen is that first enough research results have to accumulate, with
enough medical advocates on university medical teaching staff, that a
good proportion of young medics in training get interested in the
ideas. Then we have to wait for the old professors on the important
committees to die and be replaced by enough low carb enthusiasts to
shake the committees, despite the placemen on the committees who are
there to protect the profits that low carb therapy for diabetics would
affect.

Its the sociology of medical politics. They are already scared by the
national medical cost implications of treating the rising rates of
diabetics. IMHO that's going to harden attitudes, harden the current
focus on drug therapy and being careful not to lower the diagnostic
criteria because the diabetic problem of the future looks scarily bad
enough as it is without diagnosing even more of them.

It's a national emergency in the making, and the first things to be
thrown out of the window in a national emergency are reason, facts,
intelligence, and clear thinking.

So I suspect we low carbing diabetics will be an ignored minority of
weirdos for a long time yet. There is one ray of hope, however, and
that is that some prestigious economist will produce an irrefutable
argument showing that preventive medicine will save a great deal of
money. That would allow new attitudes to flourish under the sun of
independent funding, without having to struggle up competitively under
the shade of the large established trees of the conventional
institutionalised forest.

--
Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 7:59:11 AM9/19/06
to
Chris Malcolm wrote:

:: Roger Zoul <roger...@hotmail.com> wrote:
::: Alan S wrote:
::::: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 12:53:38 GMT, "BJ in Texas"
::::: <bjt...@hotmale.con> wrote:
:::::
:::::: Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
:::::: the ADA recommends the diet they do.
::::::
:::::: http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
::::::
:::::
::::: Although I agree with her point of view, I like to know
::::: where such views come from, so I did a little searching.
:::::
::::: Was anyone aware of the Wilshires, or the "Carbohydrate
::::: Awareness Council"?
::::: http://www.carbaware.org/about/team.htm
::
::: I wonder how many people have to lose, without the help of the
::: established medical community, shitloads of fat (142lbs in my case)
::: and maintain normal BG levels over extended periods of time with
::: controled carb nutrition, before the establishment will listen?
::
:: The establishment is obsessed with averages. So the answer is
:: probably enough people to significantly affect the average in a
:: population study of diabetics and to be identified as a signficant
:: subgroup in a preliminary population study of 100 or so, where
:: "significantly" is a strong enough result to counteract the well
:: known medical fact that "we know very few people can stick to diets".

Yeah, that will never happen. In a study, it is very unlikely that
participants will received skilled guidence in making a LC plan work - this
will definitely impact long-term adherence.

::
:: IMHO they're much more likely to recommend stomach stapling than a
:: diet.

Agreed. Of course, they're already doing this.

:: We have a very long way to go before the establishment will


:: agree to take its blinkers off. I think the process by which it will
:: happen is that first enough research results have to accumulate, with
:: enough medical advocates on university medical teaching staff, that a
:: good proportion of young medics in training get interested in the
:: ideas. Then we have to wait for the old professors on the important
:: committees to die and be replaced by enough low carb enthusiasts to
:: shake the committees, despite the placemen on the committees who are
:: there to protect the profits that low carb therapy for diabetics
:: would affect.

I think you're right.

::
:: Its the sociology of medical politics. They are already scared by the


:: national medical cost implications of treating the rising rates of
:: diabetics. IMHO that's going to harden attitudes, harden the current
:: focus on drug therapy and being careful not to lower the diagnostic
:: criteria because the diabetic problem of the future looks scarily bad
:: enough as it is without diagnosing even more of them.
::
:: It's a national emergency in the making, and the first things to be
:: thrown out of the window in a national emergency are reason, facts,
:: intelligence, and clear thinking.
::
:: So I suspect we low carbing diabetics will be an ignored minority of
:: weirdos for a long time yet.

Yep. Won't bother me, though.

:: There is one ray of hope, however, and


:: that is that some prestigious economist will produce an irrefutable
:: argument showing that preventive medicine will save a great deal of
:: money. That would allow new attitudes to flourish under the sun of
:: independent funding, without having to struggle up competitively
:: under the shade of the large established trees of the conventional
:: institutionalised forest.

I like the sound of that!


Chris Malcolm

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 8:08:25 AM9/19/06
to
Kurt <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> BJ in Texas wrote:
>> Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
>> the ADA recommends the diet they do.
>>
>> http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697

> This looked like an advertisement for Bernstein and Atkins rather than
> an objective scientific article. The author had a chip on her shoulder
> the size of a loaf of bread and drew the same convoluted and biased
> conclusions that I see from some posters in here.

If you want an argument or a discussion, or to persuade anyone, you'll
need to present at least a little bit of evidence in support of your
views. Otherwise you're just the bloke in the back of the hall who
keeps shouting.

W.M.McKee

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 8:21:02 AM9/19/06
to
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:21:25 -0400, Susan <neve...@nomail.com>
wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes
>
>BJ in Texas wrote:

>> Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
>> the ADA recommends the diet they do.
>>
>> http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
>>
>>
>

Thanks BJ,

This is exactly what I have been thinking for some time, and it is why
I took the trouble about a month ago to exhaustively present the
articles and studies that demonstrated the truth of this artricle,
much to the embarrassment and discomfiture of the "more carbs are good
for you" crowd.

Will, T2

W.M.McKee

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 8:48:21 AM9/19/06
to
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:21:25 -0400, Susan <neve...@nomail.com>
wrote:

>
>


>Excellent piece, plainspoken.
>
>"As Dr. Bernstein said in the recent debate, available for viewing on
>dLife, after starting a low-carb diet, "when patients see the pay off
>they stick with it."
>
>The pay-off is improvement; often with reduction or elimination of
>medication."
>
>And the lack of such payoff on the ADA diet leads to non-compliance.
>Why would anyone continue to eat a diet that deprived them of taste,
>health *and* failed to improve their health?
>
>I still reject the reasoning, though, since study after study has found
>the same about low carb and DM; I think it's about sponsorships. How
>else does one explain the ADA coming out in favor of table sugar, since
>it's no worse for you than starches??? Anyone with any integrity
>would've limited starches because they're just as bad as table sugar.
>

>Susan

It does appear that the ADA is saying "look, we know it won't work,
but here is what we recommend."

It may be as you say, Susan, good sense is outweighed by financial
conflict of interest. If everyone eats more carbs, the processed food
industry wins, the drug companies win, and a lot of doctors have a lot
more sick patients to treat with pills, palliatives, and shots.

It is probably no conincidence that those are the many of the sorts of
interests that financially support the ADA. It would appear that the
ADA does not want to piss off their sources of funding.

Willl, T2

rk

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 9:03:51 AM9/19/06
to
"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:4na4tpF...@individual.net...
:

As a T1 and having read the Quack (Bernsquack & Chung are neck n neck)
I found it hilarious that he's against pumping when his own micro-managing
method is just a manual type pumping. He still promotes outdated insulins
and theres no need to inject (bolus) so many times, especially for T1's when
we have no IR (most times) to deal with. For me as long as my pain is
managed
then I have no IR issues, otherwise I need to compensate for that factor,
which
is only increasing my insulin most times.

Case in point; my fasting bg was 98mg/dL, I had 1cup of Honey Bunches of
Oats
(48gm) w/1c of 2% low fat milk (13gm) along with 2 slices of toast (28gm) I
injected 6.7u for 89gm total as I was waiting on my toast (approx 10mins
before
I sat down to eat) I ate in about 20mins at 90mins I was at 138 and at
2.5hrs
I was at 87mg/dL. This is without exercise at all! If I were to exercise
then I'd
have to drop my insulin even further or up my carbs to compensate.

So, there are some of us that can get by and eat more then a handful of
carbs
and aren't overweight or gain weight and can control their glucose just
fine.

So how about you concede that not ALL diabetics need to reduce their carbs
to maintain glucose control, and I'll concede that most T2's need too and
leave
it at that... and you and your little playground buddies stop trying to
shove the
"low carb" bit down others throats and let others decide what is best for
them
if it's low carb or not.

Besides as we all know... Diabetes is a YMMV dieases at best.

rk

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 9:50:55 AM9/19/06
to

"W.M.McKee" <wmm...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:nfpvg2l40b8sqp2cd...@4ax.com...
: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:21:25 -0400, Susan <neve...@nomail.com>
: wrote:
:
::
: It may be as you say, Susan, good sense is outweighed by financial

: conflict of interest. If everyone eats more carbs, the processed food
: industry wins, the drug companies win, and a lot of doctors have a lot
: more sick patients to treat with pills, palliatives, and shots.
:
: It is probably no conincidence that those are the many of the sorts of
: interests that financially support the ADA. It would appear that the
: ADA does not want to piss off their sources of funding.
:
: Willl, T2

give me a BREAK!

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:07:53 AM9/19/06
to

"rk" <p_haha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3BSPg.13574$bM....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...

lol i know.
with the amounts of low carbers in here increasing their meds like crazy
its pretty funny how they keep saying that the ADA has a financial interest
with drug companies.
if we did a study based on the posters of this group one would probably find
that
many low carbers take more medications for cholesterol and blood sugar and
like to live
by the slogan... Eat Low Carb Exercise Less. i think those that increase
acitivity levels to match carbs
are far better off then those that reduce carbs to match reduced activity
levels.

Tom


Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:17:00 AM9/19/06
to

"Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158603616.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>

it was very funny how i felt like i was reading a post from this group when
i went to that
thread.
most studies dont usually prove anything. it is very strange how some feel
and push that they do.
i must admit i was never really against the low carb diet I am more against
those that push it as some kind of magic pill. I am now starting to wonder
as i watch those in here increasing their medications
and some are now even using insulin. perhaps it is not common sense ( as low
carbies like to put it)
perhaps in the long run - running away from carbs is much worse then
increasing acitivity levels to match carb intake. how much proof do these
people need that their way may not be the best way.
just because someone creates a report based on a scientists report does not
mean they truely understand it and in most cases i feel are just following
the Bernsteins and the Atkins blindly.
Dont get me wrong.. Living in Manhattan i truely wish we had more cab
drivers here like Anal S.

Tom


Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:36:09 AM9/19/06
to
rk wrote:
:: So how about you concede that not ALL diabetics need to reduce their

:: carbs to maintain glucose control, and I'll concede that most T2's
:: need too and leave

That's the entire point. Most T2s need to reduce their carbs ot maintain
glucose control. Finally you said it.
Why can't the ADA say it. It's the most direct, practical and inexpensive
thing to do, rather than eating Honey Bunches of Oats, low fat milk, and
toast, and taking drugs.

::
:: Besides as we all know... Diabetes is a YMMV dieases at best.
::

It's not nearly as YMMV as you seem to think.


Roger Zoul

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:36:39 AM9/19/06
to
rk wrote:

::
:: give me a BREAK!
::

Okay.


Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:35:57 AM9/19/06
to

"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:4n9o4tF...@individual.net...

> So I suspect we low carbing diabetics will be an ignored minority of
> weirdos for a long time yet.

All 20 of you?


Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 11:42:10 AM9/19/06
to

"Roger Zoul" <roger...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12h03e9...@news.supernews.com...

> rk wrote:
> :: So how about you concede that not ALL diabetics need to reduce their
> :: carbs to maintain glucose control, and I'll concede that most T2's
> :: need too and leave
>
> That's the entire point. Most T2s need to reduce their carbs ot maintain
> glucose control. Finally you said it.
> Why can't the ADA say it.

they do.. I reduced mine to 200 a day. much less than what i was eating.
i used to eat big bowls of pasta and rice and also have bread at the same
meal.
seems to me that if you look at those posting in this group.. those on low
fat take
much less medications for blood sugar levels and cholesterol.

Tom


Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 2:22:05 PM9/19/06
to

Chris Malcolm wrote:
> Kurt <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > BJ in Texas wrote:
> >> Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
> >> the ADA recommends the diet they do.
> >>
> >> http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
>
> > This looked like an advertisement for Bernstein and Atkins rather than
> > an objective scientific article. The author had a chip on her shoulder
> > the size of a loaf of bread and drew the same convoluted and biased
> > conclusions that I see from some posters in here.
>
> If you want an argument or a discussion, or to persuade anyone, you'll
> need to present at least a little bit of evidence in support of your
> views. Otherwise you're just the bloke in the back of the hall who
> keeps shouting.

I'm not trying to argue, discuss, or persuade anyone of anything, least
of all you. It was my observation of the article presented by a woman
who obviously has an agenda. You can't see that because you wear
blinders like a plow horse and continue to pull the plow with your own
dogmatic discourse.

Besides, the day I find myself in the same "hall" as you, is the day I
look at my ticket and realize I'm in the wrong hall.

Kurt

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 2:32:54 PM9/19/06
to
Gantlet wrote:
> "Roger Zoul" <roger...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:12h03e9...@news.supernews.com...
> > rk wrote:
> > :: So how about you concede that not ALL diabetics need to reduce their
> > :: carbs to maintain glucose control, and I'll concede that most T2's
> > :: need too and leave
> >
> > That's the entire point. Most T2s need to reduce their carbs ot maintain
> > glucose control. Finally you said it.
> > Why can't the ADA say it.
>
> they do..

Of course, the ADA does. However, they are not extreme enough for some
in here with the mandates of the dietary approaches they offer. Since
everyone is different in terms of diet, it would be foolish for them to
say you should never at more than X number of carbs. What they advise
is that people with diabetes work with their doctor and health care
team (of which the diabetic is part of) to determine what their
individual needs are.

>I reduced mine to 200 a day.

I probably eat around that on most days. Yesterday I ate approximately
100 because I was working on something most of the day and wasn't as
active as usual.

>much less than what i was eating.
> i used to eat big bowls of pasta and rice and also have bread at the same
> meal.
> seems to me that if you look at those posting in this group.. those on low
> fat take
> much less medications for blood sugar levels and cholesterol.

The majority of the people in this group, based on what they say about
their diet and exercise routines, are not in any way representative of
the average diabetic. Many seem to have other medical conditions that
affect their diabetes. Because of that they should be the last ones to
be giving another diabetic diet advice.

Look, we all want to be right when it comes to what we eat and how we
control our diabetes. If it works for us we think it must work for
everyone. In most cases it usually does not. I see YMMV everywhere in
here, but few actually believe it.

Best,
Kurt

Ma¢k

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 2:35:23 PM9/19/06
to
[Default] On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:35:57 GMT, "Gantlet"
<NotS...@yahoo.com> Maniacally Screamed the following like a drunken
"Gantlet" <NotS...@yahoo.com> into the madness of usenet:

>
"Gantlet" <NotS...@yahoo.com>
There is much more shrilling being posted than useful information.

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 2:36:15 PM9/19/06
to

:)

Best,
Kurt

TigerLily

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 2:45:16 PM9/19/06
to
interesting Kurt, your buddy Tom calls me a
low-carber because i eat about 100gm of carbs a
day....... the same amount of carbs you had
yesterday

to him EVERYONE must eat a MINIMUM of 250 gm of
carb a day

kate
--
Join us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet
/server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk
More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/
http://www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm
I have no medical qualifications beyond my own
experience.
Choose your advisers carefully, because experience
can be
an expensive teacher.

"Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote in
message

news:1158690774.4...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 3:04:31 PM9/19/06
to
Gantlet wrote:

> lol i know.
> with the amounts of low carbers in here increasing their meds like crazy
> its pretty funny how they keep saying that the ADA has a financial interest
> with drug companies.
> if we did a study based on the posters of this group one would probably find
> that
> many low carbers take more medications for cholesterol and blood sugar and
> like to live
> by the slogan... Eat Low Carb Exercise Less. i think those that increase
> acitivity levels to match carbs
> are far better off then those that reduce carbs to match reduced activity
> levels.


What about those who eat low carb, and exercise?

I think this ADA suspicion is paranoid, and smacks of conspiracy theory

thinking. I eat very low carb because I feel better that way, but I'm
not on
meds yet. I'm keeping my bg down under 110 mg/dL on average that way.
I hope to get it lower when I lose some weight.

Who says it has to be low carb versus exercise?

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 3:08:13 PM9/19/06
to

TigerLily wrote:
> interesting Kurt, your buddy Tom

LOL, you're not the first one to feel the need to say that in a
response to me, like it's some kind of bad thing to think Tom is a good
guy. Even though we've never met in person I would consider Tom to be
a buddy in this newsgroup because I agree with much of what he says and
he is always decent to me. I would consider RK a buddy and Cheri and
several others. But I never see anyone saying "Your buddy RK" or "Your
buddy Cheri"...

>calls me a
> low-carber because i eat about 100gm of carbs a
> day....... the same amount of carbs you had
> yesterday

I would consider 100 grams of carb "moderate" if I had to slap a
definition on it. But I prefer to look at what someone eats as what
they feel they need to eat to maintain optimum health. From what you
write here, and my interpretation of it, you seem to be in pretty good
control of your diabetes and have good common sense about your own
nutritional needs.

> to him EVERYONE must eat a MINIMUM of 250 gm of
> carb a day

I've never seem him post anything close to that. What I glean from his
posts is that he can handle that many carbs. However, your "buddies"
keep telling him that he is wrong.

Best,
Kurt

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 3:10:53 PM9/19/06
to

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> If you want an argument or a discussion, or to persuade anyone, you'll
> need to present at least a little bit of evidence in support of your
> views. Otherwise you're just the bloke in the back of the hall who
> keeps shouting.

And you are a regular army clown.

Message has been deleted

Nicky

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 3:23:57 PM9/19/06
to

<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1158692671....@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Who says it has to be low carb versus exercise?
>

Tom, apparently : ) The rest of us do both, of course...

Cheri

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 3:58:17 PM9/19/06
to
Kurt, I hope you're having a good day. Mine is going well. :-)

--
Your Buddy Cheri

Kurt wrote in message

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:04:22 PM9/19/06
to

"TigerLily" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:4nas7qF...@individual.net...

> interesting Kurt, your buddy Tom calls me a
> low-carber because i eat about 100gm of carbs a
> day....... the same amount of carbs you had
> yesterday
>
> to him EVERYONE must eat a MINIMUM of 250 gm of
> carb a day
>
> kate


its comments like this that make me wonder just how honest
these people are.
anyone who has been here for even a few weeks knows i have
nothing against those eating low carb but i do have something against
those that push it on everyone.

Tom

wmm...@cox.net

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:09:34 PM9/19/06
to

On 19-Sep-2006, dumb_f...@yahoo.com wrote:

> Who says it has to be low carb versus exercise?

I do low carb and exercise reasonably when I can.... and generally have FBG
at 105, or less, every day.... Have been on metformin also. My take on it is
whatever works for a particular individual is fine for that individual. In
my case, I simply could not achieve good contol without adopting the low
carb approach, in the context also of controlled calories, etc.

Will, T2

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:27:58 PM9/19/06
to

Kurt wrote:

> Of course, the ADA does. However, they are not extreme enough for some
> in here with the mandates of the dietary approaches they offer. Since
> everyone is different in terms of diet, it would be foolish for them to
> say you should never at more than X number of carbs. What they advise
> is that people with diabetes work with their doctor and health care
> team (of which the diabetic is part of) to determine what their
> individual needs are.


I think that's good for people who are at the point where they need
meds,
and have health insurance. I don;t have any insurance, and until I get
to
the point of needing meds, I'm self-educating and using my meter to
figure
out what doesn't work for me. For example, now I have to accept not
using
lemon juice in salad dressing, and using malt vinegar or red wine
vinegar
instead. Too bad, I like it a lot.

Do people here recommend a rigid number of carbs for everybody?
I haven't noticed that.


> The majority of the people in this group, based on what they say about
> their diet and exercise routines, are not in any way representative of
> the average diabetic.

I didn't know that. Is it really so uncommon for diabetics to eat low
carb?

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:30:05 PM9/19/06
to

Kurt wrote:
> BJ in Texas wrote:
> > Interesting piece on the ADA diet recommendations explaining why
> > the ADA recommends the diet they do.
> >
> > http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=5697
>
> This looked like an advertisement for Bernstein and Atkins rather than
> an objective scientific article. The author had a chip on her shoulder
> the size of a loaf of bread and drew the same convoluted and biased
> conclusions that I see from some posters in here. Someone should send
> the author an email and have her subscribe to a.s.d.... she would have
> a whole gaggle of kindred spirits.


I agree that it did not seem objective, but what is wrong with
Bernstein?
Are you against him, or just against cult mentality?

Cheri

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:36:03 PM9/19/06
to
Yes, that seems like a reasonable approach to me as well, though my FBG
is higher than that. Today, I had a fairly long walk, not jogging mind
you, but walking. Hope you're having a good day Will.

--
Cheri

wmm...@cox.net wrote in message

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:34:50 PM9/19/06
to
Cheri wrote:
> Kurt, I hope you're having a good day. Mine is going well. :-)
>
> --
> Your Buddy Cheri

LOL. Actually, today got off to a rough start because I was up very
late last night and subsequently got up late today. But I have a
wonderful evening planned and feel good physically. So I got that
going for me...

Glad to hear yours is going well (putting on my best Alan Hale Jr.
voice) "Little Buddy!"

Best,
Kurt

bj

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:39:19 PM9/19/06
to
<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1158697678....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

>
> out what doesn't work for me. For example, now I have to accept not
> using lemon juice in salad dressing, and using malt vinegar or red wine
> vinegar instead. Too bad, I like it a lot.
>

How much lemon juice, and how much dressing, are you talking about?

How many actual grams of carbs is in whatever lemon-juice-dressing-serving
you would normally use? According to the USDA nutrient database, there are
less than 3g of carbs in 1 fluid oz of raw lemon juice.
bj

Cheri

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:45:48 PM9/19/06
to
LOL Seriously, feeling good physically and a wonderful evening
planned...what more could you ask for. Have a great time Kurt.

--
Cheri

Kurt wrote in message
<1158698089....@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>...

TigerLily

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:49:32 PM9/19/06
to
Tom....... show me just ONE place where i have
"pushed it on everyone"

i think your memory is very poor...... and i agree
with Kurt........ 100gm of carbs a day is a good
level for ME.....
YMMV

"Gantlet" <NotS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a3YPg.5800$_k1.3635@trndny01...

Cheri

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:54:22 PM9/19/06
to
Why don't you use lemon juice? I'm curious.

--
Cheri

dumb_f...@yahoo.com wrote in message

wmm...@cox.net

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 4:55:08 PM9/19/06
to

On 19-Sep-2006, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote:

> Yes, that seems like a reasonable approach to me as well, though my FBG
> is higher than that. Today, I had a fairly long walk, not jogging mind
> you, but walking. Hope you're having a good day Will.

Doing fine, Cheri... Hope you are as well.

I am going to hear Colin Powell give a speech tonight... It should be
interesting.

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:16:08 PM9/19/06
to

dumb_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Kurt wrote:
>
> > Of course, the ADA does. However, they are not extreme enough for some
> > in here with the mandates of the dietary approaches they offer. Since
> > everyone is different in terms of diet, it would be foolish for them to
> > say you should never at more than X number of carbs. What they advise
> > is that people with diabetes work with their doctor and health care
> > team (of which the diabetic is part of) to determine what their
> > individual needs are.
>
>
> I think that's good for people who are at the point where they need
> meds,
> and have health insurance. I don;t have any insurance, and until I get
> to
> the point of needing meds, I'm self-educating and using my meter to
> figure
> out what doesn't work for me. For example, now I have to accept not
> using
> lemon juice in salad dressing, and using malt vinegar or red wine
> vinegar
> instead. Too bad, I like it a lot.

I don't think anyone is ever at the point where they don't need a
professional doctor to oversee what they are doing. Finding one that
you can trust is the thing that may take a bit of looking. This is a
compicated disease and IMO it's foolish to think we can treat it all by
ourselves.

> Do people here recommend a rigid number of carbs for everybody?
> I haven't noticed that.

Not a rigid number, no. But a few will criticize someone who eats out
of the range of what THEY think is acceptable.

> > The majority of the people in this group, based on what they say about
> > their diet and exercise routines, are not in any way representative of
> > the average diabetic.
>
> I didn't know that. Is it really so uncommon for diabetics to eat low
> carb?

The definition of low carb is very vague and I bet you wouldn't find
many here who can agree on what that number is. When I say not
representative of the average diabetic I am referring mostly to
discipline and motivation. I include myself in the "not
representative" group as well.

Kurt

Kurt

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:20:09 PM9/19/06
to

I have nothing against Dr. Bernstein and think he has a lot to offer in
the field of diabetes. Personally, I find a lot of what he says a bit
too extreme. If he was my doctor I might have a different opinion, but
all I know about him is what I have read in his book and when I saw him
on dLife once. My main problem is not with him, but the fact that a
couple of people in here seem to be selling his book for him. If one
wants to know more they could always ask their library if they have a
copy.

Best,
Kurt

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:31:47 PM9/19/06
to

<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1158697678....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Kurt wrote:
>
>> Of course, the ADA does. However, they are not extreme enough for some
>> in here with the mandates of the dietary approaches they offer. Since
>> everyone is different in terms of diet, it would be foolish for them to
>> say you should never at more than X number of carbs. What they advise
>> is that people with diabetes work with their doctor and health care
>> team (of which the diabetic is part of) to determine what their
>> individual needs are.
>
>
> I think that's good for people who are at the point where they need
> meds,
> and have health insurance.

"at the point were they need meds"
i was at the point of needing meds when i was first diagnosed. I no longer
need them
then to show you how different people are.
Alan S and i were diagnosed about the same time.. he tried to do it the low
carb way with no medications. I tried to do it with medications and low
fat. 4 years later I am now the one not taking medications and Alan does.
I just dont understand what you mean by "at the point were they need meds"
most people on meds could get off them with a little effort.

Tom

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:32:19 PM9/19/06
to

<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1158697805....@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...


i dont like what i read about bernstein.


Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:35:02 PM9/19/06
to

"TigerLily" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:4nb3gjF...@individual.net...

> Tom....... show me just ONE place where i have
> "pushed it on everyone"

sorry for the misunderstanding but i didnt question your pushing
low carb i questioned your honesty.

>
> i think your memory is very poor

thats ok.. i think your advice is very poor.

...... and i agree
> with Kurt........ 100gm of carbs a day is a good
> level for ME.....

that is nice.


> YMMV

it does

wmm...@cox.net

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:35:13 PM9/19/06
to

On 19-Sep-2006, "Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I don't think anyone is ever at the point where they don't need a
> professional doctor to oversee what they are doing. Finding one that
> you can trust is the thing that may take a bit of looking. This is a
> compicated disease and IMO it's foolish to think we can treat it all by
> ourselves.

Actually, I would agree with that. There should be some regular supervision
and monitoring.... Going without medical care when you have diabetes is
asking for trouble, because so many things can go wrong very quickly,
especially if there are other problems, like kidney stones or cancer, just
to name a couple.

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:41:50 PM9/19/06
to
you have to understand how these people here post.
they make like they are replying to a certain post but if you
look what is written it has nothing to do with the post they replied to.


"TigerLily" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message

news:4nb3gjF...@individual.net...


> Tom....... show me just ONE place where i have
> "pushed it on everyone"

she cant show me where in my post i said she does.
once again i had to correct her in trying to make it look like
i am the one that worships a certain diet.
its part of what i call the ASD back step.
usually means they will say anything to get away
from the actual post they are replying to.

i questioned her honest.
its wasnt a mistake on her part. it was simply a lie.

Tom


>
> i think your memory is very poor...... and i agree
> with Kurt........ 100gm of carbs a day is a good
> level for ME.....

as your doctor probably says everytime you open your mouth
"yes Kate you are correct"


> YMMV

thank god.

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:44:37 PM9/19/06
to

Kurt wrote:


> I don't think anyone is ever at the point where they don't need a
> professional doctor to oversee what they are doing. Finding one that
> you can trust is the thing that may take a bit of looking. This is a
> compicated disease and IMO it's foolish to think we can treat it all by
> ourselves.

And how about finding one that you can trust not to officially
doagnose you until you actually need meds?

Well, how do you define "manage"? Does it mean keeping your
bg under a certain generally agreed upon level, such as < 110 mg/dL
or whatever? Are you saying that people who can do that without
meds still need a dietician to tell them what to eat? Maybe I am
already learning how I need to eat by reading and checking my bg.

As for finding out how my organs are doing, my heart rate recently
went way down during exercise which is pretty weird, but I'm not
complaining. I'm getting a blood test done pretty soon for something
else, and I can just add one for kidneys and triglyderides on the form,

and tell my (gp) doctor I just wanted to know. They *are* educated
enough to know how to interpret the results, at the clinic I go to.

> > Do people here recommend a rigid number of carbs for everybody?
> > I haven't noticed that.
>
> Not a rigid number, no. But a few will criticize someone who eats out
> of the range of what THEY think is acceptable.

ok, I see. Well maybe some here need to get lives anyway.


> The definition of low carb is very vague and I bet you wouldn't find
> many here who can agree on what that number is. When I say not
> representative of the average diabetic I am referring mostly to
> discipline and motivation. I include myself in the "not
> representative" group as well.

well ok....

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 5:56:50 PM9/19/06
to
Gantlet wrote:

> "at the point were they need meds"
> i was at the point of needing meds when i was first diagnosed. I no longer
> need them
> then to show you how different people are.
> Alan S and i were diagnosed about the same time.. he tried to do it the low
> carb way with no medications. I tried to do it with medications and low
> fat. 4 years later I am now the one not taking medications and Alan does.
> I just dont understand what you mean by "at the point were they need meds"
> most people on meds could get off them with a little effort.

How do they get off them? By eating low carb and exercising?


I meant: at the point where one cannot keep one's bg low enough
to prevent complications by diet and exercise alone, such as:
_________________________________________________
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm

Here's my opinion on what numbers to aim for, they are
non-diabetic numbers.

FBG under 110

One hour after meals under 140

Two hours after meals under 120
_______________________________________________


I thought this was an easy concept. Is there some
controversy about this?

So, are you promoting eating carbs? I'm just trying to get
where you're coming from.

Gantlet

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 6:16:09 PM9/19/06
to

<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1158703010....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

> Gantlet wrote:
>
>> "at the point were they need meds"
>> i was at the point of needing meds when i was first diagnosed. I no
>> longer
>> need them
>> then to show you how different people are.
>> Alan S and i were diagnosed about the same time.. he tried to do it the
>> low
>> carb way with no medications. I tried to do it with medications and low
>> fat. 4 years later I am now the one not taking medications and Alan
>> does.
>> I just dont understand what you mean by "at the point were they need
>> meds"
>> most people on meds could get off them with a little effort.
>
> How do they get off them?

becoming more active and following a healthy diet.


>By eating low carb and exercising?

it seems most that do it that way feel everyone has to do it the same way.
from what i have seen those that promote low fat generally look much
healthier than
those that support low carb. just look at any health channel.


>
>
> I meant: at the point where one cannot keep one's bg low enough
> to prevent complications by diet and exercise alone, such as:

I have not met anyone yet that takes meds that couldnt be healthier.


> _________________________________________________
> http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm


you would agree that low carb could work for me right.
there for if i would have tried that way perhaps i would have also
been fooled into thinking low carb was the only way for me.


>
> Here's my opinion on what numbers to aim for, they are
> non-diabetic numbers.

if you are telling me what numbers you aim for i would say
that is good.
if you are telling me that in your opinion i or any newbie reading this
should also shoot for those numbers I can only have 1 answer.
and that is
your opinion on what numbers I should shoot for means very little to me.


>
> FBG under 110
>
> One hour after meals under 140
>
> Two hours after meals under 120
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> I thought this was an easy concept. Is there some
> controversy about this?

diabetes is not a 1 way for everyone kind of thing.
my numbers and my goals have changed over the last 4 years
and while the numbers above may have been hard for me to do in the first
couple
of months. I can get them now with my eyes closed.
I think newbies should work with their doctors and not strangers in a
newsgroup to determine
treatment.


>
> So, are you promoting eating carbs?

for myself i do like the idea of getting my energy from whole grains
over fat.
I know some low carber in here is going to say something about veggies.
well veggies are carbs and my diet has allows for more carbs there for i can
eat more veggies than a low carber.

I'm just trying to get
> where you're coming from.

i am promoting that newbies work with doctors and dietitians to develop a
treatment plan
on nutrition and exercise and not with strangers in a news group.
other than that i just like pointing out all the lies i see being posted.

Tom


TigerLily

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 6:39:20 PM9/19/06
to
Tom, and you neglect to add that you lost a
significant amount of weight following the diet
that your dietician (or was it your wife's
dietician) put you on

losing 7% of your body weight is enough to allow a
lot of diabetic to have a med free life

have you ever thought that Alan wasn't that
overweight in the first place?

--
Join us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet
/server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk
More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/
http://www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm
I have no medical qualifications beyond my own
experience.
Choose your advisers carefully, because experience
can be
an expensive teacher.

"Gantlet" <NotS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:J_ZPg.2394$x11.396@trndny02...

TigerLily

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 6:40:55 PM9/19/06
to
who is a liar Tom?

i think the fingers are pointing BACK at you when
you point at someone

"Gantlet" <NotS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:yuZPg.907$I.114@trndny05...

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 7:05:45 PM9/19/06
to

wmm...@cox.net wrote:
> On 19-Sep-2006, "Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't think anyone is ever at the point where they don't need a
> > professional doctor to oversee what they are doing. Finding one that
> > you can trust is the thing that may take a bit of looking. This is a
> > compicated disease and IMO it's foolish to think we can treat it all by
> > ourselves.
>
> Actually, I would agree with that. There should be some regular supervision
> and monitoring.... Going without medical care when you have diabetes is
> asking for trouble, because so many things can go wrong very quickly,
> especially if there are other problems, like kidney stones or cancer, just
> to name a couple.

So if anything else goes wrong, the idea is that it shows up in the bg
readings, right?

Otherwise, if it doesn't affect bg readings, I don;t see how it would
affect
diabetes.

dumb_f...@yahoo.com

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 7:24:39 PM9/19/06
to
Gantlet wrote:

> > How do they get off them?
>
> becoming more active and following a healthy diet.

ok, by eating low carb and exercising.

>
>
> >By eating low carb and exercising?
>
> it seems most that do it that way feel everyone has to do it the same way.
> from what i have seen those that promote low fat generally look much
> healthier than > those that support low carb. just look at any health channel.

Are those people on the health channel diabetic? If not, why even
bring them up? Ok, so it looks like you are promoting the low fat
high carb way. Well, I can only comment on how my own physical
vehicle reacts to carbs, and I get very serious commentary in favor
of low carb. I can undersand the desire to help others. but maybe
some get co-dependent about it.

How do your bg numbers do on a low fat, medium to high carb diet?
Are you willing to get specific about it? Tiger Lily mentioned that
youy lost a lot of weight. Maybe that also helped you to deal with
carbs quite a bit. Maybe that's something that gets left out of the
equation a lot.

> > I meant: at the point where one cannot keep one's bg low enough
> > to prevent complications by diet and exercise alone, such as:
>
> I have not met anyone yet that takes meds that couldnt be healthier.

You are being too indirect.

>
>
> > _________________________________________________
> > http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm
>
>
> you would agree that low carb could work for me right.
> there for if i would have tried that way perhaps i would have also
> been fooled into thinking low carb was the only way for me.
>
>
> >
> > Here's my opinion on what numbers to aim for, they are
> > non-diabetic numbers.
>
> if you are telling me what numbers you aim for i would say
> that is good.
> if you are telling me that in your opinion i or any newbie reading this
> should also shoot for those numbers I can only have 1 answer.
> and that is
> your opinion on what numbers I should shoot for means very little to me.


Now, you see, I didn;t say that., that's from the web site. I even
left that in the underlined boundaries to separate it from my own
comments. Eveything within the lines was a quote from the web
site.

>
>
> >
> > FBG under 110
> >
> > One hour after meals under 140
> >
> > Two hours after meals under 120
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > I thought this was an easy concept. Is there some
> > controversy about this?
>
> diabetes is not a 1 way for everyone kind of thing.

So are you saying those numbers are not a good guidline?

> my numbers and my goals have changed over the last 4 years
> and while the numbers above may have been hard for me to do in the first
> couple
> of months. I can get them now with my eyes closed.

So you do accept that guidleine...

> I think newbies should work with their doctors and not strangers in a
> newsgroup to determine
> treatment.

Or they can read books by doctors and use their meter until they can't
manage
it without meds.


>
>
> >
> > So, are you promoting eating carbs?
>
> for myself i do like the idea of getting my energy from whole grains
> over fat.

yes, but does your body like it?

> I know some low carber in here is going to say something about veggies.
> well veggies are carbs and my diet has allows for more carbs there for i can
> eat more veggies than a low carber.


Maybe that's because you lost weight.

>
> I'm just trying to get
> > where you're coming from.
>
> i am promoting that newbies work with doctors and dietitians to develop a
> treatment plan
> on nutrition and exercise and not with strangers in a news group.
> other than that i just like pointing out all the lies i see being posted.

well ok but try to be clear about it, please....

Alan S

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 7:26:00 PM9/19/06
to
On 19 Sep 2006 14:16:08 -0700, "Kurt"
<kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote:

You love putting up straw men Kurt.

>> I don't think anyone is ever at the point where they don't need a
>> professional doctor to oversee what they are doing.

Name a person, any person, who has said that here. Include a
link to a post.

> Finding one that
>> you can trust is the thing that may take a bit of looking.

True.

>> This is a
>> compicated disease and IMO it's foolish to think we can treat it all by
>> ourselves.

Again, name a person, any person, who has said that here.
Include a link to a post.

You continually imply - or state - that people pose as
doctors here and offer specific medical advice without
adequate qualification of their words.

Again, name a person, any person, who has done that here.
Include a link to the post. You should find that easier. It
has happpened, but rarely, and such posts will always be
challenged and clarified by subsequent posters. Pastor Frank
leaps to mind recently.

Most of us also note our type and other info in our sigs to
help readers evaluate relevance. Try it. It will help to
remind your readers that you are type 1 when you add your
comments to the mix. That doesn't mean you shouldn't comment
- but your comments on diet to a type 2 using dietary means
to assist in BG control should be weighted about the same as
my comments on insulin management to a type 1. Advice I
would rarely, if ever, offer.

Most of us also credit the readers with sufficient
intelligence and discrimination to judge for themselves what
is valuable for them and what should be discussed with their
doctors before acting. Stop acting as the school principal
here issuing strident warnings to the naive innocent
students about talking to strangers.

If you put the same effort into assisting newby type 1's as
you do into railing against your straw-man ADA haters this
would be a better place for all.

Cheers Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg

I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience.
Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be
an expensive teacher.

Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.

Alan S

unread,
Sep 19, 2006, 8:00:00 PM9/19/06