Do you agree with Gary Scheiner about Low Carb Diets?

There's a difference between burning ketones as fuel & having high urine ketones. Consistently high BG (that can't be brought down) along with high ketones is a symptom of DKA. Just having ketones from burning fat is not cause for concern. This isn't high ketones. Ketones don't turn into DKA.

Most everyone has mild ketones in the morning simply from fasting overnight.

Thanks Terry. 23andme did tell me I had a 4x risk of getting T1, but that's about it. Oh and I already had it, so it didn't do me much good knowing the increased risk.

I can recommend an app called MyFitnessPal for counting carbs etc, on iPhone, Android.

Whenever 23&Me has come up in Biology classes, the general consensus is that it's minimally helpful--if you have a 4X risk of getting T1, there isn't exactly anything you can do about it. It's good for some things, but otherwise you just spend time worrying about things you can't control.

I am not a low carber , living with type 1 over 30 years ( present age very close to 73 ) .I recall Gary saying breakfast is the most difficult meal to manage due to fasting during the night ; he suggests, that one can eat part of the breakfast as a morning snack ( I do that with my milk ...usually after or just before my morning walk ) .I eat well balanced meals , prepared from " scratch " lots of greens ....and no my A!C is not below 6.5 , has never been ...I have no complications ...and we are all different

PS my TDD is less than 21 units

I'm T1 & have been eating LC (30-35 carbs) for almost 5 years. I disagree with Gary that a higher carb diet simplifies BG control. Like you, I've experienced the opposite. Smaller insulin doses yield more precise & predictable results. I see no advantage, & only disadvantages, with large insulin doses to cover higher carbs. Once I started LC, there were no more huge swings between hypo & hyper. In addition to more level BG, I immediately felt better, my blood lipids improved on low carb/moderate protein/high fat & carb cravings went away. I was no longer hungry between meals & my energy level improved.

Also disagree with Gary on the role of protein being used for carbs to the detriment of muscle development, bone building, etc. Our ancestors didn't have a carb heavy diet.

There are other sources of non-dietary glucose. Cells dying, different biochemical processes contribute glucose.

Hi, dear Judith!

I found I have to limit my carbs and eliminate grains and starchy veggies to have any control. I started out with Dr. B's 30g and had a 5.1 ac1 down from 13% at my diagnosis, then I went to 50g per day due to feeling too hungry on that diet and my a1c went to 5.7. So I would disagree with him, however that is just me. If there were a way for me to still eat more carbs and not jump to high bg I would be doing it for sure. In the past I always ate carbs with protein and fat and stuck to whole grains for the most part. I suffered from hypoglycemia at one point so I was testing myself a bit then. My bg in my past was always in the low 80's when tested and lower at times. I never did glucose tolerance test so I don't know how much I spiked when eating a lot of carbs.

Thanks, Rich and Terry! I don't post here very much (not enough time, for one thing!) but wanted to respond after Rich advised me of Gary's interview and asked for my thoughts on his statements about carb restriction.

Hi ricmac. It's so individual! I've been Type 1 for 20 years. I never get consistent blood glucose readings when eating a meal w/o carbs, but a a small amount of carbs seems to help to stabilize them. Of course I physically feel better when stable, but for me there's a mental benefit also. I've spent periods of my life in poverty, I mean little or no food available, so I don't like to deliberately deprive myself of good food -- say, a fresh apple like Gary S was eating during the video! Celiac keeps me honest as well, so 100 g carbs daily (and a gf beer now and then) works for me.

Frankly, very disappointing. Statements like these have no basis in fact, and it only causes me to view the people who make them as misinformed and less credible.

Fact is: the more fast acting carbs you consume, the more complex it is to manage your BG as a diabetic. There is no one "right" or one "wrong" way, however. It's a matter of choice. You can get the proper nutrition on a low, medium, or high carb diet, and it's really up to the individual to decide how best to adjust the other variables of insulin and exercise to achieve optimal BG control and health.

Bread, pasta, rice, french fries, donuts, cereal, bagels, baked potatoes, etc.. - I love them all, who doesn't? They taste great, no doubt about it. But if I eat them, BG control becomes a roller coaster ride, so I don't. Suggesting that these foods are nutritionally necessary, however, is incorrect.

There are a lot of things which effect BG. Temperature, humidity, stress, exercise or even that annoying customer. All can move levels a massive amount if you are sensitive enough to them. Some of us are, some aren't which is why no one rule fits us all.

I actually found Gary's comments exact to what I've seen myself. Meanwhile unlike some who find he's some kind of religious figure, I find pretty much everything Bernstein says is utter quack material (as underlined by his recent anti pump comments). If I went anywhere near any of the things he proclaims I would be unconscious and on the floor before the end of the day. Gary's comments though fit everything I've learned, and discusses with many dietitians and experienced myself.

Personally on an active day I can easily nail 600-800g of carbs a day and flat line it with a massive amount of protein thrown in for the necessary muscle repair. On a quiet day I can happily hop between 120-200g mostly depending on desire or activity again. If I'm doing nothing but sitting in the office all day than fine, few carbs are necessary. But anything else it's totally necessary.

And as others above have mentioned it, my TDD on a 600-800g day is about 11u (I run my basal lower and don't bolus for the intake during this), and on a quiet day with say little activity and 160g works in at 20u.

Again, this points out how very different we all are ;)

I'd be interested to know how he arrived at the 100 gram cho a day number. How much does our body actually need? I'm sure it's derived from either studies or experience, but inquiring minds want to know ;)

The 100-120g comment he made about that being the needed fuel for the nervous system and brain you mean? Not actually sure what the source of that was, but it does sound very similar to what most dietitians mention since most try to avoid low carb diets in T1's, and even more so in kids. Knowing the amount of physics usually backing up the maths that dietitians tend to use I wouldn't be surprised if there are some numbers around for a recommended daily.

I think the issue is there is plenty of physics, and supporting maths worked out over the years to show how much carb goes to fuel activity, even taking into account body mass and various other elements. While the protein based figures are a whole less adaptable to use in an everyday environment as Gary also pointed to. The sums are for example what my dietitian used straight from her own text books to calculate my usual 60-100g per hour consumption rates when I harassed her about my stupid activities.

I disagree as well. To have a successful low-carb diet you require your primary source of energy to be fat as our bodies are much more efficient at using fat for energy. This is because we (humans) will not survive on protein alone. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation. There are so many resources out there for low-carb diets and the benefits/drawbacks of each approach. As a type 1 myself, I have found that lowering, but not eliminating, carbs has had a very positive affect on my diabetes. Anything that requires your body to produce/consume more insulin then truly needed only leads to more problems.

It's actually less than what dieticians in the state take out of their textbooks. I'd like not to see a textbook, but the numbers/reasons behind it. Nya, if you've seen the physics/maths/etc, that's what I'd like to see ;)

Well put Christopher. Most of the people commenting here are also reiterating that it's an individual choice, e.g. Trudy has found something that works for her. Which is the biggest takeaway I think, that you need to find out what works for you. For me, I find that a low carb diet (although not super-low like Dr Bernstein) makes my BGL stable. Indeed my main problem right now is not losing any more weight! Which is a good problem to have for a T1, considering my previous rollar coaster highs and lows before I started low carb.

I think like so many things with D, the carb theory is what works best for you. Me personally I can manage carbs fairly well, as long as I keep portion sizes in mind. I actually gain weight on a low carb diet versus losing weight. If low carbing works for you, keeps you stable, fine whatever works. If moderate carbing is what does it that's fine too. If you have a decent tolerance for carbs thats great as well. The key is finding what works best for us as individuals, and applying what works for us, to keep our blood glucose under control and lower our a1c's. My last a1c was 5.9, and I DEF eat more than 60 grams of carbs a day lol!

1 Like

In 50 years when there is more data, what will we think? In 100 years? Diet ideas come and go but people afflicted with disease will always look for alternatives. To me as a t1, low carbing is interesting and worth a look!

Scheiner is T1 also