In addition to the above, I would also recommend Volek and Phinney's book. Among other things, they pretty effectively debunk the widely held and oft-repeated mantra that the brain needs a large supply of dietary carbohydrate.
Case in point--even my OmniPod trainer, a former nutritionist, told me (in Jan 2013) that "the body needs 140g of carbohydrate each day for brain health." When I protested, she rolled her eyes and refused to discuss it...the orthodoxy dies hard. Presumably the corn industry has poured a lot of money into this, and will continue to do so. Glad to hear about another resource--will look on Amazon for Volek and Phinney's book.
LOL. Just realized that I never said which of their books I was talking about. It's The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living.
No problem, found it immediately on Amazon and ordered it already, 2-day shipping (Kindle is too slow a read when there are tables and recipes). Looked at the random page selection and got a page that noted that they could have provided 50+ citations per chapter but instead cited only the most well-known sources. There is lots of evidence for their case! and yet the health industry keeps pushing the low-fat, low-protein, high carbohydrate regimen...The book for athletes looks good as does their reconsideration of Atkins, but happy to get the one you meant. Thanks again!
Very welcome. I hope you like it. It's heavy on science, as well as being well written and a pleasure to read.
I'm not familiar with Anthony Colpo, but his response really resonated with me on a common sense level. I have been an avid cyclist for over 20 years, and you are just going to bonk quick if you aren't fueling your body with carbohydrates during a 100km ride. My son who is Type 1 can be out playing road hockey for 8 hours straight on any given weekend/evening. His body needs the fuel of carbohydrates. I think the point Anthony makes is that any endurance athlete, even one trying to eat low carb, can only do this to a point - certainly not during intense activity. He's not running the Western State on chicken and butter. However, I do think that carbs can be cut way back on the days my son is less active. Also, it seems to be the combination of carbohydrates plus high fat (ie. pizza) that causes the most problems, not strictly carbs per se. My son can have a sandwich on multigrain bread and his blood sugars be stable, but if he has pizza there is usually a high bg coming at some point. I think the scientific research regarding carbs can only be applied to people with diabetes up to a certain point.
I just finished that book last week. Some of the more technical sections slow down my reading but I like a book that challenges me. Volek and Phinney do have a talent for making scientific topics understandable to us mere mortals. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The only disappointment was an entire chapter devoted to T2D and none on T1D. They referred readers to read Bernstein on that topic. They paid homage to Bernstein more than once, deservedly so.
I guess I like the David and Goliath aspect of the the low-carb constituency's struggle with the wealthy, and powerful processed-food/pharma combine's dominance over the standard western diet. Volek and Phinney keep cranking out persuasive evidence that chips away at the traditional low fat high carb diet that sacrifices many of us that are carb intolerant!
Maybe those of us who eat moderate carbs (about 30% of calories from carbohydrates) should form a group so that we wouldn't feel so lonely. Plus it would help educate low carb fans that some of us can eat 150-250 carbs a day and not be riding the rollercoaster or living off donuts.
Hey, still_young_at_heart, I'd join that group!
I admire that you're aware of where your carb intolerance threshold is. If I could eat that many carbs and get away with, I definitely would.
Getting the nutritional/medical establishment to concede that there exists such a thing as carb intolerance, beyond a Celiac diagnosis, would be a significant step in the right direction.
In the meantime the hypo- and hyper-carb camps shoot at each other and you folks in the middle are dodging the rhetorical bullets. By the way, your 30% of calories from carbs is about 2/3 to 1/2 the low fat high carb camp's position.
I feel like each dustup over this issue does move the common understanding forward, a little at a time. There is such a thing as constructive conflict.
After Gary's comments, his book went through the shredder! He is seriously mistaken. I cannot even remotely get good control on high carb. I guess as always, it's my fault. I just wish that somebody would tell me what I'm doing wrong.
The hard reality is that we have diabetes, by definition an intolerance to carbohydrates. While our intolerance threshold levels may be distributed over a range, we as persons with diabetes all have a natural limit. For anyone to counsel us to eat at least a specific number of carbs is generally bad advice.
Once I exceed about 100 grams of carbs per day, my glucose variability dramatically rises, the BG roller coaster starts, and the quantity and severity of hypos increases. It's my personal metabolic truth and no "expert" will convince me otherwise.
As I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread, you might be interested in Volek and Phinney's book, The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living. It's well written and readable, long on science, and does a pretty effective job of dismantling the myth that the brain needs a large supply of dietary carbohydrate.
That book appears to be unavailable in Canada. But I read some extracts online and it seems to be excellent.
Just finished that book about a week ago. Good read. That’s what influenced my use of the term “carb intolerance threshold.” While I’m not dx’d with Celiac, I am carb intolerant as is anyone with D. Variance in the location of the threshold does not undermine the fact that we D’s, as a group, do not tolerate carbs well.
I view wholesale pushing of 50% of daily calories as carbs for a diabetic akin to telling an alcoholic that s/he can drink on the weekends.
RE: Sam I am
Hi. T1 27years. I was asking these same questions a couple years ago. Strange.
I am now confused. Who be Sam I am. Is he really Sam or is he Sam Iam? Or is he really Samiam?
Yes and no.
I am a 5'2" female who is type 1.
I was more successful at keeping my bg stable with Bernstein level carbs, however, an unintended consequence for me was eating too much sodium. I have some kidney issues, so I don't process electrolytes like most. Too much sodium in the diet, for most people, raises blood pressure. High blood pressure acts similarly to high blood sugars, as far as organ, nerve, and tissue damage. If you can keep Bernstein levels of carbs and still stay below 1500 mg sodium for each 2000 calories you eat, go for it (That is what the ADA recommends for diabetics).
It was too hard for me, so I personally upped it to stay between 50 and 100g / day, and I stay below 1000 mg sodium/day because of my kidney disease. (With about 3 years of A1c's below 6.5 and low sodium diet for 18 months, I have raised my eGFR from 17 to 55 in less than 18 months. I want to stay off dialysis at least until that UCSF artifical kidney project is ready for people like me, if not forever. =)
That is really astounding progress with your eGFR. Whatever works, please keep it up.
Sam We R