"As noted previously, in many studies, the low-carbohydrate group is allowed unlimited access to food as long as carbohydrate is reduced"
So basically open access to fatty food.
"whereas the low-fat control is explicitly constrained to reduction in calories, an obvious benefit for compliance."
Here's eat a lettuce leaf! Which while is great for the T2's due to the need to remove the fat attached to the pancreas in the majority of cases at the point of diagnosis (see current ongoing studies with over 10,000 T2's at point of diagnosis), at least for a short period of time anyhow it is not beneficial to a T1 as the major studies (involving people being actually studied and not pasting together bits from other papers which themselves was pieced together bits of other papers which might one day of some form of study involved off someone, which also just happens to of been all combined together by someone working for a low carb diet company who is complaining that every other study is biased as it's funded by basically anyone who aren't themselves...odd that isn't it!).
"Role of starch versus mono- and disaccharides" the first sentence is "Replacement of carbohydrate with fat or, in some cases, with protein, is beneficial in both types of diabetes leading to better glycemic control, weight loss, cardiovascular risk markers, and reduction in medication".
Oddly not supported by proper scientific studies not from a company making millions from selling books about this diet. Strange that isn't it?
So let's have a look at some proper science for once not a load of marketing fluff. Let's take some studies from University of Athens Medical School US, Medical Schools from Scandinavia and Europe. With funding provided by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society and the Swedish Research Council and charity groups (please note not someone trying to market some diet books!). The study was then published in the peer-reviewed medical journal British Medical Journal which made it an open access article.
This large study (50,000 people) provides evidence of a link between low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets and increased risk of cardiovascular events such as strokes.
The focus of the coverage upon the Atkins diet is because the dietary pattern in the study mimicked some of the Atkins diet’s recommendations of a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet.
The study followed people for an average of 15.7 years, and the researchers used national registries to identify hospital discharge information and reported deaths to look for first diagnoses of cardiovascular diseases (as recorded by recognised disease classification codes).
The researchers’ analysis found that both high-protein and low-carbohydrate scores were significantly associated with an increased rate of these cardiovascular events. A one-tenth (one point) increase in protein intake was associated with a 4% increase in the risk of any new cardiovascular events (rate ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.06). A one-tenth decrease in carbohydrate intake was associated with a (borderline significant) 4% increase in the risk of any new cardiovascular event (rate ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 1.08). A two-unit increase in a composite low-carbohydrate, high-protein score was associated with a 5% increase in the risk of any new cardiovascular event (rate ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.08).
Researchers also found a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease with increasing levels of education and physical activity. Risk of cardiovascular disease was increased with tobacco smoking and a history of high blood pressure.
The researchers concluded that “low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets, used on a regular basis and without consideration of the nature of carbohydrates or the source of proteins, are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease”. They estimated that a 20g decrease in daily carbohydrate intake and a 5g increase in daily protein intake would lead to a 5% increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
"Low-carbohydrate diets generally have better compliance (point 5)"
Which pretty much confirms that it's easier to stick to a set regime where it's a case of avoid one thing, and follow the testing and correction procedure more tightly. Whereas those given incredibly strict diets with low calorie but open carbs found the diet to restrictive and thus gave up on keeping with the regime and control.
Being diabetic is about control, nothing much else. What we can eat, or do is pretty much an open book as long as we have control and know what we are doing. This is just simple education and giving people something they want to stick to. If we the patients want to stick to something which controls us well, as this study shows those patients will have better control. Give them something so restrictive it causes them to lose faith in control it shows they give in and their BG control goes to hell. They spin it many ways to show their way is better than anyone else's, but they do touch occasionally on the point that in reality the correct way is the one which makes the patient interested in keeping good control. And that is a far better way. Education leading to better control, not crackpot diets!
