Double ditto on the R-ALA and it helps with any neuropathy as well.
IIRC, that's a bump in daily carb total for you bsc. If so, is that because you started insulin?
First, I really DON'T LIKE they mix studies about type 1 on insulin and type 2 on different terapies: what's the meaning then to say 2 are better low carbs and one high carbs ? Were the low carbs studies about type 2, and the high about well controlled type 1 ?
Apple and oranges situation ....
I think still_young_at_heart is right, he is pointing to this your cited article quote
Low Carb Findings (Up to 30% of calories from carbs)
And then they write:
Based on the studies in this systematic review, the following definitions are used:very-low-carbohydrate diet: 21–70 g/day of carbohydrate
moderately low–carbohydrate diet: 30 to <40% of kcal as carbohydrate moderate-carbohydrate diet: 40–65% of kcal as carbohydrate high-carbohydrate diet: >65% of kcal as carbohydrate
These definitions are not all-inclusive (e.g., a 100-g/day carbohydrate diet may be <30% kcal), but they represent the typical definitions used by authors, and all published articles fit in one of these categories.
Well, I've been very strict at times. I found that keeping to 50-100 g/day was good as 30 g/day. Everyone has their individual tolerance for carbs. This was even before insulin, but since insulin I've been able to significantly reduce after meal excursions.
Agreed we can't seem to arrive at a definition around here but you could probably get agreement that 180 is not low carb
Here's the catagories they used for this study:
very-low-carbohydrate diet: 21–70 g/day of carbohydrate
moderately low–carbohydrate diet: 30 to <40% of kcal as carbohydrate
moderate-carbohydrate diet: 40–65% of kcal as carbohydrate
high-carbohydrate diet: >65% of kcal as carbohydrate
Sort of an interesting system in that one is in grams/day while the others are in % of total calories. I would agree < 70 is very-low carb, I think I'd loose the "very". A better name is ketogenic because in a way there is only one division, that between burning mostly fat or burning mostly carbs.
It's a lot to go through and I can't claim to have examined it in detail but the gist I get is that low carb is effective in treating T2 and its safe. As far as I can tell they didn't bring out their old canard about not knowing if low carb is safe because no long term studies of safety haven't been done.
None of this is really news. I've read enough studies to draw the same conclusion, but to see it in the ADA Journal is news.
I'm reading and found this:
Lower (very low and moderately low) carbohydrate
Glycemic control.
Eleven clinical trials examined the effects of lowering total carbohydrate intake on glycemic control in individuals with diabetes. The carbohydrate content goal of the diet was very low in 7 studies (10–16) and moderately low in 4 studies (17–20).All studies included adults with type 2 diabetes
OK, so these arguments are not for type 1.
These findings are all for type 2, and they don't say if under insulin or other medications.
They say they got better A1c and so on .... I read no more, I find these meaningless.
Why did you related this to ADA type 1 and 2 indications ?
The latest incarnate of their recommendations can be read in the JADA article "The Evidence for MNT for Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Adults". I read through it and found it terribly flawed,
You have your opinions, but this article doesn't support them at all.
Interesting review! Thanks for posting it!
I think that doctors should discuss food as medicine more regularly. I may joke about "jelly beans PRN" but most of my docs have been like "if you want to talk about food, see a dietitian" and even, when I was in the 225-30 lb range, better than I had been but having lost some weight and wanting to lose more, the dietitian was like "eat more carbs..."
Well I will give the the results of a study of 1 yes one me. LC/HF vs HC/LF blood sugar well duh was just what all diabetics already know but the surprise was 30% better HDL and 25 % lower triglycerides with the same LDL with the low carb high saturated fat diet.
Ok, so you are correct, one high carb study found a lower A1c in a subgroup.
As I wrote, this statements are meaningless, they compare type2 studies with type one: different terapies, different ages and body mass and previous diet habits, different importance of diet with respect to medications and exercise.
But in science, one can slice and dice data to prove anything
This kind of articles are not scientific at all, it is "google search" research.
Science proves something when there is a clear trend, and reasons to explain that trend are found and tested (expecially by other scientific groups).
So you are right, this highlights a huge problem. All this diet stuff speculates on what is best for a T1. There are almost no good quality studies of what is best for a T1. The advice from the ADA and ADtA basically assumes that whatever is good for a non-diabetic must be good for a T1. I am not so willing to just take a huge leap of faith.
While you're right, this review doesn't present new research, I think there is value in having review articles to look over. This one is presenting what's currently out there and they do what they can to outline the parameters they used for inclusion and exclusion. Any new research is going to have to build on this foundation, at least to start with.
I think looking at subgroups and clarifying delineations between groups and treatments is extremely important. If anything, this review article highlights, at least in what they present, how much more work there is to do alomg those lines.
I also don't like the idea that there has been no studies of type 1. I suspect that result for certain subgroups may differ, not based on the type of therapy, but on things like insulin sensitivity. Gardners work at Stanford seemed to really highlight the differences between the groups. But our current T1 recommendations suggest that because we have not done the studies, T1s should eat what non-diabetics eat. Personally, when I look at America, I don't think that is workin too well.
And I agree with the problem of defining a low carb diet. The definition was whacked in the ADtA assesment and still weird in the cited review.
T1 are more fragile and need close supervision by their medical team, MD/CDE and dietitian, for any conversations about food...hee hee...
I think we have to understand that often these studies are hard pressed to get any result. They may well have broken out the patients by diabetes type or therapy, but once you start breaking the studies into little subgroups you start to lose the power of resolution. Only through including enough study members and observing enough of a significant difference can you conclude anything. For most of these studies, once you break it up into little groups it is no longer statistically significant.
You can make your own choices based on these studies and what you want to eat. But if you choose to eat low carb, I think this reviews supports the idea is a safe and effective option.
I agree. I stopped taking Lyrica( crossed eyes, swollen feet, weight gain) and the R-ala does the trick with NO side effects.
God Bless,
Brunetta
I am really new to all this. That being said, low carb should be WHOLE FOODS. Vegetables and lower glycemic fruits. Proteins & Fats paired w/ vegetables. REAL FOOD. These lower daily BGL. Healthy fats w/ vegies-such as olive oil w/ broccoli w/ chicken. Fats & protein slow digestion.Reduce or eliminate grains. Weight loss will commence. Energy levels rise.Readings stabilize.Real food usually has 5 or less ingredients. An apple is an apple.
Hooray for husbands who cook! :) My hubby does all the cooking also...he says it's therapy for him and it's a chore for me. He cooks, I clean up; works great for us! He's been on the low carb band wagon too and weighs less than he has in 10 years.
Thanks Judith! I agree w/ eating by your meters 100% ! I only meant apple is a whole food.Aspargus.Green beans. Simply single ingredient food. I love pineapple & can only pair w/ protein such as peanut butter or turkey or I spike right up! :D
Hi Dragonfly - totally agree with you, and I try to focus on 'good carbs' rather than 'low carb'.
I've recently read several books by Joel Fuhrman and changed my focus to Whole/Real Foods. I eliminated most grains and white carbs, and I think that was a bigger factor in improved BG/A1C than the reduction of total carbs. I also pair my carbs with good fats and proteins, and find I can now enjoy several servings of fruit/day. Love apples with peanut butter, and sometime a chunk of dark chocolate !
No, it's just AR who needs close supervision, because he does wacky things like running a lot, and then drinking his carbs. The dietitians definitely do NOT recommend this!!! :-P