You know what's a crappy way to live? Not having your legs.
So true.
Fascinating. Thanks for sharing!
100-150g of carbs a day is definitely NOT VLC. I would be afraid to put a child on a Bernstein-type diet with only 30g of carbs a day, but that's a huge difference.
I think children need high nutrition, which they get from fruits and vegetables, and protein. Their carb needs should come with foods that have other nutritional values, such as milk, potatoes, corn, etc. What they don't need are things like sugary drinks, hard candy, white bread, white rice, white pasta, etc.
And even those things are OK once in a while, just not as every-day meals. When the gang is having pizza, the diabetic child should have pizza too, but BGs must be checked and corrected for hours afterward.
Parents of diabetic children have a really hard time balancing the needs of diabetes with the needs of the child to have as happy and normal a childhood as possible. My heart goes out to them.
Very true, diabetes is the leading cause of amputations, kidney failure and blindness. Those of us taking good care of ourselves, and having stable BG control are not likely to have these problems. But how about the many millions of diabetics who never visit an online support group? It is not surprising that diabetes is the #7 cause of death among diseases in the US. I think it will appear higher on the list in the years ahead since it is predicted that half of the population will have diabetes a few decades from now. Educating the public about diabetes is the best way of curtailing these deaths, but I don’t see widespread education taking place.
Yes, and there are many deaths who do not get put down as Diabetes, because the person developed heart failure from the Diabetes, or another condition. I think the number would be higher, if they were...
acidrock,
Perhaps you should try low carb to see for yourself. I've been eating 30-35 carbs for over 2.5 years. I haven't been turned into a potted plant sitting on the couch. I have tons of energy. In fact, I have much more energy then when I ate the ADA way.
I too agree with Joe,
t really is so dependent upon your activity levels. Regimes like Bernsteins just don't take this into account.
On a recent backpacking holiday in the Pyrenees, I wore a garmin which gave some indication of the calories used . For a person of my weight and age my basal metabolic rate is about 1400 calories but on some days I was using up to 5000 calories for the walk alone. A diet containing 10% carbs would be a very low percentage of carbs but would be 125 carbs (over 3x Bernsteins allowance),30% a moderate proportion would be 375 carbs.
Actually I didn't eat the full amount of calories but took less insulin, had a few too many hypos and lost weight over the week. My endo told me when I returned that she thought next time I should not only eat a bit more (including carbs) but cut the lunchtime bolus.
Horror of horror though, my blog report of my trip caused consternation to one low carb enthusiast. He poured scorn on me when I wrote that I'd eaten a thin slice of a chocolate gateau after dinner! (and a French portion size is not large)
Like Joe I think life is for living, I'll climb those mountains in spite of being a grandmother, and then I have no reason to decline a slice of chocolate cake. (or the crepes that served for breakfast on another day)
Sorry life is for living and quality of life is important too. (incidently my last HbA1c which covered the chocolate cake and the crepes was 5.6% the same as the one before)
I personally find it less healthy and more unrealistic to pretend people climb mountains all the time, or run marathons all the time, or be on a bike 24/7 just so that they can have more carbs and eat things because they think those things are quality of life. To me, quality of life is living another day/month/year/decade complication free, and with my family and loved ones... And yes, I keep VERY active, and I am not a potted plant... without having to climb a mountain for an infinitely tiny amount of cake. I'd rather make low carb chocolate cake, thank you very much.
>> The ADA creation in 1940 in a large part was driven by this controversy, which obviously remains to this day. An early premise of the ADA was that patients should just go about their lives as though they did not have diabetes, and that the medical system should support that strategy. <<
I had not heard this one. Where do you find this assertion from the ADA?
Even non-diabetics who engage in strenuous long-term activity require more carbohydrates (or calories) than people who lead a normal life, even those who exercise at the gym.
So we all have to adjust our carb intake to our activity level -- if you're doing fine as is, more power to you! :-) I probably can't eat as many carbs as you can, because I'm pretty lazy -- the only exercise I do (other than the activities of daily living) is folk dancing, and it's not strenuous, or I wouldn't be able to keep it up for 2 hours.
Reduced carb has been working for me for 2 months, except today, when I can't get my BG under 140, no matter how many corrections I try. I hope I'm not getting sick!
I eat low carb, Natalie. Even with all my physical activity.
I doubt one would find the ADA making this admission today. If I recall, the history was reviewed in Gary Taubes, GCBC. But it is also on the wiki page for Elliott Joslin:
Dr. Joslin was adamant in his position that good glucose control, achieved through a restricted carbohydrate diet, exercise, and frequent testing and insulin adjustment, would prevent complications. This was debated for decades by other endocrinologists and scientists, and the American Diabetes Association was divided on this subject from its inception. Joslin’s approach wasn’t validated until 30 years after his death, when in 1993, a 10-year study, “The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Report” was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine. This study demonstrated that the onset of diabetes complications was delayed by tight glucose control, something Joslin had argued decades prior.
I respectfully disagree, Joe. My quality of life has vastly improved from following a low carb diet. I don't feel deprived (which is constantly implied), I don't have any extraordinary amount of discipline (to answer those who think low carb takes willpower) & I love food as much as the next person. I don't live on meat & salad. My meals are varied, delicious & balanced. I'm far from starving. There appears to be many misconceptions about low carb.
I don't water ski all day, climb mountains regularly, compete in soccer tournaments or run races. However, I'm quite active & never lack for energy.
The whole 'debate' needs to be set against the backdrop of national obesification, giant servings, carbohydrate culture, "Supersize Me", etc. Things seem to have swung back a bit. I can't figure out why doctors/ dieticians are still so insistent that you eat 60G of carbs/ meal, along with snacks, etc.?
eeeek! I dunno what I'm talking about either! I can't believe I could go 30-35 carbs/ day!
Joe and acidrock,
As T1s using insulin and getting lots of exercise you have the option of consuming more carbs.
As a T2 getting moderate exercise(1 mile brisk walk per day) Low carb is the only option if I want to avoid complications. I adopted low carb not because I read a book and decided to try it but because frequent testing told me this was what I had to do to avoid large damaging spikes. Since adopting low carb I have noticed an increase in my energy levels.
I don't feel deprived by my diet, there are still lots of good things to eat. I really haven't had a problem avoiding certain foods, my meter provides the necessary discipline. I know those high readings are slow death. I don't feel like a potted plant but I probably won't be running any marathons any time soon either:)
Although I can certainly accept that low carb is not for you, please understand that high or even medium carb is very damaging to many of us, and low carb is our best option. Quality of life is in the eye of the beholder. Getting control of my blood sugars has increased quality of life from my perspective.
Agree bsc, quite a leap.
What did children eat before grain based, carb heavy diets became standard:) I did a huge amount of research before going low carb & found nothing about lowering carbs endangering a child's health. What I did find was people parroting ADA, which btw, is not based on science. It's based on convention.
I don't how low carb is the threshold for kids & would be interested in finding out.
The most important component for proper growth & development is adequate protein & fat, not carbs. Children don't need corn, potatoes, rice, wheat & milk to thrive & be healthy. Carbs from nutritionally dense sources (green, orange, yellow, red vegetables) is what's healthiest for us all.
I think that there's lots of people who 'fly' without ANY information, either online, doctors, etc.
BSC, I'll be back with what I want to say in a few. I am getting very annoyed trying to type in this stupid box that, after a few lines, bounces up and down like a fr..king bunny rabbit. What the heck happened??