Why low GI diets don't work for most diabetics ! Part 2

If you watched the video in the thread 'Why low GI diets don't work for most diabetics' it is clear the whole idea is a minefield. When you look at low GI there are a huge amount of variables, you have to start looking into glycemic loading, more variables, the variables go on and on. Also as stated, 100 grams of carb is a hundred grams of carb full stop. There may be some variance in the curves of timing and blood glucose spikes, but there will be spikes for most. In the early days of my diabetes I tried for a long time to fool the betus, it can't be done. Once you accept that fact you can move on and consider beta cell destruction (in type two diabetes) how much beta cell function do you have left ?

There are tests that can determine this,( a plasma insulin level test among others) but are rarely done on the NHS on the grounds of costs. Besides most medics believe type two diabetes is always a downward spiral to palookaville and the knackers yard, so why bother saving what beta cells a type two has left. If we accept as often reported upto and beyond 50% of beta cells are destroyed at diagnosis and it is a fact after the age of around 30 they do not replace themselves, It seems logical to me to do everything you can to protect the beta cells you have left. Are you going to do that meddling around with a low GI/GL diet ? I don't think so. It makes sense to me to give the beta cells the least amount of work as possible, let's face it, overworking them brought about the destruction in the first place, why flog the remaining beta cells to death producing high amounts of insulin brought about by unnecessary carbs in the diet.

Let's consider a young type two diabetic, say thirty or forty years of age, holding good BG numbers and non diabetic HbA1c. Let's say he can hold those numbers on a moderate protein and hundred carbs per day diet. It seems logical to me he can protect his beta cells and help them live longer by reducing the load he places on them. It maybe half the carbs means they will live twice as long, and that could be very important in the future. At 64 years of age I have used around 50 carbs per day for almost 5.5 years, and have held non diabetic HbA1c numbers (highest 6.1 in old money) the whole time of my known type two diabetes, other than at diagnosis, (HbA1c almost 12) reduced with a 30 carb per day diet to non diabetic within three months. The 50 carbs per day was a decision based on my comfort levels taking into consideration my age. If I had been in my 20's 30's 40's as so many people are joining the betus club these days, I would have stayed on a keto diet (30 carbs or less for most) or semi keto for life. Anything to stay independent for as long as possible and free of medication.

By the way, the oaf known as douglas99 made a comment on the forum of flog the other day re my use of Metformin and not practising what I preach, when I was diagnosed I soon realised Metformin made very little difference to my BG numbers, but being on Metformin gave me free prescriptions and an adequate supply of test strips and other benefits. It was also reported at the time Met offered benefits regarding CVD. As I have learnt, to get what you want as an NHS patient, is not always as straightforward as it should be, games sometimes have to be played. Those who fight for good treatment and test strips usually get them, of course, games should not have to be played.

Some fascinating information on Beta cells and how above ground nuclear bomb testing played a part in diabetes knowledge. 

"Beta cells, which make insulin in the human body, do not replicate after the age of 30, indicating that clinicians may be closer to better treating diabetes. Type 1 diabetes is caused by a loss of beta cells by auto-immunity while type 2 is due to a relative insufficiency of beta cells. Whether beta cells replicate after birth has remained an open issue, and is critically important for designing therapies for diabetes.

By using radioactive carbon-14 produced by above-ground nuclear testing in the 1950s and '60s, researchers have determined that the number of beta cells remains static after age 30.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientist Bruce Buchholz, with collaborators from the National Institutes of Health, used two methods to examine adult human beta cell turnover and longevity. 

Using LLNL's Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, Buchholz measured the amount of carbon 14 in DNA in beta cells and discovered that after age 30, the body does not create any new beta cells, thus decreasing the capacity to produce insulin as a person ages. Carbon 14 atmospheric concentration levels remained relatively stable until the Cold War, when above-ground nuclear bomb tests caused a sharp increase, or peak, which decreased slowly after the end of above-ground testing in 1963. This spike in carbon 14 in the atmosphere serves as a chronometer of the past 57 years.

Type 2 diabetes (often called adult onset diabetes) is common in older people whose ability to secrete sufficient insulin to regulate blood sugar deteriorates as they age and is often due to increased demand in obese people.

"It could be due to loss of beta cells with age," Buchholz said. "The body doesn't make new ones in adulthood and there might not be enough cells to control blood sugar."

Source of information here.

Eddie