Monday 17 September 2012
Anecdotal a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.
“It's often much easier for people to believe someone's testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more 'abstract' statistical reality.”
At first look all the above seems pretty sound eh ? We all know there has been no long term trials and studies into the effects of lowcarb diets for diabetics. The typical Dietition or Doctor/Diabetes Nurse at best will say “If it works for you stick with it” The medical professionals don’t deal in anecdotal experience, they deal in science. Science very often supplied by big pharma who have been fined $billions for lying, falsifying trials and bribery and corruption. Maybe they consider the ADA and DUK dietary science, which follows along these lines.
You can read Diabetes UK’s advice for type 2 diabetics on their site. Here’s a core piece of advice:
At each meal include starchy carbohydrate foods.
Examples include bread, pasta, chapatis, potatoes, yam, noodles, rice and cereals. The amount of carbohydrate you eat is important to control your blood glucose levels. Especially try to include those that are more slowly absorbed (have a lower glycaemic index) as these won’t affect your blood glucose levels as much. Better choices include: pasta, basmati or easy cook rice, grainy breads such as granary, pumpernickel and rye, new potatoes, sweet potato and yam, porridge oats, All-Bran and natural muesli. The high fibre varieties of starchy foods will also help to maintain the health of your digestive system and prevent problems such as constipation.
This sort of science and advice creates the HbA1c numbers from the NHS audits.
Results for England. The National Diabetes Audit 2010-2011
Percentage of registered Type 1patients in England
HbA1c >= 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) = 92.6%
HbA1c > 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) = 71.3%
HbA1c > 10.0% (86 mmol/mol) = 18.1%
Percentage of registered Type 2 patients in England
HbA1c >= 6.5% (48 mmol/mol = 72.5%
HbA1c > 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) = 32.6%
HbA1c >10.0% (86 mmol/mol) = 6.8%
These results are very similar to those obtained in previous NHS audits over the past 5 - 6 years.
So the $64000 question. What or who do you believe ? Science or a diabetic that holds non diabetic numbers year in and year out on nil/minimal meds. What happens when you know, or know of hundreds of diabetics who show far better BG numbers than science can provide ? Who do you trust ? The man or woman with nothing to sell, nothing to give but their word, or science ? I’ve got by for over 60 years looking into someones eyes and knowing whether to trust them, I’m too old to change, as for my type two diabetes, I’m sticking to the anecdotal. At the moment most of the 'science' sucks!