"The only differences that I see between your diet suggestions and my diet are that I dont eat enough oily fish as frankly I dont like it, when I saw a dietician she made the same comment but its hard to change your diet to include things you dont like"
Sid Bonkers
"I don't think that's a lot different to my diet"
douglas99
The Southport diet brought about substantial improvements for the trial participants and was easy to keep to, it was not a low carb, low calorie or low fat diet. As I said on the Low Carb Dietitians blog yesterday "As you can see not overly strict or very low carb, the participants had no trouble sticking to it and I can see why. With the excellent improvements in the markers quoted, it makes me wonder how bad their diets must have been before the trial. Not surprising they became diabetics in my opinion." It also begs the question, if these participants went truly low carb, how much more weight would they lose and would probably see further improvements in BG numbers and Lipid profiles etc. Those using medication if any, would probably be able to reduce medication, some may get off medication altogether. Also, a further reduction in carbs would help preserve the pancreas beta cells for longer.
There is no doubt about it, the trial subjects have got off to a great start with the Southport GP's diet, in improving their outcomes, but looking at the diet, although infinitely better than the diet of death promoted by the NHS, DUK and BDA, I feel there is more work to be done, to obtain optimum control.
Why the Sid and duggie comments ? Because they say the Southport diet is what they use, that being the case, neither are on a low calorie, low carb, low fat diet. This probably explains why duggie is on Metformin, Januvia and statins and Sid's nick name is the 'chemist' due to the amount of meds he is on. Duggie tells us it will probably be a 33% fat, carb and protein diet when he stops "fine tuning" his diet, not if he wants to get good control long term, and does not want to up the meds, or of course, starve to death.
The fact is, these guys contradict themselves regularly, and don't appear to know what diet they are on. As those guys and their ilk love to say "we are all different" ain't that a fact !
Eddie
7 comments:
For those of you who don't read DCUK There are links to the pro and anti low carb presentations used in the DUK debate here.
http://www.smegsite.net/ProLowCarbArgument.pdf
http://www.smegsite.net/AntiLowCarbArgument.pdf
Thanks xyzzy new thread started.
Eddie
After Southport GP
We're all lowcarbers now!!!!
John
John said...
After Southport GP
We're all lowcarbers now!!!!
Yes your right John, but unlike us many are pseudo lowcarbers, low fat low calorie portion control is unsustainable in the long term.
Cheers
Graham
Being a bit grumpy here but to my mind, although 130g is lower than the recommended guideline crap we've been fed, and of course is a big step in the right direction, I wouldn't exactly call it low carb...and where does high fat come into the equation?
Geri
I don't recall the Southport GP mentioning 130g carbs Geri, I think that's just speculation.
What i do find laughable though is those who proclaim that's like my diet, one states 33% carbs as a goal and another has cornflakes for breakfast.
Graham
Graham said " I don't recall Southport GP mentioning 130g"
You're right Graham he didn't, but others deciding that was what it amounts to annoyed me. As for the 33% and cornflakes etc..... It's crunching numbers, not cereal. ;)
Geri :)
Post a Comment