You know, I always find it very difficult to be assertive when I'm
meeting an authority, especially a person in the health field. But
though I have type 2 diabetes and binge eating disorder, that does not
mean I do not know my nutritional science. As a matter of fact, I have
gone out of my way to learn about studies on nutrition because I dealt
with these issues and I felt powerless over them, and I wanted ideas on
how to fight cravings and keep my blood sugars level.
You are a diabetes educator, you say, but you advise a diet with at
least 130 grams of carbs a day. You said this was necessary for my brain
to function. I find it hard to immediately have a good reaction when we
are face to face, but I knew from experience that that is not true.
I've been on a low carb diet in the past and am still following a 100
grams of carbs a day diet and my brain works -fine-. The science
information out there also shows that the brain doesn't get the glucose
it works on (and it can use ketones and lactate!) only from carbs, but
also from glycogenesis in the liver. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/r
osspomeroy/2013/11/12/do-l
ow-carbohydrate-diets-make
-you-dumber/)
We worked out a diet of 130 carbs a day, but the carbs you use count
fiber as well into the carb count. That way you are punishing foods with
higher fiber, which are much healthier and the fiber wouldn't make my
blood sugars or insulin go up! Also if I count the fiber along with the
carbs I eat at a meal I'd not get a clear view of how much insulin and
how much b lood sugar reaction I can expect from one meal to the other.
Also, with my on average 30 grams of fiber a day and 100 grams of net
carbs a day I'm already at your 130 grams level.
You also claimed that it was impossible to get all nutrients my body
needed from a lower carb diet like what I was on. But even people who
eat a 'normal' diet have vitamin shortages and I eat a whole lot of
veggies and fruit with less sugar but just as many vitamins and other
nutrients. I also really do not think that the sources of carbs most
people would use, like bread, but also all the foods in the store that
have unnecessary added sugar or starches do not have as much nutrients
as you'd like to believe.
The ADA has now at least created an advise strategy that does not set
anymore how many carbs someone should eat, and leaves it to people
individually to work it out. As a registered Diabetes educator you
should be aware of this. The reason the ADA stopped touting high carb
meals is that there is so very much recent proof that shows that low
carb diets are better for type 2 diabetics than a high carb diet. But
you're still referring to the old levels of how much carbs people should
be eating.
You were using old information about the amount of carbs the brain
needs, how do I know your other information is up to date? You were able
to see during the meeting I've educated myself on nutrition but you
chose to talk to me without referring studies or giving information I
haven't heard spouted at all the previous diabetes education classes.
That doesn't mean that information is correct. The least you could do to
help your clients is educate yourself on lower carb diets and be ready
with actual recent knowledge if someone appears in your office who's had
benefits from such a food plan.
I don't know if I'll be sending you this letter, because I'm not up for a
whole fight and even disagreeing without speaking up has made me feel
bad. Bad enough I was binging, way to support my low carb way of eating
to myself, sigh. I am not comfortable with a sparring match. Studies
also are sometimes very helpful but not always, and I will explain in
two paragraphs below why. But I don't want people to tell me for decades
that I should be eating margarin because it's less fat than butter
(like happened in the 80s) to find out decades later that butter is
healthier, because it has no trans fats and that trans fats are -really-
bad for you. Or that cholesterol in eggs and other foods is so bad that
you should severely limit it when we -need- cholesterol and studies
have now shown the amount you get from what you eat is not very
significant (as in it doesn't account for differences in scientific
studies). Or that plant oils would be so much healthier because they're
unsaturated when most of the non-traditional plant oils that need
chemical extraction overload us with omega 6 which undoes all omega 3's
good work. No thanks.
That is what really bothers me, a lot of current nutritional advise is
pushed by food and medication manufacturers and even the ADA has them as
funding. That means I feel that categorically I cannot trust any
information anymore that comes through the ADA. It has been known for
decades that low carb is helpful when you have diabetes, and -still-
people are trying to tell us 'we'll regret it if we use that type of
diet'. Still we're being sold on whole grains, unsaturated fast, that
saturated would be worse, that cholesterol is a very bad thing when
survival studies show -no- advantage for women in taking statins at all,
so you'd die of other causes even if it does lower heart disease risk
(like diabetes, double the chance for it on statins!!!!). Also I really
believe that people have different metabolisms. Some develop type 2 but
not everyone will. Some have celiac disease. Some have lactose
intolerance. And you're still telling everyone they should eat the same
diet? Our ancestors had so many different eating patterns, from 95
percent animal based to 95 percent plant based, low carb to high carb,
and the same goes for now. We could eat many kinds of diets and it's up
to us to eat what helps our body feels the best, causes the least health
problems, and gives us the most energy. And that will be different for
different groups.
People often say 'statistics lie', and that is the third problem with
nutritional science. I had a math major in college and even I am having
trouble interpreting scientific studies. If you do searches you will
notice that you can find proof for low carb diets, but other people can
find proof for high carb diets just as easily. THe problem with
nutrition is that you can't base it on scientific facts because:
1. we can't know how foods like GMOs will affect us right away, it would
take years and years to find out (but for example the fact that there
are now so many gluten-sensitive people who -can- eat gluten in Europe
where GMO is not allowed but not here in the US does not point to a fad
diet, it points to GMO problems!!!!! And still people just call it a
'fad', which shows how powerful big manufacturers are).
2. it's incredibly hard to control people's diet, you'd have to put them
in a room and feed them yourself, or depend on what they 'self report',
and the self reporting is much easier. But that means people might not
have reported correctly what they were eating. Often people will fill
out questionnaires in a way they think the researches wants the answers
to be. Or portions are underestimated, I surprised myself when I started
weighing and measuring, and unless someone has been doing that
regularly they are very likely to underestimate some things and
overestimate others.
3. Many studies do not carefully weed out what exaclty they're testing
so they change several factors at once, and then conclude that the
factor they changed that they -want- to make the conclusion about is
what made a difference! No, to prove something like that you change one
thing, nothing else.
4. A connection does not mean there is causality. So if they find out
that people who have type 2 diabetes are usually overweight, they
conclude the weight causes the type 2. When in effect it could be that
insulin resistance first causes the weight gain and then it causes the
type 2 diabetes. Not every connection should be claimed as a 'truth'
that is evident. You'd have to do studies on people with type 2 who are
not overweight and people who are overweight without type 2 to be able
to make some really meaningful connections and interpretations.
So that's why I'm going to avoid having to talk to nutritionists from
now on. It's no use anyways and I would prefer to make my own choices
about what is best for me and my body.
written on Thu Feb 5, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment