Re: Better control

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:57:52 -0400, Susan <susan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

x-no-archive: yes

Alan S wrote:

Whether he is doing anything incorrectly only time will tell. There
are certainly things he could do worse, and I fully understand his
fear of blindness as a strong motivator. That is also my motivator.

Why did you assert that he's not doing things correctly?

Let's be very accurate. Here is what I wrote in answering Kurt:

"Kurt, stick to T1subjects that you know something about instead of
criticising techniques which, when used correctly (which Michael is
NOT doing) work very well."

That referred in the context to "Test, test, test", not diet. I
believe Michael is not doing it correctly because he is obsessing over
trivial elevations in BG levels such as 8 mg/dl (as I commented
earlier) and is unnecessarily restricting his menu as a consequence.

The man is
doing something very proactive for his health and everyone is jumping on
him for his "deficient" diet which is anything plus.

Nonsense. No-one is "jumping on him". However, some are offering
advice different to that offered by you. I don't call that "jumping on
him".

I've certainly tried to encourage him to be more relaxed and flexible,
but in a support group of proactive diabetics, it's so very
disheartening to see freedom so many of you feel to openly condemn his
practices.


You are exaggerating and mis-stating the alleged "condemnation".


For reference here is the way of eating he advised:

I eat meat, water, eggs, fish, broccoli, cauliflower, iceberg lettuce,
romaine lettuce, green peppers, a little vinegar, a little olive oil, a
little yogurt, and a little cottage cheese.

He advised or is doing for himself?


That was a direct quote from his post. We can only go by that; what he
actually does is something only Michael knows.


This seems to me to be a balanced diet. I also take a multiple vitamin
and extra minerals.

Define "balanced." I think you get as many definitions as people you
ask. A truly "balanced" diet would be 33/33/33/ and a third
carbs/protein/fat and we could all kiss our kidneys and eyesight goodbye.

I didn't write that so I see no need to define balanced. And I
certainly would not define it as 33/33/33. Last time I checked mine
was more like:
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/2008/10/analysis-of-days-meals.html
Protein 17%
Carbohydrate 32%
Fat 51% (including Sat Fat 17%)
I don't claim that is balanced, it just happens to be what I ate that
day. And that varies daily.


I agree with Julie on this one. Adding some colours, or more
specifically, widening his range of vegetables should be possible for
him and would add significant benefits.

That's not what Julie said; she opined incorrectly that his diet was
deficient in vitamin C.

She may have also written that. But Julie did say this: "How about
eating all colors of the rainbow? That would be a start." Go back
through the thread; it's not hard to find. And be a little more
careful about making such firm statements without checking.

Julie lists her food choices as pretzels, pasta
and apple sauce, so you'll forgive Michael if he ignores her expertise?

Julie writes about many things. Sometimes she does things in ways I
disagree with, sometimes she gets things exactly right. Just like
you. Or me. No-one is always wrong; I even agree with Kurt at times:-)

Quentin is the better person
to answer this question, because I never recall all the technical data
and terminology on flavonoids and the other subtle variations that
different vegetables add to our nutrition and the way they interact.

I'm sure Michael's diet could be improved, as could yours or mine. But
there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Absolutely? In that case it is not possible to improve it so why
bother?

How on earth can you be so certain of that. He has not listed portion
sizes, nor do I believe he has listed his full menu. Without such
information and a lot more knowledge of his personal situation none of
us can make such absolute statements. I am suggesting he could benefit
by considering increasing the range and variety of his menu,
particularly in relation to vegetables.

On the other hand you are suggesting he has reached perfection and
there is no need to consider further improvements.

Which of those two suggestions do you think is more extreme?

One way we know that is that
people are able to live healthy lives on protein and fat alone, but not
those other foods alone.

As I read his posts and some others here over the years I slowly
modified my menu as various specific micronutrients were discussed.
Because I am not an expert on the subject I realised that the simplest
way to be sure I didn't miss some of those was to have a little of
everything regularly. Allied to that I didn't want to eat foods that
spiked me so even though the new food or fruit may have benefits I
still tested them as I added them. I had to be particularly careful
with fruit, but I found I could add a piece of fruit daily if I ate in
half-portions.

Over the years I noted some specific foods that Quentin - and others -
discussed and I tested them to include them in my diet when I could.
Some seasonally, like strawberries and blueberries (although I also
use frozen ones) and some regularly, like yellow capsicum, onions,
cooked tomato, "pink" fish and seafood like salmon and prawns, beef
for vitamin B, oily fish, yoghurt and many others. Some years back I
wrote on the way my own vegetable choices changed here:
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/2006/11/vegetables.html

I recall that one of the triggers for that change was Kate's list of
"free veggies", which is still available in the diabetic talk archive
here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071229231006/www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm
Thanks for that Kate.

I commend that list to Michael as a starting point. I also highly
recommend that he purchase Quentin's book "Nutrition for Blokes" which
he will find available here: http://www.phlaunt.com/quentin/

As to whether Michael is doing anything incorrectly in nutrition
terms, he could run his daily menu through one of the many nutrition
programmes to see if any vital nutrients are missing; almost certainly
his multivitamin isn't covering them all. If he finds something is
missing I suggest this as a good place to start searching for a food
to add rather than buying another supplement:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=17477

I am of the firm belief that it is better, if possible, to obtain my
nutrition needs from a food rather than a pill when possible. Two
specific examples that I recall being discussed here are Vitamin B and
calcium, both of which are much less effective taken as supplements.
So I eat beef and silver-beet (Swiss chard) and eat cheese (young
cheeses, Quentin:-) and make yoghurt. Again, I learned that here but
you would have to refer to the authors of those posts for the details.
My main qualm is the extremely limited list of vegetables in his menu,
but without portion sizes it's hard to comment more.

Someone mentioned Bill, a past poster with a limited diet. Michael's
comment on eyes reminded me of Chris J who also used an extremely
limited diet to drop his A1c dramatically in a very short time and had
a resulting serious eye problem. However, I accept that it may not be
relevant because I don't think Michael started from a high A1c.
Unfortunately, like you, Chris J used x-no archive so it's difficult
to refer back to that rather alarming occasion. But I'm sure some here
will recall it.

Sorry if that's a bit rambling and isn't a direct answer to your
question, but those are my reasons.

Incidentally, this also answers Kurt's response that all we advise
here is "eat to your meter". I learned far more than that over the
years from the good people on this group.

So what you've done here is exactly what I've told Michael to ignore;
rate his diet against your own personal habits, and preferences and
beliefs.

I did nothing of the sort. What you have done here is state that I
have done something I did not.

I gave an example of how I reached my own position on the way of
eating I follow. I offered that as an answer to your question and also
as something for him to consider, not as a "you must do this"
direction. You have a habit of twisting what is written to meet your
pre-conceptions of the author.

Fact is, he's anxious the way Chris J was and is focusing on the bg and
obsessing a bit, but has expressed nothing BUT eagerness to eat more of
the foods you all keep telling him he's deficient in, but he doesn't
want to eat "low spike" the way YOU choose to, he wants to eat "no
spike" which bodes best of any other way in terms of longevity, from my
reading.

I can see encouraging Michael to relax. To announce to everyone that
what he's doing is "incorrect" or wrong is not constructive nor accurate.

Read what I wrote again. I advised Kurt that I believe Michael is
incorrectly applying "Test, test, test". On diet my only firm
recommendations were that he read Quentin's book and Kate's list of
free veggies and consider adding some variety to his menu rather than
supplements.

I think I have been quite clear; once again I'll leave the last word
to you. I don't know which of your various supplements affect your
adrenalin levels, but being constantly in attack mode can't be good
for your health.

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
--
d&e, metformin 2000 mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com (Food, Farmers and Factories)
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com (Noumea Revisited)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gliadin Intolerance, and prehistoric diet.
    ... This last site was very good regarding specific foods. ... and I limit my diet to the foods that work. ... lecture and meeting a lot of other celiacs, it seems I am able to eat ... when their normal weight was about 130 or 140 pounds. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Gliadin Intolerance, and prehistoric diet.
    ... This last site was very good regarding specific foods. ... and I limit my diet to the foods that work. ... lecture and meeting a lot of other celiacs, it seems I am able to eat ... when their normal weight was about 130 or 140 pounds. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Scientists Solve Critical Part of Insulin Puzzle
    ... I love her very much, I would not dream of giving her omiga-3 oil capsules, I frequntly make a meal with fresh salmon when baby sitting.She loves to eat it and use the remainder to paint het dress.YMMV ... If your body has been significantly damaged by a poor diet over time, supplements can be useful medicine for healing. ... They do not REPLACE foods, but nearly everyone can get some dietary "insurance" with a general multivitamin/mineral pill. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: Better control
    ... Michael came here with his own skewed ideas. ... I eat meat, water, eggs, fish, broccoli, cauliflower, iceberg lettuce, ... This seems to me to be a balanced diet. ... If what I am doing can cause harm to myself, ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: diets
    ... A good diet might be to only eat foods you hate. ... I have seen many actually load up on some diet food. ... If you eat something and no one sees you eat it, it has no calories. ...
    (misc.health.diabetes)