Re: Bacon does not raise BG???
- From: Michael <micoder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:46:36 -0500
Michelle C. wrote:
BDR529 wrote:Michael wrote:BDR529 wrote:Steve Hopkins wrote:"StarDust" <gysz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageThe glycemic index of all meats, fat and fish and protein is zero, but,
I've been having pork bacon for breakfast, smoked, sliced and un-
fried as it comes from the store.
6 gr fat/ 2 slices!
This morning, I had 4 slices of bacon, 2-3 slices of wheat bread, half
tomato and onion.
Before breakfast, 7:30 AM my BG was 104, than I measured my BG later
at work around 11 am, it was 129 and I was feeling good.
Yesterday I had similar result.
Also, eating pork bacon, I'm not hungry for 5-6 hours and have more
Why is that?
12gm of fat is quite a bit especially when most diabetics are the most
resistant in the morning. The bacon as others have stated is protein
and fat. A portion of the protein will converted to glucose a few hours
after you eat it. I've found it can hit even the following day if I
large of a steak. As for the fat, that will delay the spike from
carbs you've eaten. This probably is why your glucose was 129 at
11am instead of back down to where you started. I would bet if you
tested even a few hours later you probably would have seen a small
rise from the protein as it was being converted into glucose. As for
having more energy, the reason why is protein helps fuel the body as
does glucose. When you eat this meal again, you might want to test
at various times over a 6hr period (every 30min-1hr) to see where
you peak and just how much of a peak. I would bet you will have
more than one peak.
eventually everything will be turned into sugar. Lipids in general will
either be stored as fats near fatcells, or they will be converted into
glycogene in the muscles as a means to store energy when you need it.
Muscles and glycogene is the first thing to be burned when you start a
low cal diet, burning fat comes later.
The problem with bacon is simply the saturated fat content, so this is
bad for LDL and triglycerides. And high levels of all cholesterols and
triglycerides in your blood will decrease the remaining functionality of
your pancreas (assuming that it is still somewhat functional) which is
to produce insulin. The remaining insulin that is made hardly arrives at
the cells requiring it, the pancreas gets stressed, and the body starts
dumping the excess glucose via the kidneys which also become stressed,
and this worsens the problem for diabetic patients. Actually, stressing
the pancreas and kidneys over time is the way diabetes and high blood
pressure develop over the years.
For this reason I would not recommend eating a lot of bacon, fish and
anything that contains a lot of animal fats even if you're healthy.
Maybe if you do a lot of physical hard work like working in the forests
all day then you could survive on such a diet.
To conclude: don't live according to your glucose meter, consult your GP
and ask for a professional advise if you think you're diabetic.
If we T2s want to maintain our health, we must eat to our meter. End of
story. How we eat to that meter is very important in my view. If we ate
cardboard that would probably look good on the meter.
We know we should not do that. We should not put foods that contain
dangerous chemicals in our body. Common sense.
However, recommending that a person living with T2 go ahead and eat a
"balanced diet" and let the BG levels fall where they may is
recommending a slow painful death.
In my opinion you are exaggerating the T2 problem. With T2 you don't
need to check yourself with a meter, it is the 3 monthly Hba1c that
counts. Furthermore the fastening blood sugar level should be below 6.5
mmol/l. At least, this is the general practice in the part of the world
where I live.
Anytime a T2 spikes over 140 (7.7) they are suffering damage. These spikes lead to those nasty complications. HgbA1c does not necessarily reflect the spikes. A person can spike over 140--significantly over--and may also have some lowish numbers, perhaps even a few hypos and have a perfectly fine A1c--since the A1c is just an average.
So I disagree with your assertion that T2s do not need test--since I fully plan to live without complications. I'm rather fond of my eyes, kidneys, and limbs.
Michelle C., T2, no meds
I have a colleague who has T2. He absolutely refuses to accept that he has this disease. I believe there is a range of denial for this illness. My colleague is at the extreme end of this range. He is in denial because he is completely unwilling to change. He is going to eat what he wants until it kills him.
The other range of this spectrum might be people like me who completely freak out at a 137 reading. I recently went from 93 to 129 when I had 1/4 cup of blueberries. That was the end of all fruit for me for an indefinite period.
There must be people in between who would like to believe they can have some carbs, especially ones they particularly like, even if this causes a serious spike. They may rationalize that it is only the A1C that counts and not the spikes. This allows them to eat more of what they want.
So when we have these conversations here, there may be an underlying layer of denial is some responses and questions.
Clearly you Michelle are not fond of that river in Egypt.
BTW in spite of Kurt's unsupported prejudice against low carb, I think he is right about bacon. I quit eating it 2 months ago when I realized what was in it. This was called to my attention by a friend here in town. I am grateful. Neither my wife or I eat any meat that is not cooked in a microwave. We are aware of the carcinogens that develop at the outer layer of the meat where it touches the fry pan. We have followed this plan for the last 7 years.
- Prev by Date: Re: Bacon does not raise BG???
- Next by Date: Re: Bacon does not raise BG???
- Previous by thread: Re: Bacon does not raise BG???
- Next by thread: Re: Bacon does not raise BG???