Re: For and against?
- From: "KROM" <krom@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 07:57:16 -0600
the problem is your bringing logic and reason to a debate which has no meaning when you count the troll factor.
the trolls will be contrary to any take because that's what they do...they will play all sides for their own jollies.
Bottom line is anyone arguing that eating natural real food and maintaining control and good health with as little meds as possible is bad is either an idiot or a troll.
You can argue that typical people might not give up junk food etc but nobody can argue french fries are better for you then broccoli..that's just silly and yet the trolls will insist it is.
The group as a collective has even taken the stance "whatever works for you" and that's still not enough to keep the trolls at bay.
I've tried reason..I've tried arguing..I've tried begging for understanding..but a troll just thrives on that so I'm done...lol
"Helen Back" <SiriusC-63@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:87327975-734b-4b81-a6ba-a8ec46dfe623@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
And so continues the "great divide". People here with the same
condition. People here to share, confide, assist, learn. But with
differing opinions on the do's and dont's - and with those
differences, comes division.
Why do we choose to get aggressive and alienate each other with our
There are those who believe that certain aspects of a diet that
differs from that of *professional* advice is dangerous to the health
of those choosing not to follow official guidelines. Doesnt that show
an element of caring and fear for others health??
And those that continue to poo-poo the official guidelines - are they
not proof enough that their decision is working for them?
If the primary aspect of diabetes is to keep blood glucose levels down
to a certain and consistent level and a balanced diet, albeit starchy
carbs or not, is maintaining this aspect - are we wrong? Like, is it
wrong for someone to find those *taboo* foods working for them?
If this is about Type I vs Type II - why? We are different in how our
diabetes affects our bodies (what we lack and how we replenish) but
why should these difference divide us?
We are all here for the same reason - common ground in sharing the
same condition. And if our conditions are kept in control by our
chosen dietary requirements, why are we divided when we should be
congratulating and praising for the endeavours, the courage, the work
involved in keeping ourselves from the evils of complications?
Some here are very angry and frustrated that others dont follow
official guidelines - but if the blood glucose levels are healthy, why
should there be a bone of contention?
And if those who do follow official guidelines are having consistently
healthy blood glucose levels, why should there be a bone of
We beg to differ - but if its working to maintain our health - what is
- For and against?
- From: Helen Back
- For and against?
- Prev by Date: Re: For and against?
- Next by Date: Re: ADA's advice on working sweets into our diet
- Previous by thread: Re: For and against?
- Next by thread: Re: For and against?