Messages In This Digest (8 Messages)
- 1a.
- Re: Newly diagnosed, and new to the group From: Holly Shaltz
- 1b.
- Re: Newly diagnosed, and new to the group From: AnaLog Services, Inc.
- 2a.
- Re: What are "spikes"? - Holly in MI :) From: Holly Shaltz
- 3a.
- Happy Holidays From: Grey-Lady C
- 3b.
- Re: Happy Holidays From: Faye Ridpath
- 4a.
- Re: BFO: carbs, calories, and weight loss :) From: lawenforcementmom
- 4b.
- Re: BFO: carbs, calories, and weight loss :) From: AnaLog Services, Inc.
- 5.
- May you and yours be blessed this season... From: Jackie
Messages
- 1a.
-
Re: Newly diagnosed, and new to the group
Posted by: "Holly Shaltz" holly@shaltzfarm.com hollyshaltz
Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:17 am (PST)
Diane writes:
<<I'm glad that you, Holly, were able to get it
normal with your diet.>>
It wasn't diet, it was weight loss, exercise, and
BG control. If I had been referred to a dietician
for diet control of BP, she would have fainted at
my diet :)
<< That's not the case of a lot of people I know.>>
If I managed to get my BGs into the non-diabetic
range, and got to a normal weight, and exercised
daily, and still didn't have normal BP or at least
a BP that's trending to normal, then I'd be
demanding a full cardio evaluation from my doctor.
I'd want to be knowing *why* my BP is still high.
Maybe we'd figure it out, maybe not. If we could
find out, then I'd be wanting to treat the
underlying cause. Which might or might not need
drug therapy. If we couldn't find out, then and
only then would I be willing to *try* drugs, one
at a time, slowly increasing the dose, *if* I felt
the condition warranted that action.
I'll do drugs when I'm convinced they're needed.
My point was that many who are put onto drugs
automatically may not actually need them. If
weight loss and exercise and maintaining normal
BGs can "cure" high BP, then that's my preferred
route - as long as it keeps working :)
Holly in MI
who has nothing against drugs - WHEN they're used
appropriately, carefully, to treat something that
honestly can't be treated a different way and
really, truly, needs treatment for quality of
life. What I object to is drugs used
indiscriminately to mask symptoms, rather than
taking the time to figure out what's really wrong,
try other treatments, educating and supporting the
patient in lifestyle choices that are shown to
really work, etc. And no, I don't blame the ADA
for this one <g> They're not smart enough to see
through the drug companies that finance them, but
that just makes them like every other mainstream
American medical association.
- 1b.
-
Re: Newly diagnosed, and new to the group
Posted by: "AnaLog Services, Inc." analog@logwell.com sydlevine
Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:33 pm (PST)
Many high BP patients simply cannot lower it with wishful thinking. It is not uncommon that multiple drugs are required. Weight loss would often help, but any clinician will tell you dieting usually does not work in the long run. Personally, I think the role of diuretics is not given enough attention in older patients.
In any event, your nature's cure approach sounds good, but is not very practical in many cases.
----- Original Message -----
From: Holly Shaltz
To: Type-2-Diabetes@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [Type-2-Diabetes] Newly diagnosed, and new to the group
Diane writes:
<<I'm glad that you, Holly, were able to get it
normal with your diet.>>
It wasn't diet, it was weight loss, exercise, and
BG control. If I had been referred to a dietician
for diet control of BP, she would have fainted at
my diet :)
<< That's not the case of a lot of people I know.>>
If I managed to get my BGs into the non-diabetic
range, and got to a normal weight, and exercised
daily, and still didn't have normal BP or at least
a BP that's trending to normal, then I'd be
demanding a full cardio evaluation from my doctor.
I'd want to be knowing *why* my BP is still high.
Maybe we'd figure it out, maybe not. If we could
find out, then I'd be wanting to treat the
underlying cause. Which might or might not need
drug therapy. If we couldn't find out, then and
only then would I be willing to *try* drugs, one
at a time, slowly increasing the dose, *if* I felt
the condition warranted that action.
I'll do drugs when I'm convinced they're needed.
My point was that many who are put onto drugs
automatically may not actually need them. If
weight loss and exercise and maintaining normal
BGs can "cure" high BP, then that's my preferred
route - as long as it keeps working :)
Holly in MI
who has nothing against drugs - WHEN they're used
appropriately, carefully, to treat something that
honestly can't be treated a different way and
really, truly, needs treatment for quality of
life. What I object to is drugs used
indiscriminately to mask symptoms, rather than
taking the time to figure out what's really wrong,
try other treatments, educating and supporting the
patient in lifestyle choices that are shown to
really work, etc. And no, I don't blame the ADA
for this one <g> They're not smart enough to see
through the drug companies that finance them, but
that just makes them like every other mainstream
American medical association.
- 2a.
-
Re: What are "spikes"? - Holly in MI :)
Posted by: "Holly Shaltz" holly@shaltzfarm.com hollyshaltz
Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:48 am (PST)
Sorry, Wee :) Too simple (and important!) a
question for me to recognize it for what it is!
A BG "spike" is a sudden jump in your numbers that
puts you out of the range you want to maintain.
For me, a spike is anything that puts me over 100
/ 5.5. That goal has changed from when I started
- but it wasn't until my BGs reached a fairly
level area that spikes began to be noticeable and
something I could analyze, then predict, then avoid.
<<This am, I had a hypo and BG was 2.4mmol/L.>>
Yikes! Bear with me as I grab a calculator....
that's about 43 in our "language". WOW! Are you
prone to hypos? Have you been trained on how to
deal with them effectively? Your best bet is
glucose tablets. After that, juice, then milk, or
other sweetened beverage. You need something to
get into your system quickly.
And now that you've recovered from it, do you know
why it occurred? It's important to avoid such
events - they can be life-threatening even if you
don't go any lower before your treatment works.
<<I felt "disoriented" but managed to eat a bowl
of egg noodle, hands shaking :(>>
I'm surprised you were able to function at all!
Do, please, buy a bottle of glucose tablets. Keep
a few in your pockets at all times. A much easier
way to treat severe lows, much more reliable, much
less likely to make your BG zoon in response like
the noodles.
<<After 15 minutes recovery, BG was 14.8mmol/L.
Is this what you called a "spike"?>>
Calculating... at approx 266 in our terms, YES
that's a spike, or would be for me. Much depends
on where your BGs have been lately. If they
usually average over that, then no spike. If they
usually average quite a bit less than that, then
yes, it's a spike.
<<After 1hr, it goes down to 9.1mmol/L. After
2hrs, 6.5mmol/L. After 3hrs, 5.4mmol/L.>>
In our terms, that's 164, 117, and 97. You must
have a LOT of insulin still pumping into your
system! That's good news for you. I would
literally stay over 100 / 5.5 for a couple days if
I had eaten those noodles.
One of the advantages of glucose tablets is you
can easily figure out how much 1 gram of glucose
raises your BG (for me, 5 points in our system,
which would be about .25 in yours, but it varies
by weight), and then, if you can figure out how
much you need to go up, you take the amount of
tablet that will get you where you want to be. It
might overshoot, put you a little higher, but not
much, and there's not anything in the tablet that
can slow the digestion of that glucose, so it will
hit your bloodstream faster than egg noodles,
juice, or just about anything except an IV line :)
Do you mind sharing what your BGs normally are,
and what sort of treatment you're using so far?
<<Yes, I record my BG b4 & 1hr, 2hr after food
daily :)>>
Excellent! Have you begun to see patterns of what
makes your BG go up higher than your goals?
Noodles, for example? :)
For *me*, I found a lot of information by choosing
a meal to analyze, and over the course of many
days of extra tests (spread out so I would still
have plenty of strips for the rest of the month),
I could figure out just what my BG was doing after
those meals. For *me*, testing at 1 and 2 hours
was missing the real spikes. I tend to be highest
between those two times. That's important
information for me. If I choose to never let my
BG go over 100 / 5.5, and test only at 1 and/or 2
hours, I might never see a number over 100 / 5.5 -
yet be 120 / 6.7 or more between the two tests.
It's up to each diabetic to choose his/her goals -
yours might be different from mine, which is fine
- but be sure to test often enough to really know
where you are relative to those goals.
<<I must record my BG b4 & after excercise, good
idea too :) >>
When I still had a lot of weight to lose, my BGs
came down and stayed down, which was great. As I
lost weight, I began to go low after exercise -
not *quite* as severely as yours, but too low for
comfort - and that led to dropping the dose on one
drug, then discontinuing it entirely. I wouldn't
have figured that out without testing around my
exercise. Now that I'm near a normal weight for
my height and age, I have to use glucose to keep
my BG from dropping, then rebounding (like a spike
but not caused by food and not usually as severe)
to the level I started at or higher. All this
requires a lot of finger sticks! But is really
worth the time and minor pain, with a reward of
steady BGs that are usually comfortable.
<<My doctor says he will let me have strips for
*only* 6 months :(
After 6 months, that will stop :( >>
Yikes! Is that the UK system, or is that your
doctor? Fire that doctor, if at all possible!!
If not, reason with him, if at all possible. It's
*dangerous* to not test at least a few times a
week! It's *dangerous* to not have strips to
check for lows and highs! Point out that you
might have died from that low without strips to
figure it out! And no, I'm *not* overreacting :)
Most of us find that our numbers creep up day by
day if we don't test often enough to see what's
happening - and that's reason enough to keep testing!
Thanks for telling us a bit more, and getting
after me about not answering your basic question
:) To sum up, a "spike" is a jump in your BGs
that's unacceptable to your goals. It's usually
caused by food, but people can also say they
"spiked" due to illness, exercise, or unknown causes.
Holly in MI
- 3a.
-
Happy Holidays
Posted by: "Grey-Lady C" greyladyc@yahoo.com greyladyc
Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:22 am (PST)
Hello Everyone,
Want to be the first to say Merry Christmas (to be P,C) happy Holidays, wouldn't it be really great if Diabetes and other chronic problems could take a Holiday too??
What is everyone doing for Christmas??? We live right across the street from our pastor and for almost 12 years we ALWAYS just walked right in without knocking or being invited tThanksgiving and Christmas EVE (mostly just to say hello and give our best wishes)anyway this year hubby and I have actually been invited to supper, Christmas Day we will sleep in open a few gifts and stay home ( I may at least talk him into going for a ride or maybe a movie) the next day my husband has to work (every 8 weeks somebody has to be on call)
Anyway however you all spend your holiday(s) remember to stay healthy as you can.
Anyone got stuck or have people coming in that has gotton stuck at thier respecttive airports??
Merry Christmas/ HAPPY HOLIDAYS
- 3b.
-
Re: Happy Holidays
Posted by: "Faye Ridpath" ispgypsy@gmail.com mommy2marcella
Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:08 pm (PST)
Well I have to work 10pm-6am tonight (Christmas Eve- I am at work now) and
Christmas Day. But we are probably going to go find a restaurant that's open
for our Christmas meal. Hubby usually cooks it (I'm lucky to boil water so
good thing I have a hubby that loves to cook) but he got called on a run to
Miami (we live in Tampa) tonight and will probably be too tired now to cook
cuz he doesn't get back till after midnight.
Hubby was teasing me cuz he had to take my car on this run because his
brakes are out and he hasn't had a chance to fix them and our daughter went
with him (cuz she is only 9 and he wouldn't be back before I had to be at
work). So his boss sent one of the other drivers to get me to work. And
hubby called to make sure he had got me ok and said "I see how you are. The
minute I go out of town, you're stepping out with another man, and on
Christmas Eve no less!" LOL
~~~Faye~~~
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Grey-Lady C <greyladyc@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>
> Hello Everyone,
> Want to be the first to say Merry Christmas (to be P,C) happy Holidays,
> wouldn't it be really great if Diabetes and other chronic problems could
> take a Holiday too??
> What is everyone doing for Christmas??? We live right across the street
> from our pastor and for almost 12 years we ALWAYS just walked right in
> without knocking or being invited tThanksgiving and Christmas EVE (mostly
> just to say hello and give our best wishes)anyway this year hubby and I have
> actually been invited to supper, Christmas Day we will sleep in open a few
> gifts and stay home ( I may at least talk him into going for a ride or
> maybe a movie) the next day my husband has to work (every 8 weeks somebody
> has to be on call)
> Anyway however you all spend your holiday(s) remember to stay healthy as
> you can.
> Anyone got stuck or have people coming in that has gotton stuck at thier
> respecttive airports??
> Merry Christmas/ HAPPY HOLIDAYS
>
>
>
>
- 4a.
-
Re: BFO: carbs, calories, and weight loss :)
Posted by: "lawenforcementmom" FiveV55@aol.com lawenforcementmom
Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:36 pm (PST)
Holly (in MI),
You bring up an exact thought that I have been having since diagnosis. I know it is the proverbial "chicken or the egg" story. Current medical thought is that obesity causes diabetes. But what if it is the other way around? What if it is the diabetes that is causing the obesity? Does anyone know if any research has been done into that theory? It seems that all the professional articles I read, are of the opinion that it is the obesity causing the diabetes. But, as you pointed out in your post, with IR, there is fat storage and weight gain. What if the medical community became more agressive in treating diabetes early? Would there be less obesity?
Just thinking out loud.............
Holly
Minnesota
--- In Type-2-Diabetes@yahoogroups. , Holly Shaltz <holly@...> wrote:com
>
> I know, a lot of you will think I'm pretty slow on
> the uptake, and you're probably right :) But I
> haven't been anywhere near a normal weight before
> in 3 decades, plus I haven't had to count calories
> at all in this weight loss process this time. And
> I've not seen this whole concept laid out
> *anywhere* in all the research I've done in books
> and on the internet, just bits and pieces here and
> there.
>
> Last couple pieces of the puzzle finally fell into
> place last night while I was thinking about all
> this diabetes stuff (of course, I *always* think
> about diabetes stuff :) I'm thinking out loud
> here, and if anyone sees a hole to poke in my
> thinking, please feel free. My last 20 pounds of
> weight loss may depend upon it <g> Parenthetical
> comments there to help clarify for myself and
> others where I'm coming from - personal
> experience, stuff I've read, things that just fall
> into place and make sense, at least to me.
>
> 1. T2 diabetes starts with insulin resistance
> (IR), which makes the cells resistant to insulin
> as a transfer-agent to get glucose from carbs we
> eat into the cells for energy.
>
> (And no one really knows what *first* causes IR
> except genetics, which may or may not be the whole
> story - I'm betting environmental contaminants
> have something to do with it as well - the
> important thing to remember is it's *not the
> diabetic's fault*!)
>
> 2. BGs begin to rise due to the IR, and the
> pancreas produces more insulin to try to get the
> BGs down. This succeeds for a time, maybe a long
> time with some, possibly all their lives for those
> with a very strong pancreas that's resistant to
> glucotoxicity.
>
> 3. Insulin is also the fat-storage hormone.
> Whatever circulating glucose it can't move into
> cells because of IR it will try to remove from the
> blood and store as fat. Weight gain, then, may be
> the first *sign* of diabetes, not the cause of it
> as is so often asserted.
>
> (FWIW, I was much more active than most of my
> generation when I started gaining weight - in the
> Army and living in Germany where we walked a LOT -
> I did a 10k volksmarch when my first child was 3
> weeks old, for example, carrying the baby in a
> pack - they gave him a gold medal <g> But the
> craving for carbs was established during that
> period and I never quite managed to lost the 50
> pounds I gained that pregnancy, putting on another
> 50-100 over the next 30 years, in spite of eating
> "healthy" by anyone's standards.)
>
> 4. Gaining weight makes insulin resistance worse,
> which means the pancreas excretes more insulin
> (until it burns out), which means we T2s put on
> more and more weight, which means IR is worse,
> which makes us gain weight....
>
> 5. That cycle makes weight loss just about
> impossible until the BGs are brought down by
> whatever means works for a given person. The
> golden triangle of BG management is diet, meds,
> and exercise (with not all people needing meds at
> all times).
>
> 6. Cutting carbs back can make weight loss
> possible because there's no longer as much glucose
> in the system to be stored as fat. Also, there's
> not a lot of free glucose to burn as energy, so
> the body "burns" stored fat.
>
> (Even on the ADA diet, many of us can lose weight,
> because it might well be a *lot* fewer carbs than
> we ate before diagnosis. As the BGs trend
> downward, additional cuts in carb consumption help
> speed weight loss along.)
>
> 7. Exercise is vitally important to that process,
> as is adequate protein (I've read a minimum of 10
> ounces per day for an average adult - some
> authorities say more - I'm guessing it depends on
> gender, age, and activity level), to make sure
> muscles are *built*, not burned for fuel.
> Building muscle tissue may apparently slow down
> weight loss (because it's heavier than fat), but
> it also helps with IR and helps burn up more
> glucose in spite of IR. Seems like I read
> someplace that muscles don't need as much insulin
> to accept glucose. At any rate, moving large
> muscles do use glucose, which also helps bring
> down the BGs.
>
> 8. Once a balance of *carbs* is achieved, getting
> BGs close to or into the non-diabetic range, then
> weight loss will continue until a natural balance
> of *calories*, exercise, and body size are reached.
>
> (This is where I appear to be at the moment,
> hovering just over 140, down from 204 at
> diagnosis, when I keep my BGs down with carb control.)
>
> 9. If additional weight loss is desired at that
> point, then *calories* must be reduced and/or
> exercise increased, gradually, for weight loss to
> continue (assuming carbs are kept down for
> continued BG control).
>
> 10. If additional *carbs* are consumed at any
> point, raising the BGs, weight gain can result.
>
> (I've personally seen this happen several times in
> the last several months - just averaging 30 g of
> carbohydrate a day instead of 25 can make me gain
> 5 pounds practically overnight, even when exercise
> stays the same or increases.)
>
> So, for me I would probably have to be willing to
> reduce the fat in my diet some more, and increase
> my exercise, to continue my weight loss at this
> point. I can't realistically cuts carbs further,
> and my protein is already down to the minimum 10
> ounces. That leaves fat as a source of calories -
> butter, cream, fattier meats, etc.
>
> I think increasing exercise sounds more appealing!
> <VBG>
>
> To sum up: Maintaining truly normal, non-diabetic
> BGs via cutting *carbs* rather than *calories* can
> result in weight loss for a T2 diabetic, because
> reducing the amount of glucose circulating will
> both reduce the amount of insulin needed to handle
> it and reduce the amount of glucose available for
> storage as fat. Cutting *calories* doesn't work
> effectively if the BGs remain out of the
> non-diabetic range. Once weight loss ceases due
> to normalizing and maintaining normal BGs, then
> cutting *calories* and increasing exercise may
> help continue weight loss, if desired.
>
> Holly in MI
> sharing the obvious so others won't stumble
> blindly like I did for so long.... and planning to
> send this to my dietician and DNE, on the off
> chance they will amend their ADA thinking just a
> hair...
>
- 4b.
-
Re: BFO: carbs, calories, and weight loss :)
Posted by: "AnaLog Services, Inc." analog@logwell.com sydlevine
Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:12 pm (PST)
It is not that simple, either way. The predilection of humans to obesity and diabetes is likely an artifact of natural selection. Is a failure of will involved in obesity? Probably almost always. But there are evolutionary reasons why we tend to eat too much in times of plenty, and why we have a tendency to develop diabetes. In fact, I am heading to the kitchen for a snack as soon as I push the send button, speaking of failure of wills.
For a clue, take a look at the fertility symbology that survives from antiquity (and the symbology for rich and prosperous individuals in general). Those females are obese by our standards, but it probably never had a chance to hurt em with a short life expectancy. We live in different times now, but the effects of natural selection lag very much behind human history (and besides, the benefits to post reproductive individuals really is not a factor in natural selection).
----- Original Message -----
From: lawenforcementmom
To: Type-2-Diabetes@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 5:36 PM
Subject: [Type-2-Diabetes] Re: BFO: carbs, calories, and weight loss :)
Holly (in MI),
You bring up an exact thought that I have been having since diagnosis. I know it is the proverbial "chicken or the egg" story. Current medical thought is that obesity causes diabetes. But what if it is the other way around? What if it is the diabetes that is causing the obesity? Does anyone know if any research has been done into that theory? It seems that all the professional articles I read, are of the opinion that it is the obesity causing the diabetes. But, as you pointed out in your post, with IR, there is fat storage and weight gain. What if the medical community became more agressive in treating diabetes early? Would there be less obesity?
Just thinking out loud.............
Holly
Minnesota
--- In Type-2-Diabetes@yahoogroups. , Holly Shaltz <holly@...> wrote:com
>
> I know, a lot of you will think I'm pretty slow on
> the uptake, and you're probably right :) But I
> haven't been anywhere near a normal weight before
> in 3 decades, plus I haven't had to count calories
> at all in this weight loss process this time. And
> I've not seen this whole concept laid out
> *anywhere* in all the research I've done in books
> and on the internet, just bits and pieces here and
> there.
>
> Last couple pieces of the puzzle finally fell into
> place last night while I was thinking about all
> this diabetes stuff (of course, I *always* think
> about diabetes stuff :) I'm thinking out loud
> here, and if anyone sees a hole to poke in my
> thinking, please feel free. My last 20 pounds of
> weight loss may depend upon it <g> Parenthetical
> comments there to help clarify for myself and
> others where I'm coming from - personal
> experience, stuff I've read, things that just fall
> into place and make sense, at least to me.
>
> 1. T2 diabetes starts with insulin resistance
> (IR), which makes the cells resistant to insulin
> as a transfer-agent to get glucose from carbs we
> eat into the cells for energy.
>
> (And no one really knows what *first* causes IR
> except genetics, which may or may not be the whole
> story - I'm betting environmental contaminants
> have something to do with it as well - the
> important thing to remember is it's *not the
> diabetic's fault*!)
>
> 2. BGs begin to rise due to the IR, and the
> pancreas produces more insulin to try to get the
> BGs down. This succeeds for a time, maybe a long
> time with some, possibly all their lives for those
> with a very strong pancreas that's resistant to
> glucotoxicity.
>
> 3. Insulin is also the fat-storage hormone.
> Whatever circulating glucose it can't move into
> cells because of IR it will try to remove from the
> blood and store as fat. Weight gain, then, may be
> the first *sign* of diabetes, not the cause of it
> as is so often asserted.
>
> (FWIW, I was much more active than most of my
> generation when I started gaining weight - in the
> Army and living in Germany where we walked a LOT -
> I did a 10k volksmarch when my first child was 3
> weeks old, for example, carrying the baby in a
> pack - they gave him a gold medal <g> But the
> craving for carbs was established during that
> period and I never quite managed to lost the 50
> pounds I gained that pregnancy, putting on another
> 50-100 over the next 30 years, in spite of eating
> "healthy" by anyone's standards.)
>
> 4. Gaining weight makes insulin resistance worse,
> which means the pancreas excretes more insulin
> (until it burns out), which means we T2s put on
> more and more weight, which means IR is worse,
> which makes us gain weight....
>
> 5. That cycle makes weight loss just about
> impossible until the BGs are brought down by
> whatever means works for a given person. The
> golden triangle of BG management is diet, meds,
> and exercise (with not all people needing meds at
> all times).
>
> 6. Cutting carbs back can make weight loss
> possible because there's no longer as much glucose
> in the system to be stored as fat. Also, there's
> not a lot of free glucose to burn as energy, so
> the body "burns" stored fat.
>
> (Even on the ADA diet, many of us can lose weight,
> because it might well be a *lot* fewer carbs than
> we ate before diagnosis. As the BGs trend
> downward, additional cuts in carb consumption help
> speed weight loss along.)
>
> 7. Exercise is vitally important to that process,
> as is adequate protein (I've read a minimum of 10
> ounces per day for an average adult - some
> authorities say more - I'm guessing it depends on
> gender, age, and activity level), to make sure
> muscles are *built*, not burned for fuel.
> Building muscle tissue may apparently slow down
> weight loss (because it's heavier than fat), but
> it also helps with IR and helps burn up more
> glucose in spite of IR. Seems like I read
> someplace that muscles don't need as much insulin
> to accept glucose. At any rate, moving large
> muscles do use glucose, which also helps bring
> down the BGs.
>
> 8. Once a balance of *carbs* is achieved, getting
> BGs close to or into the non-diabetic range, then
> weight loss will continue until a natural balance
> of *calories*, exercise, and body size are reached.
>
> (This is where I appear to be at the moment,
> hovering just over 140, down from 204 at
> diagnosis, when I keep my BGs down with carb control.)
>
> 9. If additional weight loss is desired at that
> point, then *calories* must be reduced and/or
> exercise increased, gradually, for weight loss to
> continue (assuming carbs are kept down for
> continued BG control).
>
> 10. If additional *carbs* are consumed at any
> point, raising the BGs, weight gain can result.
>
> (I've personally seen this happen several times in
> the last several months - just averaging 30 g of
> carbohydrate a day instead of 25 can make me gain
> 5 pounds practically overnight, even when exercise
> stays the same or increases.)
>
> So, for me I would probably have to be willing to
> reduce the fat in my diet some more, and increase
> my exercise, to continue my weight loss at this
> point. I can't realistically cuts carbs further,
> and my protein is already down to the minimum 10
> ounces. That leaves fat as a source of calories -
> butter, cream, fattier meats, etc.
>
> I think increasing exercise sounds more appealing!
> <VBG>
>
> To sum up: Maintaining truly normal, non-diabetic
> BGs via cutting *carbs* rather than *calories* can
> result in weight loss for a T2 diabetic, because
> reducing the amount of glucose circulating will
> both reduce the amount of insulin needed to handle
> it and reduce the amount of glucose available for
> storage as fat. Cutting *calories* doesn't work
> effectively if the BGs remain out of the
> non-diabetic range. Once weight loss ceases due
> to normalizing and maintaining normal BGs, then
> cutting *calories* and increasing exercise may
> help continue weight loss, if desired.
>
> Holly in MI
> sharing the obvious so others won't stumble
> blindly like I did for so long.... and planning to
> send this to my dietician and DNE, on the off
> chance they will amend their ADA thinking just a
> hair...
>
- 5.
-
May you and yours be blessed this season...
Posted by: "Jackie" jackievanderhorst@yahoo.com ladyj_ca_2000
Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:09 pm (PST)
Hi
I have been a member for a few months now, I can be accused of lurking I
guess, nothing intentional meant by that, I just don't usually talk a
lot and usually only when it seems to me to be relevent.
But right now I would like to wish all of you a very Merry and Peaceful
Christmas full of joyous new memories and a Bright, Sparkling New Year.
Jackie
Need to Reply?
Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.
*** All information discussed on this list is not to be taken as medical advice but the experience of each member based on discussions with their doctors. ***
*** Please always consult with your doctor about what treatment options are best for your situation. ***
*** Please always consult with your doctor about what treatment options are best for your situation. ***
MARKETPLACE
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
No comments:
Post a Comment