So nothing to do with fat people overeating and never exercising?

Seems logical.

24 minutes ago, atpeace said:

It would be perfect for you and you will learn how to interpret the numbers. It isn't too difficult. You already understand the basics and a little more research and you will be an expert.

I don't think daily CGM obsession is the best approach.

People need to get proper bloodwork first and foremost.

Then, if fasting insulin and/or HBA1C is too high, they need to reduce carbs and/or reduce processed foods and/or reduce meal frequency and increase movement.

Then, you can play around with a CGM to check which foods are causing the highest spikes, I guess. But there's no way you can correlate that to an actual fasting insulin score.

Just reduce carbs / junk food and increase movement and need to re-test bloodwork.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by save the frogs

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

I don't think daily CGM obsession is the best approach.

People need to get proper bloodwork first and foremost.

Then, if fasting insulin and/or HBA1C is too high, they need to reduce carbs and/or reduce processed foods and/or reduce meal frequency and increase movement.

Then, you can play around with a CGM to check which foods are causing the highest spikes, I guess. But there's no way you can correlate that to an actual fasting insulin score.

Just reduce carbs and increase movement.

You could be right but IMO insulin management is number 1, then blood pressure, and finally blood work. A glucose meter tells you your flexibility which is huge. How long it takes to go from 145 to 100 for example and it will give you a better grasp of your actual fasted number. When you wake in the morning, cortisol spikes and throws off fasted numbers. A CGM eliminates that issue.

11 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

So nothing to do with fat people overeating and never exercising?

Seems logical.

Apparently not in some poster opinions. Some just like to a scapegoat to make them feel better. Looking at younger kids here, something needs to be done but ignoring the root of the problem is stupid. For some of us, processed foods are fine and even beneficial but for others that can't control themselves, they are terrible.

Hey, I got my vices but none that will kill me. Possibly go blind but I don't blame it on naked girls on the internet.

Of course. It's a bit like saying serious air pollution leads to lung issues, and dumping trash and ship bulges into the ocean leads to marine environmental issues.

We are what we eat, and if we don't watch what we eat we end up debilitated, we end up aging quickly, and we end up with all kinds of ailments that were preventable.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

Doctors are focusing only on cholesterol levels, probably so they can push statin drugs, or they don't know any better.

There are multiple issues that may lead to heart problems.

One of them is insulin resistance.

This is why it's not surprising that someone may have both diabetes and heart health issues.

What's interesting is that, in addition to heart problems, people have all sorts of other medical conditions, many of which can be linked back to systemic inflammation. All the autoimmune diseases, for example. Anyway, what we eat really does matter.

I once tried following all his advice, but that meant that I had to rule out 95% of all the items in the typical grocery store. Much easier said than done. I still try, though, to avoid processed and ultraprocessed food, or food with chemical additives.

Not sure how anyone can state CGM is waste of time/money, as it shows in real time, immediate results your food intake has on blood sugar spikes.

A few things I tested surprised me, both good & bad. A few didn't and simple enforced what I thought, falls in common sense territory. I really only tested the crappiest foods, except last couple days of having.

Got to the point, I could predict the spike and longevity of it, which to me, that info was immessureable, moving forward.

Pasta & rice were the worse. Potatoes, not as bad as you'd think. Pasta bad for me, as I ate a lot, since not a fan of rice. Did the pasta / Thai fusion thingy, and not good at all.

Only pasta I do now, is egg noodles, and sparingly, hoping the extra egg protein, lessens the spike from flour.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by KhunLA

34 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

So nothing to do with fat people overeating and never exercising?

Seems logical.

It’s not possible to exercise yourself out of the consequences of eating a poor diet, over eating, processed foods or more commonly a cocktail of each.

food banks in the UK are giving out tons of upf ,those who cant afford to feed themselves dont care when theyre hungry

50 minutes ago, atpeace said:

It will be the number 1 cause of death soon I think. Our health systems have failed miserably while focussing on keeping people alive after they have diabetes.

Most docs won't even question a fasted 105 mg/dl when it should be huge red flag. Almost criminal IMO. Catching it early provides so many options to resolve it. On this forums health site, I've read posts where the poster just found out they are diabetic and they were healthy by their estimation before being diabetic. If the docs were truly concerned about the patient they would have tested earlier and explained the results. It showed up probably decades prior and was easy to see.

I don't think it will ever beat heart disease as the number one, seeing it's more easily curtailed with proper medicine, and heart attacks are why millions die yearly, a lot from just old age. I do think the cases will continue to climb because of the prevalence of junk food and sedentary lifestyles. Aging itself deteriorates the heart.

They're closely connected diseases also, as my brother had diabetes for quite awhile regulated by medicine but his heart, which was always strong with low blood pressure and RP, was what got him in the end, mainly because he never lost the weight he should have.

17 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Not sure how anyone can state CGM is waste of time/money, as it shows in real time, immediate results you food intake has on blood sugar spikes.

A few things I tested surprised me, both good & bad. A few didn't and simple enforced what I thought, simple falls in common sense territory. I really only tested the crappiest foods, except last couple days of having.

Got to the point, I could predict the spike and longevity of it, which to me, that info was immessureable, moving forward.

Pasta & rice were the worse. Potatoes, not as bad as you'd think. Pasta bad for me, as I ate a lot, since not a fan of rice. Did the paste / Thai fusion thingy, and not good at all.

Only pasta I do now, is egg noodles, and sparingly, hoping the extra egg protein, lessens the spike from flour.

I’ve used a CGM to tune my sports fueling, they are a very effective solution, but of little use unless the data they provide is understood and addressed by dietary changes.

In terms of sports fueling they provide a very good overview across events or workouts but they don’t provide an effective realtime feedback.

By time blood glucose drops in an event it’s too late to refuel.

Where they are effective is in post event analysis, in which readings are compared with other data, heart rate, power, pace, breathing rate etc.

As you rightly say, in normal every day use they provide very useful real time feedback on the impact of foods.

They can also be useful to confirm the positive impacts of post meal exercise, intake of dietary fiber and mixing proteins/fats with carbs.

However, the positive impact of all those things are well established, CGM might serve to drive the message home.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by Chomper Higgot

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not possible to exercise yourself out of the consequences of eating a poor diet, over eating, processed foods or more commonly a cocktail of each.

That is the 100% accurate. You can't exercise your way out of "over eating". We are now in agreement :)

9 minutes ago, atpeace said:

That is the 100% accurate. You can't exercise your way out of "over eating". We are now in agreement :)

I have over 20 years of my cycling data recorded with Training Peaks, Polar and Garmin.

Comparing training stress score/heart rate and calorie burn across over two decades, the amount of exercise needed to burn off a Big Mac Meal, a KFC or a large sweetened frappe would either consume more time than most people can spare, or give them a heart attack trying.

Added to which is the problem of the restricted energy model.

Burn energy in exercise and you will involuntarily reduce energy usage through the rest of the day.

processed/fast food balanced by exercise is a lie perpetrated by the processed/fast food industry.

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I have over 20 years of my cycling data recorded with Training Peaks, Polar and Garmin.

Comparing training stress score/heart rate and calorie burn across over two decades, the amount of exercise needed to burn off a Big Mac Meal, a KFC or a large sweetened frappe would either consume more time than most people can spare, or give them a heart attack trying.

Added to which is the problem of the restricted energy model.

Burn energy in exercise and you will involuntarily reduce energy usage through the rest of the day.

processed/fast food balanced by exercise is a lie perpetrated by the processed/fast food industry.

I agree for the most part and had data going back to 1993 and Polar :) Polar just deleted my account :( Now I eat loads of processed food but I have to be careful not to eat too much. Exercise burns few calories and like I said earlier in this thread, a few oreo cookies will take most an hour of exercise to burn for most casual gym rats.

Back in 2018 (50+ age group) when I raced often and had HM times around 1:15 at big international races in Bangkok and won overall at at Thailand's oldest marathon with 4000 runners, I was eating about 5k calories a day. Processed foods were almost a necessity. Today I'm in a holding pattern and keep telling myself I will pick it up next months. I eat half the processed food I did in 2018.

In the end it is simply calories in and calories out regardless if processed. Sure there are many nuances but that is the gist of the issue.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by atpeace

4 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Pasta & rice were the worse. Potatoes, not as bad as you'd think.

Potatoes may be better than pasta, but the CGM still doesn't tell you how many potatoes you can eat before it causes problems. Or maybe the potatoes will never cause problems.

Need to try the new diet for x months, then re-test bloodwork.

CGM is not enough.

9 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Potatoes may be better than pasta, but the CGM still doesn't tell you how many potatoes you can eat before it causes problems. Or maybe the potatoes will never cause problems.

Need to try the new diet for x months, then re-test bloodwork.

CGM is not enough.

Honestly, please don't be offended but the issue is that you don't want to see the numbers? I get it and I avoid reality sometimes. Checking your blood sugar regularly and learning about the numbers will tell you much more than HBA1c test done annually. Now if you have 10 HBA1c tests over a 5 year period, it might be almost as good.

17 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Potatoes may be better than pasta, but the CGM still doesn't tell you how many potatoes you can eat before it causes problems. Or maybe the potatoes will never cause problems.

Need to try the new diet for x months, then re-test bloodwork.

CGM is not enough.

If concerned about glucose/sugar spikes, then the CGM is the tool. No, it's not a recipe or diet book. It's a blood sugar meter.

If you weight out & cook so many grams, serving size of, whatever, after fasting, on an empty stomach, and eat, it will tell you how that food affects your blood sugar. That's all.

It can tell how eating foods in the right order, or in combination affects your blood sugar. Or how simple exercise, normal walking for 30 minutes after a meal, affects your blood sugar.

It's a CGM, nothing more, nothing less. Not a personal trainer, dietician or home cook for you.

What are you trying to accomplish with a new diet ? Most you need to know is simply common sense. Will power and finding a diet that works, and one you'll stick to, is the key.

I used it, as I stated, to find the best options of crappy food to eat, when we're out & about. Home cooking isn't much of an issue, and didn't really have any surprises, as we cook & eat mostly whole foods from scratch. Actually didn't test much home cooking at all, as my HbA1C six months prior to using, was 5.3, and 5.0 six months after using.

Glucose levels from home cooking was never an issue.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by KhunLA

11 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Honestly, please don't be offended but the issue is that you don't want to see the numbers? I get it and I avoid reality sometimes. Checking your blood sugar regularly and learning about the numbers will tell you much more than HBA1c test done annually. Now if you have 10 HBA1c tests over a 5 year period, it might be almost as good.

No, the issue is I pretty much quit carbs.

Carbs cause the biggest spikes, with different carbs spiking differently.

And my diet doesn't change much now.

I will get tested soon, but I already know the numbers will be low because carbs / sugar / processed foods are the only foods that are causing issues.

Your CGM will still never tell you how many potatoes and cereals your body can handle before it gets tired of processing all those carbs. Only consistent bloodwork will tell you.

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Or how simple exercise, normal walking for 30 minutes after a meal, affects your blood sugar.

It's not feasible to walk 30 minutes after every meal.

No one has the disciple (or the time or the schedule) to do that.

5 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

as my HbA1C six months prior to using, was 5.3, and 5.0 six months after using.

that's the most important thing.

if your numbers are fine, then you're fine.

2 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Your CGM will still never tell you how many potatoes and cereals your body can handle before it gets tired of processing all those carbs. Only consistent bloodwork will tell you.

Actually it will, but since you never used one, I'm sure you know everything about them.

Not rocket science ... eat this much, blood sugar goes up by this much, for this long. How much more info do you need.

Blood work simply tells you that you're eating OK or not. Does not tell you what is affecting your blood sugar, how long, or how to lessen the affect.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by KhunLA

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

that's the most important thing.

if your numbers are fine, then you're fine.

Yes, I knew my blood sugar / glucose was fine. Reading comprehension, that's not why I used it. Geez, what is with AN members & reading comprehension.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by KhunLA

11 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Yes, I knew my blood sugar / glucose was fine. Reading comprehension, that's not why I used it. Geez, what is with AN members & reading comprehension.

Some of us are dyslexic readers.

You seem to know what you're doing. You're checking your bloodwork and your numbers are fine.

You're doing better than most, so you don't need to argue with me.

36 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

It's not feasible to walk 30 minutes after every meal.

No one has the disciple (or the time or the schedule) to do that.

If retired in TH, and especially if having a dog, then it's easy. If I forget, the dog reminds me.

... "Hey idiot, near 12 noon, we're done fasting, where's our damn break-fast. OK, better, don't sit back down, take me to the park and or surf, for a sniff and a dump. It's only been 18 hrs."

... "Yo, me again, it's 5 o'clock, dinner time. I'll be back before the sun sets, for my walk, don't get too comfy."

Yea, she's got me on a schedule.

Most people can make time, they simply don't. Not every meal, but do you need 3 a day. Wake up earlier for brekkie, then a walk, then prep and do your day. After your day, the evening meal and a stroll is easy.

Helps you blood sugar, and your stress level, (unless soi dogs chase you) which also helps you blood sugar. Don't need a CGM, just walk this YT'er, as does it all for you.

Take note,half his meal was rice ...

Zone 1 - 2 - 3 comparison, not much between 1 & 2. No surprise with 3, a intense will spike and as stated, no necessarily a bad thing.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by KhunLA

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Actually it will, but since you never used one, I'm sure you know everything about them.

Not rocket science ... eat this much, blood sugar goes up by this much, for this long. How much more info do you need.

Blood work simply tells you that you're eating OK or not. Does not tell you what is affecting your blood sugar, how long, or how to lessen the affect.

He seems to be a very nice guy but he thinks Glucose meters are the problem. Reminds me of "The Jerk" when Steve was running away from the soda cans. Not sure if that analogy works :)

Blood work is great but as far as insulin resistance a meter is the gold standard. Maybe needles are the issue? Anyhow, He seems cool so I'm sure he will figure it out.

11 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

If retired in TH, and especially if having a dog, then it's easy. If I forget, the dog reminds me.

If you're aware of your numbers and walking after meals, you're doing better than most.

The streets near me are not that walkable. So I'm getting lazy to walk all the time outside. Crappy sidewalks, traffic, soi dogs in the morning.

What I do is try not to sit at the desk all the time. Sometimes I will do light movements with dumbbells while watching Youtube. Doesn't have to be a walk. Any movement is helpful.

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Take note,half his meal was rice ...

But now the conversations has veered toward my carb skepticism.

He is stuffing his face with a big bowl of carbs and trying to bring down the spike.

But I'm not entirely convinced it's a good idea to eat a big bowl of carbs, even if you jog 6 miles and burn it off. Bringing down the spike and burning it off doesn't (necessarily) explain the entire physiology of what's going on in the body.

Because researcher Tim Noakes found that many athletes were prediabetic or insulin resistant on high carb diets.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by save the frogs

More than 600,000 people in Britain could be out of work because of obesity, according to new research highlighting the growing economic impact of the country's weight crisis. The findings come as ministers expand efforts to tackle worklessness, including pilot schemes offering weight-loss injections to unemployed people.

Weight Crisis Hits the Workforce

Researchers at the University of York found obesity significantly reduces a person's likelihood of being employed, with around four in every 100 obese adults estimated to be out of work because of their weight.

Using data from more than 284,000 UK Biobank participants, the study concluded that obesity lowers the probability of employment by 4.2 percentage points. With around 15 million obese adults in Britain, the researchers estimate the effect could account for more than 600,000 people being outside the workforce.

Men Face Bigger Employment Impact

The study found the employment penalty was markedly greater for men than women. Obesity reduced men's chances of being in work by 6.6 percentage points, compared with 2.1 percentage points for women.

Lead researcher Dr Aharon Katz said the reasons remain unclear, suggesting the gap could reflect differences in health, occupations, employer discrimination or wider social factors. He stressed further research is needed to understand the disparity.

Economic Stakes Continue to Rise

The findings, presented at the International Congress on Obesity in Mexico, warn that soaring obesity rates are creating substantial economic costs by reducing workforce participation during people's prime working years.

Researchers also found obese adults with lower levels of education were significantly more likely to be unemployed, while having a university degree appeared to reduce the impact on employment prospects.

Government Looks to Weight-Loss Treatments

The study comes as the Government tests the use of weight-loss injections to help more unemployed people return to work. Separate research has suggested the treatments could reduce sickness absence, ease pressure on the NHS and improve workplace productivity.

With around two-thirds of UK adults now overweight or obese and obesity rates having doubled since the 1990s, researchers argue that tackling the condition is no longer solely a public health issue but an economic priority affecting jobs, productivity and long-term public spending.

More than 600,000 Britons 'too fat to work'

1 hour ago, bannork said:

Weight Crisis Hits the Workforce

Researchers at the University of York found obesity significantly reduces a person's likelihood of being employed, with around four in every 100 obese adults estimated to be out of work because of their weight.

Using data from more than 284,000 UK Biobank participants, the study concluded that obesity lowers the probability of employment by 4.2 percentage points. With around 15 million obese adults in Britain, the researchers estimate the effect could account for more than 600,000 people being outside the workforce.

It seems this study has yet to be published.

7 minutes ago, TedG said:

It seems this study has yet to be published.

This may be of some help.

You'd better head to Mexico, Ted.

Being obese can make you more likely to be unemployed - Scimex