Royal Approval for 23 Gambling Activities, Including Bull Races and Mahjong

[chiang mai]

I'm refering to a low glycemic diet rather than a low carb diet, the dietary changes I have made don't involve eating fewer carbs, simply that the ones I do eat are no higher than 50 on the glycemic scale.

You have improved your numbers significantly without lowering carbs, but eating only foods below 50 on the glycemic index? Now,that is interesting.

It make sence if you think about it, the nutrients in say a slice of white bread for example are ready for absorption into the body as soon as it gets into the first few inches of the small bowel, two minutes and its food value has been depleted. Whole grains however need a series of enzymes to break down the outer covering of the grain in order to get to the nutrients at the core, that process takes time and is why the small bowel is twenty feet long - it takes just under three hours for food to pass from the stomach to the large bowel and potentially absorption takes place for that entire period, provided there are nutrients to be had.

So, fast release carbs vs slow release carbs, both have a different impact on the liver and the amount of insulin required to be produced by the pancreas and the time required to produce it, resulting in a lower and shorter glucose peak/spike. That approach also means that I still have an unused tool in my arsenal which is to adopt a low carb diet.

Edited January 23, 2013 by chiang mai

[tropo]

This is where people with diabetes should spend their time:

http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/

There are separate sub forums for type 1, type 1.5, type 2 and pre-diabetes.

You can't beat talking to real people who live with diabetes. There are some extremely knowledgeable people here.

All I know is that when I know a lot about something and look at what people say on the internet, the vast majority are full of sh*t. I don't trust the advice on these websites over medical professionals like the Mayo clinic.

You didn't mention if you have diabetes, but if you want to put your faith in doctors, good luck. I've done extremely well with the internet - all the information you need is on there and all the major diabetic associations have official websites too.

Also, the vast majority of people on diabetic forums are not talking sh*t. These are extremely well moderated forums with genuine people seeking help and others with experience giving out valuable information.

[tropo]

Well thus far the internet advice is correct in terms of a low glycemic diet

I don't think that there is any doubt about a low carb diet, but how low is in question. The recommended websites dispute the Mayo Clinic and the ADA and I do not think that these diabetes doctors are involved in some sort of conspiracy to promote bad advice.

Do you know about Glycemic load?I get the idea that it is more accurate than the Glycemic index and some of the foods that look bad on the index are not so bad if eaten in moderation (bananas and pineapple for example).

Forget about glycemic load. Forget about glycemic index. Get a meter and test yourself after all meals. A pre-diabetic may be able to handle bananas but a person with full on diabetes will find them a problem.

It's all about how advanced a person's insulin resistance is.

I'm not the slightest bit interested in glycemic load or indexes. A slight difference in absorption rate will make little difference to your readings.

The main thing you need to know is how many grams of carbs you're consuming. You peak at about 45 minutes after the start of a meal whether you eat chocolate or oatmeal. You'll find a diabetic will go sky high whether he eats fruits or whole grains. Makes no difference.

Edited January 23, 2013 by tropo

[tropo]

That approach also means that I still have an unused tool in my arsenal which is to adopt a low carb diet.

Ultimately that's the only tool that will bring your numbers into the normal zone.

[chiang mai]

Well thus far the internet advice is correct in terms of a low glycemic diet

I don't think that there is any doubt about a low carb diet, but how low is in question. The recommended websites dispute the Mayo Clinic and the ADA and I do not think that these diabetes doctors are involved in some sort of conspiracy to promote bad advice.

Do you know about Glycemic load?I get the idea that it is more accurate than the Glycemic index and some of the foods that look bad on the index are not so bad if eaten in moderation (bananas and pineapple for example).

Forget about glycemic load. Forget about glycemic index. Get a meter and test yourself after all meals. A pre-diabetic may be able to handle bananas but a person with full on diabetes will find them a problem.

It's all about how advanced a person's insulin resistance is.

I'm not the slightest bit interested in glycemic load or indexes. A slight difference in absorption rate will make little difference to your readings.

The main thing you need to know is how many grams of carbs you're consuming. You peak at about 45 minutes after the start of a meal whether you eat chocolate or oatmeal. You'll find a diabetic will go sky high whether he eats fruits or whole grains. Makes no difference.

I disagree, an extreme example: the absorption of starch e.g. rice, potato, white bread, begins in the mouth whereas the absorption of other nutrients begins in the small bowel where the majority of absorption takes place, the time difference between the two processes and locations is between two and five hours. Therefore, the impact of digesting 50 grams of Orange Gatorade (GI score of 100) vs 50 grams of Turkish Noodle Soup (GI score of 1) is that the nutrients in the Gatorade are absorbed into the body (and require a glucose and insulin response from it) within fifteen minutes whereas absorption (and response time) from the Soup is around four hours. Incedently, the Glycemic Load of those two items is 50 and 0 respectively whilst the ammount consumed in both cases is 50 grams.

.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digestion

http://en.wikipedia..../Glycemic_index

The glycemic index, or glycaemic index, (GI) provides a measure of how quickly blood sugar levels (i.e. levels of glucose in the blood) rise after eating a particular type of food. The effects that different foods have on blood sugar levels vary considerably. The glycemic index estimates how much each gram of available carbohydrate (total carbohydrate minus fiber) in a food raises a person's blood glucose level following consumption of the food, relative to consumption of pure glucose.^[1] Glucose has a glycemic index of 100.

A practical limitation of the glycemic index is that it does not take into account the amount of carbohydrate actually consumed. A related measure, the glycemic load, factors this in by multiplying the glycemic index of the food in question by the carbohydrate content of the actual serving.

Finally, you state that different absorption rates will make little difference to the readings, I think it's pretty clear from not only my figures earlier but also from the definitions above that that is not the case.

Edited January 23, 2013 by chiang mai

[tropo]

(I didn't need a wipipedia cut 'n paste. I'm quite aware of glycemic load and indexes)

Taking into consideration the degree of error for glucometers, I don't see any significant changes in your FBS over the past 35 days.

The changes you see in your postprandial numbers are nothing great either, within the degree of error. Even if you didn't vary your intake you'll see big day to day fluctuations even with the same food.

If you went low carb and shot for some decent goals you may get somewhere. At a latter stage when your pancreas has had a good break you can reintroduce carbs and you'll could be surprised.

By all means, continue on this road. Sooner or later you'll discover that low carb'ing is the way to go.

[chiang mai]

Just to be perfectly clear:

the numbers that I posted are averages based on a one month period, thirty different readings using the same glucometer with the trend and average overall. If there is a margin or error in the readings (which I agree there is), that same margin exists in all readings hence the downwards trends remain valid, I believe.

Indeed I may well introduce a lower carb diet at some stage, as indeed I may well see how losing 5 kilo's affects the overall picture, or how increasing my excersise regime from four to six days a week impacts things, as far as I'm concerned those are tools yet to be deployed.

Finally, yes I was aware that you understand GI et al but I thought it helpful for the readers who are trying to follow and learn from this thread if they had some clarification.

[tropo]

Just to be perfectly clear:

the numbers that I posted are averages based on a one month period, thirty different readings using the same glucometer with the trend and average overall. If there is a margin or error in the readings (which I agree there is), that same margin exists in all readings hence the downwards trends remain valid, I believe.

This morning my FBS was 107. This is higher than usual so I immediately had another go on a different finger - 102.

The thing is that I've seen so much bouncing around of numbers over the years on the same meals that the small differences on your 35 day chart don't indicate any meaningful change to me.

[chiang mai]

Just to be perfectly clear:

the numbers that I posted are averages based on a one month period, thirty different readings using the same glucometer with the trend and average overall. If there is a margin or error in the readings (which I agree there is), that same margin exists in all readings hence the downwards trends remain valid, I believe.

This morning my FBS was 107. This is higher than usual so I immediately had another go on a different finger - 102.

The thing is that I've seen so much bouncing around of numbers over the years on the same meals that the small differences on your 35 day chart don't indicate any meaningful change to me.

You may be right but I'm doubtful, mathematically, the margin of error in each of 35 different readings will balance out. But now I'm struggling to understand where you are comming from, you don't trust/believe the A1C test results, you think glucpmeters are inaccurate to up to 20%, you don't buy the benefits of a low glycemic diet and you distrust/ignore averaging. Apparently all you do believe in is in a low carb diet, tell me, how do you measure any progress and quantify the gain you've achieved via your low carb. diet?

[tropo]

Just to be perfectly clear:

the numbers that I posted are averages based on a one month period, thirty different readings using the same glucometer with the trend and average overall. If there is a margin or error in the readings (which I agree there is), that same margin exists in all readings hence the downwards trends remain valid, I believe.

This morning my FBS was 107. This is higher than usual so I immediately had another go on a different finger - 102.

The thing is that I've seen so much bouncing around of numbers over the years on the same meals that the small differences on your 35 day chart don't indicate any meaningful change to me.

You may be right but I'm doubtful, mathematically, the margin of error in each of 35 different readings will balance out. But now I'm struggling to understand where you are comming from, you don't trust/believe the A1C test results, you think glucpmeters are inaccurate to up to 20%, you don't buy the benefits of a low glycemic diet and you distrust/ignore averaging. Apparently all you do believe in is in a low carb diet, tell me, how do you measure any progress and quantify the gain you've achieved via your low carb. diet?

This is what happens when you've been studying it too long and testing for too long - things start to look grey.

Not everything is easy to understand. For example, why can I now eat relatively high carb meals and post low numbers?

For example, this morning after weetbix, milk, WPC, canned peaches and raisins my 1 hour was 91 and 2 hours 89. The 60 grams of WPC may hold the answer as it promotes the release of insulin.

I'll have to leave this for later - I'm off to the gym

Edited January 23, 2013 by tropo

[chiang mai]

You're eating small police women?

(WPC = woman police constable in the UK)

Ok let's leave it there, I'm still confused why you think your numbers are good and mine are wrong but I can relate to what you say about being too close to it all for too long and the colour grey. Just keep doing what you're doing, if it works for you.

[JSixpack]

That approach also means that I still have an unused tool in my arsenal which is to adopt a low carb diet.

Ultimately that's the only tool that will bring your numbers into the normal zone.

+1. That's exactly the way to go. Why create static and delay?

Edited January 23, 2013 by JSixpack

[ignis]

What prey is WPC ??

Not sure the internet helps as searching is confusing, lots of you guys say have no idea what these sort of letter mean and the search make no sence that ir has anything to do with people or Diabetic..

wpc

Web definitions

The Cyclone class patrol ships are a class of United States Navy coastal patrol boats. Most of these ships were launched between 1992...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(WPC)

[chiang mai]

That approach also means that I still have an unused tool in my arsenal which is to adopt a low carb diet.

Ultimately that's the only tool that will bring your numbers into the normal zone.

+1. That's exactly the way to go. Why create static and delay?

Big sigh!

[tropo]

That approach also means that I still have an unused tool in my arsenal which is to adopt a low carb diet.

Ultimately that's the only tool that will bring your numbers into the normal zone.

+1. That's exactly the way to go. Why create static and delay?

Big sigh!

He's got a very good point. You're reducing your numbers slightly by fiddling with what carbs you eat. If you went very low carb you'd definitely get low numbers and probably lose all your excess fat while you're at it. Low carbs definitely keeps blood sugar low, even in highly insulin resistant people. I'm talking about postprandial readings here. FBS can be a problem due to the early morning liver dump (dawn phenomenon), however postprandial control is far more important than obsessing about morning numbers, numbers you don't have much control over and numbers which can take a very long time to drop - without medication (Metformin).

... then, after a good length of time you can experiment with adding some carbs of different types to see what you can eat without sending your numbers high again. I believe if you keep your numbers low you'll end up improving your insulin sensitivity and you'll be surprised that you can handle carbs better than before, especially if you have a regular exercise program.

The breakfast I've been eating that I mentioned above is relatively high in carbs. I thought this would be a problem meal, but testing showed me that it isn't. I was eating a very low carb breakfast for about 6 months before I tried the one above because I was getting really bored with all the eggs. One thing is consistent with all my meals - they are small.

Regarding my attitude toward HbA1c. My current opinion on it comes from actual experience of testing (myself and friends) along with the study I linked before. I've been getting HbA1c tests at least 4 times per year for many years. I already gave you some very good reasons why the results must be flawed. Just comparing your result to mine is evidence enough there's a problem. We have nearly the same HbA1c numbers but very different postprandial and FBS numbers. I'm surprised that doesn't give you cause for concern. My main concern now is that I may have been wasting my money.

Regarding the inaccuracy of home test glucometers...,. well, that's not my opinion but a well recorded fact. That's a reason why I get lab FBS tests done from time to time.

[tropo]

You're eating small police women?

(WPC = woman police constable in the UK)

Ok let's leave it there, I'm still confused why you think your numbers are good and mine are wrong but I can relate to what you say about being too close to it all for too long and the colour grey. Just keep doing what you're doing, if it works for you.

What works for me will work for all - low carbs and lots of exercise. The worse the insulin resistance the lower the carbs should be. You're trying to find reasons why you should be able to eat high fiber carbs because they digest slowly, but this is not demonstrated in reality. You eat chocolate or potatoes - you'll spike at about 45 minutes. Starches digest amazingly quickly whether they are brown or white, refined or not. This was one of my first surprises when I first discovered my own problem as I thought as you do - that high fiber carbs took hours to digest.

Sure, the high fiber, unrefined carbs are much healthier for other reasons - more nutrients and fiber, but give unrefined carbs to a diabetic and see what happens. Even the smallest amount will send blood sugar through the roof. This is where spending time discussing things with real people on diabetic forums can be very useful. You'll learn how things work in real life rather than in theory.

For the rest, eat lots of carbs and take diabetic medication - that also works. My 82 year old mother does this and it's still working. I couldn't believe how high her carb intake was. This is another reason why doctors don't push the low carb diet - it's very hard to teach old dogs new tricks and they wouldn't have the patience anyway. You need to consult a dietitian for that.

This also keeps the pharmaceutical companies happy.

I was pushed straight onto diabetic medication myself based only on one FBS test (255).

I do believe that if you have very high FBS Metformin can be useful in the early stages, because when it is that high it's causing serious cellular damage. I noticed a very significant deterioration in my eyesight in those years.

There also comes a time when people have such advanced diabetes that medication is the only option WITH low carbs. By the time the toes start losing their feeling and turn black, medication is a God send.

Edited January 23, 2013 by tropo

[tropo]

What prey is WPC ??

Whey Protein Concentrate.

It's a quickly digestible protein, with tends to stimulate the release of insulin, a very good thing for people with insulin resistance - i.e. stimulating insulin release without increasing blood sugar. It also doubles as an appetite suppressant, probably due to the increase of insulin which stimulates leptin production - which "tells" the brain you're full.

Please note that this is just a theory to try and explain why WPC:

1. Leaves me feeling satisfied for many hours.

2. Gives me low blood sugar readings even when combined with simple carbs.

Edited January 23, 2013 by tropo

[ignis]

What prey is WPC ??

Whey Protein Concentrate.

It's a quickly digestible protein, with tends to stimulate the release of insulin, a very good thing for people with insulin resistance - i.e. stimulating insulin release without increasing blood sugar. It also doubles as an appetite suppressant, probably due to the increase of insulin which stimulates leptin production - which "tells" the brain you're full.

Please note that this is just a theory to try and explain why WPC:

1. Leaves me feeling satisfied for many hours.

2. Gives me low blood sugar readings even when combined with simple carbs.

Many thanks

Just many website are full of these letters, many I simple have no idea what they are, so the best I can do is search the letters......... mostly comes up with very odd things.... eg: medication for Cows, old ships, water treatment, and so on, makes very confusing reading

[ignis]

So many appear to have so much knowledge, I do try to read and hope understand what is being said...

Maybe could ask here someone may know ? about 14 or 15 years ago the specialist said I had never damage in both feet, understand normal in diabetes to have little or no feeling in your feet................ last 2 months or so they my feet are OK but going to bed they start to get painful, appear laying down = a lot of pain, today just could not stand the pain any longer so go up at 3.30 am.......... Oddly this morning my feet look normal, often they are twice there size, again oddly when they are very swollen there is little pain, just cannot get my shoes on.

Most of the time they feel freezing cold, but to touch are not [never use Air Con] always wear slippers in the house.

For years when they are swollen a walk to the end of the Village and back would see the swelling/puffiness go down, now a day appear to make no difference.................. Is not easy to explain to a Dr....... like yesterday evening went to my Dr, feet very swollen, only he was closed, no point going today as feet are back to normal and no puffiness at all.. OK still have a lot of pain after laying down for some time...

​Is all this just normal ? .......... I do worry as have seen 5 members of my family, loss 1st there foot, then to knee then to hip before dying, yet I have out lived all of them Uncle was the oldest at 49, youngest 36, Mother 2 days before she was 40, I am 62..

[chiang mai]

You're reducing your numbers slightly by fiddling with what carbs you eat.

I've only tried to make one single point here and that is that my current low glycemic diet, my first step in my glucose lowering program, has allowed me to lower my blood glucose levels, you have repeatedly challenged whether that was even possible but I now see that you accept ithat it is, thank you. But let's be clear, I am not "fiddling with my carbs" I am following a low glycemic diet on the advice of my Endo and it has resulted in approx 20% post grandial lowering os glucose levels across the board in three and a half weeks.

I accept fully that a low carb diet will add further benefit to my program, there has never been any dispute that it's an effective method of lowering blood glucose levels. I think what's probably being missed here is that for someone new to the blood glucose problem, reductions in sugar levels represents potentially a series of major changes in life, it's not only what I eat but where and how often and there's a fair amount of forward planning/thought that has to go into it all each day. It's less of a shock to the system and far easier if you can make that change slowly and in subtle ways at first rather than saying boom, start a low carb/no carb diet today, no doubt that time will come but I think my Endo of all people recognises that making those changes slowly means they are more likely to be permanent and sucessful.

Finally, your use of WPC reminds me, is your focus today body building whilst glucose level control is almost secondary? I seem to recall earlier discussions on this aspect and indeed have read your posts elsewhere on the internet where you talk about percentages of fat vs muscle etc.

Edited January 23, 2013 by chiang mai

[tropo]

What prey is WPC ??

Whey Protein Concentrate.

It's a quickly digestible protein, with tends to stimulate the release of insulin, a very good thing for people with insulin resistance - i.e. stimulating insulin release without increasing blood sugar. It also doubles as an appetite suppressant, probably due to the increase of insulin which stimulates leptin production - which "tells" the brain you're full.

Please note that this is just a theory to try and explain why WPC:

1. Leaves me feeling satisfied for many hours.

2. Gives me low blood sugar readings even when combined with simple carbs.

Many thanks

Just many website are full of these letters, many I simple have no idea what they are, so the best I can do is search the letters......... mostly comes up with very odd things.... eg: medication for Cows, old ships, water treatment, and so on, makes very confusing reading

I understand. I get annoyed myself when people use abbreviations assuming we all should know what they mean. You've made a very good point.

[tropo]

Finally, your use of WPC reminds me, is your focus today body building whilst glucose level control is almost secondary? I seem to recall earlier discussions on this aspect and indeed have read your posts elsewhere on the internet where you talk about percentages of fat vs muscle etc.

They're both of equal importance to me. One helps the other. By keeping my blood sugar low and steady I've managed to get rid of a lot of visceral and sub-cutaneous fat. Building muscle through intense weight training plus additional cardio exercise helps to keep the blood sugar under control. It gives any excess blood sugar something to do. i.e. feed the muscles. I still low carb on all meals except the one I mentioned earlier. My diet is very strictly controlled. Portion size is small or moderate. I hardly ever indulge in sweets, cakes or chocolates. Never drink sodas or fruit juices. Don't drink alcohol.

I just counted my empty testing strip containers. I've used 15 in the last year, so testing is quite important to me. I tested 5 times today in fact. 102 - 91 - 89 - 87...so as you can see, I'm keeping things well under control. I'd like to test even more but it costs too much. If my strips were free I'd probably test 20 x per day.

[chiang mai]

Finally, your use of WPC reminds me, is your focus today body building whilst glucose level control is almost secondary? I seem to recall earlier discussions on this aspect and indeed have read your posts elsewhere on the internet where you talk about percentages of fat vs muscle etc.

I just counted my empty testing strip containers. I've used 15 in the last year, so testing is quite important to me. I tested 5 times today in fact. 102 - 91 - 89 - 87...so as you can see, I'm keeping things well under control. I'd like to test even more but it costs too much. If my strips were free I'd probably test 20 x per day.

I'm testing about six times a day currently which is going to get expensive, but it's worth it of course to try and understand what happens when and with what. Today I was 109 fasting, 111 postprandial breakfast, 133 lunch and 119 dinner - lunch was an experiment that didn't quite work out so we wont be repeating that one.

[tropo]

I'm testing about six times a day currently which is going to get expensive, but it's worth it of course to try and understand what happens when and with what. Today I was 109 fasting, 111 postprandial breakfast, 133 lunch and 119 dinner - lunch was an experiment that didn't quite work out so we wont be repeating that one.

This thread has got me testing a bit more than usual. I'll go periods where I don't test at all and then test again to make sure everything is in check - or test a new meal out. 6 tests a day would come out at about 3000 baht per month at the cost of my strips. I normally test at 1 hour only these days as that is usually the highest reading. If the 1 hour reading is too high then I'll do a 2 hours test. On occasion I'll have an unusually low 1 hour reading, in which case I'll test again at 2 hours - which in these cases is sometimes higher.

1 hour breakfast readings are often lower than my FBS...which of course is indicative of the dawn phenomenon. I just had to explain this to my friend who was shocked about a lower breakfast reading than his FBS.

Those numbers you got today are quite ok. Nothing to stress over.

Edited January 24, 2013 by tropo