Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 09:50
mike_d's Avatar
mike_d mike_d is offline
Grease is the word!
Posts: 8,408
 
Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/181/180 Male 72 inches
BF:disappearing!
Progress: 98%
Location: Alamo city, Texas
Thumbs down Eating red meat may boost Type 2 diabetes risk

Amazing how quickly these studies get reported repeatedly, and with little real evidence. Looking at the comments I think people are beginning to see an underlying bias in these 'studies' that manipulate statistics?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162...-diabetes-risk/
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 10:08
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,903
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

I liked the response: "I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain just to eat vegetables"
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 10:27
Deciduous Deciduous is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,963
 
Plan: SBR/Atkins
Stats: 154/135.5/130 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 77%
Location: Ontario, Canada
Default

I know that they attempt to correct for the other foods people are ingesting, statistically speaking, but I find it hard to believe that they can actually adjust for the fact that red meats, more often than say chicken or fish, are accompanied by blood sugar triggering white-bread (hamburger or hotdog buns) AND potatoes (fries, white potatoes with roasts).
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 11:00
s-piper s-piper is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 694
 
Plan: LC Primal
Stats: 290/270/160 Female 5'7
BF:
Progress: 15%
Default

Wasn't there one of these studies where they counted meat lover's pizza as a meat but not a carb?

It kind of makes me wonder about the details of these survey's and how closely they look at details.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 11:59
ojoj's Avatar
ojoj ojoj is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,184
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 210/126/127 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: South of England
Default

I cant even read it - its rubbish! How stupid so they think the general public are and how stupid are those who actually believe this nonsense!

Our governments way of subtly trying to get us all to eat more wheat and to build agriculture by blatantly lying!

Jo xxx
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 12:11
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,475
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
When glucose builds up, it can lead to diabetes-related health issues like high blood pressure, mental health troubles, hearing loss and eye, foot and skin complications.

Thanks for the explanation, but that's the wrong explanation. Those are not "diabetes-related health issues", those are the description of diabetes. It's like asking the burning man if he's suffering from fire-related issues.

Experimental studies show the opposite. For example, the Bellevue all-meat trial shows the subjects maintained good health in spite of eating only meat, mostly red meat. Sure, there was only two subjects in that experiment, but an experiment of n=1 beats an observation of n=xx any day of the week. I mean, if red meat does cause diabetes, then eating tons of red meat for a year would certainly reveal some effect. That experiment contradicts the very essence of the hypothesis about red meat and diabetes.

Quote:
The researchers also analyzed red meat and processed meats separately, and found the association was greater for processed products.

Now we're getting somewhere. Processed meats contain sugars and other refined carbs like wheat and corn. Meat does not contain those things. It follows that if the true association comes from the refined carbs which are usually eaten in conjunction with meat (burger and hot dog buns for example), then eating processed meat will show a stronger association.

I mean goddamnit, we're just amateur analysts and we can figure out that most meat we eat is usually eaten with loads of carbs. Why doesn't the article mention that association? Bias.

Euh, rant over.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 12:17
Cocoatime's Avatar
Cocoatime Cocoatime is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 135
 
Plan: Moderate Carb Paleo
Stats: 165/146/135 Female 5'4
BF:36%/30%/25%
Progress: 63%
Default On the News: Red Meat Bad for You

I was just watching the news, and a story came on about "a new study" that shows red meat has been linked with Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and reduced brain function. It's really hard to tune these types of health messages out. They are everywhere!
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 12:44
keith v's Avatar
keith v keith v is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 730
 
Plan: Wheat belly
Stats: 235/220/200 Male 6 feet 2 inches
BF:
Progress: 43%
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA Earth
Default

Not in the news, whole grains are linked to diabetes and heart disease.

Which is fact, which is fiction?
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 13:29
ojoj's Avatar
ojoj ojoj is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,184
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 210/126/127 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: South of England
Default

Quite honestly, correlation alone is enough to prove that this "study" is rubbish. Afterall, its only been in the last 30 or so years, since we've been told to hold back on red meat (and fats) that type two has become epidemic
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 14:54
Cocoatime's Avatar
Cocoatime Cocoatime is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 135
 
Plan: Moderate Carb Paleo
Stats: 165/146/135 Female 5'4
BF:36%/30%/25%
Progress: 63%
Default

Personally, I feel like I am close to a head explosion due to conflicting information. I wonder if rather than focus on specific food groups that "cause" diabetes, heart disease, etc, which is a difficult study to do well anyway, it makes more sense to focus on first determining the root causes of obesity, which is intrinsically related to the other two diseases. What I really want is for the western medical establishment to acknowledge the things we already know and discuss on this forum, rather than repeating the same tired conclusions over and over, using poor science and methods we debunked 30 years ago. /rant
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 15:22
ojoj's Avatar
ojoj ojoj is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,184
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 210/126/127 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: South of England
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoatime
Personally, I feel like I am close to a head explosion due to conflicting information. I wonder if rather than focus on specific food groups that "cause" diabetes, heart disease, etc, which is a difficult study to do well anyway, it makes more sense to focus on first determining the root causes of obesity, which is intrinsically related to the other two diseases. What I really want is for the western medical establishment to acknowledge the things we already know and discuss on this forum, rather than repeating the same tired conclusions over and over, using poor science and methods we debunked 30 years ago. /rant
I know what you mean about all the conflicting information, mind boggling isnt it!!!

The cause of obesity is fairly obvious to me - too much sugar, too much food available. When I was a kid, we didnt have "wall to wall" chocolate/candy bars, biscuits/cookies, snacks, cakes, sugary drinks. We werent able to buy that stuff anywhere and everywhere. No drive thrus, fast food places, takeaways. Breakfast cereals were plain cornflakes, wheat etc - yes, carby, but none of this added sugar/flavouring stuff.... We have bred a generation or two now who are introduced to sugar/carb addiction at a very young age and as with all addictions the quantities keep increasing - as does the damage they cause

Jo xxx
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, Jun-18-13, 19:35
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,364
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/213/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 34%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
If we can say to patients, get the saturated fats, get the meat out of your diet and you're going to prevent diabetes, that's hugely empowering

To who? Diabetes drug manufacturers? Never mind the article's photo even included a burger in the big white carby bun. But nooo....the high blood sugar of type 2 diabetes couldn't be influenced by things that turn into high blood sugar like carbs, now could it? Nah, must be all that evil saturated fat.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Wed, Jun-19-13, 09:42
lovinita's Avatar
lovinita lovinita is offline
Triple digit loss
Posts: 927
 
Plan: Dr. Bernstien
Stats: 352/206.8/175 Female 5'7
BF:
Progress: 82%
Location: Boston, MA
Default

I call BS from my own situation.

I have for a good portion of my life on a high carb, low fat, limited meat. Collegiate Athlete.

I got insulin resistance, started eating meat more but still was having with meduim carb meals. Working out as usual

Weight still ballooned and insulin resistance turned to type 2 diabetes. Tried inbtween to loose the weight with all the various plans.

Then I did Dr Bs plan as I am Type 2 diabetic. Went off my medications before I started.

Within a matter of 2 weeks my blood sugars normalized to pre diabetic levels.

I went in 2 months for blood testing, without loosing all my weight, from a 6.8 to a 5.8 with a fasting FBG of 105.

I have since cut out diary (ie creams, cream cheese, sour cream)

Recently started testing my BGs again a couple of days ago.

Now today for the second day in a row, I woke up with a FBG measuring of a 94,93.

Personally, I feel this all has to do with money. Money in the various areas of the food industry. Money in research. Money, Money, Money.

I watched a link by a doctor(who turned type 2 diabetic and did LC diet to get it under control) in canada and they asked him. Why do you think the ADA(American diabetes association) is not embracing the low carb solution.

He said plainly (summarizing) there is no money in it. And in order to prove the theory, which is what they want, you have to run fairly big trials for them to take you seriously. Why would anyone invest in those trials with no money to be made from the results. That all the person has to do is switch their diet.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Wed, Jun-19-13, 13:52
Ilikemice's Avatar
Ilikemice Ilikemice is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 720
 
Plan: Paleo-ish general LC
Stats: 151/122/118 Female 64 in
BF:
Progress: 88%
Location: Middle Tennessee
Default

The version of this I read on a medical site included the statement that people who eat lots of red meat should be referred to a dietician.

I have no problem telling anyone how much meat I eat. They try this with me, someone's gonna get a smackdown (probably with the dietician, which would be more fun).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:10.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.