The Diabetes Forum Support Community For Diabetics Online banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Okay, I just started measuring my blood sugar yesterday.
I am convinced that LCHF is the way to go.

My first question is, if I test 1 hour after a meal, and I get a "good" result, can I skip testing 2 hours after that meal? For example, my FBS this morning was 97. We were out of groceries, so I ate a serving of peanut butter and drank a 16 oz cup of coffee with 1.5 TBSP of sugar, and 4 TBSP of 1/2 & 1/2.

One hour later my BG was 122. 2 hours later it was 100.

For lunch I made a smoothie with OJ, frozen strawberries, bananas, raw eggs, and fish oil. (I worked out the nutritional data on it if you need that to answer my questions, let me know). I had 1/2 the amount that I used to. One hour later my BG was 118. 2 hours later it was 87.

I had oven-roasted, boneless, skinless chicken thighs, organic agave-sweetened bar-b-que sauce and steamed (frozen) broccolli with butter for dinner. I forgot to set my timer so I think I was about 15 minutes late testing. So 1.25ish hours after dinner I got a reading of 109 and didn't test again because saving money on strips would be good.

Also, according to what I've read on the forum, my carb intake is on the high side of things. I was at 62 grams of carbs and haven't done my calculations on dinner yet.

Is it okay for my health to eat this many carbs? I'm going to be honest. I am a life-long compulsive overeater and giving up my comfort foods (Coke, McDonald's french fries, and Ben and Jerry's by the pint) is going to be hard for me :pout:, but the thought that I might not have to give up *all* the things I enjoy on a frequent basis (the homemade smoothies I make for breakfast or lunch for the whole family when things are rushed) and coffee with real sugar and 1/2 & 1/2 is a great comfort to me at the moment. I used to drink 2 or 3 extra-large mugs of coffee a day. Yesterday and today I have limited it to 1. I need to lose weight and since it's such a high carb item I want to moderate. As a cancer survivor, I do not ever consume artificial sweeteners, and I don't like the taste of Stevia at all. So I either put sugar in my coffee or I drink it black. I strongly prefer the sugar, but not enough to die or damage my organs for.
 

·
Anti-Man Made Carbs!
Joined
·
1,891 Posts
sugar is poison to diabetics
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
Okay, I just started measuring my blood sugar yesterday.
I am convinced that LCHF is the way to go.
Great! There are tons of LCHF'ers here who can help out.

My first question is, if I test 1 hour after a meal, and I get a "good" result, can I skip testing 2 hours after that meal?
You can't tell from just one measurement if you BG is on the rise or is falling. Say you test at 1 hour and it was 122, if you test again at 2 hours and it's at 100 you can say hey it's gone down enough, I can stop testing. If it was 140 at 2 hours, then you would want to keep testing until you saw it come back down to about your pre-meal #.

By testing like this you can see about how high your BG goes and how long it takes to come back to normal.

I had oven-roasted, boneless, skinless chicken thighs, organic agave-sweetened bar-b-que sauce and steamed (frozen) broccolli with butter for dinner. I forgot to set my timer so I think I was about 15 minutes late testing. So 1.25ish hours after dinner I got a reading of 109 and didn't test again because saving money on strips would be good.
A couple of suggestions to help make this higher in fat and lower in carbs. Thighs are preferred over breast, so good job there. Keep the skin on though. It has other good micronutrients and ups the fat.

Agave sweetener while it may be low in glucose is really high in fructose. Fructose isn't immediately turned into blood sugar sure but your liver converts it into either fat or glycogen which can be released as sugar at a later time. Also some people are starting to think that excessive fructose can be bad for your health (see Dr. Robert Lustig's videos).

Also, according to what I've read on the forum, my carb intake is on the high side of things. I was at 62 grams of carbs and haven't done my calculations on dinner yet.

Is it okay for my health to eat this many carbs?
Considering the average carb intake for most Americans is 300-400, you are still low carb! Instead of asking us if it's okay, judge by your BG control and if you are trying to lose/maintain your weight, your success with that. Everyone is able to tolerate a different amount of carbohydrates while still achieving their goals (either triglycerides, weight loss, BG control).

Sure there are some people (myself included, samorgan is another) who feel that it is important to reduce carbohydrates for other important health reasons. And we do wax poetic about the reasons why at the drop of a hat. :D So if you would like to hear it just say so.

You don't necessarily have to give up the TYPES of foods that you love, just switch it up a bit. Though it's a bit more tricky since you don't do artificial sweeteners*. You can always still use natural sweeteners like juice and just keep an eye on the carbs. If you are looking for replacements or recipes, there are a ton on the forums or you can ask for ideas on a specific food.

* I have had good luck with Stevia by using the 100% pure powder (no extras) and then use a ridiculously tiny amount (think 15-50mg depending on the recipe). It does indeed taste bad if you put in too much but if you get the amount right it should be sweet without an aftertaste, bite or bitterness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
sugar is poison to diabetics
Okay. As a prediabetic, I add organic evaporated cane sugar to my coffee and it doesn't result in high BG. Poison. Got it.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, but to go from consuming several pints of Ben and Jerry's each week and drinking a large (32oz, I think) Coke every day and drinking 2 or 3 huge mugs of coffee with 1.5 TBSP of sugar a day to only consuming 1.5 TBSP of sugar per day seems like a drastic change. But if it's poison, then obviously there is no safe amount.

What about the orange juice, banana, and frozen strawberries I make smoothies with?

TIA!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
You can't tell from just one measurement if you BG is on the rise or is falling. Say you test at 1 hour and it was 122, if you test again at 2 hours and it's at 100 you can say hey it's gone down enough, I can stop testing. If it was 140 at 2 hours, then you would want to keep testing until you saw it come back down to about your pre-meal #.

By testing like this you can see about how high your BG goes and how long it takes to come back to normal.
Got it. I had no idea that it could go up between the 1 hour and 2 hour test. What a newb!;)

Sure there are some people (myself included, samorgan is another) who feel that it is important to reduce carbohydrates for other important health reasons. And we do wax poetic about the reasons why at the drop of a hat. :D So if you would like to hear it just say so.
I would like to hear it! I love learning about this stuff.

* I have had good luck with Stevia by using the 100% pure powder (no extras) and then use a ridiculously tiny amount (think 15-50mg depending on the recipe). It does indeed taste bad if you put in too much but if you get the amount right it should be sweet without an aftertaste, bite or bitterness.
I will try it. I've always used the drops, and probably too many.

Thanks:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,394 Posts
What about the orange juice, banana, and frozen strawberries I make smoothies with?
The orange juice & banana would shoot my bg into outer space. Strawberries I can eat a very few without too big a spike. All you can do is test after you drink it - keep adjusting the recipe until your bg is acceptable afterward. With things like orange & pineapple juices, which I formerly used a great deal to flavor things like sweet/sour sauce, etc., I've had to switch to the bottled extracts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,491 Posts
Those of us with impaired glucose tolerance, whether diabetic or pre-diabetic are really best-off avoiding sugar, period.

Interestingly, after a while you won't seek the sugary comfort-foods if you stick with it.

Replace those you can... Find some diet drinks you like, and drink them at meals instead of a sugary soda. There are some no-sugar added ice creams that are reasonably healthy - you'll need to check for them and see how you do with them by testing.

Some of us will have fast-food occasionally and either eat things bun-less, or bring our own buns or tortillas... Fast-food Fried Chicken isn't usually too bad, unless it's double-breaded or "extra-crispy" etc.

When sweetening your own shakes/smoothies, coffee, etc. there's lots of good-tasting options... I use either plain stevia, or a product called Truvia (mostly Erythritol), whichever is less when I go to buy it.

I eat home-made peanut-butter cookies, chocolate bars, cheesecake, and other goodies ALL low-carb and without sugar.

As for fruit - I find berries my BEST bet (berries are the lowest-glycemic of the fruits), followed by cherries and granny-smith apples (I eat 1/2 apple at a time). I haven't eaten a banana in months - and that was only a 3rd a banana after a 5hr mountainous bike ride... Bananas send me to the moon.

And skip the juice - that's good advice for ANYONE whether they have impaired glucose-tolerance or not... fruit has just as much sugar as a Coke, ounce for ounce. Some juices have MORE.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
I would like to hear it! I love learning about this stuff.
I wonder if I can put out the "Salim" bat signal and have him read this thread? :D It was his posts that inspired me to do more research and really restrict my carbs. I'll do my best to explain!

After reading more about glucose metabolism, I feel that even if I can "get away" with having say 100g of carbs a day because it doesn't raise my BG over 140 that it will have other negative consequences, some of which I can't easily measure.

For instance if my BG didn't go up very high it's because my body made enough insulin to cover it. Since I am insulin resistant, it probably even means that it was a lot of insulin. From reading Gary Taubes (Good Calories Bad Calories or Why We Get Fat) I understand that insulin plays a major role in keeping fat locked away in my cells. So that higher insulin hurts my weight loss and prevents me from using fat for energy, making me feel tired and probably hungry.

If that wasn't enough, many diseases have been associated with hyperinsulinemia, so even if I felt fine in the short term, maybe that extra insulin isn't doing my health any favors in the long term.

Now if I go back to the amount of carbs I ate, even if my BG stays the same, my body still metabolized that glucose. Some of it was stored in my liver (to contribute to liver dumps at a later time) and eventually when it is used up for energy creates by-products such as methylglyoxal(MG). MG is one of the molecules that create AGEs (Advanced Glycation End-products). AGEs are that contribute to aging; they react with the cells in your body and cause all sorts of damage, such as inflammation, diabetes, heart disease, alzheimer's, kidney disease, etc.

Basically, my understanding is that every molecule of glucose I consume contributes a little bit more to poor health. There are studies which show that that isn't really any "safe" level of blood sugar, like 140 or 180 and that the more normal and level your BG stays, the lower your incidence of complications. You don't have to take my word for it either. I am quoting Dr Ron Rosedale from the link in my original post

There is no threshold for healthy blood glucose:

Is there a glycemic threshold for mortality risk?
Diabetes Care May 1999 vol. 22 no. 5 696-699

“…the lowest observed death rates were in the intervals centered on 5.5 mmol/l [99mg/dl] for fasting glucose and 5.0 mmol/l [90 mg/dl] for 2-h glucose.

CONCLUSIONS: In the Paris Prospective Study, there were no clear thresholds for fasting or 2-h glucose concentrations above which mortality sharply increased; in the upper levels of the glucose distributions, the risk of death progressively increased with increasing fasting and 2-h glucose concentrations.”

“Normal” blood glucose and coronary risk
BMJ VOLUME 322 6 JANUARY 2001
“Khaw et al in this issue shows that glycosylated haemoglobin levels are positively associated with the risk of future coronary heart disease in a linear stepwise fashion, with no evidence of a threshold effect and independent of other common risk factors for coronary heart disease. These are the most convincing data available that the association between glucose and coronary heart disease occurs throughout the normal range of glucose.”

Post-challenge blood glucose concentration and stroke mortality rates in non-diabetic men in London: 38-year follow-up of the original Whitehall prospective cohort study
Diabetologia (2008) 51:1123–1126
“Results During follow-up of 18,406 non-diabetic men, 13,116 deaths occurred (1,189 by stroke).
Plots of stroke mortality rates versus [post challenge of 50 gms] blood glucose identified an upward inflection in risk of death from stroke at about 4.6 mmol/l [82 mg/dl]. This upward inflection in risk could be adequately described using a single linear term above this threshold. Conclusions/interpretation; An incremental elevation in stroke mortality rates occurs with increasing post-challenge blood glucose.”

2010 WebMD
How the Blood Sugar of Diabetes Affects the Body
“At present, the diagnosis of diabetes or prediabetes is based on an arbitrary cut-off point for a normal blood sugar level.”

ScienceDaily, Monash University (2008, August 22)
Killer Carbs: Scientist Finds Key To Overeating As We Age
published in ‘Nature’.
“Dr Andrews found that appetite-suppressing cells are attacked by free radicals after eating and said the degeneration is more significant following meals rich in carbohydrates and sugars. ‘The more carbs and sugars you eat, the more your appetite-control cells are damaged, and potentially you consume more,’ Dr Andrews said.”

Is There a Clear Threshold for Fasting Plasma Glucose That Differentiates
Between Those With and Without Neuropathy and Chronic Kidney Disease?
Am J Epidemiol 2009;169:1454–1462
“Recent studies suggest that no distinct glycemic threshold consistently differentiates individuals with or without retinopathy. The authors sought to determine whether the same was true [in a random sample of individuals] for other microvascular complications…Prevalence of peripheral neuropathy and chronic kidney disease gradually increased in relation to fasting plasma glucose, beginning at levels below the existing diagnostic threshold for diabetes mellitus of 7.0 mmol/L (126 mg/dL).

One-hour postload plasma glucose and risks of fatal coronary heart disease and stroke among nondiabetic men and women: the Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry (CHA) Study.
J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Dec;50(12):1369-76
Stamler J. Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL
“Plasma glucose was determined one hour after a 50-gram oral glucose load… higher glucose was significantly associated with mortality from coronary heart disease, stroke, cardiovascular diseases, and all cause mortality in men and women. This large longitudinal study provides evidence that one-hour postload plasma glucose in the absence of clinical diabetes at baseline apparently is an independent risk factor for fatal coronary heart disease and stroke in middle-aged and older nondiabetic men and women, and also for cardiovascular diseases and for all cause mortality.

Glycated haemoglobin, diabetes, and mortality in men in Norfolk cohort of European Prospective Investigation of Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC°©Norfolk)
BMJ VOLUME 322 6 JANUARY 2001
HbA1c was continuously related to subsequent all cause, cardiovascular, and ischaemic heart disease mortality through the whole population distribution, with lowest rates in those with HbA1c concentrations below 5%. An increase of 1% in HbA1c was associated with a 28% (P < 0.002) increase in risk of death..."

Glucose accelerates aging, oxidative stress…

Pro-Aging Effects of Glucose Signaling through a G Protein-Coupled Glucose Receptor in Fission Yeast
PLoS Genetics, March 2009 | Volume 5 | Issue 3
“…excess of glucose has been associated with several diseases, including diabetes and the less understood process of aging. On the contrary, limiting glucose (i.e., calorie restriction) slows aging and age-related diseases in most species…The pro-aging effect of glucose signaling on life span correlated with an increase in reactive oxygen species and a decrease in oxidative stress resistance and respiration rate. Likewise, the anti-aging effect of both calorie restriction and the Dgit3 mutation was accompanied by increased respiration and lower reactive oxygen species production.”

Rather than being good for white blood cells, glucose can oxidize them…
GLUCOSE CHALLENGE STIMULATES REACTIVE OXYGEN SPECIES (ROS) GENERATION BY LEUCOCYTES
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Vol. 85, No. 8, Aug. 2000
“Blood samples were drawn from 14 normal subjects prior to, at 1, 2 and 3 h following ingestion of 75 g glucose…We conclude that glucose intake…increases oxidative load [in leukocytes] and causes a fall in a-tocopherol concentration.”

Sugar glycates. For those unaware, this is where glucose (and other sugars) combines with other essential molecules such as proteins and DNA affecting their shape and structure and preventing their proper function. This is a very bad. Glycation is one of the major molecular mechanisms that cause damage resulting in senescence that we notice as “aging”. That is why products of glycation, advanced glycated end products, are not coincidentally called AGEs.

There is no threshold for glycation…more glucose, greater risk of glycation…
Advanced glycated end products: a review
Diabetologia (2001) 44: 129-146
“Glycation is concentration-dependent”

Lipoprotein Lipase Mediates the Uptake of Glycated LDL in Fibroblasts, Endothelial Cells, and Macrophages.
Diabetes 50: 1643–1653, 2001
“Protein glycation is a nonenzymatic reaction of glucose with susceptible amino groups that occurs at a rate linearly related to the plasma glucose concentration.”

Significant amounts of highly reactive precursors to AGEs (advanced glycated end products) are formed after a single standard (with carbohydrate) meal…
a-Dicarbonyls Increase in the Postprandial Period and Reflect the Degree of Hyperglycemia.
Diabetes Care 24:726–732, 2001
“Chronic hyperglycemia is known to increase tissue glycation and diabetic
complications, but controversy exists regarding the independent role of increased postprandial glucose excursions. To address this question, we have studied the effect of postprandial glycemic excursions (PPGEs) on levels of methylglyoxal (MG) and 3-deoxyglucosone (3-DG), two highly reactive precursors of advanced glycation end products (AGEs)….PPGE was determined after a standard test meal. Conclusion: Increased production of MG and 3-DG [AGEs] occur with greater PPGE, whereas HbA1c does not reflect these differences.”

Insulin glycates contributing to insulin resistance…and its sequelae, diabetes, CV disease, obesity, cancer, and accelerated aging…
Glycation of insulin results in reduced biological activity in mice.
Acta Diabetol. 1997 Dec;34(4):265-70
“These data indicate that glycated insulin exhibits impaired biological activity which may contribute to glucose intolerance…”

Glycation of LDL in non-diabetic people: Small dense LDL is preferentially
glycated both in vivo and in vitro.
Atherosclerosis. 2009 Jan;202(1):162-8
“CONCLUSION: Small-dense LDL is more susceptible to glycation and this may contribute to the atherogenicity of smalldense LDL, even in non-diabetic people.”

Glucose directly contributes to aging and feeds cancer cells;
Glucose restriction can extend normal cell lifespan and impair precancerous cell growth through epigenetic control of hTERT and p16 expression.
FASEB, December 17, 2009
“Cancer cells metabolize glucose at elevated rates and have a higher sensitivity to glucose reduction…The altered gene expression was partly due to glucose restriction-induced DNA methylation changes…Collectively, these results provide new insights into the epigenetic mechanisms of a nutrient control strategy that may contribute to cancer therapy as well as antiaging approaches.”

Raising glucose, raises insulin, increases insulin resistance…
Beta-cell dysfunction and glucose intolerance: results from the San Antonio metabolism (SAM) study.
Diabetologia (2004) 47:31–39
“Conclusion/interpretation. When the plasma insulin response to oral glucose is related to the glycaemic stimulus and severity of insulin resistance, there is a progressive decline in beta-cell function that begins in “normal” glucose tolerant individuals.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I wonder if I can put out the "Salim" bat signal and have him read this thread? :D It was his posts that inspired me to do more research and really restrict my carbs. I'll do my best to explain!

After reading more about glucose metabolism, I feel that even if I can "get away" with having say 100g of carbs a day because it doesn't raise my BG over 140 that it will have other negative consequences, some of which I can't easily measure.

For instance if my BG didn't go up very high it's because my body made enough insulin to cover it. Since I am insulin resistant, it probably even means that it was a lot of insulin. From reading Gary Taubes (Good Calories Bad Calories or Why We Get Fat) I understand that insulin plays a major role in keeping fat locked away in my cells. So that higher insulin hurts my weight loss and prevents me from using fat for energy, making me feel tired and probably hungry.

If that wasn't enough, many diseases have been associated with hyperinsulinemia, so even if I felt fine in the short term, maybe that extra insulin isn't doing my health any favors in the long term.

Now if I go back to the amount of carbs I ate, even if my BG stays the same, my body still metabolized that glucose. Some of it was stored in my liver (to contribute to liver dumps at a later time) and eventually when it is used up for energy creates by-products such as methylglyoxal(MG). MG is one of the molecules that create AGEs (Advanced Glycation End-products). AGEs are that contribute to aging; they react with the cells in your body and cause all sorts of damage, such as inflammation, diabetes, heart disease, alzheimer's, kidney disease, etc.

Basically, my understanding is that every molecule of glucose I consume contributes a little bit more to poor health. There are studies which show that that isn't really any "safe" level of blood sugar, like 140 or 180 and that the more normal and level your BG stays, the lower your incidence of complications. You don't have to take my word for it either. I am quoting Dr Ron Rosedale from the link in my original post
:faint2:

Okay. I'm convinced. I admit that I've read this post several times, understanding a little bit more each time. At first I was like, "Huh?" and, "Wha?" and it kinda hurt my head. Then I got to that bit about glucose feeding cancer cells and that got my attention. I had thyroid cancer in 2004, and since I had a child in 2006 and another in 2008 I live in fear of it coming back. Not enough fear to eat well and exercise consistently, but fear nonetheless.

Then I thought about how my aunt (who is very close to me). She has struggled with her T2D for years and years and had bypass surgery 6 months ago. She believes the party-line and tries to eat small portions, but her diet is terrible. Low-fat, high-refined-carb. Gross. Even if I tracked all my data and gave it to her, she would never do anything that went against what she's been told by her doctor or her ADA newb class. It's sad.

Thank you for all the helpful information. I'm going to see if my library carries the books you mentioned.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
:faint2:

Okay. I'm convinced. I admit that I've read this post several times, understanding a little bit more each time. At first I was like, "Huh?" and, "Wha?" and it kinda hurt my head.
Ha ha, that's my reaction to most of the more technical blog posts and articles I read. :D It usually takes me a couple of goes, going to Wikipedia to look-up terms, etc. I'm glad that you found the information useful!
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top