Coronavirus in the UK

I can understand why you're thinking things you wouldn't ordinarily think (we are probably all doing this some days), but I doubt that the wonderful people in the NHS would put themselves at great risk if it was a government "cull" or some other insidious machination.

i went on a diabetes awareness course this time last year. most of what i learned ( very little ) has been successfully ignored. But i have seriously reduced carbs--rice--spuds in all forms--pasta--bread. even sugar--halved in hot drinks--and fewer of them. i lost 10 kilos during the timeframe of the course--which ended when the lockdown started. my weight is stable.
i still drink more than i should--but probably less than a doctor. 2 to 3 cans of lager per night--instead of my previous diet of white cider. a nightcap of a scotch and splash of diet coke.

Honestly Dom, I have had contact with so so many people in the same position. And on Metfartin, I mean Metformin. And all of those people have reversed their condition to the extent that they no longer take it. Magic eh.

There are some GPs reversing their patients conditions ( like your own) not by prescribing medication, but by dietary change and deprescribing (reducing the drugs), at the rate of 1 or 2 a month. Completely off drugs, blood pressure reduced, weight reduced and importantly blood sugar in the safe zone along with associated ailments that come with high blood sugar. I can even post real people that have achieved this in what might appear to be a miraculous way but is really down to dietary change and not very much to do with exercise.

Many people have told me about their experiences of Metformin which really doesn’t solved the problem. Some prefer to stay on it as they find the challenge of changing what they eat a bit too much. But countless people elect to go drug free by changing what they eat.

Your reference to culling isn’t such a daft one. Covid19 picks on the metabolically weak as I explained to Oss, with the case histories from various sources.

In reducing rice spuds pasta bread etc you have done the right thing, I promise you that. It’s all sugar. If we had a chemist amongst us they would explain. Our nation’s GPs learn that at GCSE A Level then forget it at medical school onwards. Pasta rice bread spuds = glucose. So when you or I tuck into them our body uses insulin to deal with them just like any other form of sugar. But for many of us our bodies insulin source starts to fail and therefore the sugar remains in our blood with all the medical issues that entails up to and including amputation of the legs.

Yes there is a saturated fat symbol. But the readings are skewed. So food high in saturated fat are given a red coding when it should be given a green coding. It’s all fooked up. So the traffic light system gives the green light to low saturated fat levels when it should be the other way around. The traffic light system includes sugar but not glucose from carbs which as far as the body is concerned is the same as sugar. Eat a bowl of cornflakes without sugar and no milk and you are eating glucose (sugar).

The nutrition table includes % carbs and sugar but the reader needs to know the implications of that content. No colour coding as you can see.

Can of Heinz Baked Beans with “no added sugar”:



Check the carbohydrates. The can of beans contains 10% sugar. Not what it says on the traffic light system.

How do we know this in practical terms? By testing the individuals blood for sugar content. That tells all we need to know. This would apply to bread, pasta, rice and spuds.

I will go with the expert advice thanks as detailed below in the link.
The traffic light report tells you what's what ie eat a lot of green your in a good place, by eating a lot of red will put pressure on your body.
I can't see the traffic light report on the tin of beans you show to see if it's red Amber or greens.


https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/how-to-read-food-labels/
You say " how do we know this" as I've said a couple of times now I know this because my health checks tell me so.

I think you both need to read my post 1806 it starts off with "Iam of the opinion" now thats my opinion based on what I see as a result of my health, I stress again my opinion, it is based on advisories from the NHS and others.

You say above that JohnAsh makes the point" official advice is counter to experimental advice!" in my eyes if the experimental advice is so good why is not official advice, perhaps its because its experimental! IE Inconclusive ,debateable etc
You then do some fag packet calculations on the bean can so working out the carb content of a can of beans I dont think the vast majority of UK shoppers are going to stand in Waitrose and attempt to calculate the carb content or other factors of every item, they want a guide which is what the traffic light does. For example I went into a shop the other day to buy lunch I looked at one item it was all red looked at another it was green and red, I chose the green(not saying I couldnt or shouldnt eat the red but to much reds isnt good for you)

I am going to be factious here and suggest that "complex carbohydrates cause a less sharp glycaemic response, starches take a little bit more effort to turn in to sugars, fructose and straight sugar are more of an issue" should be on the food packets to advise Joe Public and see the results or perhaps advisories such as the current traffic light report.

You say that you worry that high fat diets are not the whole story for everyone, and this is exactly my point, based on advisories (traffic light report) common sense and listening and seeing the results in my well man health checks my healthy in my opinion diet is working for me and as you say in the last link "it may not work for everyone.
So tonight I have sat down to a pasta bake consisting of Pasta, eggs, onions and oily tuna and a couple of glasses of red. Healthy diet

On the glycemic load, anyone using a test meter that has issues with insulin knows that all those foods (bread, pasta, rice, spuds) deliver a surprisingly high glycemic load. This is well established now. Even brown bread and brown rice. A CGM worn by a patient records blood sugar levels and it is so easy to determine the outcome for any one food on blood sugar levels. Thousands and thousands of people record this information and know to avoid consuming these foods. For an expert go no further than Norwood, Southport where a team of GPs have proven this to be the case with a large number of patients.

Here is one of many similar charts that demonstrate. They are being issued in many languages now.

Here is another one:


These are without milk or added sugar. Look at porridge. These have been constructed by an expert.

8.4 teaspoons of sugar effectively in a small 30g bowl of cornflakes, before milk and sugar added.

It seems those who are metabolically healthy are also impacted by these foods. However, insulin arrives to “mop up”. Until the individual becomes insulin resistant and or obese. Then the sugar levels don’t drop and that’s where T2 occurs.

Dr Simon Tobin at Norwood is metabolically healthy but has conducted tests on himself. The outcomes leads to an increase followed by a decrease where carbs are concerned.

Sweetners affect some and not others.

It is a fact that we all do not respond exactly the same to each food. However there is a HUGE amount of commonality.

I didn’t post the traffic report from the beans as it’s Tosh.Complete and utter tosh. And I have already specified the several erroneous elements of the system. So will not repeat them. Up to you if you want to stick with them. I try and avoid packaged and tinned food anyway. Try real food.

That New Scientist material is quite good. His findings are of course anecdotal. However can you imagine somewhere where thousands of people are all checking their blood sugars in response to all foods. Pool that info and you get a huge amount of commonality of results. Not 100% across the board but 80/90% as a matter of routine.

It’s a fair study. His point about variability is correct to a limited degree. Like I said earlier on the whole the responses to certain foods such as starchy carbohydrates is the same for pretty much all of us. This is verified by blood glucose testing which thousands and thousands do. The differences are nowhere near those he implies.

Triglicerides and saturated fats. Am sorry but he is wrong. Evidence is rife now at surgery level where GPs are fixing patients.

It seems an odd thing but nearly everything I post on this sort of thing illicits a negative response. That’s really odd. If I was describing the best way to bring a Filipina Spouse to the U.K. through the Immigration system I wouldn’t expect posters to try and dig up the diametric opposite, even though none of us are experts on Spousal Immigration, we just have good experiences. By contrast posts of mine where I have a very useful set of experiences and a fantastic range of contacts and their personal and professional knowledge to call upon are typically met with a diametrically opposite stance.

Try and dig up a counter argument against the Sugar equivalent charts of various food types. There are more than just 2. I have posted them before. They tend to get ignored. Maybe there is no fun to be had in contesting them. But make no mistake the story they tell is massive. Some GPs have them in their surgery to show their patients. They simplify what is a complex concept. But we can choose to ignore them. I hope people on the forum get some benefit from them, especially if their good health is compromised these days or even if they are currently healthy. The Traffic Light information on the fronts of processed foods does not tell us about carbohydrates and sugar. That is the biggest mistake.

Regardless of type the foods in the two pictograms above WILL deliver the sugar equivalent response in blood glucose after consumption. There is no disputing that but I am sure someone will have a try. I will go as far as to say ignore it at ones peril, unfortunately.

Are you telling me to try real food?

If you are reading the traffic light system you are reading processed food packets / tins. The traffic light system was brought in to try to get processed food manufacturers to account for the content of the foods. They play the game to sell the gullible their products for their profit. They don’t care about people’s health. Best look at the ingredients and nutrition table. If it’s in a packet or tin and has 5 or more ingredients it is junk food (from an expert).

@oss. It’s all Googlable.

Starches (bread, potatoes, pasta, rice etc) are made of long chains of glucose, which the body rapidly digests into blood glucose. It’s as simple as that. You can contest it if you wish. It’s A level biochemistry. But in practise it is perfectly accurate.

I eat a lot of fresh fish and fruit, but I eat a lot of bread (whole wheat) and spuds. I drink a lot less than before, 3 small bottles of San mig and a nightcap of Tanduay and coke (Large).
Now, I'm not going to change my drinking habits but need to cut down on spuds (carbs). I'm 90 kilos, I do some exerciser on my home gym, but not enough.
If I don't eat bread, olive oil fried eggs in the morning I feel hungry during the day and tend to snack on biscuits (wifes).
What food can I replace with bread and spuds? Oh and there's no traffic colours on our food over here.