Comments on Susie's #19436

[Guest guest]

, I guess you don't have the time to read many of the posts. We have

reported that a test of *healthy young adults* revealed that three-fourths of

them were already reacting abnormally (as in spiking bg's). Another study

showed 85% of us are born with a " genetic variant " that makes us less

tolerant to carbohydrate ingestion. (My question is, of course, why something

that all but 15% of us have is called a " genetic variant " . We're not the

strange ones ... those who can handle high carb intake are the ones with the

" genetic variant " .) There is a high concentration of type 2 diabetes in

societies that have a shorter history of agriculture. Many authors conclude

that our bodies haven't had the time yet to adopt to high grain intake. We've

had agriculture maybe 10,000 years; we find archaeological evidence that our

ancestors were skilled hunters of large game animals at least 40,000 years

ago, and lived primarily on meat. Our digestive systems - while not as short

as true carnivores such as tigers - are quite short ... designed for meat

digestion, rather than grains. It is widely reported by those who lower their

carb intake that chronic problems such as GERD (gastro-esophageal reflux

disease), heartburn, gas, nausea, constipation and diarrhea disappear. It

happened to me; it happened to my younger largerly-vegetarian sister, who was

a real grain-burner. Her diagnosed disease, for which she was told there was

no cure - only ineffectual treatment - vanished when she made subtle shifts

in her diet after being diagnosed type 2.

It's the point we keep making ... As many as one-half of all diabetics are

undiagnosed. Glucose tolerance tests and HbA1c's include undiagnosed

diabetics, and are therefore higher than optimum. I'm happy to register under

6.0 - but we should aim for a 5.0 HbA1c. The secret to good control, I feel,

is to mimic the bodies of non-diabetics as much as possible.

Rather than thinking that it's okay to eat sugar and bread with abandon

because postprandial readings of 150-180 are " okay, " we see these glucose

spikes as indicative of a disease process that is responsible for much of our

modern world's ailments. We diabetics are the canaries in the coalmine. Think

of all the associated diseases we report. Are these diseases not widely

present among the general population? Don't many of us find an amazing

improvement in these allied diseases when we return our bodies to good health

by minimizing glucose spikes?

, eloquent Bob is correct. We are trying to save you from ill

health, just as you believe you are trying to save ours.

Susie

[Guest guest]

Susie

Vicki thought that I should answer the points you made in your

Message #19436 of October 25th.

Removing the quotations you took from my message and also removing

all your usual polemic, I am left with the following points:

1. Non-diabetics do *not* experience postprandial bg spikes.

2. A bg hike indicates carbohydrate intolerance ... it indicates

diabetes ... it's a manifestation of a major illness.

3. The difference between diabetics and non-diabetics is that

terrible bg rise following ingestion of carbohydrates. It is a

reflection of a *major disease process*.

I am sure that you won't mind me pointing out that you do not

substantiate these claims nor give any clue as to where you got this

information (I presume that you read it somewhere). In the same way,

most of my stuff is something that I read somewhere. If I have the

source information to hand I always give it; however, looking back

through months of reading is not justified for a casual exchange of

views on an e-mail list.

Nevertheless, since this is one of the key points at issue (if

everybody - diabetics and non-diabetics alike - really do get post-

prandial spikes then the argument for diabetics restricting their

intake of carbohydrates is weakened) I decided to sort something out

for you.

In a German book about healthy living and nutrition (by the nutrition

adviser - an MD - to Schumacher, the German champion racing

driver) I read the following (don't forget - this is all about

healthy people without diabetes):

" The Ups and Downs of the Blood Sugar Level "

" Between 80 and 100 milligrams of glucose normally swim about in 100

milliliters of blood.: when you eat a bread roll your blood sugar

level rises in the next 30 minutes - to 130 milligrams or, if you

include a lot of marmalade, to 180 milligrams. The blood sugar level

falls during the next 90 minutes to its normal level again or sinks

below it. This is because hormones remove the sugar from your blood

to store it in your liver, in your muscles or to convert it into fat

at your hips. Your hormones will regulate your blood sugar level

between 180 and 60 milligrams. Too much sugar in your blood will

damage your blood vessels and your nerves, too little sugar will make

you tired, shaky and nervous. "

There is a graph showing the blood sugar response for a healthy

person for five different forms of carbohydrate, starting at 75

mg/dl:

- for plain household sugar (the curve peaks at 155 mg/dl after 45

minutes and falls to normal after 120 minutes),

- for white bread (the curve peaks at 125 mg/dl after 60 minutes and

returns to near-normal after 120 minutes),

- for white bread with 5% fiber (the curve peaks at 110 mg/dl after

45 minutes and returns to near-normal after 120 minutes),

- for whole-wheat bread (the curve peaks at 105 mg/dl after 40

minutes and returns to near-normal after 90 minutes), and

- for raw whole-wheat flakes (not " cornflakes " but the crushed corn

grains) (the curve rises only to 90 mg/dl after 40 minutes and goes

off the graph still at 90 after 150 minutes).

This is obviously not a medical text; the whole purpose of the

chapter containing this extract is to persuade healthy non-diabetic

people to avoid white bread and eat only whole-wheat bread, the

author is an advocate of eating only natural food.

But this is why all the physicians, including diabetes specialists,

that I have listened to say that a diabetic can safely accept BG

rises up to 180 mg/dl regularly - because healthy people can do the

same.

Your turn now, Susie. Quote me something that substantiates your

claim that " non-diabetics do *not* experience postprandial bg spikes " .

Between us, we will get to the bottom of this! I am not stuck on

this - if you can prove me wrong, I will be happy to be corrected.

[Guest guest]

My insurance (Cigna) covers the Incharge strips also.

Re: Re: Comments on Susie's #19436

>How do the running costs compare with the usual mass-production meter

>and strips?

I've got my HMO to cover the strips for the Incharge meter. Currently the

Bioscanner 2000 does not have a HBA1C test. I do not test glucose on the

Bioscanner, sine the other strips are a lot cheaper. The Bioscanner 2000

does not have someone there 24 hours per day as other meter companies do.

[Guest guest]

I'm a mutant and proud of it! <g> However, since I do have another

auto-immune disorder (Sjogren's, also hypothyroid) and my diabetes was

diagnosed after a viral illness,, can't say cause is mystery, as those

factors are thought to trigger diabetes. (Another mutant thing about me is

the only one in my family to need glasses - which I have required since age

5. My mother, at 96, still doesn't wear 'em.) V.

In a message dated 00-10-28 04:43:55 EDT, you write:

<<

> Yabut, ...glad that word " usually "

> is there 'cuz I'm type 1 and not only

> is it nowhere in my family (I'm a mutant!)

It sounds better if you call yourself an ideopathic Type 1 (meaning

they are not too sure what the cause is or that it just happens for

no apparent reason).

>>

[Guest guest]

Did I say hyperthyroid? I meant to say hyPO thyroid, which is just the

opposite -- not enough of the durned stuff in my system. Had it for at least

30 years. Thought it was a pretty cool disease to have since once they

figured out what the problem was (that took a while) all I had to do was pop

a pill every day and have my thyroid function tested yearly. Never thought

it would lead to diabetes! (It doesn't, always)...Vicki

In a message dated 00-10-28 10:01:17 EDT, you write:

<<

Hi, again, Vicki. Well, well, well. Something else we have in common.

I am hyperthyroid, too. I didn't know it was considered an auto immune

disease! I must share that info with another computer-less friend who

is hypo, also. I sure learn a lot from everyone on this list! I am so

glad I found all of you.

Sheila {:-D

>>

[Guest guest]

Oh, for crying out loud, . Lighten up. The mutant comment was a joke.

Re: Comments on Susie's #19436

> Yabut, ...glad that word " usually "

> is there 'cuz I'm type 1 and not only

> is it nowhere in my family (I'm a mutant!)

It sounds better if you call yourself an ideopathic Type 1 (meaning

they are not too sure what the cause is or that it just happens for

no apparent reason).

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Hi, again, Vicki. Well, well, well. Something else we have in common.

I am hyperthyroid, too. I didn't know it was considered an auto immune

disease! I must share that info with another computer-less friend who

is hypo, also. I sure learn a lot from everyone on this list! I am so

glad I found all of you.

Sheila {:-D

[Guest guest]

Hi, Vicki. No, you said hypo thyroid. I am the one who goofed! I,

too, am hypo thyroid! I am glad to know that it doesn't always lead to

diabetes. My dad was diagnosed as hypo about 60 years ago! He has

never had a " bad " bg. Of course he has never been overweight, either!

{:-D

Sheila