No Paula, say it ain’t dough!

So, Paula Deen has been outed, with palpable glee and sanctimonious delight among the media and food police, as a Type 2 diabetic.

Not to say it couldn’t be an instructive moment.  Unfortunately, that would require people knowing what they’re talking about.  If that was happening, here are some things you’d hear…

*Type 2 Diabetes is a “burning out” of the pancreas’ ability to produce insulin, the powerful hormone that keeps the body’s blood sugar in a very narrow range — so you don’t die.

*Insulin works by forcing your muscles to burn blood sugar first while pushing other nutrients into your fat cells until the sugar is dealt with.

*If you continuously bombard your system with sugar, your muscles can eventually become “resistant” to insulin’s signals and will not uptake the sugar.

*At that point your body will convert the sugar to fat and store that in your fats cells, too, because insulin’s immediate concern is keeping you from sugar-stroking, not how you’ll look in a swimsuit this summer.

*Since insulin is still present, your fat cells won’t release fat for your body to burn as energy.  So you’ll tend to eat more while remaining hungry and tired because you’re starving at the cellular level.

*Carbohydrates are sugar.  Even the hearthealthywholegrain kind (yeah, it’s pretty much officially one word now).

*Fat does not affect blood sugar.

…So, when America’s comfort food guru comes up diabetic, are we cautioned about the pastas, flour, sugar, potatoes, or breads at the foundations of many of her dishes — every one of which is dumping sugar into her now compromised system?

Nope.  The experts say it was the butter, cream, and mayo that did it. So cut those fats!, eat healthy grains!, cook with industrial vegetable oils!  Oh, and take your $500 a month drugs.

It’s your choice.  As for me, hold the bagel and pass the bacon.

This entry was posted in Diet & Nutrition. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to No Paula, say it ain’t dough!

  1. Pingback: Fat Head » The Older Brother on Paula Deen

  2. Kathy Hall says:

    Short, sweet and the best post I’ve seen on this yet!

    Thanks. I kept it short for the 300 word limit on letters to the editor in my local paper. We’ll see if they’ll print it!

    –jn

  3. Amen to that! As a recent (okay – 2 years ago!) diagnosed diabetic, I hear all about how I should avoid them “rich foods.” Right… because all the cokes, pasta, rice, cakes, sweets, fruits, fruit juices had nothing to do with that.

    Worse still – people turn around and blame a diabetic. In my case – I really had no option. I was diagnosed as “borderline” back in 1990. What was my mother told to do? Cut the fat. Cut the cholesterol. See – the idea is that those things hurt you in terms of heart attacks. Diabetics are more likely to get heart attacks.

    The preventative measure is not against diabetes, but against heart attacks. Heart attacks don’t pay as well as the daily testing strips, needles, insulin, lancets, software, pumps, machines, and daily doses of wonder drugs.

    In my case, it was something in my body that decided my pancreas wasn’t welcome anymore. A slow, methodical destruction. Better still, because of my awesome diet, I also added insulin resistance to the mix. About the only thing that kept me non diabetic was the constant level of activity I partook in. (I am a chef by trade – so there is a lot of movement there.)

    The only “healthy” grain I partake of these days is a bit of rice. It is the least bad – and 6 billion people eat it. I find that I don’t spike too hard with it. Mind you, I don’t go falling for that brown rice nonsense… I like my rice the traditional way.

    Your brother helped open my eyes a long time ago – and I’m glad I found this spot too!

    It’s always great to hear from folks who’ve seen through the BS.

  4. Squirrel says:

    Excellent, could not have written it better.
    From my view, it is money, money, and more money guiding this naive woman. She just can’t destroy her brand, even though this would have given her a perfect opportunity to start an entirely new show, low carb, buck the trend, don’t kowtow to the so-called experts at the ADA. Take a risk. Hell, she might even be able to stop taking/using her $500 month drugs!

    In Ms. Deen’s case, I’m willing to believe it’s more about the naive than about the money. My guess is that as a mega-successful celebrity and businesswoman, she’s probably been getting some of the best medical advice money can buy. Unfortunately, that advice is bought and paid for by Big Pharma and Big Ag.

    I’ll bet she’s been surrounded by “experts” in lab coats who have taught her everything they want her to think she now knows.

    The Wife has pointed out that of all the Food TV crowd, Deen’s were the ones that we always liked. After our Fat Head awakening, we retired some of her carb heavy recipes, modified others into low-carb versions (thank God for whizzed up cauliflower!), and felt even better about all of that wonderful butter and cream!

    I think the saddest part is that now one of her sons — the more irritating one — is redoing her recipes with things like hearthealthywholegrain flours and skim milk.

    Somewhere in Tennessee, a writer/filmmaker/computer geek is banging his head on his desk!

    –jn

  5. Lynda NZ says:

    Well said – how true is that. I may even copy some of it :)

    Thanks. Please copy at will!

  6. James Howell says:

    “hearthealthywholegrain”

    Funny.

    I stole that from somewhere. Might’ve been something one of the Eades’ said in Fat Head(?). Goes with

    arterycloggingsaturatedfat

    Maybe it was Sally Fallon.

    Speaking of the Eades, Dr. Mike Eades’ blog had a YouTube (with his play-by-play superimposed) on a Harvard Med School professor discussing a new study (caveat: it’s an observational study) showing nearly a 50% increase in diabetes among statin users vs. non-users.

    Couldn’t Google up any info on whether Paula Deen is/has been using statins, but it sure would be interesting to know.

    So now, besides never, ever having shown any benefit to women of taking statins, and having been demonstrated that higher cholesterol levels are associated with lower mortality among women, there is now at least a compelling observational case that statins may be strongly implicated in America’s diabetes epidemic.

    Of course, the Harvard doc cautioned against any women using that information to stop taking statins against their doctors advice — because then they wouldn’t get the benefits of the drugs. Har! Har! You can’t make this stuff up.

    This kind of drug industry and medical establishment FUD is why I don’t feel any animosity towards Ms. Deen. She’s just another victim, albeit very well compensated.

    –jn

  7. Robin Stange says:

    Very well said, Older Bro! It’s a shame, as a celebrity/brand-name, Paula Deen doesn’t have any real friends in the nutritional field. Oprah has this same problem: gurus that she trusts with her life, and if anyone goes against the guru they MUST be a quack. Sad, really. Those of us that aren’t a brand (I assume most people fall into this category) have the luxury of lots of different perspectives because we’re not bombarded by our mainstream TV doctor friends and their very mainstream opinions. Still, it’s very sad that Paula had this great chance to break away and go against the popular and forge a new way of ‘healthy eating’. Someone in the mainstream NEEDS to or we’ll never make any progress!

    I think once you attain a certain level of celebrity and become, as you say, a “brand,” it’s exceedingly hard to have any real friends, period. So when you need experts, you get the “best.” When you then go looking for the best, you really only get the “best known,” and people out there bucking the conventional wisdom don’t get rave reviews from the emperors who are having their naked self-interest exposed.

    Paula Deen was a poor, agoraphobic, single mom with two young kids to feed who just flat out decided she was going to do whatever was necessary to take care of them, and she was a helluva southern-style cook. Worked out pretty good. There’s nowhere in her trajectory that she could’ve reasonably been expected to become familiar with the things people who are now advising her are paid to not know.

    There are some folks in the popular culture who are low-carbers. Jennifer Aniston comes to mind. But I think they tend be like conservatives in Hollywood. If you’re not a really big name, you keep your mouth shut; and if you are a big name, your “friends” just assume you’re nice, but wrong and keep it out of polite conversation.

    –jn

  8. Frannie Montegut says:

    So true. Just put it on facebook.

  9. Amy Dungan says:

    Excellent! I’ll share on my blog. Too many people really believe it’s all that butter she uses. That’s like saying my tires went flat because I put too much gasoline in my tank. It makes no sense.

    Thanks, Amy.

    Told The Wife at lunch today that the only consolation is that this type of stupidity is keeping bacon and butter cheaper for the rest of us!

    • Chris B says:

      That’s right – after all, look what’s happening in Scandinavia where they are going all out on LCHF (low carb, high fat) and now they have a serious butter shortage!

      Don’t worry. The news report I saw said the shortage is due to a “faddish low-carb, high-fat diet”(!) Probably pass as soon as all of those poor Scandinavians start keeling over from butter-induced heart attacks. Meantime, it looks like some pesky Swedes are getting busted for trying to bring butter to sell at a profit! Horrors. What they need is a War on Dairy Products.

      Come to think of it, I guess we already do.

      –jn

      • Charlotte says:

        Heck, even the Norwegians, who were the people running short on butter, can’t agree on HFLC diets. Two headlines in one of the local newspapers of Bergen reads:

        This is why low carb diets will give you cancer!
        and
        Low carb diets will not give you cancer!

        Ohwell, more for me! Pass the butter :o)

  10. Mike says:

    I learned a loonnggg time ago that when prevailing wisdom points in a particular direction, the best choice is pretty much 180 degrees the other way.

    Debt is good. (um, no thanks, I’ll zero debt)
    Cholesterol in food is bad (make mine 3 eggs!)
    Whole grains are good (as long as you like insulin shots)

    What is really difficult to take is that the maladies of modern diet and life tend to come home to roost when you can least afford or want them around.

    I hope someone gets to Paula before some fool flat out kills her.

    I don’t think Paula will be able to avoid being helped to death.

    • Concerned Citizen says:

      Mike has hit it on the head about doing the opposite of what the “authorities” tell us is good for us. I had a nutritionist tell me to eat whole grain bread, fruits and vegetables, etc., and not to eat red meat. Now a year later, I’m enjoying the red meat, bacon, cheese, cream, butter, etc., including lard.

      That seems to be the best approach. When the “experts” are acting on wrong (unexamined) base assuptions, the odds of negative consequences are higher than just random chance would predict. We wouldn’t be dealing with national obesity and diabetes epidemics, among other issues, if the experts had just kept their mouths shut.

      –jn

  11. I really love reading the posts, but I have to say the comments are a close second. Not only do you sound like you know what you are talking about, you also have readers who divulge what they are thinking (with the exception of one). Tell me, as I have not guessed, are you backing Ron Paul?

    I agree with probably 99.7% of what Ron Paul stands for, and voted for him the first time he ran for President — on the 1988 Libertarian ticket. I won’t waste my vote on anyone else in the field, but having an extra two decades of experience, I harbor no illusion that America would ever elect someone who actually believes in our country’s founding principles of the rule of law and limited government.

    I’m quite sincere when I say that the situation is hopeless, but not serious.

    As to the high caliber of the commentors, I owe a lot of that to the people who float over from my brother’s nutrition and science blog at http://www.fathead-movie.com! If you didn’t get here from there, and are at all interested in nutrition, diabetes, diet, good vs. bad science, etc., I’d strongly urge you to check it out.

    –jn

    • Charlotte says:

      Yeah we come afloatin’ on the fat in our low carb diets! See! Fat is good for more things than “arterycloggingsaturatedfats”. ;o)

  12. Karen says:

    Paula Deen has made some of the “dietary elite” or pseudo-intellectual diet phobs jealous with her success. I hope she takes it for what it’s worth. NOTHING!!!!!!
    Amazing how many think they have superior intellect only to show their ignorance.

    Too bad the folks who bill themselves as scientists and experts seem to be just as bad as the rest.

  13. Paul Eilers says:

    “I’m quite sincere when I say that the situation is hopeless, but not serious.”

    I know this is not related to the subject matter. However, I did not know of any other way to contact you.

    Would you be willing to further expand on your comment? Possibly even a blog post?

    Thanks,

    Paul

    If you’ve perused some of my other entries on my blog here, I think you’ll get a sense of the “situation is hopeless” part. Our government at all levels metastasized completely beyond any legitimate moral purpose a long time ago and, like any cancer, is now living for itself to the detriment (and eventual death) of its host.

    As for the “but not serious” part of the equation, I’d refer you to that handsome wee person you’ve got on your lap in your picture. I’ve got a few young people about that size (granddaughters) whose future is the most important thing to me. I’d become more and more distraught over the last several years thinking that my despicable Baby Boom generation, having spent the accumulated wealth of the last several past generations, and borrowed against the earnings of the next several future generations, was going to leave them economically enslaved for life under a suffocating mountain of fiscal and moral bankruptcy.

    I’m now becoming more certain than ever that instead of a slow, grinding, slide into third world fiscal status, we are going to have an utter and complete economic collapse. Not a recession, not a depression, not even a “great” depression. Those options are far behind us. I’m also certain that this is going to happen sooner rather than later. A total default/collapse will mean at least a few years of economic and societal chaos but, for those who make it to the other side (like hopefully, my grandkids) it also means a clean slate and hopefully some very important lessons learned on the nature and limits of government.

    And us baby boomers will get the one thing we thought we’d never get (besides old) — the bill!

    Thinking of it lightens my step and warms my heart.

    –jn

    • Tom Naughton says:

      You do realize, of course, there’s at least a 50% chance the collapse will be blamed on capitalism and the next generation will be taught that government didn’t do enough to stop it?

      Yeah, that’s why I’m secretly going to vote for Obama, so the socialists get full credit.

      Shoot. That was my out-loud voice, wasn’t it?

      Seriously, I agree completely — if a Republican is in the seat at meltdown, that’s exactly what will happen even though most Republicans wouldn’t know a free market if it bit them on the butt. I’m just hoping that after the government collapses, including all of the teachers’ pension funds, that there won’t be anyone around to administer the reeducation camps.

      –jn

      • Sean says:

        This has been my opinion for quite a while. If Romney or Gingrich is elected it will be blamed on the evils of a selfish capitalist, hell, they will probably even claim he was “small-government”.

        Exactly. Like George Bush explaining that they had to bail out Wall Street and protect the mega-banks from capitalism in order to save capitalism. How’s anyone supposed to understand free markets when the ones who say they’re for them don’t have a clue.

  14. Mark Lodes says:

    I hate, absolutely hate to burst your bubble, but as an insulin dependent diabetic for over 20 years now, I must point out that your understanding of the cellular biology, in particular the ‘resistance’ part, is severely misguided. Please read up on insulin resistance, because this is perhaps what may have thrown you off. Furthermore muscles don’t become resistant to sugar. The cells in your body develop an insulin resistance and or/ insulin loses its effectiveness as metabolism slows down. Exercise increases the efficiency of insulin. It also builds muscle. In addition insulin helps store sugar by converting it to fat. You may need to take a class on the biology of diabetes before you go leaving this post up without doing yourself the favor of actually learning a bit about the science of the subject you are talking about. Fat ingested does not rapidly affect blood sugar, but it does affect blood sugar, and it (as well as salt) does clog arteries, especially trans fats, and given that diabetes is hard on the elasticity of the arteries, (on account of the fluctuation in blood sugar,) heart attacks and the fat that helps cause them should be avoided as much as possible by diabetics. Bacon is good, but consider what your mouth feels like after four or five or six peices and then you start to understand what your bloodstream feels like as a result of too much fat in the diet. Add diabetes to the mix and you might as well subtract 20 years from your life expectancy. But don’t take my word for it. I’m no scientist.

    Mark,

    Well, the fact that you’re not a scientist is encouraging, but citing your insulin dependence is a similar appeal-to-authority type argument. Coupled with your recitation of the conventional dogma from the AHA, ADA, et. al., in particular regarding fat pretty much tells the story.

    I generally limit my writing to around the 300 word limit on letters to the editor for submission to my local paper, and I’m trying to reach an audience that is unaware of the nutritional debate, so I did in fact simplify some of the facts, but presented a much more accurate description of the current knowledge than what they’ll read in the papers. Or on the ADA site, for that matter.

    Let’s review your statements here, picking up after the ad hominem opening:

    “Furthermore muscles don’t become resistant to sugar. The cells in your body develop an insulin resistance and or/ insulin loses its effectiveness as metabolism slows down.”

    Huh? Are you saying that muscles don’t become resistant to sugar? Or are you saying they do, but it’s caused because of metabolic slowdown? In which case, the question is — what’s causing the metabolic slowdown?

    “Exercise increases the efficiency of insulin. It also builds muscle.”

    Again, huh? Those statements are true, but so what?

    “In addition insulin helps store sugar by converting it to fat.”

    That would be the part where I said “*At that point your body will convert the sugar to fat…” Or does it only sound right when you say it?

    “Fat ingested does not rapidly affect blood sugar, but it does affect blood sugar, …”

    I realize fat has some affect on blood sugar, but it isn’t significant and is not implicated in insulin resistance. My editorial point was that all we’re hearing is the media tying Paula Deen’s fat intake with her diabetes, while ignoring the huge carb (sugar) load in her diet.

    “… and it (as well as salt) does clog arteries, especially trans fats, and given that diabetes is hard on the elasticity of the arteries, (on account of the fluctuation in blood sugar,) heart attacks and the fat that helps cause them should be avoided as much as possible by diabetics. ”

    Well finally, out comes the ADA, AHA, USDA hymnal of the Holy Lipid Hypothesis. Look, it’s simply a fact that fat does not “clog arteries.” Plaques form in arteries UNDER the arterial wall, most likely due, according the the latest actual science, to inflammation (in which those trans fats you mention are implicated. Too bad CSPI and all the Heart Healthy! folks spent years pushing for them before they started pushing against them).

    The cholesterol found in plaques, thereby getting pinned as the culprit, is most likely the body trying to repair the damage. Kind of like saying band-aids cause lacerations. And I think that everyone should avoid heart attacks, not just diabetics. That’s not going to be accomplished by avoiding saturated fats, though. NO clinical study has EVER shown saturated fat to cause ANY heart disease. If anyone says otherwise, they’re either lying or ignorant. If they’re wearing a lab coat, assume they’re lying and being well-paid for it.

    If you have a study, please cite it, but please ONLY AFTER searching for it at http://www.fathead-movie.com, because whatever you think you’ve got has probably already been thoroughly debunked there, where my Younger Brother — who is also not a scientist — takes these things apart for fun.

    Here’s a link to something on the salt deal that I blogged about previously that you may find of interest, unless you think the people at the Journal of the American Medical Association need to take some biology classes, too:

    Experts 0, Nature 3

    I wish you well in dealing with your diabetes. I would sincerely ask you to check into the real scientific debate going on. If you enjoy reading science as much as I do, I’d suggest Gary Taube’s “Good Calories, Bad Calories.”

    You’ve been lied to.

    –jn

    • Jonathan says:

      And Mark, you do realize that dietary fat gets well broken down before it enters the blood steam so the feeling in your mouth is nothing like what it “does” to your vessel walls (not to mention that if the fat in your vessels did something to your artery walls why wouldn’t it do the same to your vein walls… since you never hear of clots in veins.)

      I’d actually had five or six pieces of bacon for breakfast that day. My mouth felt pretty darned good about it.

    • Susanne says:

      This article just arrived in my mailbox today.
      http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/publications/johns_hopkins_health/winter_2012/salt_shakedown
      I wanted to scream. Instead I forwarded them your jama link. I am so glad I stumbled onto your blog in such a timely manner. :) just watched fathead for the second time and then ended up here.

      Thanks for stopping by!

    • John says:

      Plaque in the arteries contains a lot of calcium. In fact, a CAC score is one of the best predictors of heart attack and stroke. There’s only one known vitamin that can prevent and even get rid of existing plaques- fat soluble vitamin K2 (not K1). Where is K2 most commonly found? Eggs, organ meats, cheese, natto, and to a lesser degree, bacon and fatty meats. All the K2 in any of these things is contained in the fat. So, instead of saturated fat intake causing heart attacks, it may be the main thing PREVENTING heart attacks.

  15. C says:

    My grandpa, who is a type 2 diabetic, has recently gone on a 100% natural vegan diet. his blood sugars and plummeted from sky-high ranges to totally normal ranges. i’m kinda confused by this. the only grains he’s eating are organic whole grains, no sugar, no processed crap, ect, and no trans fats or preservatives or anything. Given this info, I’m not sure whole grains are the biggest culprit here. I have no faith he’ll stick to it, since it’s 100% vegan, but I think a better food group to attack would be the preservatives, the trans fats, the high fructose corn syrup, and other man-made “foods”. After all, when cancer, diabetes, and heart attacks started skyrocketing, that was around the point in time where we started really using all that crap. i think your theory of saturated fat being good and most grains being bad is accurate, but it’s probable you’re placing too much emphasis on the wrong place.

    Anyone who ditches sugar, processed crap, preservatives, trans fats, HFCS, etc. is bound to see health improvements. If the whole grains are replacing processed flour, that’s a net benefit, too. But so is switching from a bottle of bourbon a day to a six-pack of beer. And no one would let Anheiser Busch get away with trying to tell people this meant beer is a health food and everyone should get at least six servings a day.

    I’d wager that if your grandpa would switch bacon and eggs, fish, etc, in for the grains, his diabetes would be even better controlled and he’ll enjoy his meals. If you haven’t seen my brother’s blog at http://www.fathead-movie.com, please check the “Recommended Reading” section on there. He’s got a couple of good ones specifically concerning diabetes management. Dr. William Davis’ “Wheat Belly” is a very good review of the current nutritional science with a strong emphasis on the damage caused by wheat/grains/carbs. It has a chapter on diabetes.

    My editorial slant was in reaction to the “fat — baaaad / grain — goooood” mainstream media message that’s being pushed over Ms. Deen’s condition. Since no one was advocating for trans fats or more preservatives in our food, I didn’t feel a need to address it.

    Best wishes for your grandpa.

    –jn

  16. mezzo says:

    “Hearthealthywholegrain”. Here’s another one “arterycloggingsaturatedfat”.

  17. BobG says:

    Leaving aside the (unjustified) public cackling over Ms. Deen’s reaping what she’s sown, and the (justified) anger that she kept her condition a secret until she had a lucrative endorsement deal AND her awful son got his awful show – there’s a bigger issue that worries me more here.

    Celebrity endorsements for “diabetes management plans” serve to further “mainstream” Type II diabetes, to make it seem like it’s just a natural part of aging, something inevitable that we’ll all have to deal with – like those expensive pills and injections are just like reading glasses and hearing aids. That’s definitely the direction we’re heading, demographically, but it’s not inevitable – we should be FIGHTING Type II diabetes, not “managing” it.

    People are poisoning themselves slowly every day, and the way we’re choosing to handle it is to market antidotes.

    Agreed. But the celebrities aren’t the problem — they’re just useful idiots. They sincerely believe what they’ve been told, and they’re being told by people who are telling them they help make things better while having a pile of cash waved in their face. A very convincing argument.

    Maybe we can also agree that the real issue — even bigger than the fact that celebrities endorse products — is the fact that the average schmoe on the street actually attaches value to what a paid celebrity says? How else could you have a commercial touting a medicine where the argument is “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV,” and it’s not a Saturday Night Live skit, it’s a real commercial that a company paid to air because it will persuade more people to buy their product.

    –jn

    • Walter B says:

      Oh, yes. Doesn’t anyone with the brains D-G gave an animal cracker know that most celebrities are endorsement whores? Long ago they were endorsing clothes they won’t be caught dead in on the street, and Barkley get caught saying the Weight Watchers was a scam after he advertised it on TV.

      How do they sleep at night? I suppose they figure the people they rip off or have health problems deserve it for being stupid?


  18. Nickie says:

    I love Paula Deen, I just wish someone would make her watch Fat Head. She has a great recipe for smoked pork butt roast, by the way. Very yummy and no carbs.

    The Oldest Son has already mastered smoked pork butt, plus he does all the work, including a great low carb sauce.

    I don’t suspect her handlers would let her near Fat Head.

  19. Walter B says:

    Paula Deen cannot assimilate “Fat Head”. It would cost here too much money.

    In India monkey catchers put dried fruit and nuts inside a coconut. When the monkeys grab the bait they can not release the bait and become easy prey for the trappers. (Or so I’ve heard.)

    It is anyway a good analogy for what is happening to Ms. Dean.

  20. George Henderson says:

    You are right. Someone commented over at Eades’ site that 61 is late for a DM2 diagnosis in the southern USA, so maybe something – like butter – was protecting Paula from them carbs, PUFAs and trans fats.
    No-one so far as I know has ever suggested salt is a factor in diabetes. Not even the idiots. In fact salt deficiency causes some diabetes in animals.

    Salt does routinely get thrown under the heart disease bus along with saturated fat.

  21. Pingback: No Paula, say it ain’t dough! « PaleoChow

  22. Katy says:

    Paula Deen appeared on Dr. Oz, who of course is very concerned about her recipes as well as her health. He challenged her to slash half the calories from a few of her favorites to prove that they don’t have to include all that fat to taste good. Of course, he got the wrong macronutrient! Lowfat mac and cheese? EEEWWW.

    Of course. Ditch the fat and keep the sugar and carbs. Just be sure to use your meds. This should turn out well.

  23. Bob Fenton says:

    Thanks for you insight. I agree that the AHA and ADA push low fat and that is their mantra as is whole grains.

    Though this is from March 2006, it is very interesting and shows that fat does help people with type 2 diabetes maintain lower blood glucose levels. http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/3/1/16

    Just keep up the good fight. I do enjoy reading your and your brothers blogs.

    Interesting link. Thanks!

  24. Thanh says:

    I seriously knew about most of this, but never the less, I still considered it had been valuable. Excellent post!

  25. Underground says:

    A lot of folks pointing fingers, just the wrong direction. Not surprising really.

    I’ve always been pretty active, but I got into some bad eating habits. I kind of fell into low carb eating on my own just through simple reasoning. But something was missing. Even after I discovered LCHF I was still having problems during periods of extended activity.

    Duh. Carbs or fat, better be eating one or the other, and I wasn’t eating enough fat. So I was really not eating ANY good source of energy and was bonking too early. Even though I knew that fat should be my primary source of energy at that point, I’d had it pounded into my head like everyone else that it was bad. And even after going the high fat route I think I was still subconsciously resistant to the idea.

    And it’s often hard to get a good supply of healthy fat when you’re traveling and eating out, at least with any variety. Most dishes are carb heavy, and the ones that are fat heavy are usually loaded with undesirable manufactured fats.

    Now I just need to find a good chitlin joint.

    Welcome to the alternative universe.

    Not sure what you mean by healthy fat, but I’ve usually been able to find bacon while on the road!

    To supplement while on the road, you should be able to grab some avocados at a local mega-mart. Grab some Spam, too — it has 16g of fat, 7g protein, and 1g carbs per serving! Eating out, any dishes with butter, cream, or eggs should bring some good fat to the party. Besides beef or pork, fatty fish like salmon are rich. Anything with real hollandaise or bearnaise sauce will up the fat content, increase satiety, and make you smile. Most places will sub green veggies for the potato (make sure you some real butter melted over them).

    Think of it as an adventure and have fun.

    Thanks for checking in!

    –jn

  26. anand srivastava says:

    Hi Jerry,

    I had a few problems with the points that you have written. There are too many insulin myths. I hope you won’t take it too negative.

    *Type 2 Diabetes is a “burning out” of the pancreas’ ability to produce insulin, the powerful hormone that keeps the body’s blood sugar in a very narrow range — so you don’t die.
    -> Type 2 Diabetics is a condition when pancreas is not able to produce enough insulin that will bring down the blood glucose level. This does not mean that the pancreas is burning out. Although it will eventually burn out if continuously stressed to the point of breaking. The distinguishing factor in Type1 and Type2 is that in Type1 pancreas are not producing enough insulin but tissues are sensitive. In Type2 pancreas is producing lots of insulin but tissues are not sensitive.

    *Insulin works by forcing your muscles to burn blood sugar first while pushing other nutrients into your fat cells until the sugar is dealt with.
    -> Insulin does not do anything special for muscles. Neither do fat cells have any special need for nutrients. It acts the same for every tissue. Liver and fat cells act a bit differently. Liver stores a lot of sugar, and also converts a lot of sugar into fat and stores around it. Fat cells primarily convert sugar to fat and store.

    *If you continuously bombard your system with sugar, your muscles can eventually become “resistant” to insulin’s signals and will not uptake the sugar.
    -> That statement is controversial. Sugar does cause glycation, but at 80mg/dl the body knows how to undo the bad effects, as this level must be maintained. The trouble happens once you go above. People with very good sensitivity are not affected because they barely go above even after consuming large quantities of carb containing real foods (not talking about highly processed carbs). The sensitivity problem does not start with glucose, but yes once it has started you do want to keep it low to prevent higher levels of glucose. Kitavans is a common example of a black swan for this theory. The glucose causes insulin resistance theory is an oversimplification.

    *At that point your body will convert the sugar to fat and store that in your fats cells, too, because insulin’s immediate concern is keeping you from sugar-stroking, not how you’ll look in a swimsuit this summer.
    -> All excess energy must get stored (probably in fat cells), unless you eat again as soon as digestion process is near completion. Believe it or not, consumed fat also gets stored in fat cells. The important point is how long you go between meals, and how much you consumed in meals. Insulin is taken to be the most important hormone. It is not. Although it is the most easily manipulated hormone. There are many more hormones involved in energy balance and hence obesity. Leptin, HGH, Testosterone, T3, Cortisol, Gherlin, etc. Focusing on Insulin is an oversimplification.

    *Since insulin is still present, your fat cells won’t release fat for your body to burn as energy. So you’ll tend to eat more while remaining hungry and tired because you’re starving at the cellular level.
    -> For some reason fat people’s blood vessels are swimming with free fatty acids, even though their insulin is high :-). Actually having lots of free fatty acids is an indication of insulin resistance. Where did this myth about fat cells not releasing fat because of insulin came about. This fact is very well known. Even Wikipedia mentions it.

    Why is it that there are Type2 patients who are thin. They are insulin resistant, so why don’t they get fat, if this theory is correct. Again a Black Swan. Ignoring Black Swan’s doesn’t make a good theory.
    http://chriskresser.com/think-skinny-people-dont-get-type-2-diabetes-think-again

    *Carbohydrates are sugar. Even the hearthealthywholegrain kind (yeah, it’s pretty much officially one word now).
    -> Wheat is not merely sugar, it contains gluten, WGA which are not sugar. Table Sugar is not just glucose it contains fructose. Omega6 is a fat. These all cause insulin resistance. One is a protein, one is a sugar, one is a fat. Why blame only carbs?

    *Fat does not affect blood sugar.
    Agreed. And that is why type 2 people should go on a low carb diet.

    I love Paleolithic principle and it makes a lot of sense. Low carb is a great way of losing fat, but lets not ignore black swans and (pre)history, and blame carbs unnecessarily.

  27. Pingback: Shared Wisdom: February 4, 2012

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>