The big fat debate over whether keto-style diets are right for reversing diabetes
 

Click here to read the rest of the article:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/he...ersing-diabetes

Fixed that for you.

The science was never there. I understand how humiliating that is but I got over it!

Looks like this ball is rolling faster.

Why is dr Atkins still vilified, when he led the charge?

Same NZ newspaper as the article, Back from the Brink. Wonder if it is doing a series on keto and diabetes?

Grav, What's up, down under? If there is more awareness in general, know your efforts are part of it!

Why is Atkins vilified? Here's my guess: it's due to more of what his WOE represents than the man personally. His WOE scares people who have bought into the low fat, high carb recommendations so prominent over the past 40 years as a prescription for health, his WOE scares vegans/vegetarians for the same reasons, but who have agendas beyond human health, his WOE scares the medical community who have promoted low fat lifestyles for CVD/CHD health, and his WOE scares business (pharma, food manufacturers). His name is associated with many unfounded negative health myths to the point where invoking the name "Atkins" alone stirs all of these fears from several large groups. This has spanned five generations. Yes, these fears are unfounded and scientifically unsubstantiated, but they're real. These "beliefs" have been status quo for a long time. We should understand the complex dynamics behind the negative associations with Robert Atkins' name, not the man and his work.

Ironic that the demand for studies and the science is often the cry but when it us delivered it is still not enough.



Ya, Im careful to avoid "Atkins", but using "keto" gets waves of interest, and conversation. Im sure dr A would be happy in anyway change happens.

That leaves this crisis in the hands of the n=1 to better ourselves and share the knowledge based on science, not folklore.

As you know, that's my approach. We'll get there, but this is a much slower process when it's contrary to "conventional wisdom."

Yes slower. But progress. Until "they" can see a spin that benefits them.

Oddly I look back at history, and change can happen:

The green wall paper that was killing everyone--- that stuff got torn down.

Cokes original formulation was with real cocaine apparently--- and now it is not.

Slaughterhoouses in the cities: regulation changed that.

Do these regulations just happen thru the goodness of government, or does it take an outraged public demanding change??? Seems like we are wimps compared to the Hong Kong protestors, or the Yellow Vests of Spain....?????

Strong protesting doesn't seem to need science, nor good reasoning to have a noticeable impact. WHY are we so complacent??

Today at CVS, the question came up to support the American Cancer Society-- while I did bikeathons as a teen, I dont give them my $$$$. From what I have dug up, cancer is much more preventable than we have been led to believe. Until someone can figure out how to make money on prevention...... that angle is not likely to get much push.

The two articles are written by the same journalist. The first was an opinion piece describing his personal story of reversing his diabetes, this follow-up article discusses the issue at a national level.

In this one he writes about Dr Glen Davies of Taupo who is part of the PreKure faculty, and was recently featured on the PreKure podcast (episode called "New Zealand's Ketotown"). And then of course the biggest names on either side of the debate in this country, Prof Jim Mann and Prof Grant Schofield.

As far as I know, he's begun writing about this entirely of his own accord, but I've made sure that certain people are aware of it and they're certainly promoting it through their channels now as well. :)

It's also pretty heartening to read through the comments section of both articles and see the extent of support that low carb seems to have amongst the informed public. There's still a good deal of resistance to low carb at the very top over here, but it does seem like more and more people at the bottom are starting to figure things out for themselves, which can only be a good thing.

I don't want to sound overly cynical, but sometimes reality supports it.

The USDA's job is to sell grains and produce. They conveniently also head our nutrition guidelines.

Internationally, food is a huge export $ for us.

Nationally, as Denise Minger mentioned in her book, the person who set the first official nutrition guidelines was told to modify the actual recommendations because the government couldn't afford to feed people meat. They wanted to give them the same cheap food they gave the natives -- flour, sugar ... grains and agri.

Add to that: the people on the board of directors for every major national food company, grain company, agri chemical company, pharma medical chemical company, television radio magazine company, etc. -- are the same small interrelated group of people. The same people making money to grow the crops are also making money selling them, packaging them, advertising them, and then making money off how sick you get eating them. The interconnections in this area were the thing that made me realize, a few decades ago, that those "american paranoids" as I called them, who spent half their life in the library of congress looking up stuff, actually weren't kidding about the everything being run by a small number of people. I'm not talking about the planet (that's above my pay grade for sure ;-)) but about the intertwined issues of agriculture for food, food, food as trade, food as welfare, food as dietary recommendations, food in advertising, and food as a causative issue for health problems.

Now Atkins comes along in 1970, into the most litigious society on God's green earth, and he indirectly evidences that in fact, everything the AMA, ADA, USDA, and US Gov is pushing is what is sweeping the entire western world with physical and mental disease in epidemic and now even pandemic fashion.

Does a diet high in carbs give you diabetes? I believe if they studied it, they would find that for the majority of genetic lines, it does. Great. Can we sue the government for killing our families off? How about for giving us welfare that actually killed us? How about, and here's the kicker, for KNOWING THIS WAS THE CASE and doing it anyway?

I was always astounded that Atkins went down on ice instead of with a bullet and much sooner. The threat of "revelation" this man brought on has multi billion dollar repercussions. Maybe hundreds of billions. Imagine if you will that in 2015, there were about 415 million people official diagnosed with diabetes on this planet. That's the official numbers. Imagine everything that goes into that -- the doctor offices, the blood tests, the glucose monitors, the endless new strips to buy, more blood tests, the medications, and more and more.

Preventing and reversing diabetes kills a gigantic cash cow.

Now add heart disease, the leading cause of death. Hey, throw in blood pressure issues. Oh yeah, and if we take grains out of the diet even by accident, we lose a very big percentage of our asthma, allergies, acid reflux, arthritic joint pain...

Need I go on?


That doesn't even start on the damage to the FOOD and DRINK companies, and the grain industries in particular wheat, sugar and corn.


They attacked Atkins in the press massively. They did disingenious, not-quite-replicated (on purpose) studies to allegedly disprove Atkins. There are comments in every major nutrition textbook right now about how much you need grains, carbs, and how low-carb is a fad and dangerous diet.

See the link in my signature? "Who gives carbs to diabetics?" That's an ad taken out many years ago. The ADA has been pushing exactly what CAUSES and WORSENS diabetes for eons. Their true sponsor list? All the largest soft drink and candy and junkfood manufacturers on earth... and all the largest diabetes pharmaceutical makers on earth. Hmmn, those are the sponsors? Does a single one of those sponsors want diabetes even reduced let alone cured, EVER??

Past that point, the best thing they could do about Atkins was ignore him, suppress as much about him and his diet and its results as they could in the media, and make a repetitive point in every form of medical education, from casual magazine articles to college texts, of emphasizing that low-carb was a dangerous fad.

Because sugar's apparently a required food group now don'tcha know.

Like anything else in the world --

-- follow the money.

PJ

I don't disagree with anything PJ is saying. But what astonished me is how THEY eat the grains and sugar, too. They give stain to their parents and candy to their children.

Do they believe their own lies?

There is a podcast called New Zealand's KetoTown? Woah...that's pretty amazing. All good news!

The podcast series is called Flippin' Health, run by Grant Schofield and the PreKure team. The episode featuring Dr Davies from a couple of weeks ago is called "New Zealand's Ketotown", describing his efforts in the town of Taupo in the central North Island to get people reversing their diabetes on a low carb / keto diet.

As an aside, my own story is also being featured on the podcast in September. :)

Knew you were having some influence, Grav. That's great news.

One of my favorite angles in the whole low carb saga is how doctors who worked with Indigenous Peoples all over the world created dramatic differences in their health: by taking them off the SAD. It has ancestral echoes from their consideration of what each population used to eat.

There was an unforgettable line in one of Taube's books where he quoted a Pacific Islander explaining their own local discovery, "Steamboat broke down for long time. Everyone eat fish and coconut. We all get better."