Are ‘they’ are now gunning for poor Dr Unwin?
I would have thought that anything that Improves the health of the nation by helping you to lose weight, reduce blood sugar and save the NHS a fortune should be praised to the heavens but nope- looks like Dr Unwin is going to become a victim of his own success.
Someone out there really doesn’t like LCHF.
Jesus! Why does anyone read the Daily Mail? There is so much rubbish in that article. It's all rubbish, but let me pick out a couple of points...
--
But is it really the answer? Although proven to aid weight loss initially, studies show few people stick to low-carb plans in the long term.
This is the eternal refrain. But you have to keep in mind, they re implicitly comparing it the Eatwell diet, which is either doesn't work or is impossible to stick with in the long term, or we wouldn't be 60% overweight.
--
The SACN report makes 3 points:
* For body weight, there is no overall difference between lower and higher carbohydrate diets in the long-term (at or beyond 12 months).
* For blood glucose (sugar) levels, lower carbohydrate diets may have benefits over higher carbohydrate diets in the short term, but their longer-term effects are unclear, based on the evidence considered.
* People with type 2 diabetes are currently advised to follow healthy eating advice for the general population. Current UK government advice (represented by the Eatwell Guide) is that for the general population, around 50% of total dietary energy should be from starchy carbohydrates (such as potatoes, bread and rice), opting for higher fibre or wholegrain versions where possible. This is based on recommendations made by SACN following its 2015 review of the evidence on carbohydrates and health.
The article only quotes the first point, which is irrelevant. You can be skinny and have diabetes. The second should be persuasive, but for the stupid caveat.
The third is just nonsense, as they know that people who follow that advice to not get better. "The condition is progressive, requiring action at the population and individual level to support changes in lifestyle, particularly diet and physical activity. It also requires oral drugs and insulin for most people over time.24 May 2018"
--
Then their stupid test,which is nonsense because two subjects might both be outliers, but Michelle's, despite what it says in the text, is startling close between the foods and the sugars. I am not a great draughtsman, so I think if I took a red pen and traced over the blue line, I might not get as close...
i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/0...
--
😡
Yeah, it's a hatchet piece. I wonder what will follow? Well, Dr Unwin is very aware of what happened to Tim Noakes and Gary Fetkke, so he won't be completely unprepared if it escalates.
Doesn’t seem right to “like” your comment! But I agree. It may well be his turn and he will be in elite company. He does seem prepared. NICE sitting on the fence as usual - yeah but, no but. Dr Unwin has been getting a lot of notice around the world, it’s only a matter time before Big Pharma/Frankenfood Industry realise what’s they stand to lose. (Prof John Yudkin and sugar anyone?)
Low carb is being demonised as unsustainable long term and I agree, on its own, but coupled with higher fats and good protein, sounds like food for humans to me.
Yes, I’m old enough to remember Yudkin, he had to threaten court action to stop the sugar industry attacks.
That implies he in some way that he won. They kept poisoning for another 50 years. They won. They still aren't defeated yet.
He only managed to stop the personal attacks that were becoming libellous. His reputation was ruined by the food industry and prominent nutritionists, he lost his professorships. It was a dirty fight which he couldn’t win, and it made sure that no one else dared to question the status quo.
And, as you say, it’s still going on.
Oh badger - I know, I only look at the online version to see what I should be disgusted or outraged at. I read papers of all persuasions.
My son says the same as you - he’s a guardian reader, trouble is he believes everything it says whereas I don’t believe anything the DM says.
Saying that I think it looks like the big pharma guns are after Dr Unwin, I only hope they don’t destroy him the same way they destroyed Dr Gordon Skinner who was a champion for many thyroid patients.
And yes, the Eatwell diet, if I’d stuck with the advice given by my practice nurse I bet I’d be on metformin now. The ‘establishment’ doesn’t like to have the change their ideas.
Are you comparing the Guardian with the Daily Mail? The Guardian is a newspaper, that uses journalists. I am not sure what the DM is beyond a click bait farm, but nothing in that piece resembles journalism.
Yes, it's healthy to treat all sources with scepticism, with The Guardian I find I must be aware of their biases, and also my confirmation bias, because I share their biases, and I will often compare what they report against other reliable sources. The DM is just a work of fiction, the only thing I rely on it is to find which new part of the female anatomy is being fetishised (see underbutt) and which two "celebrities" I have never heard of are breaking up.
Of course they're gunning for him. A lot of lucrative jobs depend upon people not eating proper food, and getting sicker/fatter. In fact it's probably the only growth industry there is in Coronavirus Britain.
I was in an M&S food store this morning and had a good look around me - it’s quite shocking when you look at the vast amounts of carb loaded foods on sale, it’s everywhere you look. They do have lo - no carb food too but when the low carb revolution comes you’re right - a lot of lucrative jobs depend on the sale of carbohydrates.
Back when I started on LCHF - I had had a spell on steroids for inflammatory arthritis and developed steroid induced T2. I had a meeting with my diabetes specialist nurse who gave me three months to work on diet and exercise and packed me off with the ‘healthy plate’ leaflet. No blood sugar meter or anything.
When I thought about it I wondered how I would know if my blood sugar was reducing, then I googled and found Dr Cavan’s book, bought it plus a blood sugar meter. I did exactly what he said and when back to my nurse stones lighter in weight - without even trying - and out of the T2 range. I said that I had gone on a LCHF eating plan and she couldn’t seem to accept LCHF and put it down to me eating low GI foods.
Hate to imagine where I would have been had I stuck with the carb loaded healthy plate diet sheet.
I really can't understand why LCHF gives doctors/nurses instant high blood pressure. It seems they'd rather see you eat absolutely anything as long as it doesn't have (gasp!) fat in it. Anyway, lucky for you that your research set you on the right path! I assume all is well now?
I know, it was so funny, I said LCHF and she came back with ‘oh yes, GI’. I left it at that as I was going to do my own thing anyway.
.
Yes, I ate my way out of T2 in less than three months. I realise though that if I go back to my old carby ways then I will most likely become T2 again.
From following the Reverse T2 book - it’s not that I’m obsessive but I’ve got spreadsheets for every meal for at least a year from back then along with blood sugar levels for before and two hours after every one of them - I know exactly what foods spike my blood and surprise, surprise grain is one of the worst offenders any quantity of any sort.
Yet I know from checking everything that I can manage a slice of pavlova with cream and fruit. I wouldn’t have thought that but I was over the moon about it.
Not sure how they conclude that those graphs disprove Unwin's assertion. The magnitude and correction response look pretty damn similar to me.
What isn't mentioned here is that Unwin's diet isn't very low-carb at all. Mostly he just advises people to eat proper food minus the white carbs, and to avoid low-fat products. But, of course, we can't have people eating proper food, can we? What would the CEOs of Cargill and Nestle do when they need a new BMW?
The best bit is that Dr Unwin, who is having excellent results treating diabetes, is apparently a crank, while the diabetes experts, who have been spectacularly unsuccessful at doing that, are still Experts. Being a diabetes quack is apparently one of those rare professions where you can be a complete loser and still charge 200 quid an hour.
Tell you what, though, at least some names are mentioned in that report. I really need to be a bit more proactive here instead of just whining. I think I'll send off some emails and see if they'd like to debate their assertions here on HU. I doubt they'll even reply, but it's worth a shot.
I must say I do wonder what would happen if low carb became mainstream. It would have a huge impact on farming, if the need for starchy foods decreased massively. They would all have to start growing avocados and nuts!!
It would be great if there were LCHF foods more widely available especially when you're on the go and didn't have time to do a packed lunch. It would be such a massive turnaround for the food industry, I can't see it happening any time soon...
This is actually an issue. Apparently historically, grains are an necessary precursor to great cities. Throughout history, grains have powered our civilisation. Probably making the individuals sicker, but having us thriving as a species.
Civilisation with grains will be a new experiment.
(yeah, I haven't studied history 🤨)
Personally, I don't buy that theory. IMO grains are the endpoint of civilisation, not the motive force behind it. The Roman Empire's dependence on carbs (mainly from North Africa) was one factor in its demise. In contrast, the USA was built on meat. Early settlers did grow stuff, of course (and we all know how grain cultivation led to the Dust Bowl events), but the sheer effort of getting tons of vegetable matter or grains harvested and out to the buying public was only a marginally-profitable load of hassle. The most successful farmers raised meat animals on pasture; by doing that, they could sell more modest quantities of a high-value commodity, using relatively low-value land and with somewhat less effort.
I write occasional rants on the subject of farming, so maybe I'll do one on a (theoretical) LCHF-fuelled world. I don't think it's an exaggeration to suggest that LCHF could save the planet. However, as Hidden said, it's not going to happen anytime soon; there are just too many people who would rather send the planet to hell in a handbasket (as long as they have a nice life before that happens).
LCHF being available even occasionally while on the go would be nothing short of a miracle. Never yet experienced it. Add the need for gluten free into the mix, and you’re looking for unicorns.
I must admit I found it daunting adding LCHF to my GF diet but it worked out ok.
When I eat on the go if I haven’t got a packed lunch / picnic with me I buy cooked chicken pieces or some cheese or nuts to nibble on. Once I got to know the sort of thing I could eat I found it got easier
Aren't most LCHF diets also gluten free? the only gluten I would eat would be contaminants. I eat nothing containing any grains.
It’s the contaminants that are the problem with any prepackaged food. Finding simple, unprocessed food is the challenge.
Oh, you are coeliac. Yeah, that's more difficult.
I just make sure it has no grains in the ingredients. If a trace could kick off an auto-immune response, then you need a much high standard.
I just about have time to boil some eggs to take out, and they are well packaged in their shell. There is one well known take away eatery that sells crayfish or salmon salad for example, it usually has boiled egg or avocado too. I think that might be ok, but I haven't checked. Cheese is a good one too...mozzarella, if you don't mind draining off the liquid from the pack. I could eat mozzarella with every meal I think!
I just pop into a supermarket and head straight to the cheese/cooked meats aisle. Plenty of choice there.
I was Co-op yesterday, and they had boiled and poached eggs! Poached were more expensive.
There all sorts of things in the tapas/antipasti section.
Also tinned fish, though that can be a bit messy if you don't have a fork.
I don't like eating unwashed vegetables, especially now, but I would risk a punnet of cherry tomatoes or a plastic wrapped cucumber if I wanted veggies.
I no longer want factory prepared food, so I am not interested in pre-assembled foods labelled "low carb". That will lead to bad things, I am sure.
Most takeaways could make food that is low carb. Deep fried fish is delicious if you just don't eat the batter, burger places often have lettuce wraps, burritos can be served in bowls, etc etc.
I'm not sure what is missing. Anyway, now I am low carb, I can really do ok skipping a meal entirely, if it's not convenient. Black coffee or a bottle of fizzy water may be enough.
If there’s a supermarket nearby I do exactly the same. I buy fresh cooked meat and salad veg. No problem. It’s when you’re relying on non supermarket choices, that it’s a problem. You can’t just not eat the batter on fried fish. You can’t eat things that have been fried in oil that has had gluten products in it. You can’t just pick up a pre packed salad because they usually have pasta or couscous or croutons in them and you can’t just pick round them. You can’t rely on the burgers not having wheat flour in them even if they are wrapped in lettuce. Soups may have been made with gluten containing stock. Soy sauce is out, it’s got to be the more expensive tamari. Same goes for most balsamic vinegars. Even crisps can be dodgy. The list is endless.
I am certain if low carb went mainstream, especially as a way to lose weight, the market would be inundated with low carb bars and shakes etc etc. They are even available now to anyone crazy enough to waste their money on them.
That's why we just need to buy food. Not stuff
You can always buy a salad. Skip the dressing and add some cheese, or ham. Just avoid the pasta salads. You can get Greek or tuna salads, not much carbs there.
One more thing in the article
Dr Unwin says the low-carb approach to type 2 diabetes treatment is evidence based and was the main method used before effective drugs were invented.
While agreeing it is true, diabetes control before drugs did rely on avoiding carbs, Prof Frost makes the point that: 'Patients' quality of life was horrendous. They suffered ill health, and died rapidly.'
Nice shell game there. Prof Frost is clearly talking about Type 1, in response to a statement about Type 2. No one is suggesting Type 1 diabetics don' t need insulin.
I suspect the journalist, rather than the professor is responsible for this sleight of hand.
This is wierd. Didn't the Daily Fail do a lengthy spread on Dr Unwin only last year? I was so astounded that it stuck in my mind. Please tell me that they're just selling the angle they want to sell this week, not that I'm going bonkers.
Episode of the food programme exploring the eat well plate