Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A fresh veggie salad with chickpeas fits in with a low-carb diet, so I'm not quite following you. What whole food groups are eliminated, in a low-carb diet? One can have brown rice, or chickpeas or regular peas, or red beans, for example, in small amounts. Diabetics generally have to eliminate fruits, except for berries, so there's a category. Corn and potatoes need to be avoided, but that's not exactly a whole category.
Could you elaborate on what you had in mind? It's an important topic, so -- you have my ear.
She is referring to whole grains of which she already stated what kind.
And this is not a thread about people with diabetes. Corn and potatoes are just fine for people who do not have diabetes.
These threads tend to get highjacked by people that have specific health issues. Start another thread for foods that diabetics need to avoid.
She is referring to whole grains of which she already stated what kind.
And this is not a thread about people with diabetes. Corn and potatoes are just fine for people who do not have diabetes.
These threads tend to get highjacked by people that have specific health issues. Start another thread for foods that diabetics need to avoid.
Potatoes are actually high in nutritional value if you eat the entire potato with skin (which is why so many died during the potato famine). Obviously friench fries are not the same thing as eating a whole potato and are pretty much on the opposite end of the spectrum, but people seem to assume that potatoes = French fries.
A fresh veggie salad with chickpeas fits in with a low-carb diet, so I'm not quite following you. What whole food groups are eliminated, in a low-carb diet? One can have brown rice, or chickpeas or regular peas, or red beans, for example, in small amounts. Diabetics generally have to eliminate fruits, except for berries, so there's a category. Corn and potatoes need to be avoided, but that's not exactly a whole category.
Could you elaborate on what you had in mind? It's an important topic, so -- you have my ear.
Well, I was going on the articles definition of less than 50 grams a day, and those are the ones who saw the difference in their health.
One cup chickpeas has around 34 g of carbs, one cup of brown rice has 44 grams. Can't even add stir fried vegetables to the rice, or the rest of the veggies in the chickpea salad.
One thing I have noticed is a lot of people say they are low carb but eat many more than the plan for keto and related diets.
Being pre-diabetic myself my doctor recommended (she is just a GP) dividing the carbs by the fiber, and if they number is <5 it's okay. I haven't seen that elsewhere. So for me, brown rice is out, totally.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
A fresh veggie salad with chickpeas fits in with a low-carb diet, so I'm not quite following you. What whole food groups are eliminated, in a low-carb diet? One can have brown rice, or chickpeas or regular peas, or red beans, for example, in small amounts. Diabetics generally have to eliminate fruits, except for berries, so there's a category. Corn and potatoes need to be avoided, but that's not exactly a whole category.
Could you elaborate on what you had in mind? It's an important topic, so -- you have my ear.
Depends.
Basic garden salad for me might be something like 1 bell pepper (~5 grams), 1 cucumber (~10 gams), 1-2 tomatoes (~7g), lettuce mix is pretty negligible. But just the basics we're already at over 20 grams of carbs. Keto low/carb that's basically it for carbs in one salad. Forget the chickpeas.
Diabetics do not need to eliminate fruits. They may need to limit them, but generally not even that. Most people aren't full on fruititarian so they're not eating 5 bananas for breakfast.
The issue with low carb and diabetics is obviously blood sugar spikes but NOT all carbs will cause that, so it goes beyond just carbs. It's about the glycemic index and glycemic load. Those numbers are the true indication of the impact on blood sugar, insulin and all of that brings. For example, beans may be high in carbs but are high in fiber and digest slowly and do not normally spike BS as much as say, bread or potatoes. Same goes for a lot of fruits. And NO, diabetics are not the only ones who should worry about blood sugar, that is just false and ignorant. ALL people get blood sugar spikes, the difference between non-diabetics and full or pre diabetics is the ability to deal with these spikes. In all cases, however, the hormone needed to deal with this is insulin and the constant presence of it leads to many health problems, the most immediate and obvious being weight gain. This is why if you eat the wrong foods at every meal, the problems come. There's nothing wrong with "eliminating" food groups if they are not good to begin with. The whole "food pyramid" was introduced in the 1950's. Just how valid is that? That needs to evolve already. If Snicker's bars were on the food pyramid would you still eat them because you didn't want to eliminate a "food group"?
6 to 11 servings of Bread, Cereal, Rice and Pasta? Are you serious?
This sounds like a more reasonable plan for already healthy individuals.
Quote:
While the food pyramid had called on Americans to eat six to 11 servings of carbohydrates a day, the new food plate provides a simpler measure: When you fill your plate, grains and starch should occupy just one-quarter of it. Fruits and vegetables should take up half the plate, with protein making up the rest.
If you are overweight, diabetic etc the above eating plan may not apply.
Well, I was going on the articles definition of less than 50 grams a day, and those are the ones who saw the difference in their health.
One cup chickpeas has around 34 g of carbs, one cup of brown rice has 44 grams. Can't even add stir fried vegetables to the rice, or the rest of the veggies in the chickpea salad.
One thing I have noticed is a lot of people say they are low carb but eat many more than the plan for keto and related diets.
Being pre-diabetic myself my doctor recommended (she is just a GP) dividing the carbs by the fiber, and if they number is <5 it's okay. I haven't seen that elsewhere. So for me, brown rice is out, totally.
I was going to say something like this. I used to do Atkins and could only eat so many carbs a day. I never got beyond phase 2 and I think 25 net carbs for the day. Beans were just out of the question on that diet because there were too many net carbs. Same with other beans, grains, etc. My diet was low carb, but also low fiber (even though I ate a lot of darn brussels spouts).
Then I had a colonoscopy and a stern warning from my doctor that I needed to eat more whole grains and fiber. So I stopped Atkins and am back to a regular diet. I'm still healthy as ever. In fact, I dropped the rest of the weight I was trying to lose after going off Atkins. Go figure.
Everyone is different and has different diet needs. Since I don't have any blood sugar, heart, or other issues that low carb diets are supposed to help, but I am at risk for colon cancer, a low carb diet would most likely make my life shorter if I stuck to it.
A serving of grains (as well as meats for that matter) is smaller than most would think. So eating 6-11 wouldn't be so mindblowing when a serving is 1/4 of a cup, or one slice, etc. Fact is that portion distortion happened and people eat two cups of pasta, an entire breast of chicken.
My meat serving is no more than 5 oz. Over the course of a day, I probably eat 6-11 servings of grains. I eat on average 150g of carbs a day...with no negative effects whatsoever, and I wasn't always lean. I lost fat and retained muscle. What improved my numbers overall was weight loss, period. And of course diabetics need to watch how much carbs they consume and insulin, no different than me being hypertensive and watching my sodium intake. But for non-diabetic people, the biggest thing they can do to improve their overall health is to lose weight. Regardless of which method you use, within reason of course.
As for net carbs, as with fat, the lower carbs "no sugar" comes at a price. A lot of the goods use sugar alcohols, which can cause big time gastric distress for a lot of people. How about preaching moderation?
I subscribe to the JAMA Journal and saw that study mentioned. I then looked it up, read it and downloaded the PDF. When you examine the kind of patients they enrolled, it's a wonder any of them made it past 40! BMIs of well over 30 ...closer to 35! In essence, most of the enrolled patients were obese rather than overweight! Many of them were failed dieters from a variety of diets as well.
The researchers said many times that these preliminary results were not to be taken as the gospel truth. They had so many factors they couldn't control. Unless you lock people up and prepare the food yourself (which they didn't do!), it's hard to reach any scientific conclusion that has much validity. Those "self-reporting" dieters have been known to "bend the truth" a bit, as to what they really ate! "Oh, I lost a pound today, so I guess that box of Twinkies didn't hurt me too much!" "I won't mention it in my diet journal."
I'm sticking to what I'm doing now, reducing simple carbs, counting calories and moving more! This seems to work for me. I used to be a big Atkins follower, but over time, from reading newer studies, realized Dr. Atkins got some things wrong. He thought fat was what controlled satiety (feeling full), but we now know protein is responsible for that feeling. Many people follow a diet without buying a book that explains its tenets. For example, in Atkins, you should only be limiting your carb intake to 20 grams for a couple of weeks -not do that for months at a time. That's where nutritional damage and deficiency arise!
I'll take that study with a big grain of salt (which I won't swallow! ) If and when there are about 10 more better-controlled studies that reach a similar conclusion, I'll modify my eating behavior accordingly!
Last edited by TheEmissary; 09-04-2018 at 01:39 PM..
I was going to say something like this. I used to do Atkins and could only eat so many carbs a day. I never got beyond phase 2 and I think 25 net carbs for the day. Beans were just out of the question on that diet because there were too many net carbs. Same with other beans, grains, etc. My diet was low carb, but also low fiber (even though I ate a lot of darn brussels spouts).
Then I had a colonoscopy and a stern warning from my doctor that I needed to eat more whole grains and fiber. So I stopped Atkins and am back to a regular diet. I'm still healthy as ever. In fact, I dropped the rest of the weight I was trying to lose after going off Atkins. Go figure.
Everyone is different and has different diet needs. Since I don't have any blood sugar, heart, or other issues that low carb diets are supposed to help, but I am at risk for colon cancer, a low carb diet would most likely make my life shorter if I stuck to it.
I did Atkins for 6 months and by that time I was so sick of my food choices I was ready to quit. Plus I was really grossed out at the amount of fat I was eating. Initially I felt great and quickly dropped 7 pounds, (I only needed to lose 15) but as I progressed the weight loss slowed and I wasn't feeling all that great.
I went off and in the course of 4 years I was up 35 pounds. I went on WW and in 6 months I had lost 40 pounds, ate from all the food groups, felt great, I exercised and was in the best shape of my life. That was 8 years ago and I have gained 10 pounds back but I am maintaining that. I could not imagine a life without all those nasty carbs!
And I was horribly constipated while on Atkins, which to your point is a recipe for colon problems.
I did my own experiment yesterday, not intentionally of course, but still. Since it was labor day, I was totally going to eat a big, fatty hamburger. I purposefully only had a light breakfast and nothing until dinnertime, when I ate the burger. I ate a burger and one half, which contained lots of saturated fat (learned the hard way that lean beef makes lousy burgers), between two slices (and a half) of bread, and two cups of broccoli. I polished that off with one of my 100 calorie Enlightened ice cream bars because I absolutely must have a sweet treat to top it off. I was full all night and into the next morning.
I lost a pound. The secret to high fat diets ultimately is.......wait for it....calorie restriction. I tallied up how many calories and it was actually below 1300. 1300 is often starvation for me, but that burger, with its high saturated fat content, killed my appetite. Sounds good, right? The problem is that I can't eat like that all of the time. All of that fat and meat would be murder on my intestines. Not to mention, it would get old after awhile, constantly eating fatty things and vegetables. I'd get bored.
Ultimately, the weight would return because I just wouldn't stick to it. YMMV.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"I won't mention it in my diet journal." 
) If and when there are about 10 more better-controlled studies that reach a similar conclusion, I'll modify my eating behavior accordingly! 
